Race for 1 Seed (2/5) | Page 7 | The Boneyard

Race for 1 Seed (2/5)

Fishy said:
1) You’re right.
2) They might be right, also.

Seeds are pretty overrated anyway. We’ve won from one and we’ve won from out of the clouds.
Expand ...

Something like 2/3 of the NCAA champions all time have been a 1 seed. It’s just not as apparent if you look solely at UConn, which has won 3 times as a 3 seed or lower.
 
.-.
auror said:
The rosiest possible viewing of the horrible, horrible game last night is that we added a Q1 win.
Expand ...

The Quad system remains hilarious

We lost a Quad 3 game which was immediately remastered into a Quad 2 loss and a Quad 2 win was turned into a Quad 1 win.

Some school with a nerd is eventually going to figure out that losing a particular game is better than winning it.
 
HooperScooper said:
Not true at all. Some of you who post stuff like this and don't know what you're talking about are doing the board a disservice by spreading false information.

NET has become one of the most commonly referenced college basketball metrics since the NCAA introduced it for the 2018-19 season. The "NCAA Evaluation Tool" remains a vital cog in selection methodology.

However, it is not necessarily a "resume" tool. NET is influenced by margin of victory and efficiency, which is a feature and not a bug. Because of the way it's designed, a team's NET ranking gives a view of how difficult that team is to beat and not necessarily a full view of its resume.

UConn is a great example. The Huskies are No. 10 in NET entering their Wednesday game against Creighton. Yet, they are projected as the fourth No. 1 seed in CBS Sports Bracketology. Why? Because of a resume that ranks No. 3 in WAB and is highlighted by victories over Illinois, Florida and Kansas.

www.cbssports.com

Why college basketball fans should master Wins Above Bubble: WAB is new factor in NCAA Tournament selection

If you only have the bandwidth to master one metric before Selection Sunday, consider learning WAB
www.cbssports.com www.cbssports.com
Expand ...
I was referring to NET, Kenpom, miya and Torvik. I guess I should have specified which metric. I hadn't considered or included WAB. It isn't false information. "Most" is a word.
 
80shusky said:
I was referring to NET, Kenpom, miya and Torvik. I guess I should have specified which metric. I hadn't considered or included WAB. It isn't false information. "Most" is a word.
Expand ...
“Which puts them mid to bottom 2 seed.” That wasn’t true when they were 8-10 in those metrics you pointed out. Those metrics don’t determine your seed. That’s what I was pointing out.
 
.-.
Fishy said:
I would not spend a hell of a lot of time worrying about the one seed.

Unless they improve markedly and immediately, they’re a three seed in one week’s time.
Expand ...
4 top 10 losses already this week and 2 more top 4 losses guaranteed on Saturday means with the gap between the top and the rest, there won’t be much movement this week.

This team can beat Nova on the road and the Johnnies at home
 
JungleLobo said:
4 top 10 losses already this week and 2 more top 4 losses guaranteed on Saturday means with the gap between the top and the rest, there won’t be much movement this week.

This team can beat Nova on the road and the Johnnies at home
Expand ...
We can also easily lose to both and will lose to both if we don't start playing defense again.
 
HooperScooper said:
“Which puts them mid to bottom 2 seed.” That wasn’t true when they were 8-10 in those metrics you pointed out. Those metrics don’t determine your seed. That’s what I was pointing out.
Expand ...
I’m good 1-3 we won it all as 7 and a 5
Screw the seed play better D and win
 
Fishy said:
I would not spend a hell of a lot of time worrying about the one seed.

Unless they improve markedly and immediately, they’re a three seed in one week’s time.
Expand ...
Unless they improve it doesn't matter what seed they are. These next two games will be telling.
 
.-.
HooperScooper said:
“Which puts them mid to bottom 2 seed.” That wasn’t true when they were 8-10 in those metrics you pointed out. Those metrics don’t determine your seed. That’s what I was pointing out.
Expand ...
So mr. scooper breaking my chops got me thinking here and I went to the NCAA website to see what metrics they use to evaluate teams.

What metrics are used by the committee to evaluate teams?​
​

BPI (ESPN)
KenPom Rankings
KPI
NET



Strength of Record (ESPN)
Torvik
Wins Above Bubble


So UConn currently:
BPI: 11
Kenpom: 13
KPI: 6
NET: 10
SOR: 4
Torvik: 9
WAB: 4

What does this mean? I have no idea.
 
80shusky said:
So mr. scooper breaking my chops got me thinking here and I went to the NCAA website to see what metrics they use to evaluate teams.

What metrics are used by the committee to evaluate teams?​
​

​

BPI (ESPN)
KenPom Rankings
KPI
NET



Strength of Record (ESPN)
Torvik
Wins Above Bubble


So UConn currently:
BPI: 11
Kenpom: 13
KPI: 6
NET: 10
SOR: 4
Torvik: 9
WAB: 4

What does this mean? I have no idea.
Expand ...
It means 2 seed.
 
RuffRuff said:
Unless they improve it doesn't matter what seed they are. These next two games will be telling.
Expand ...
This is correct. It's why I never posted that much, if at all, in threads concerning seeding even if I read them. Even before the awful clunker they had against Creighton, UConn was in position for a #1 seed but they certainly have not looked the part when the calendar changed to 2026. I was then in the beginning of 2026, and now am more concerned with how they fix or mask their weaknesses, the defense in general, creating shots off the dribble when the play breaks down, inconsistent shooting, and the one that disappoints me the most, lack of depth. When they were in line for a #1 seed, and now as a #2 or #3 seed, they looked like a 2nd weekend team in the NCAAT at best and at worst a team with a possibly of losing in the first weekend to a #7, #8, #9, or #10 seed .
 
Last edited:
I guess it needs repeating.
All that matters is how well we're playing.
Did the seven seed matter in 2014?
Did the three seed matter in 2023?
Did it matter when the Germans bombed Pearl Harbor?
Let's all just relax and see if Dan Hurley is worth the money he's being paid.
A second straight year making a mistake on signing a backup point guard, the eighth straight year not being able teach effective inbounds plays, several years of the guards being unable to stay in front of their man on defense, and a sudden inability to rebound, run a fast break and dunk off pick and rolls have hit hard.
But most concerning is the team's body language.
Something just doesn't seem right.
 
auror said:
It means 2 seed.
Expand ...
Today. Before the Creighton game they were probably the 4th 1 seed. Which didn't equate to NET, Kenpom, BPI, Torvik, etc. If people would just read the articles on WAB I posted they would understand but people on here just like to argue no matter what they think they know.

Forget it, I'm done on the subject. It's tough arguing with people who are using assumptions that are wrong.
 
HooperScooper said:
Today. Before the Creighton game they were probably the 4th 1 seed. Which didn't equate to NET, Kenpom, BPI, Torvik, etc. If people would just read the articles on WAB I posted they would understand but people on here just like to argue no matter what they think they know.

Forget it, I'm done on the subject. It's tough arguing with people who don't know what they're talking about.
Expand ...
Thank you for posting that stuff @HooperScooper. I also posted the article from the media mock tournament exercise where they specifically talk about the importance of WAB. Meanwhile, we have posters still using RPI...
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,247
Messages
4,515,051
Members
10,393
Latest member
jims


Top Bottom