Race for 1 Seed (2/5)

[BFieldHusky]

Yeah we should definitely keep in mind that the Florida winning out scenario is a minority outcome, KenPom puts it like 30% or so (and that's only giving 20% chance to Kentucky, which you seem to think is higher, and I probably agree).

I can see Kentucky playing well at home in a rivalry game. And Florida hasn't been in a close game in what seems a while.

 

[NJHusky]

Where I believe we stand as of 3/1. Again, I am basing this of where we were a little over a week ago from the committee.

1. Duke
2. Michigan
3. Arizona
4. UConn

5. Florida
6. Houston
7. Nebraska
8. Michigan St.

9. Iowa St.
10. Illinois
11. Purdue
12. Gonzaga

13. Texas Tech
14. Kansas


Couple of note:

A. Michigan and Arizona could swap, but they are set as the 2nd and 3rd 1 seed.

Gets tough to rank the teams after Florida as Houston, Iowa St, Illinois, and Kansas have lost twice since the reveal, with Purdue and Gonzaga also losing.

They will try and avoid putting Nebraska/Michigan St/Purdue with Michigan. Same with Houston/Iowa St/Kansas with Arizona.

Isn’t balancing the conf a big issue too? B12 and b10 need to be separated from top 16 conf team

 

[Inyatkin]

With these giant conferences it becomes impossible to separate teams like they used to. And with unbalanced conference schedules it doesn’t seem as necessary either

 

[Dibbie]

They have some ridiculous wins this year - credit that coach. Yesterday's dominating win seemed so improbable. It makes you wonder if they had Toppin if they could have been in that contender box.

As with us, TTU should have beaten Florida last year. I absolutely think they were a dark horse contender this year with Toppin.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Just for reference, Lunardi has the following this morning:

1: Duke, Michigan, Arizona, UConn
2: Florida, Iowa St, Houston, Purdue
3: Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, Michigan St.
4: Gonzaga, Texas Tech, Alabama, Virginia

CBS this morning had them broken up as:

East: Duke, Purdue, Iowa St, Texas Tech
Midwest: Michigan, Houston, Nebraska, Virginia
West: Arizona, Illinois, Alabama, Gonzaga
South: UConn, Florida, Michigan St, Kansas

 

[RuffRuff]

Just for reference, Lunardi has the following this morning:

1: Duke, Michigan, Arizona, UConn
2: Florida, Iowa St, Houston, Purdue
3: Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, Michigan St.
4: Gonzaga, Texas Tech, Alabama, Virginia

CBS this morning had them broken up as:

East: Duke, Purdue, Iowa St, Texas Tech
Midwest: Michigan, Houston, Nebraska, Virginia
West: Arizona, Illinois, Alabama, Gonzaga
South: UConn, Florida, Michigan St, Kansas

CBS is a stacked region. Easily the most challenging.

5-8 right now on the 2 line is a moving target. Lots can still happen there. I feel like the first 5 seeds are rock solid, lots of play in the next ten teams.

 

[bendm]

Michigan loses L.J. Cason for rest of season with torn ACL

Michigan's L.J. Cason, who had emerged as one of the premier backup guards in college basketball this season, suffered a torn right ACL and will miss the rest of the season.

www.espn.com

Huge loss. Michigans PG play was already their Achilles heel and they just lose their backup.

 

[bendm]

Just for reference, Lunardi has the following this morning:

1: Duke, Michigan, Arizona, UConn
2: Florida, Iowa St, Houston, Purdue
3: Illinois, Kansas, Nebraska, Michigan St.
4: Gonzaga, Texas Tech, Alabama, Virginia

If I’m reading this right he has the Midwest 2,3,4 seeds all from the big12? the top 3 teams from each conference are supposed to be separated. Thats why we can’t get SJU as the 5. Are these guys even trying anymore?

 

[RuffRuff]

If I’m reading this right he has the Midwest 2,3,4 seeds all from the big12? the top 3 teams from each conference are supposed to be separated. Thats why we can’t get SJU as the 5. Are these guys even trying anymore?

Strength rating not how they would sort into region

 

[ucp990411]

Florida/Illinois would be tied for my least wanted to play because UConn already played them. Illinois has a higher ceiling and is a crap shoot in many ways with their ability to shoot but Florida the higher floor. Houston/ISU would be like playing SJU/SH again in many ways but at a higher level. Purdue would be ideal IMO but I would bet they are in Dukes region if they are a two seed.

Florida/Illinois would be tied for my least wanted to play because UConn already played them. Illinois has a higher ceiling and is a crap shoot in many ways with their ability to shoot but Florida the higher floor. Houston/ISU would be like playing SJU/SH again in many ways but at a higher level. Purdue would be ideal IMO but I would bet they are in Dukes region if they are a two seed.

Illinois may have lots of talent on the court but they also have Brad Underwood. The great equalizer on the bench

 

[RuffRuff]

Illinois may have lots of talent on the court but they also have Brad Underwood. The great equalizer on the bench

I’m with you there - they are mega talented. I do think some book is out on Wagler too. He lacks some verticality and easy to take on defense.

I’d be surprised if NC didn’t come out of first 5 seeds.

Purdue feels like a sinking ship of a contender.

 

[MuchoDogYears]

I still don't get why so many are putting so much importance in what seed we end up with and which region we end up in.

Whether we are a one or a two, regardless of region, if we don't make it to the regional finals, we would have gotten knocked off by a team that wasn't as good as us. That will be entirely our fault, whether we lost as a one or a two, anywhere in the country.

If for example we make it to the regional finals as the last one seed, facing the top two seed, or the top two seed facing the last one seed, the only difference would be color of the uniforms we wear. Does anyone believe that the outcome of the game would depend on whether we are wearing blue or white?

Whatever happens from here on out will be entirely on us.

The reason getting a one seed as opposed to a two seed matters is because of the Sweet 16 matchups.

In the Sweet 16, a one seed plays a four seed, while the two seed plays a three seed.

That matters because there’s practically no difference between the teams with a two or three seed.

But there’s a noticeable drop off when you get to the four seeds. So being a one seed playing a four seed, as opposed to being a two playing a three seed, in the Sweet 16 matters. A lot.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

The reason getting a one seed as opposed to a two seed matters is because of the Sweet 16 matchups.

In the Sweet 16, a one seed plays a four seed, while the two seed plays a three seed.

That matters because there’s practically no difference between the teams with a two or three seed.

But there’s a noticeable drop off when you get to the four seeds. So being a one seed playing a four seed, as opposed to being a two playing a three seed, in the Sweet 16 matters. A lot.

Why do we need a dropoff opponent in the sweet 16?

I've seen too many instances where an allegedly easier matchup ended a school's season (not just us, many schools). If we can't beat a team seeded below us in the sweet 16 we aren't accomplishing what we want to accomplish this year.

 

[MuchoDogYears]

Why do we need a dropoff opponent in the sweet 16?

I've seen too many instances where an allegedly easier matchup ended a school's season (not just us, many schools). If we can't beat a team seeded below us in the sweet 16 we aren't accomplishing what we want to accomplish this year.

Fair point.

 

[RuffRuff]

Why do we need a dropoff opponent in the sweet 16?

I've seen too many instances where an allegedly easier matchup ended a school's season (not just us, many schools). If we can't beat a team seeded below us in the sweet 16 we aren't accomplishing what we want to accomplish this year.

Matchups matter.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

Matchups matter.

Yes they do. I fully remember the 1996 tournament and believe without question that UCLA woyuld have been a far better matchup for our team that year than Mississippi St was. Unfortunately for us, UCLA couldn't get past Princeton.

 

[RuffRuff]

Yes they do. I fully remember the 1996 tournament and believe without question that UCLA woyuld have been a far better matchup for our team that year than Mississippi St was. Unfortunately for us, UCLA couldn't get past Princeton.

They do - I hate Duke as a matchup. They can switch all over and have some long defenders that are agile. Then they can bully us with Boozer.

 

[tzznandrew]

The reason getting a one seed as opposed to a two seed matters is because of the Sweet 16 matchups.

In the Sweet 16, a one seed plays a four seed, while the two seed plays a three seed.

That matters because there’s practically no difference between the teams with a two or three seed.

But there’s a noticeable drop off when you get to the four seeds. So being a one seed playing a four seed, as opposed to being a two playing a three seed, in the Sweet 16 matters. A lot.

Not only is there a reasonable drop off when you get to the four seeds, but, as a consequence of that drop off, you are more likely to play a 5-12-13 in that matchup than a 4: the 4 seed is only 48.1% likely to make that round.

The 3-seed is statistically higher in making it to the S16, and in the upset route, the 12/13s are essentially DOA in the S16, whereas 11s are noticeably much friskier.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

They do - I hate Duke as a matchup. They can switch all over and have some long defenders that are agile. Then they can bully us with Boozer.

I can't see any way the committee seeds this tournament in a wat that we would end up facing Duke in the sweet sixteen.

If we see them later than that, I'll take my chances.

 

[connVA]

Purdue and Illinois doing their own version of the tankathon to move down to the three line. I don't think Houston deserves a two either but it's basically a battle of attrition after Florida and ISU. Maybe Kansas manages to sneak in there (?).

 

[MrJoe]

uconn and florida 1 2 or 2 1 in south and starting in philly . doesnt matter

 

[willie99]

Purdue lost again, but it was to another Big 10 team that lost a lot of games to other Big 10 teams, so that's all good for them

Winning games is so overrated

LMFAO

 

[businesslawyer]

Didn't you think UConn was a safely a 1 seed as of last night? Not surprised you are flip flopping.

The people who are loving Florida as a 1 seed are in the "what have you done for me recently." The committee, at least according to the criteria, is not supposed to bring that into play.

UConn's WAB is 8.8 to Florida' 7.0.
Q1/Q2 record: UConn 17-2 v.s. Florida 16-6
UConn beat Florida on a neutral court.

IMO, UConn would have to lose to Marquette AND lose before the final for the BE tournament plus Florida would need to win out for them to pass us. 6 losses to 3 losses, and WE BEAT THEM ON A NEUTRAL COURT.

All we have to do is is beat Marquette and we’re going to be the 4th #1 seed. But I agree with FCF — small differences in placement really doesn’t mean much. I’d rather be #4 than #20 but 4 v 5 in the nation doesn’t make a huge difference. It means your sweet sixteen game is against #13 rather than #12. And, given conference and geographic considerations, the #4 overall could get 12 rather than 13 anyway,

 

[businesslawyer]

It's fun to speculate about, and it's good for bragging rights and historical counting stats.

Who cares about how many times you’re a one seed? That’s not a result. People care about wins, conference championships, Final Fours and national championships. Because those all are about winning, not being selected,

 

[willie99]

Purdue lost again, but it was to another Big 10 team that lost a lot of games to other Big 10 teams, so that's all good for them

Winning games is so overrated

LMFAO

It's official, Purdue is still better than us. We're the 5th best team in the B10

Michigan
Illinois
Purdue
Michigan St

And Nebraska should junp us when they lose a game this week

Whoop whoop whoop

 

[uh-no]

uconn and florida 1 2 or 2 1 in south and starting in philly . doesnt matter

If uconn is a two, they almost surely end up in the East

 

[Waquoit]

We are the clear #1 currently in WAB. That has to put UConn on the top line... Why do we care about WAB again? It's not more fun with numbers? I'm asking.

 

[Hurleyman216]

They do - I hate Duke as a matchup. They can switch all over and have some long defenders that are agile. Then they can bully us with Boozer.

I don’t hate us matching up with Dook. Dook is good but highly reliant on Boozer (similar to how Purdue was so reliant in Edey). In situations like that Hurley has shown time and again that he can game plan to limit the damage. If we play out A game I’m not really worried about any of these teams.

 

[KingAG]

I don’t hate us matching up with Dook. Dook is good but highly reliant on Boozer (similar to how Purdue was so reliant in Edey). In situations like that Hurley has shown time and again that he can game plan to limit the damage. If we play out A game I’m not really worried about any of these teams.

I think Michigan’s A game and our A game could lean Michigan. Them and Duke are the only teams that worry me. Everyone else I feel like destiny is in our hands.

 

[RuffRuff]

I think Michigan’s A game and our A game could lean Michigan. Them and Duke are the only teams that worry me. Everyone else I feel like destiny is in our hands.

What about OKC? How would you feel there? Probably pretty good?