Race for 1 Seed (2/5)

[FightOnCT]

Iowa State beat top 10 Houston this week and then lost @ top 25 BYU.

UConn lost at home to unranked, not even on the bubble Creighton and won @ unranked Villanova.

Iowa State still has the inside track.

That’s something that’d affect the AP poll but rankings mean zilch, quads do. Creighton loss will sting, but the Nova win is Q1A which could possibly help our case. At worst keeps us at the top of the 2 line

 

[businesslawyer]

Chances are slim to none if you ask me. Winning out is the only chance and based on how we look, that doesn't sound likely.

We are 14 in KP - that has to be the lowest KP for anyone thinking they had one seed chances, ever.

If you have ever been clear on anything, please be clear on this — no one asked you.

(Having been shown as 5th in the country on Saturday, by the way, that your ranking of UConn is simply dead wrong, will that have any effect whatsoever on your trolling on this?)

 

[businesslawyer]

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.

No one but the Boneyard thinks winning at Creighton and winning at Kansas do comparable things for your resume. Or that it makes a difference whether a team you beat on the road ends up 72nd or 77th. Quad records are just a superficial starting point for comparing teams because you have to start somewhere.

 

[businesslawyer]

You really take those that don't read your articles personal, don't yeah? Teacher?

In no one’s world is ignorance a strength.

Iowa State beat top 10 Houston this week and then lost @ top 25 BYU.

UConn lost at home to unranked, not even on the bubble Creighton and won @ unranked Villanova.

Iowa State still has the inside track.

You realize that Iowa State’s win against Houston and our loss to Creighton HAD ALREADY HAPPENED at the time time these rankings were made, right? Iowa State may still be ahead of us as of this morning, but logic please.

 

[RuffRuff]

In no one’s world is ignorance a strength.

You realize that Iowa State’s win against Houston and our loss to Creighton HAD ALREADY HAPPENED at the time time these rankings were made, right? Iowa State may still be ahead of us as of this morning, but logic please.

If we beat StJ and win out, 1 is back. Couldn’t have had a more perfect day yesterday. Houston losing at home to AZ w/o Peat was the kicker. Feels like a tie with ISU.

 

[king conn]

Torvik has us back as a #1 seed

For those fretting about Iowa St, they are the last 2 seed

 

[RuffRuff]

Torvik has us back as a #1 seed

For those fretting about Iowa St, they are the last 2 seed

Not sure Torvik thinks like the committee. If the top 8 seeds fall as is, the team want to avoid as a 2 is Illinois. I suspect Florida may work back into a 2, and if so, would want to avoid them as a 2 or a 3.

 

[king conn]

Not sure Torvik thinks like the committee. If the top 8 seeds fall as is, the team want to avoid as a 2 is Illinois. I suspect Florida may work back into a 2, and if so, would want to avoid them as a 2 or a 3.

Lol he uses the same metrics as the committee. I know you are adverse to this, but go see it he has it all laid out

He does it 2 ways, as it stands now, and then he does one with predictive assuming the year is over. In both instances, he has us as a 1.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Lol he uses the same metrics as the committee. I know you are adverse to this, but go see it he has it all laid out

He does it 2 ways, as it stands now, and then he does one with predictive assuming the year is over. In both instances, he has us as a 1.

He doesn't have the time to actually read about this. He is too busy posting here!

 

[RuffRuff]

He doesn't have the time to actually read about this. He is too busy posting here!

There was nothing shared - hockey is on.

 

[CTBasketball]

Gun to my head if I had to pick a metric nerd to align with, give me the bullet.

 

[Inyatkin]

He doesn't have the time to actually read about this. He is too busy posting here!

Daily post limits would do wonders around here

 

[FfldCntyFan]

I get that many here are placing quite a bit of importance on what seed we end up with for the tournament, but I believe we have other concerns, which will carry quite a bit of weight towards where we will end up once this season is over while our seeding will play a very small role.

We took a nice step forward yesterday, but we need to continue doing so, at increasing levels if this season is going to end as we want it to. If we do this, we can make a deep run as either a one or two seed, regardless of which region we end up in. If we don't, we can be a one seed anywhere and still be ripe to get picked off in the sweet sixteen or earlier.

We won't drop to so low of a seed that the path would be too demanding if we can fix what needs to be fixed. If we can't fix what needs to be fixed, no seeding would get us where we want to end up.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Based on yesterday's bracket reveal and then the results of yesterday, this is my reasonable guess where things stand purely from a numbers perspective:

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

5. Iowa St.
6. Houston
7. Illinois
8. Purdue

9. Florida
10. Nebraska
11. Gonzaga
12. Kansas

13. Texas Tech
14. Michigan St
15. Virginia
16. Alabama

 

[auror]

Lol he uses the same metrics as the committee. I know you are adverse to this, but go see it he has it all laid out

He does it 2 ways, as it stands now, and then he does one with predictive assuming the year is over. In both instances, he has us as a 1.

I think one of the points he may have been making (and if not it's a point I will make) is that I don't believe Iowa State was listed as a 1 before the reveal on Saturday, which means the site was underrating their profile, and they are unlikely to actually be the last 2 seed as listed on the site.

 

[uh-no]

Lol he uses the same metrics as the committee. I know you are adverse to this, but go see it he has it all laid out

He does it 2 ways, as it stands now, and then he does one with predictive assuming the year is over. In both instances, he has us as a 1.

no he doesn't.

It's a predictive rating in contrast to the committee, which rewards resumes with things like quad wins, and WAB.

While the committee has access to KP and Torvik, they have traditionally relied far more heavily on the quality of a teams wins than the slew of predictive metrics.

 

[RuffRuff]

Gun to my head if I had to pick a metric nerd to align with, give me the bullet.

I tend to like the metric of top 3 wins. It tells you what a team’s ceiling is, with some element of recency weighted.

Let’s see how that impacts Wisconsin this year. Wins @UM, @Illinois and MSU. I bet it bumps them a couple likes above the metrics.

 

[Tiamat7]

Hilarious quad system: based on yesterday's results, UConn now has two fewer Quad 1 wins (6) and one Quad 3 loss. This happened because Nova fell to 31 in the NET, and the thrashing Creighton took at St Johns pushed them into the 80s.

 

[navery12]

Hilarious quad system: based on yesterday's results, UConn now has two fewer Quad 1 wins (6) and one Quad 3 loss. This happened because Nova fell to 31 in the NET, and the thrashing Creighton took at St Johns pushed them into the 80s.

One fewer Q1 win, because we won a Q1 game yesterday in addition to the 2 games shifting down to Q2

 

[uh-no]

Hilarious quad system: based on yesterday's results, UConn now has two fewer Quad 1 wins (6) and one Quad 3 loss. This happened because Nova fell to 31 in the NET, and the thrashing Creighton took at St Johns pushed them into the 80s.

Q1A matters as much or more than Q1 when talking about the top couple seedlines

 

[king conn]

I think one of the points he may have been making (and if not it's a point I will make) is that I don't believe Iowa State was listed as a 1 before the reveal on Saturday, which means the site was underrating their profile, and they are unlikely to actually be the last 2 seed as listed on the site.

Except the committee chair said they were hit by the unexpected loss by UConn and working quick, they based their 1 seed on a simple head to head result with Houston that just conveniently happened. In which case they wouldn't have needed to be seeded a 1 by torvik beforehand.

That does set a precedent I guess which would work in our favor if we collide with Illinois

 

[bazzdog]

I get that many here are placing quite a bit of importance on what seed we end up with for the tournament, but I believe we have other concerns, which will carry quite a bit of weight towards where we will end up once this season is over while our seeding will play a very small role.

We took a nice step forward yesterday, but we need to continue doing so, at increasing levels if this season is going to end as we want it to. If we do this, we can make a deep run as either a one or two seed, regardless of which region we end up in. If we don't, we can be a one seed anywhere and still be ripe to get picked off in the sweet sixteen or earlier.

We won't drop to so low of a seed that the path would be too demanding if we can fix what needs to be fixed. If we can't fix what needs to be fixed, no seeding would get us where we want to end up.

Exactly
We need to turn that 2nd half into 2 straight halves against Johnnie’s.

 

[Mr. Wonderful]

Based on yesterday's bracket reveal and then the results of yesterday, this is my reasonable guess where things stand purely from a numbers perspective:

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

5. Iowa St.
6. Houston
7. Illinois
8. Purdue

9. Florida
10. Nebraska
11. Gonzaga
12. Kansas

13. Texas Tech
14. Michigan St
15. Virginia
16. Alabama

Yes please.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Based on yesterday's bracket reveal and then the results of yesterday, this is my reasonable guess where things stand purely from a numbers perspective:

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

5. Iowa St.
6. Houston
7. Illinois
8. Purdue

9. Florida
10. Nebraska
11. Gonzaga
12. Kansas

13. Texas Tech
14. Michigan St
15. Virginia
16. Alabama

Right now our 3 best wins are Illinois, Florida, and Kansas, with the first 2 on a neutral court, and the 3rd at Kansas.

Iowa St's 3 best wins are at Purdue, Kansas at home (split with them) and Houston at home. I'd give a UConn a slight edge but it's very close.

Houston's 3 best wins are Arkansas (neutral), Texas Tech (split with them) and at BYU. Advantage UConn.

 

[king conn]

no he doesn't.

It's a predictive rating in contrast to the committee, which rewards resumes with things like quad wins, and WAB.

While the committee has access to KP and Torvik, they have traditionally relied far more heavily on the quality of a teams wins than the slew of predictive metrics.

You can say everything is predictive unless you are in the room Captain Obvious.

Otherwise, it is a model also based on resumes that rewards what you just said! Both as of right now, and another that he says is predictive.

When they have a tight margin and need to make a close decision, then they go to something like best wins, or head to head, both of which they mentioned yesterday. Or, that all gets thrown out the window based on conference configurations and/or locations.