Race for 1 Seed (2/5)

[RuffRuff]

If we can get the last #1 seed, we would face the best #2 seed. The region would be the South (in Houston), so should we care if that #2 is in fact the Houston Cougars ? I don't know how it will play out, if Houston or Iowa St or FL or Illinois becomes the best #2 seed, but just personally would not want to be with a major crowd disadvantage.

Or is this thinking too many steps ahead ....

I'm not sure that's automatic. And Houston will not be the best 2 seed. I doubt you can reward them.

I'd personally want to avoid Florida at all costs if they get to the 2 line. I can see it landing something like this.

 

[BFieldHusky]

These guys are goofballs. Where did you find this? We can't get you to read basic articles, but you find this stuff. Bizarre. Anyway...

Again, I think Illinois would need to win out for this even to be a discussion.

If you are Dan Hurley, what is the point of scheduling tough matchups in November/December, on NEUTRAL courts, if the results aren't going to matter? UConn beating Illinois by 13 points should be a factor in this.

 

[Umami Zen]

I think we need to get to Friday night to feel comfortable. @KingAG made a great point that we have learned over the recent years. The committee doesn't pay attention to the conference tournaments as much as we think. But losing to a .500 Big East team in the quarterfinals would not be good.

Again, really need Michigan to beat Illinois tonight. But more importantly, need Arizona to beat Iowa St. at home on Monday.

Would be shocked if we don't take care of business on Friday night at BET/play for BET trophy on Sat. and expect we'll stack two more Ws with SH/Marq. Arizona won't lose at home on Monday. How hot will Illini's shooters be vs Michigan? Expect a close game.

 

[RuffRuff]

These guys are goofballs. Where did you find this? We can't get you to read basic articles, but you find this stuff. Bizarre. Anyway...

Again, I think Illinois would need to win out for this even to be a discussion.

If you are Dan Hurley, what is the point of scheduling tough matchups in November/December, on NEUTRAL courts, if the results aren't going to matter? UConn beating Illinois by 13 points should be a factor in this.

You do that if you're Hurley to hedge against an awful BE schedule.

Yeah, goofy, AND B10 homers, but they know they're stuff, albeit content fillers. I didn't watch this one, but for anyone interested. And I think you're right. UM wins tonight and that convo can end.

 

[Rich]

I don't understand the new 'Wins Above Bubble' metric. I mean, understand what it purports to accomplish; but I fail to see how it's a relevant measuring stick for the committee.

For example (and I'm stealing from the Athletic here), a 2025-2026 'bubble' team would have had ~25 wins against Miami of Ohio's schedule. Miami actually has 28. So, they are three wins above bubble.

Auburn is 'only' .89 wins above bubble against its schedule, so the simplistic idea is that Miami of Ohio has 'accomplished' more than Auburn and would thus be more deserving of an 'at large' bid as the committee would comp Miami's ~2 WAB vs. Auburn's .89 WAB.

I find this preposterous. Auburn plays in arguably the deepest, most competitive conference in the country; I don't even think Miami of Ohio has played a Quad 2 team this season. In order for the WAB metric to truly accomplish what the committee wants, I think there has got to be, or there should be, a component that says, 'OK, now how would Miami do against Auburn's schedule and vice versa?' Not a separate metric (that's arguably the purpose of the whole 'quad' measurement) but if you insist on using WAB it should be modified, not static.

The Red Hawks are having a great season and I hope they go undefeated through their tournament and gain admission through the auto-bid. But if you're going to compare them to a team like Auburn then I should think Miami would have to approach 8 or 9 WAB before even starting to think about comparing them to a Power 4 team floating around the cut line.

 

[Tenspro2002]

If we can get the last #1 seed, we would face the best #2 seed. The region would be the South (in Houston), so should we care if that #2 is in fact the Houston Cougars ? I don't know how it will play out, if Houston or Iowa St or FL or Illinois becomes the best #2 seed, but just personally would not want to be with a major crowd disadvantage.

Or is this thinking too many steps ahead ....

With Houston in the South, whether as a #1 or #2 seed, would be a disaster.

We have to hope it's us and Iowa State. Or maybe Florida or Illinois. Good news is we should (emphasis should, can't ever take the Committee for granted given its biases) get head to head consideration over the latter two.

The good news is, currently, we're probably #4 or #5, with Iowa State the other, and Houston behind them at #6.

 

[Nameless]

There are two caveats to this:

If Illinois beats Michigan at home or Iowa State beats Arizona on the road.

If either of those 2 things happen, and then those teams win their conference tournaments, I think it would be hard to deny them.

Personally, I don't think Illinois should have any chance of getting a 1 seed over us, even if we drop one more game.

In the scenario you laid out, that would certainly be a strong finish to their season. But it would come on the heels of being 2-3 in their last 5, and they also have 6 losses on the season even if they do win out and win the B1G tourney. Throw in the fact we controlled our H2H matchup with them, on a neutral court when we weren't even fully healthy, and I just don't see how one can make the case they would deserve the final 1 seed over us.

I know their predictive metrics are strong, but we play the games for a reason. They had their shot to show the committee they deserved a 1 seed over us and didn't seize the opportunity. Just my $.02

 

[superjohn]

These guys are goofballs. Where did you find this? We can't get you to read basic articles, but you find this stuff. Bizarre. Anyway...

Again, I think Illinois would need to win out for this even to be a discussion.

If you are Dan Hurley, what is the point of scheduling tough matchups in November/December, on NEUTRAL courts, if the results aren't going to matter? UConn beating Illinois by 13 points should be a factor in this.

He doesn't even watch the stuff he sends.

 

[Kemba15]

These guys are goofballs. Where did you find this? We can't get you to read basic articles, but you find this stuff. Bizarre. Anyway...

Again, I think Illinois would need to win out for this even to be a discussion.

If you are Dan Hurley, what is the point of scheduling tough matchups in November/December, on NEUTRAL courts, if the results aren't going to matter? UConn beating Illinois by 13 points should be a factor in this.

They are such Big 10 shills and picked against us every round in 2024, including picking Northwestern to beat us in Round 2 lol. That game was over literally 3 minutes in. I have told @RuffRuff this, but he continues to hype up Sleepers!

 

[BFieldHusky]

He doesn't even watch the stuff he sends.

Really strange. Like recommending a movie you never saw, or a book you never read.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I'm not sure that's automatic. And Houston will not be the best 2 seed. I doubt you can reward them.

I'd personally want to avoid Florida at all costs if they get to the 2 line. I can see it landing something like this.

St. John's a 6. Yikes. They really screwed the pooch OOC and are dragging down the rest of the conference with them.

 

[FfldCntyFan]

We don't need to hope, we don't need the path to do us any favors, we don't need to concern ourselves with whether we'll be one of the last one seeds or one of the first two seeds.

Regardless of seeding or location, we should be the better team on the court until the regional final. If we can't get that far, it will be on us, nobody else.

If we want the hardware (I know I do), we will need to beat a quality team in each of the final three games in order to cut down the nets in April. I don't see how any fan of this program would waste any time hoping things fall our way. Either we are or we are not good enough to face whoever is in our way. It's entirely on how we perform in the tournament.

 

[RuffRuff]

We don't need to hope, we don't need the path to do us any favors, we don't need to concern ourselves with whether we'll be one of the last one seeds or one of the first two seeds.

Regardless of seeding or location, we should be the better team on the court until the regional final. If we can't get that far, it will be on us, nobody else.

If we want the hardware (I know I do), we will need to beat a quality team in each of the final three games in order to cut down the nets in April. I don't see how any fan of this program would waste any time hoping things fall our way. Either we are or we are not good enough to face whoever is in our way. It's entirely on how we perform in the tournament.

There is a LOT of doubters in UConn this year - plenty of bulletin board for Hurley to staple.

Again, wonder if its part of his master plan. He's been beyond calm this year. If this guy is that good that he can conduct at such a stealth level, and win a third, just enshrine him already.

 

[bendm]

Illinois has 4 Ws against currently ranked teams: TT, Tenn, Purdue and Nebraska. That’s it. Ls to Bama, UConn, Nebraska, MSU, Wisconsin, UCLA.

Let’s see how they fair tonight but I’m not worrying about them running the table and winning the BIG tourney. Plus The committee has proven time and again they don’t care who wins conference tourneys.

 

[navery12]

I don't understand the new 'Wins Above Bubble' metric. I mean, understand what it purports to accomplish; but I fail to see how it's a relevant measuring stick for the committee.

For example (and I'm stealing from the Athletic here), a 2025-2026 'bubble' team would have had ~25 wins against Miami of Ohio's schedule. Miami actually has 28. So, they are three wins above bubble.

Auburn is 'only' .89 wins above bubble against its schedule, so the simplistic idea is that Miami of Ohio has 'accomplished' more than Auburn and would thus be more deserving of an 'at large' bid as the committee would comp Miami's ~2 WAB vs. Auburn's .89 WAB.

I find this preposterous. Auburn plays in arguably the deepest, most competitive conference in the country; I don't even think Miami of Ohio has played a Quad 2 team this season. In order for the WAB metric to truly accomplish what the committee wants, I think there has got to be, or there should be, a component that says, 'OK, now how would Miami do against Auburn's schedule and vice versa?' Not a separate metric (that's arguably the purpose of the whole 'quad' measurement) but if you insist on using WAB it should be modified, not static.

The Red Hawks are having a great season and I hope they go undefeated through their tournament and gain admission through the auto-bid. But if you're going to compare them to a team like Auburn then I should think Miami would have to approach 8 or 9 WAB before even starting to think about comparing them to a Power 4 team floating around the cut line.

What you are suggesting WAB should do is exactly what it is doing now. You can disagree with the takeaway, which it seems like you do, but you really could have just stopped at your first sentence when you said you don't understand WAB.

The only reason Miami is so high in WAB is because they haven't lost a single game, which is really hard to do. Despite winning 28 games they only have a WAB of around 3. If they lose a single game the rest of the season their WAB would drop by around 0.8-0.9 depending on the game and end up around 2 WAB.

That superior schedule for Auburn is already accounted for when all of their games have a much higher value associated to them, and as a result all of their losses also have a much lower value associated with them. That's why the comparison is being done with their respective WABs

 

[RuffRuff]

Illinois has 4 Ws against currently ranked teams: TT, Tenn, Purdue and Nebraska. That’s it.

22 Tennessee
17 Alabama

We find out what they're made of tonight.

 

[Marat]

There is a LOT of doubters in UConn this year - plenty of bulletin board for Hurley to staple.

Again, wonder if its part of his master plan. He's been beyond calm this year. If this guy is that good that he can conduct at such a stealth level, and win a third, just enshrine him already.

If you ask him, he'll say its just about figuring out which lucky underwear to wear.

 

[bendm]

22 Tennessee
17 Alabama

We find out what they're made of tonight.

I listed Tenn and they lost to Bama and
UConn, Nebraska, MSU, Wisconsin, UCLA.

I’m not worrying about them running the table and winning the BIG tourney. Plus The committee has proven time and again they don’t care who wins conference tourneys.

 

[Samoo]

I'm not sure that's automatic. And Houston will not be the best 2 seed. I doubt you can reward them.

I'd personally want to avoid Florida at all costs if they get to the 2 line. I can see it landing something like this.

So NC State, Virginia to start. We could be ACC champs in basketball as well as football.

 

[bendm]

I'm not sure that's automatic. And Houston will not be the best 2 seed. I doubt you can reward them.

It’s not about rewarding anyone it’s about selling tickets. If Houston is a 1 or 2 seed they’ll be in the south. We have to hope they keep losing and fall to a 3. Although Houston in Houston doesn’t really scare me anymore. Would rather that than a rematch against Florida Illinois Kansas. Indifferent on ISU and Purdue.

 

[RuffRuff]

I listed Tenn and they lost to Bama and
UConn, Nebraska, MSU, Wisconsin, UCLA.

I’m not worrying about them running the table and winning the BIG tourney. Plus The committee has proven time and again they don’t care who wins conference tourneys.

Their resume really isn't all that great if you look at it in retro. Nebraska is meh. Tenn is meh. Purdue is meh.

Let's see on Houston in the South.

 

[auror]

I don't understand the new 'Wins Above Bubble' metric. I mean, understand what it purports to accomplish; but I fail to see how it's a relevant measuring stick for the committee.

For example (and I'm stealing from the Athletic here), a 2025-2026 'bubble' team would have had ~25 wins against Miami of Ohio's schedule. Miami actually has 28. So, they are three wins above bubble.

Auburn is 'only' .89 wins above bubble against its schedule, so the simplistic idea is that Miami of Ohio has 'accomplished' more than Auburn and would thus be more deserving of an 'at large' bid as the committee would comp Miami's ~2 WAB vs. Auburn's .89 WAB.

I find this preposterous. Auburn plays in arguably the deepest, most competitive conference in the country; I don't even think Miami of Ohio has played a Quad 2 team this season. In order for the WAB metric to truly accomplish what the committee wants, I think there has got to be, or there should be, a component that says, 'OK, now how would Miami do against Auburn's schedule and vice versa?' Not a separate metric (that's arguably the purpose of the whole 'quad' measurement) but if you insist on using WAB it should be modified, not static.

The Red Hawks are having a great season and I hope they go undefeated through their tournament and gain admission through the auto-bid. But if you're going to compare them to a team like Auburn then I should think Miami would have to approach 8 or 9 WAB before even starting to think about comparing them to a Power 4 team floating around the cut line.

It's extremely likely that Auburn would have had more losses against Miami's schedule than Miami has had. Because Auburn is basically the poster child for bubble team (37th KenPom, 46th WAB), and the strength of team that is a bubble team on average would have won 25 games against Miami's easy schedule based on the calculations. That's a full 10 more games than they've actually won due to the easier schedule. But it's very, very hard to not lose any games with the amount of variability in shooting and how hard it is to win double digit games on the road.

 

[Nameless]

It's extremely likely that Auburn would have had more losses against Miami's schedule than Miami has had. Because Auburn is basically the poster child for bubble team (37th KenPom, 46th WAB), and the strength of team that is a bubble team on average would have won 25 games against Miami's easy schedule based on the calculations. That's a full 10 more games than they've actually won due to the easier schedule. But it's very, very hard to not lose any games with the amount of variability in shooting and how hard it is to win double digit games on the road.

Just curious, do you know if when calculating WAB and how many games a bubble team would have won against a certain schedule if games against D-2 teams are taken into account? I have to imagine if they are every bubble team would be expected to win 99% of the time or more, and they would provide an incredibly small boost to a team's overall WAB rating.

I like Miami O and want them to make the dance if they win out and lose in their conference tourney final to Akron. However, I ask because they have 3 wins against Division 2 teams. So, if they have 28 wins and a bubble team would have 25 against their schedule, but those 3 wins against D-2 teams aren't being taken into account when determining how many wins a bubble team would have against said schedule... They would have exactly as many wins as a bubble team would be expected to have, not 3 more wins than expected. No?

 

[upstater]

These guys are goofballs. Where did you find this? We can't get you to read basic articles, but you find this stuff. Bizarre. Anyway...

Again, I think Illinois would need to win out for this even to be a discussion.

If you are Dan Hurley, what is the point of scheduling tough matchups in November/December, on NEUTRAL courts, if the results aren't going to matter? UConn beating Illinois by 13 points should be a factor in this.

Are these the same guys who said Bouie from Northwestern was going to go off on UConn in 2024? And then they said Illinois would destroy UConn after Northwestern went down?

 

[navery12]

Just curious, do you know if when calculating WAB and how many games a bubble team would have won against a certain schedule if games against D-2 teams are taken into account? I have to imagine if they are every bubble team would be expected to win 99% of the time or more, and they would provide an incredibly small boost to a team's overall WAB rating.

I like Miami O and want them to make the dance if they win out and lose in their conference tourney final to Akron. However, I ask because they have 3 wins against Division 2 teams. So, if they have 28 wins and a bubble team would have 25 against their schedule, but those 3 wins against D-2 teams aren't being taken into account when determining how many wins a bubble team would have against said schedule... They would have exactly as many wins as a bubble team would be expected to have, not 3 more wins than expected. No?

You are correct that you don't get any WAB for beating a D2 team, but the subsequent logic is a bit off. The 25 wins for an expected bubble team is coming from their 28-0 record and them having a WAB of 3 (so an average bubble team would be expected to be 25-3). So if you then exclude those 3 D2 games you'd also have to adjust the expected wins down as well. So they'd be 25-0 and a bubble team would be 22-3