This National Ranking Has UConn #10

[Sphinx]

This morning UConn is ranked 25th in the overall Sagarin Ratings. But Sagarin offers a number of alternative rankings, one of them weighing recent performance heavier than early season performance.

Here is Sagarin's "RECENT" rankings, as of this morning:

1. Gonzaga 97.85
2. Illinois 96.76
3. Baylor 95.01
4. Iowa 93.90
5. Arkansas 91.79
6. Michigan 89.98
7. Kansas 89.97
8. Purdue 89.63
9. Alabama 89.41
10. UConn 88.85

Here you see the dilemma facing the NCAA selection committee -- how do you seed a Top Ten caliber team whose overall season performance may earn them only a 7 or 8 seed? Or, put another way, how do you seed an 18-2 team with a 14-6 record? If UConn wins the BET, the problem becomes more acute. UConn could be pushing the Top Five in this ranking and yet headed for a 5 or 6 seed at best.

 

[Waquoit]

Seth Davis has them up to #20. Imagine where we'd be if we played that game against Quinnipiac.

 

[JohnFSilver]

This morning UConn is ranked 25th in the overall Sagarin Ratings. But Sagarin offers a number of alternative rankings, one of them weighing recent performance heavier than early season performance.

Here is Sagarin's "RECENT" rankings, as of this morning:

1. Gonzaga 97.85
2. Illinois 96.76
3. Baylor 95.01
4. Iowa 93.90
5. Arkansas 91.79
6. Michigan 89.98
7. Kansas 89.97
8. Purdue 89.63
9. Alabama 89.41
10. UConn 88.85

Here you see the dilemma facing the NCAA selection committee -- how do you seed a Top Ten caliber team whose overall season performance may earn them only a 7 or 8 seed? Or, put another way, how do you seed an 18-2 team with a 14-6 record? If UConn wins the BET, the problem becomes more acute. UConn could be pushing the Top Five in this ranking and yet headed for a 5 or 6 seed at best.

I think this is going to generate a major discussion depending on what UConn does in BET. If they get to BET finals, what do you do? Keep them as a 7/8? That's ridiculous for the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds. Their metrics say they are 25-35, but does the committee go off the eye test and recent play? It is not about being fair to UConn, it is about wrecking the balance of the bracket and sandbagging the one seed.

Then, Uconn should probably be a 6-seed heading onto BET. They win it? Might go up a line or 2. It's crazy to think about, but if Uconn wins BET, they would be 17-6, and 13-2 with James Bouknight in the lineup. Then, when you look at their losses, no bad losses and all games close. They are probably closer to a top 15 team . But can you justify it? It is subjective because they have two things happen to them:

1. Covid pause knocked out about 8 games this year.
2. Injury to a top 10 draft pick.

The committee, if it isn't confident, can always justify a seeding based on NET Ranking. But is that best for the tournament? I have no idea.

 

[CTBasketball]

The simplest thing is to keep winning. The committee will not do the right thing.

 

[CTBasketball]

I think this is going to generate a major discussion depending on what UConn does in BET. If they get to BET finals, what do you do? Keep them as a 7/8? That's ridiculous for the No. 1 and No. 2 seeds. Their metrics say they are 25-35, but does the committee go off the eye test and recent play? It is not about being fair to UConn, it is about wrecking the balance of the bracket and sandbagging the one seed.

Then, Uconn should probably be a 6-seed heading onto BET. They win it? Might go up a line or 2. It's crazy to think about, but if Uconn wins BET, they would be 17-6, and 13-2 with James Bouknight in the lineup. Then, when you look at their losses, no bad losses and all games close. They are probably closer to a top 15 team . But can you justify it? It is subjective because they have two things happen to them:

1. Covid pause knocked out about 8 games this year.
2. Injury to a top 10 draft pick.

The committee, if it isn't confident, can always justify a seeding based on NET Ranking. But is that best for the tournament? I have no idea.

No because Colgate will be a 3 seed.

 

[husky429]

20-25 seems right to me. If we had Bouk the whole time, then we'd probably be 10-15.

IMO you based the decision on the overall record regardless of injuries as much as possible. Maybe give the edge to two teams that are close if one had an injured star. Way too much subjectivity when you start trying to make those judgment calls instead of going by the #s as much as possible.

 

[MexicoHusky]

Winning the BE will definitely do the committee a favor. They'll seed us as a 5 or 6. Knocking off a 3 or 4 is less aggregous.

The committee has a similar dilemma with Nova. What are they? 3 or 4? They won't be able to beat a 5 or 6 without their starting PG. They probably won't be able to win their 1st round game if the other guard is out.

 

[JohnFSilver]

20-25 seems right to me. If we had Bouk the whole time, then we'd probably be 10-15.

IMO you based the decision on the overall record regardless of injuries. Way too much subjectivity when you start doing that.

I actually disagree. If injuries can knock a team down, why can't health launch a team up a line?

 

[husky429]

I actually disagree. If injuries can knock a team down, why can't health launch a team up a line?

If injuries are knocking a team down, it's because they lost games. Literal games that were actually played. That's objective: you either won or lost. If the committee starts going "well, what games would they have won with Bouknight" and making calls for seeding based on that, they're living in fantasy land. The fantasy land is probably pretty close to real life, but nonetheless, it didn't occur.

There's bound to be some subjectivity when it comes to seeding because not everyone plays everyone like the NBA. But still, no one is saying "Well, the Celts didn't have Kemba or Smart so their record should be better." Subjectivity needs to be minimized. Use the actual data that is available from real games.

 

[HuskyHawk]

20-25 seems right to me. If we had Bouk the whole time, then we'd probably be 10-15.

IMO you based the decision on the overall record regardless of injuries as much as possible. Maybe give the edge to two teams that are close if one had an injured star. Way too much subjectivity when you start trying to make those judgment calls instead of going by the #s as much as possible.

It's all subjective this year. There are too few out or conference games to fairly evaluate any team. And while we missed Bouk, remember, we also missed Jackson. Our roster is quite different than it was earlier in the year. Sanogo emerging changes us as well.

I think we are one of the 16 most dangerous teams out there right now.

 

[husky429]

It's all subjective this year. There are too few out or conference games to fairly evaluate any team. And while we missed Bouk, remember, we also missed Jackson. Our roster is quite different than it was earlier in the year. Sanogo emerging changes us as well.

I think we are one of the 16 most dangerous teams out there right now.

I agree we are a sweet-16 team, maybe elite-8 if we get the right matchups. My only concern would be lack of experience.

This year is more subjective than normal--very true. I'm thinking more about normal years.

 

[JohnFSilver]

If injuries are knocking a team down, it's because they lost games. Literal games that were actually played. That's objective: you either won or lost. If the committee starts going "well, what games would they have won with Bouknight" and making calls for seeding based on that, they're living in fantasy land. The fantasy land is probably pretty close to real life, but nonetheless, it didn't occur.

There's bound to be some subjectivity when it comes to seeding because not everyone plays everyone like the NBA. But still, no one is saying "Well, the Celts didn't have Kemba or Smart so their record should be better." Subjectivity needs to be minimized. Use the actual data that is available from real games.

The tournament committee takes injuries into account though. Goes all the way back to the Cincinnati team with Kenyon Martin 20 something years ago. Should have been Top NO. 1 seed, he got hurt, the made Cincy a No. 2. They also, regularly, take injuries into account. If Luka Garza was injured for Iowa and not playing, they would knock Iowa down. Things like that. This is that extreme case in reverse.

 

[NJHusky]

If injuries are knocking a team down, it's because they lost games. Literal games that were actually played. That's objective: you either won or lost. If the committee starts going "well, what games would they have won with Bouknight" and making calls for seeding based on that, they're living in fantasy land. The fantasy land is probably pretty close to real life, but nonetheless, it didn't occur.

There's bound to be some subjectivity when it comes to seeding because not everyone plays everyone like the NBA. But still, no one is saying "Well, the Celts didn't have Kemba or Smart so their record should be better." Subjectivity needs to be minimized. Use the actual data that is available from real games.

I don’t think it’s as much subjectivity as recency bias. Yes the record is x, but in the last 10 games they are 9-1 signifying a team that is playing well NOW. Body of work gets you in but how you are playing recently impacts seeding IMO. especially with this crazy season and limited OOC.

i dont think they will put us on the 8/9 regardless of what happens in the BET. too much potential for an upset early if we play someone other than Baylor or Zags. .

 

[husky429]

The tournament committee takes injuries into account though. Goes all the way back to the Cincinnati team with Kenyon Martin 20 something years ago. Should have been Top NO. 1 seed, he got hurt, the made Cincy a No. 2. They also, regularly, take injuries into account. If Luka Garza was injured for Iowa and not playing, they would knock Iowa down. Things like that. This is that extreme case in reverse.

Yeah, I guess the point I should have made more clearly is that I think those kinds of judgment calls are stupid.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

I actually disagree. If injuries can knock a team down, why can't health launch a team up a line?

Absolutely. Not so much for us as to protect the top seeds in the tournament.

It’s not fair to potentially throw a 4-seed in 8-seed’s clothing at a 1 in the first weekend.

 

[husky429]

I don’t think it’s as much subjectivity as recency bias. Yes the record is x, but in the last 10 games they are 9-1 signifying a team that is playing well NOW. Body of work gets you in but how you are playing recently impacts seeding IMO. especially with this crazy season and limited OOC.

Recency bias is fair because those are games that were actually played. If they wanted to create an algorithm of some kind to favor more recent games, that would be totally fair and should be used (or maybe they even have--I have no idea).

So if the committee can look at our last 5 games and say "yeah, they're clearly trending up," then it would be reasonable to bump us up a seed.

I'm just saying I think it's dumb for anyone to say "well, we could've won more if Bouknight wasn't hurt and now he's back." We probably would have, but no one actually knows that because the games weren't played.

 

[UChusky916]

The committee does not take "recent performance" into account anymore, so while these rankings are fun, they're practically meaningless. And everything is moot until we see what happens in the BET.

I do think the committee will account for Bouk's injury and raise us a seed line over what our record indicates. My prediction:

• Win BET: 4/5 seed depending on teams played and other results
• BET finals loss: 5/6 seed depending on teams played and other results
• 2nd rd loss: 6/7 seed depending on teams played and other results
• 1st rd loss: 8/9 seed depending on teams played and other results

 

[NJHusky]

I'm just saying I think it's dumb for anyone to say "well, we could've won more if Bouknight wasn't hurt and now he's back." We probably would have, but no one actually knows that because the games weren't played.

I agree 100%...you can' assume who would win a game. As Herm Edwards said...that's why you play the game!

 

[NJHusky]

The committee does not take "recent performance" into account anymore, so while these rankings are fun, they're practically meaningless. And everything is moot until we see what happens in the BET.

I do think the committee will account for Bouk's injury and raise us a seed line over what our record indicates. My prediction:

• Win BET: 4/5 seed depending on teams played and other results
• BET finals loss: 5/6 seed depending on teams played and other results
• 2nd rd loss: 6/7 seed depending on teams played and other results
• 1st rd loss: 8/9 seed depending on teams played and other results

agree but I'd guess more likely a 10 than a 9...

 

[Palatine]

Recency bias gives you a more accurate picture of what is actually happening. That's why player statistics often have a separate, last seven, or last ten games, box under the season or career stats.

 

[goskis2018]

I'm hoping we land a 6/7 seed. I think we have a good shot against basically anyone in the country outside of the 1 seeds. If we could avoid a 1 seed until the elite 8 then I think we have a very real chance of getting there.

 

[uconngb]

Seth Davis has them up to #20. Imagine where we'd be if we played that game against Quinnipiac.

You're gonna make this poor guy's head pop off. He still can't give up the ghost, is adamant we'd be better off if we'd played and beaten Q, Yale and Fordham. Mind boggling how he's holding onto it.

 

[Umami Zen]

One of the challenges for the Committee with us is a smaller sample size of games due to COVID starts and stops vs other teams with a larger sample size = more games. Bouk's injury has some bearing on the "calculus".

Winning the BET will put additional pressure on them to overlook the smaller sample size and more accurately slot us with a reasonable seeding position.

In contrast, as an example, will the PG injuries at Nova impact their seeding at all or will it simply be their W/L record vs quality opponents and their recent legacy in the Tournament?

Great to be talking about seedings/brackets again rather than starting to hit golf balls at the range because the season is over.

 

[jibsey]

I want to go into these 2 tournaments like in 11 and 14, under the radar and with no respect from the media morons. Every time we advanced they were all surprised and predicted the next game was the last.

 

[storrsroars]

I've seen money lines as low as 2500 this morning, basically making UConn equal to Kansas and Texas, which would rank us a T11 as far as favorites to win it all.

 

[KingAG]

I want to go into these 2 tournaments like in 11 and 14, under the radar and with no respect from the media morons. Every time we advanced they were all surprised and predicted the next game was the last.

In 2011 we weren't under the radar. We literally have one championship where we were this incredible massive underdog and fans really think that its a blueprint for success

 

[Kolumbo]

Absolutely. Not so much for us as to protect the top seeds in the tournament.

It’s not fair to potentially throw a 4-seed in 8-seed’s clothing at a 1 in the first weekend.

I couldn't remember how it was that UConn and Kentucky were 7 and 8 seeds in 2014.

 

[VAHuskyFan]

I couldn't remember how it was that UConn and Kentucky were 7 and 8 seeds in 2014.

A week before Selection Sunday 2014, Louisville beat us by 33 points (33!). We deserved to be in the tournament, but it was not a situation like this year where we are clearly significantly better than our full-season resume would suggest.

Kentucky was a 10-loss team and dropped 5 of their last 10. Classic 8-seed resume and again nothing to suggest they had suddenly put it all together at the end of the season and were outplaying their overall resume.

We both just played well when it counted.

 

[jibsey]

In 2011 we weren't under the radar. We literally have one championship where we were this incredible massive underdog and fans really think that its a blueprint for success

We weren't under the radar in 11 going into the BE tournament? We weren't flying high. Our fanbase was depressed. (See MakersMuppet).

 

[gtcam]

If you don't win all this is out the window
Lose in the 1st game of the NBE tournament and UConn ends up in that dreaded place of playing the #1 seed in game 2 of the dance
This team needs to make the NBE finals to get the recognition it wants/deserves - sad but true
JUST WIN