Seeding Outlook

[aburks41]

This is how I view it:

L? 4 seed
W/L? 3 seed
W/W/L? 3 seed
W/W/W? 2 seed

In terms of the region, I think being the #1 4 seed or the #1 3 seed is the best outcome. So if we beat PC and lose to Marquette, we might get the last 3 seed in which case we are at the mercy of the committee…

 

[tzznandrew]

This is how I view it:

L? 4 seed
W/L? 3 seed
W/W/L? 3 seed
W/W/W? 2 seed

In terms of the region, I think being the #1 4 seed or the #1 3 seed is the best outcome. So if we beat PC and lose to Marquette, we might get the last 3 seed in which case we are at the mercy of the committee…

First things first: get Albany as a 2/3 should be the goal. You play 14 seed rather than 13. In the second round, the 6/11 teams are always preferable to the 5/12—and we avoid the 1 even longer.

It's the S-curve after that, so more luck. Want to be slotted opposed to whichever 1-seed is closest east. Seems most likely to be Purdue.

But at this stage, since we're not in discussion for a 1, the goal has to be Albany with the 1 on the other side of the bracket.

 

[Dibbie]

They should be a 2 seed, if the committee realizes they were the best team in the country, hit a mid season lul, then got their mojo back at the right time.

But if they were a 2 seed, they’d be the lowest 2, thus matched up with the #1 overall (Houston), putting them outside the East region.

Every team is beatable. They have a 3 seed locked up now, so it’s a matter of continuing their good play.

 

[BleedHuskyBlu]

Am I the only one that thinks if we win the BET and other things fall our way we could be a 1 seed? I understand it may take a bunch of dominoes, but the parity is incredible this year.

Don’t think so I think the top 4 of Houston, Kansas, UCLA, Alabama are all but locked up

 

[JohnFSilver]

This is how I view it:

L? 4 seed
W/L? 3 seed
W/W/L? 3 seed
W/W/W? 2 seed

In terms of the region, I think being the #1 4 seed or the #1 3 seed is the best outcome. So if we beat PC and lose to Marquette, we might get the last 3 seed in which case we are at the mercy of the committee…

Most likely scenario

 

[Hunt for 7]

FWIW most sites have us as a 3 seed right now. If we get to the be final even if we lose I think we will be no worse than a 3 seed and possibly 2 seed!

 

[jake14mw]

So, is UConn almost a lock for Albany? I know somebody who has tickets for Friday in Albany.

 

[MrSec224]

Remember guys. What happens from friday on has very little bearing on seeding. Either good or bad, save for auto bid stealers. I dont think we move above a 3 regardless if BET outcome

 

[Ewekon]

win BET, Alabama is huge...we find a region in need of a 2. That slip at home vs. Xavier doesn't help; but they may be a team we have to play through in BET conquest.

 

[Ewekon]

seeding - take a combo of ap/coaches poll, divide by 4, keep it or add or subtract one. seeding.
already weeks into seed mania, it's only going to get worser.
all seems so very much like 'and, they're off!'

cuz, u know, it's all soo dang simple.

that Monty Python clip made my weekend. proving perhaps, "i'm not dead"

 

[HooperScooper]

FWIW most sites have us as a 3 seed right now. If we get to the be final even if we lose I think we will be no worse than a 3 seed and possibly 2 seed!

Looks like the majority of sites have them as a 4 but it's close. Average seed is the highest 4 so real close to a 3.

The Bracket Project's Bracket Matrix - 2023

 

[Tenspro2002]

First things first: get Albany as a 2/3 should be the goal. You play 14 seed rather than 13. In the second round, the 6/11 teams are always preferable to the 5/12—and we avoid the 1 even longer.

It's the S-curve after that, so more luck. Want to be slotted opposed to whichever 1-seed is closest east. Seems most likely to be Purdue.

But at this stage, since we're not in discussion for a 1, the goal has to be Albany with the 1 on the other side of the bracket.

Under-discussed and astute point.

Forget all the MSG talk (which will be at the whims of the Committee). A #3 seed puts us in a much, much better position to get to the Final Four than a #4 seed.

• #13 seeds tend to be a lot more game than #14
• though it isn't always the case, this year there is a significant dropoff after the first ~20 or so teams. The 6 seed line is weak this year.
• likewise, though it isn't always the case, this year there is a pretty significant dropoff after the first handful of teams. Facing 2-seed Kansas State is a lot more appealing than #1 seed Kansas in the Sweet 16 if we get there

 

[shizzle787]

Under-discussed and astute point.

Forget all the MSG talk (which will be at the whims of the Committee). A #3 seed puts us in a much, much better position to get to the Final Four than a #4 seed.

• #13 seeds tend to be a lot more game than #14
• though it isn't always the case, this year there is a significant dropoff after the first ~20 or so teams. The 6 seed line is weak this year.
• likewise, though it isn't always the case, this year there is a pretty significant dropoff after the first handful of teams. Facing 2-seed Kansas State is a lot more appealing than #1 seed Kansas in the Sweet 16 if we get there

Yes, all but a hand full of national championships have been won by top 3 seeds.

 

[CTBasketball]

We are not jumping to the 2 line. Pray for a BET title and a 3 seed in the East.

 

[shizzle787]

We are not jumping to the 2 line. Pray for a BET title and a 3 seed in the East.

I don't think we can get a 2 either now that I look at it: we can't pass Kansas, Texas, Kansas State, UCLA, Purdue, or Baylor based on Quad victories/losses. It is highly unlikely we pass any one of the other two we need to get a Quad 3 loss: Houston or Alabama. Both would have to run into sub-100 NET teams and lose. I don't see that happening.

 

[tzznandrew]

I don't think we can get a 2 either now that I look at it: we can't pass Kansas, Texas, Kansas State, UCLA, Purdue, or Baylor based on Quad victories/losses. It is highly unlikely we pass any one of the other two we need to get a Quad 3 loss: Houston or Alabama. Both would have to run into sub-100 NET teams and lose. I don't see that happening.

There's a very outside chance of the 2. The 3 is our goal. It's gettable. We may be sittin on one right now. But of course we need to hold on.

 

[shizzle787]

There's a very outside chance of the 2. The 3 is our goal. It's gettable. We may be sittin on one right now.

I think we are #12 on the S-Curve ahead of Tennessee (they have 3 Q2 losses to our 1 Q3) and slightly behind Gonzaga.

 

[pj]

I don't think we can get a 2 either now that I look at it: we can't pass Kansas, Texas, Kansas State, UCLA, Purdue, or Baylor based on Quad victories/losses. It is highly unlikely we pass any one of the other two we need to get a Quad 3 loss: Houston or Alabama. Both would have to run into sub-100 NET teams and lose. I don't see that happening.

I don't know how the committee is going to look at it, but that's not at all how I see it.

Just looking at the two weakest teams on your "we can't pass" list:

• Kansas State has 8 losses and against shared opponents with UConn went 4-2 with losses to Butler and Iowa State and wins over Oklahoma St (twice), Iowa State, and Florida. UConn went 5-0 against those opponents. K State is not finishing strong, 6-6 in their last 12. They are Kenpom #18.
• Baylor has 9 losses and against shared opponents with UConn went 0-3 with losses to Marquette and Iowa State (twice). UConn went 2-1 against those opponents. Baylor is 2-3 in their last 5. They are Kenpom #14.

I don't see how either team could be ranked ahead of UConn. We have a better overall record, look better against shared opponents, are Kenpom #4 and are finishing strong having won 8 of our last 9.

 

[shizzle787]

I don't know how the committee is going to look at it, but that's not at all how I see it.

Just looking at the two weakest teams on your "we can't pass" list:

• Kansas State has 8 losses and against shared opponents with UConn went 4-2 with losses to Butler and Iowa State and wins over Oklahoma St (twice), Iowa State, and Florida. UConn went 5-0 against those opponents. K State is not finishing strong, 6-6 in their last 12.
• Baylor has 9 losses and against shared opponents with UConn went 0-3 with losses to Marquette and Iowa State (twice). UConn went 2-1 against those opponents. Baylor is 2-3 in their last 5.

I don't see how either team could be ranked ahead of UConn.

The committee places zero value on how you finish.

Kansas State has zero losses in Quad 3 or 4. They have one loss in Quad 2. If they lose to TCU, that will be a Quad 1 loss. They would finish at 9-8 in Quad 1.

If we win out, we would finish 8-6 in Quad 1 but we would have a Quad 3 loss. 9-8 vs. 8-6 is basically a tossup. The differentiator is having a Quad 2 loss (them) vs. a Quad 3 loss (us).

Baylor has zero losses in Quads 2, 3, or 4. They are 11-9 in Quad 1. If they lose to Iowa State they will be 11-10 in Quad 1. 11-10 in Quad 1 with no other losses is slightly better than 8-6 in Quad 1 with a Quad 3 loss.

 

[tzznandrew]

The committee places zero value on how you finish.

Kansas State has zero losses in Quad 3 or 4. They have one loss in Quad 2. If they lose to TCU, that will be a Quad 1 loss. They would finish at 9-8 in Quad 1.

If we win out, we would finish 8-6 in Quad 1 but we would have a Quad 3 loss. 9-8 vs. 8-6 is basically a tossup. The differentiator is having a Quad 2 loss (them) vs. a Quad 3 loss (us).

Baylor has zero losses in Quads 2, 3, or 4. They are 11-9 in Quad 1. If they lose to Iowa State they will be 11-10 in Quad 1. 11-10 in Quad 1 with no other losses is slightly better than 8-6 in Quad 1 with a Quad 3 loss.

I think we may be ahead of KSU right now. We may hop Baylor. We may hop one merely on procedural grounds, too, given how clumped up the BXII is.

If we win out, we're a 3 at least. Other things would need to shake out for us to get a 2.

A 3 is fine. We've won a title from there. We can start in Albany from there.

 

[MTBingNinja]

I’m all for better seeding, the easier the opponent in theory.

Once the get the monkey off their back in the first round, we can exhale and enjoy the games a bit more.

 

[AZHuskiePop]

The committee loves to send us West.

Second round is in Vegas
Not two bad a trip , I could live with that

 

[Greathusky]

Men's Bracketology: We will ask again for the 25th time ... is this the Big Ten's season?

Nine Big Ten members are listed in our latest bracket, and every one of the First Four Out group -- Nebraska, Maryland, Wisconsin and USC -- are Big Ten members.

www.espn.com

Lunardi's bracket has us still as a #4. I am surprised that Tennessee is a number #3 in our bracket despite the injury to their point guard.

 

[pj]

The committee places zero value on how you finish.

Kansas State has zero losses in Quad 3 or 4. They have one loss in Quad 2. If they lose to TCU, that will be a Quad 1 loss. They would finish at 9-8 in Quad 1.

If we win out, we would finish 8-6 in Quad 1 but we would have a Quad 3 loss. 9-8 vs. 8-6 is basically a tossup. The differentiator is having a Quad 2 loss (them) vs. a Quad 3 loss (us).

Baylor has zero losses in Quads 2, 3, or 4. They are 11-9 in Quad 1. If they lose to Iowa State they will be 11-10 in Quad 1. 11-10 in Quad 1 with no other losses is slightly better than 8-6 in Quad 1 with a Quad 3 loss.

This worship of the Quadrant scores strikes me as idiocy. By quadrant score we are #13 nationally and on the 4 line, but if we had won one more game we'd be #7 nationally and on the 2 line. Our last three losses came by 3 points or less and one could easily have swung the other way.

Moreover, the quadrant scores really reward teams for playing in a conference with a lot of top 50 teams. If you play all Q1 teams and go .500, your quadrant score is 1.50 and you would be ranked the #16 team in the country, ahead of Virginia, St Mary's, Tennessee, Duke, Kentucky, and many others, and get a 4 seed. Whereas if you play all Q4 teams and go undefeated, your quadrant score is 1.00 and you are ranked #42 and are on the bubble or an 11 seed.

By the eye test, UConn is better than a 4 seed, and better than K State or Baylor.

 

[tzznandrew]

This worship of the Quadrant scores strikes me as idiocy. By quadrant score we are #13 nationally and on the 4 line, but if we had won one more game we'd be #7 nationally and on the 2 line. Our last three losses came by 3 points or less and one could easily have swung the other way.

Moreover, the quadrant scores really reward teams for playing in a conference with a lot of top 50 teams. If you play all Q1 teams and go .500, your quadrant score is 1.50 and you would be ranked the #16 team in the country, ahead of Virginia, St Mary's, Tennessee, Duke, Kentucky, and many others, and get a 4 seed. Whereas if you play all Q4 teams and go undefeated, your quadrant score is 1.00 and you are ranked #42 and are on the bubble or an 11 seed. ... Since Q1 is basically the top 50 teams, going 50-50 against Q1 should rank you around #25 and a 7 seed, not #16 and a 4 seed.

By the eye test, UConn is better than a 4 seed, and better than K State or Baylor.

Quadrants are dumb and frankly should go away. They should just do like they did with RPI with the NET and break it down v. Top 25, Top 50, and Top 100, and sub 100, and then break them down Home, Road, Neutral. It's just more informative. Some Q1 games are not vs. likely tournament teams, but most Top 50 are. That's just more useful.

The quad **** is frankly more confusing than helpful. A good team should never lost to the 135th best team yet somehow at home that's Q2 (meh) and on the road Q3 (bad).