Officially #2 AP

[Fairfield_1st]

Ummmm, Tristen Newton was playing point for us. How else did he win the Bob Cousy Award? You really think Castle was the point guard on that team? Maybe a secondary ball handler but in no way was he the main point guard on that team. Flemings definitely is Houston's main point guard which is what would worry me if I was predicting that they would win the championship.

Tristen Newton Wins 2024 Bob Cousy Award - University of Connecticut Athletics

PHOENIX – UConn men's basketball graduate guard Tristen Newton has been named the winner of the 2024 Bob Cousy Award, as announced by the Naismith Hall of Fa...

uconnhuskies.com

That's fair. I do think Castle played some point for us.

 

[uconngb]

Your deranged misreading of what I wrote is bizarre.

"I know nothing."

Pick up a dictionary and look up the word impact because you have a severe dysfunction when it comes to reading and language.

First off, it doesn't "impact" seeding...I believe I proved my point

and Secondly, your exact quote was "probably because this stuff DETERMINES seeding". I think that's a little different than "impact"

So why don't you just admit you have no clue what you are talking about, AND you are completely trying to walk back what you said without admitting it. I guess you have a severe dysfunction in remembering YOUR OWN WORDS. Unreal

 

[uconngb]

First off, it doesn't "impact" seeding...I believe I proved my point

and Secondly, your exact quote was "probably because this stuff DETERMINES seeding". I think that's a little different than "impact"

So why don't you just admit you have no clue what you are talking about, AND you are completely trying to walk back what you said without admitting it. I guess you have a severe dysfunction in remembering YOUR OWN WORDS. Unreal

upstater​

JoinedAug 26, 2011Messages30,286Reaction Score51,416

• Yesterday at 3:58 PM
• 
  
• Add bookmark
• #25

This is why it amazes me that you all get so worked up by these polls. How objective do you think this sportswriter from SYRACUSE is??

Meanwhile UNC loses twice to unranked teams and is still 24th, yet Seton Hall loses a barn burner to the #2 team in the country and then one to Butjer and doesn’t even receive one vote this week??

And yet you’re all in the edge of your seats waiting for the weekly poll to come out. It’s like you’re married to a pretty girl but every week you need 60 random people to tell you she’s pretty……and most of them have never seen her!! Just take solace in knowing she is pretty!!!!

It's probably because this stuff determines seeding.

Florida must not have been too happy to draw UConn the second weekend last year, and it was all because they had us seeded 8th. I had us seeded 6th.

Lest you try and revise history....here's your exact quote

 

[Lafayette]

AP matter exactly one time: postseason #1 100% correlates to the natty winner.

Otherwise AP and KP = Jimmy Crack Corn for me.

 

[80shusky]

Gary Parrish now thinks Houston will win it all. Then again he had St. John's #1 to start the season. I like Houston but I would be somewhat worried that they rely heavily on a freshman point guard. I just am not confident in a freshman point guard leading a team to the championship.

Top 25 And 1: Houston looking good enough to win NCAA Tournament

CBS Sports' Gary Parrish is picking the 17-1 Cougars to cut down the nets in Indianapolis

www.cbssports.com

There is no question in my mind that Parrish huffs paint thinner on the regular.

 

[noelle]

i mean houston is not a bad pick especially with a guy like flemings there. the way refs are calling fouls helps a speedy guy like him to just get to the rim at will. houston with a good offense is pretty strong.

 

[upstater]

First off, it doesn't "impact" seeding...I believe I proved my point

and Secondly, your exact quote was "probably because this stuff DETERMINES seeding". I think that's a little different than "impact"

So why don't you just admit you have no clue what you are talking about, AND you are completely trying to walk back what you said without admitting it. I guess you have a severe dysfunction in remembering YOUR OWN WORDS. Unreal

You didn't prove anything except the fact that you're a megalomaniac knowitall.

It says impact right in the post you initially responded to. & St. John's benefited from it's #5 ranking last year.

 

[RuffRuff]

 

[HooperScooper]

Resume metrics have UConn top 3, we wouldn’t be a 3 seed either way

This guy thinks so. Not sure what he's smoking.

Bracketology: How No. 2 seed Nebraska's rapid ascension compares to Indiana's run in College Football Playoff

The Cornhuskers have never won an NCAA Tournament game but are still undefeated

www.cbssports.com

 

[AllHusky]

Poll rankings picked by brain dead writers have NEVER been a criteria nor had influence over seedlings. This is one of the most ridiculous things I have ever heard.

What kind of seedlings ya got there? Birch or Pine?

 

[auror]

This guy thinks so. Not sure what he's smoking.

Bracketology: How No. 2 seed Nebraska's rapid ascension compares to Indiana's run in College Football Playoff

The Cornhuskers have never won an NCAA Tournament game but are still undefeated

www.cbssports.com

Looks like it's a bracketology "simulation" so it's based on a hypothetical rest of season as simulated by the Sportsline analytics. So not a "as of right now" as the other guy was talking about.

 

[HooperScooper]

Looks like it's a bracketology "simulation" so it's based on a hypothetical rest of season as simulated by the Sportsline analytics. So not a "as of right now" as the other guy was talking about.

Thanks. So the model thinks UConn isn't going to be that good the rest of the season? I thought the predictive models have UConn as the favorite, and in most heavy favorites, in almost every game the rest of the season?

 

[superjohn]

Thanks. So the model thinks UConn isn't going to be that good the rest of the season? I thought the predictive models have UConn as the favorite, and in most heavy favorites, in almost every game the rest of the season?

That bracketology thing is the dumbest thing I've seen yet. Anyone who thinks we're going to be a #3 seed is an idiot.

 

[auror]

Thanks. So the model thinks UConn isn't going to be that good the rest of the season? I thought the predictive models have UConn as the favorite, and in most heavy favorites, in almost every game the rest of the season?

KenPom has us as the favorite in every game except one (now at SJU), but also has us projected to lose 3 games. Essentially, the favorite doesn't win every game, so the chances of losing add up and the expected number of losses is 3.

I think if we lose 3 we still probably get a 2 seed, though.

 

[Leebo]

That bracketology thing is the dumbest thing I've seen yet. Anyone who thinks we're going to be a #3 seed is an idiot.

If we lose a few games, then a 2 seed is a reasonable expectation. And then there's always a way for seeding principles or other nonsense to screw you by a seed line.

 

[uconngb]

It’s all up to the sportswriters. They know best.

 

[uconngb]

You didn't prove anything except the fact that you're a megalomaniac knowitall.

It says impact right in the post you initially responded to. & St. John's benefited from it's #5 ranking last year.

View attachment 116204

Nice attempt at dodging…..except it didn’t work

 

[upstater]

Nice attempt at dodging…..except it didn’t work

If quoting directly the post you responded to didn't work, then you are absent of facts.

St. John's

KenPom: 15
Torvik: 16
AP Ranking: 5 (6th before the BET)

Result: 2 seed

Clearly, they went away from the metrics and rated St. John's closer to the analyst consensus.

 

[JohnFSilver]

You are just continuing to prove how little you know about college basketball. You should just stop. AP rankings have NOTHING TO DO WITH SEEDING in the NCAA tournament. Never have, never will.

Let's look at last year, just as one example:

AZ was a 4 seed. They were ranked #21 in the last top 25 poll
BYU was a 6 seed. They were ranked #17 in the last top 25 poll.
St Marys was a 7 seed. They were ranked #20 in the last top 25 poll.
Gonzaga was an 8 seed. They were ranked #24 in the last top 25 poll.
Kentucky was a 3 seed. They were ranked #18 in the last top 25 poll,.
Clemson was a 5 seed. They were ranked #13 in the last top 25 poll.

I could go on. And that is just from LAST year. Each one of those teams was seeded at least two lines off of where their ranking indicated they should be. Some higher, some lower.

Poll rankings don't mean SQUAT for seeding purposes.

They mean something. It is just a data point though, as is KenPom, Net, and eye test counts too. Right now? UConn is a 1 seed. It will be
Settle In February. I would say they lose 2-3 games they will be a 2 seed.

 

[uconn_jack]

Bottom line, the selection committee uses analytics ratings when it suits them, just like every other "criteria" they use.

 

[uconngb]

If quoting directly the post you responded to didn't work, then you are absent of facts.

St. John's

KenPom: 15
Torvik: 16
AP Ranking: 5 (6th before the BET)

Result: 2 seed

Clearly, they went away from the metrics and rated St. John's closer to the analyst consensus.

You are giving ONE example and NOWHERE can you point to anything or anyone that said the seeding was based on the ranking. It’s a relationship that just doesn’t exist but you are somehow trying to force it.

You wouldn’t find one expert or committee member or frankly, anyone that knows anything about college basketball that would say poll rankings determine seedlings.

But keep trying pal.,,,,it’s fun watching you gyrate

 

[auror]

If quoting directly the post you responded to didn't work, then you are absent of facts.

St. John's

KenPom: 15
Torvik: 16
AP Ranking: 5 (6th before the BET)

Result: 2 seed

Clearly, they went away from the metrics and rated St. John's closer to the analyst consensus.

Their resume metrics put them as a 2 seed. Committee members consider other metrics aside from KenPom and Torvik.

 

[upstater]

View attachment 116212
Their resume metrics put them as a 2 seed. Committee members consider other metrics aside from KenPom and Torvik.

Well you have the NET in line with KenPom and Torvik as well. KPI is 3rd seed.

Still seems out of whack.

There are others.

What would you say are primary?

 

[upstater]

You are giving ONE example and NOWHERE can you point to anything or anyone that said the seeding was based on the ranking. It’s a relationship that just doesn’t exist but you are somehow trying to force it.

You wouldn’t find one expert or committee member or frankly, anyone that knows anything about college basketball that would say poll rankings determine seedlings.

But keep trying pal.,,,,it’s fun watching you gyrate

Plenty of other examples.

You just try to ignore them as you did when I originally wrote this

 

[auror]

Well you have the NET in line with KenPom and Torvik as well. KPI is 3rd seed.

Still seems out of whack.

There are others.

What would you say are primary?

The committee discusses a full resume, including all of the metrics and the actual games.

The more you dig into the actual results on a resume, the more you eventually just wind up at the resume metrics WAB or SOR because they do a pretty good job of summarizing it. So especially at the bubble cutline, where the most thorough discussion takes place, the committee results definitely skew towards the resume metrics. Not necessarily because they use them as the guiding star, but because the process itself is similar to the way the metric is calculated.

But outliers in the predictive metrics and especially big wins or whatever can skew the results in a direction, like UNC being far better than all the teams under consideration in the predictive metrics likely getting them a bid last season when the resume impressiveness according to the resume metrics was otherwise similar (despite the utter terrible performance in Q1).

 

[upstater]

The committee discusses a full resume, including all of the metrics and the actual games.

The more you dig into the actual results on a resume, the more you eventually just wind up at the resume metrics WAB or SOR because they do a pretty good job of summarizing it. So especially at the bubble cutline, where the most thorough discussion takes place, the committee results definitely skew towards the resume metrics. Not necessarily because they use them as the guiding star, but because the process itself is similar to the way the metric is calculated.

But outliers in the predictive metrics and especially big wins or whatever can skew the results in a direction, like UNC being far better than all the teams under consideration in the predictive metrics likely getting them a bid last season when the resume impressiveness according to the resume metrics was otherwise similar (despite the utter terrible performance in Q1).

When I looked at the last few years, I saw a lot of variance between the metrics I was looking at (NET, KenPom, Torvik) in the 1st through 3 seeds. I'm sure as you get down to the 35-40th ranked teams, that it becomes much more hazy.

 

[FearThePups]

I am not counting the MSU game as anything. Beyond worthless to even count it as an evaluation.

Yeah. I’m sure Tom Izzo was just fine with the L.

 

[FearThePups]

First off, it doesn't "impact" seeding...I believe I proved my point

and Secondly, your exact quote was "probably because this stuff DETERMINES seeding". I think that's a little different than "impact"

So why don't you just admit you have no clue what you are talking about, AND you are completely trying to walk back what you said without admitting it. I guess you have a severe dysfunction in remembering YOUR OWN WORDS. Unreal

Gotta love the boneyard 🥊

 

[HooperScooper]

Kyle Boone just lost all credibility after seeing number 3 here in his Power Rankings. UConn is number 4. Is he just trying to get clicks?

College Basketball Power Rankings: Miami (OH) surges into top three as Iowa State, Vanderbilt slide down

Iowa State and Vanderbilt suffered huge slides in this week's ranks, while the perfect teams congregated into the top spots

www.cbssports.com

 

[RuffRuff]

Kyle Boone just lost all credibility after seeing number 3 here in his Power Rankings. UConn is number 4. Is he just trying to get clicks?

College Basketball Power Rankings: Miami (OH) surges into top three as Iowa State, Vanderbilt slide down

Iowa State and Vanderbilt suffered huge slides in this week's ranks, while the perfect teams congregated into the top spots

www.cbssports.com

Yeah, not even worth looking at. Miami Oh and Nebraska in the top 4 is not a legit power ranking.