Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="Glenn, post: 4581917, member: 3538"] [LIST] [*]Top 2 seeds won quite easily, by 25 or more points. Let’s not focus on 1 versus 2, as it really does not matter, except for the #2 that has to face SC. [*]The 3 and 4 lines also did well (even if tOSU was down double digits in the second quarter). ND looked legit, even without Miles. [*]The 5 seeds did worse than expected, with 2 losing (Washington State and Iowa State) and Louisville winning only by 2. Only Oklahoma did well—supporting the argument that they should have been considered for a hosting 4 seed. Historically, 5 seeds have won 80%. It looks like Washington State was overseeded, perhaps because of too much weight on their PAC-12 Tournament performance, they were lower in the “metrics.” ISU also went out early, but they were a legitimate 5 seed, according to the metrics. [*]6 seeds: 3 out of 4 won and historically the record is 68%. So the normal amount of upsets. Creighton lost by a lot, but in terms of the metrics (NET ratings and Massey), they were properly seeded. [*]Of the 7 seeds, two lost: NC State and Florida St. Both had key injured players, whose injury status was not known in advance. And typically only 65% of the 7 seeds advance, so good job committee. [*]Half of the 8 seeds lost, as is usual. [*]The P-5 do not appear to be over-represented, except perhaps the B10. The SEC has advanced 6 out of 7; the ACC has 5 out of 8 (with injuries hurting them), P12 has 5 out of 7. The B10 has 5 out of 8. [/LIST] [/QUOTE]

Verification: First name of men's bb coach