Updated Metrics (2/26/23) | Page 3 | The Boneyard

Updated Metrics (2/26/23)

auror said:
Oklahoma is top 50 NET, so on neutral it would be Q1.

They'd have a better profile than Michigan 2022, just last year, who was NET 34, KenPom 33, SOR 44, 5-10 in Q1, 3-3 Q2, with a strong SoS and a Q3 loss. 6-10 road/neutral.

Iowa St. would be similarly ranked analytically. They're 22, 24, and 27 right now, but with 3 somewhat close loses will drop to around 34, 33, 44. They'd be 8-12 in Q1 (substantially better), 2-2 Q2 (similar), and undefeated in Q3+Q4 (better). 4-10 in road/neutral (slightly worse).
Expand ...
Oklahoma is 65 according the ncaa website.
 
shizzle787 said:
Another thing you are forgetting is that some of these bubble teams will win three or four more games. Teams play themselves off the bubble, but they also play themselves in. About half will play themselves in and you have bid-thieves.

Take Pitt. They have 21 wins. They will likely win one or two more. Even in a down year for the ACC, a 23-win Pitt is getting in.

One thing that you are also not taking into account is the human element on the board (and I type this as I realize that the Iowa State AD is on the committee). The ACC representative is not going to stand for a 17-win Iowa State getting in over a 23-win Clemson. Not going to happen.

Anyway: I have 25 teams as pure mathematical locks as of today.

I have 9 more teams that will likely play their way in (one or two more wins): Kentucky, USC, Missouri, Texas A&M, USC, Arizona State, Illinois, Pitt, Clemson.

That is 34 teams that should be in. They play in the major six leagues, the MW, WCC, and AAC.

Let's assume there are three bid thieves among those nine leagues: 34 teams that should be minus six auto bids = 28 at-larges already accounted for.

Let's assume one of Charleston or FAU lose in their conference final (and VCU wins the A-10): another bid thief.

This gives us eight spots to fight for.

The contenders (my bubble-predicted regular season records in second parentheses):
Iowa State (17-11: not on the bubble yet but if they lose all three I think they are out) (17-14)
North Carolina (18-11) (20-11)
Oklahoma State (16-13) (17-14)
Wake Forest (18-11) (19-12)
West Virginia (16-13) (17-14)
Texas Tech (16-13) (16-15)
Michigan (17-12) (17-14)
Iowa (18-11) (19-12)
Michigan State (17-11) (19-11)
Rutgers (18-11) (20-11)
Wisconsin (16-12) (17-13)
Boise State (22-7) (23-8)
Utah State (22-7) (24-7)
Nevada (22-7) (24-7)
New Mexico (20-9) (22-9)
Auburn (19-10) (19-12)
Arkansas (19-10) (19-12)
Mississippi State (19-10) (21-10)
Charleston (28-3: assuming losing in CAA final) (30-4)

If Iowa State is to make the field, they have to be one of the top eight here; to make the field without a bye, one of the top four.

I don't know who will do what, but I will predict a little (only regular season-conference tourneys would take too long).

I based my projections on realistic results: you are probably not going to win on the road against the #8 team in the country, etc.


The eight teams I highlighted will be the eight teams I think get in.

My reasoning:
The MW will get three teams in. SDSU + 2 others. That is two bids.
Mississippi State has a favorable schedule. I see them going 2-0 this week to get to 21 wins. Probably win one more in the SEC tournament to get to 22. Don't see a 22-11 SEC team with a win over Marquette being left out.
Auburn and Arkansas I have both losing their last two regular season games to good teams, but I think one will win at least one game in the SEC tournament (probably Auburn). If you get to 20 wins in the SEC, you will get in (unless you're Texas A&M who likes to schedule a ton of cupcakes). One more bids.
UNC is going to get on a little heater here. I think they beat Duke at home and win a game or two in the ACC tournament. One more bid.
Michigan State and Rutgers have favorable schedules and will probably be in even if they lose in their first respective games in the B1G tournament as long as they go 2-0 this week. Two more bids.
Finally, Charleston. I think there is a good chance they get to the final of the CAA tournament and lose to Hofstra. Politically, I don't see a 30-4 team from a middle of the pack D-1 league missing the tournament, especially in a year with few mid-majors in the field otherwise. One more bid.

My projected last four byes:
Michigan State
Rutgers
Boise State
UNC

My projected last four in:
Utah State
Auburn
Charleston
Mississippi State

My projected first four out:
Arkansas
Utah State
Iowa
Oklahoma State

My projected next four out:
Iowa State
Michigan
New Mexico
West Virginia

Iowa State will be the fifth team out according to my projections.
Expand ...
So a UNC team who just got their first quad 1 win vs a sliding UVA would get in over Iowa State, and also get a bye?
 
MDHuskFan said:
So a UNC team who just got their first quad 1 win vs a sliding UVA would get in over Iowa State, and also get a bye?
Expand ...
If they win three more games including over Duke, yes. No way is a 21-win UNC getting left out. You guys love the net so much yet it just let us down with the committee reveal as I screamed for days it would and everyone swore by the NET. It's one of several metrics the committee uses. A 21-win UNC (brand) is not getting left out. You can adjust a team or two and may have to play-in but they will be in.
 
Last edited:
shizzle787 said:
If they win three more games including over Duke, yes. No way is a 21-win UNC getting left out. You guys love the net so much yet it just let us down with the committee reveal as I screamed for days it would and everyone swore by the NET. It's one of several metrics the committee uses. A 21-win UNC (brand) is not getting left out. You can adjust a team or two and may have to play-in but they will be in.
Expand ...
I have said over and over NET will be a good predictor for who gets in, not for seed.

shizzle787 said:
Another thing you are forgetting is that some of these bubble teams will win three or four more games. Teams play themselves off the bubble, but they also play themselves in. About half will play themselves in and you have bid-thieves.

Take Pitt. They have 21 wins. They will likely win one or two more. Even in a down year for the ACC, a 23-win Pitt is getting in.

One thing that you are also not taking into account is the human element on the board (and I type this as I realize that the Iowa State AD is on the committee). The ACC representative is not going to stand for a 17-win Iowa State getting in over a 23-win Clemson. Not going to happen.

Anyway: I have 25 teams as pure mathematical locks as of today.

I have 9 more teams that will likely play their way in (one or two more wins): Kentucky, USC, Missouri, Texas A&M, USC, Arizona State, Illinois, Pitt, Clemson.

That is 34 teams that should be in. They play in the major six leagues, the MW, WCC, and AAC.

Let's assume there are three bid thieves among those nine leagues: 34 teams that should be minus six auto bids = 28 at-larges already accounted for.

Let's assume one of Charleston or FAU lose in their conference final (and VCU wins the A-10): another bid thief.

This gives us eight spots to fight for.

The contenders (my bubble-predicted regular season records in second parentheses):
Iowa State (17-11: not on the bubble yet but if they lose all three I think they are out) (17-14)
North Carolina (18-11) (20-11)
Oklahoma State (16-13) (17-14)
Wake Forest (18-11) (19-12)
West Virginia (16-13) (17-14)
Texas Tech (16-13) (16-15)
Michigan (17-12) (17-14)
Iowa (18-11) (19-12)
Michigan State (17-11) (19-11)
Rutgers (18-11) (20-11)
Wisconsin (16-12) (17-13)
Boise State (22-7) (23-8)
Utah State (22-7) (24-7)
Nevada (22-7) (24-7)
New Mexico (20-9) (22-9)
Auburn (19-10) (19-12)
Arkansas (19-10) (19-12)
Mississippi State (19-10) (21-10)
Charleston (28-3: assuming losing in CAA final) (30-4)

If Iowa State is to make the field, they have to be one of the top eight here; to make the field without a bye, one of the top four.

I don't know who will do what, but I will predict a little (only regular season-conference tourneys would take too long).

I based my projections on realistic results: you are probably not going to win on the road against the #8 team in the country, etc.


The eight teams I highlighted will be the eight teams I think get in.

My reasoning:
The MW will get three teams in. SDSU + 2 others. That is two bids.
Mississippi State has a favorable schedule. I see them going 2-0 this week to get to 21 wins. Probably win one more in the SEC tournament to get to 22. Don't see a 22-11 SEC team with a win over Marquette being left out.
Auburn and Arkansas I have both losing their last two regular season games to good teams, but I think one will win at least one game in the SEC tournament (probably Auburn). If you get to 20 wins in the SEC, you will get in (unless you're Texas A&M who likes to schedule a ton of cupcakes). One more bids.
UNC is going to get on a little heater here. I think they beat Duke at home and win a game or two in the ACC tournament. One more bid.
Michigan State and Rutgers have favorable schedules and will probably be in even if they lose in their first respective games in the B1G tournament as long as they go 2-0 this week. Two more bids.
Finally, Charleston. I think there is a good chance they get to the final of the CAA tournament and lose to Hofstra. Politically, I don't see a 30-4 team from a middle of the pack D-1 league missing the tournament, especially in a year with few mid-majors in the field otherwise. One more bid.

My projected last four byes:
Michigan State
Rutgers
Boise State
UNC

My projected last four in:
Utah State
Auburn
Charleston
Mississippi State

My projected first four out:
Arkansas
Utah State
Iowa
Oklahoma State

My projected next four out:
Iowa State
Michigan
New Mexico
West Virginia

Iowa State will be the fifth team out according to my projections.
Expand ...

You have MSU way lower than I do, and I mean way lower. I have them at a 7-8 right now. I'm not surprised considering right now they have a similar resume to ISU that you have them barely in the tournament even with winning.

Rutgers I have at a 9. Boise State a 10 (so theoretically could be a last bye I guess). I'm also higher on Auburn.

Can't argue with what you have because honestly, it's a waste of time without knowing your full list and I don't have the time or patience to do it.
 
caw said:
I have said over and over NET will be a good predictor for who gets in, not for seed.



You have MSU way lower than I do, and I mean way lower. I have them at a 7-8 right now. I'm not surprised considering right now they have a similar resume to ISU that you have them barely in the tournament even with winning.

Rutgers I have at a 9. Boise State a 10 (so theoretically could be a last bye I guess). I'm also higher on Auburn.

Can't argue with what you have because honestly, it's a waste of time without knowing your full list and I don't have the time or patience to do it.
Expand ...
I literally gave you my list. Including the nine teams I expect to get in ahead of the bubble situation. But either way, if Iowa State wins tonight, it’s moot. If not, the debate will intensify.
 
shizzle787 said:
Another thing you are forgetting is that some of these bubble teams will win three or four more games. Teams play themselves off the bubble, but they also play themselves in. About half will play themselves in and you have bid-thieves.

Take Pitt. They have 21 wins. They will likely win one or two more. Even in a down year for the ACC, a 23-win Pitt is getting in.

One thing that you are also not taking into account is the human element on the board (and I type this as I realize that the Iowa State AD is on the committee). The ACC representative is not going to stand for a 17-win Iowa State getting in over a 23-win Clemson. Not going to happen.

Anyway: I have 25 teams as pure mathematical locks as of today.

I have 9 more teams that will likely play their way in (one or two more wins): Kentucky, USC, Missouri, Texas A&M, USC, Arizona State, Illinois, Pitt, Clemson.

That is 34 teams that should be in. They play in the major six leagues, the MW, WCC, and AAC.

Let's assume there are three bid thieves among those nine leagues: 34 teams that should be minus six auto bids = 28 at-larges already accounted for.

Let's assume one of Charleston or FAU lose in their conference final (and VCU wins the A-10): another bid thief.

This gives us eight spots to fight for.

The contenders (my bubble-predicted regular season records in second parentheses):
Iowa State (17-11: not on the bubble yet but if they lose all three I think they are out) (17-14)
North Carolina (18-11) (20-11)
Oklahoma State (16-13) (17-14)
Wake Forest (18-11) (19-12)
West Virginia (16-13) (17-14)
Texas Tech (16-13) (16-15)
Michigan (17-12) (17-14)
Iowa (18-11) (19-12)
Michigan State (17-11) (19-11)
Rutgers (18-11) (20-11)
Wisconsin (16-12) (17-13)
Boise State (22-7) (23-8)
Utah State (22-7) (24-7)
Nevada (22-7) (24-7)
New Mexico (20-9) (22-9)
Auburn (19-10) (19-12)
Arkansas (19-10) (19-12)
Mississippi State (19-10) (21-10)
Charleston (28-3: assuming losing in CAA final) (30-4)

If Iowa State is to make the field, they have to be one of the top eight here; to make the field without a bye, one of the top four.

I don't know who will do what, but I will predict a little (only regular season-conference tourneys would take too long).

I based my projections on realistic results: you are probably not going to win on the road against the #8 team in the country, etc.


The eight teams I highlighted will be the eight teams I think get in.

My reasoning:
The MW will get three teams in. SDSU + 2 others. That is two bids.
Mississippi State has a favorable schedule. I see them going 2-0 this week to get to 21 wins. Probably win one more in the SEC tournament to get to 22. Don't see a 22-11 SEC team with a win over Marquette being left out.
Auburn and Arkansas I have both losing their last two regular season games to good teams, but I think one will win at least one game in the SEC tournament (probably Auburn). If you get to 20 wins in the SEC, you will get in (unless you're Texas A&M who likes to schedule a ton of cupcakes). One more bids.
UNC is going to get on a little heater here. I think they beat Duke at home and win a game or two in the ACC tournament. One more bid.
Michigan State and Rutgers have favorable schedules and will probably be in even if they lose in their first respective games in the B1G tournament as long as they go 2-0 this week. Two more bids.
Finally, Charleston. I think there is a good chance they get to the final of the CAA tournament and lose to Hofstra. Politically, I don't see a 30-4 team from a middle of the pack D-1 league missing the tournament, especially in a year with few mid-majors in the field otherwise. One more bid.

My projected last four byes:
Michigan State
Rutgers
Boise State
UNC

My projected last four in:
Utah State
Auburn
Charleston
Mississippi State

My projected first four out:
Arkansas
Utah State
Iowa
Oklahoma State

My projected next four out:
Iowa State
Michigan
New Mexico
West Virginia

Iowa State will be the fifth team out according to my projections.
Expand ...
Lol. Iowa State is making the ncaa tournament. I guess if they lose out. But come on. They are in today .
 
.-.
Pulled team sheets back to 2018.

No team with 8 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

No team with 7 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

1 Team with 6 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

Average seed of teams with 8 Q1 Wins = 3.26

Last year's Iowa St got in as an 11 seed with a much worse resume. I don't think Iowa St. is in trouble.
 
Hans Sprungfeld said:
I'll start with the cliches (or similar), because they seem particularly apt.

Heads we lose a lot; tails we don't win much

For every punch, there's a counter punch.

Any loss counts hugely against us and means we're not that good.

But any victory is no big deal and can be explained away so that we're not that good:

The margin wasn't big enough, so we're not that good

We beat a team that lost, so we're not that good

The second half margin was smaller than the first half, so we're not that good

We were the home team, so we were expected to win, so the victory wasn't all that great, so we're not that good

Our good opponents really aren't all that good, so we're not that good

The final 8, 4, or 2 minutes saw the margin shrink, so we're not that good

One false move and we aren't that good.

Any success and it's ephemeral.

The losses are proof positive that we aren't that good. They can and must be trusted.

The victories are at best provisional, and always undeserving of trust.

Remember:

We were great in the beginning of the season, but that was months ago not now.

We were terrible in January, and must never forget this.

We must always know that the January bad could re-emerge at any time.

None of these notions apply, for example, to Purdue which is 3-4 in February.

Except that our victories over Iowa State and Oklahoma State don't really mean much, because those teams have both lost a lot in Big 12 play recently.

And our victory over Oregon counts even less because their roster was depleted by injuries when we played.

The 15-point victory over Alabama was from when we were good and they weren't yet great. Brandon Miller was a freshman, playing in only his 6th game. Plus, we let them close an earlier double digit gap. Besides, their losses to Tennessee and Oklahoma were on the road, and the Oklahoma game was a fluke anyway, so it shouldn't be held against them, and their Gonzaga loss wasn't a home loss because the game was played in Birmingham not Tuscaloosa, and they beat Houston in an away game coming back from a large margin, but the UConn loss that featured a closed margin that got reopened as a second large margin doesn't mean as much because it was done on a neutral court which wasn't as hard as coming back in a true road game, so WE'RE not that good AND they are not bad AND it wasn't so great a UConn win.

Remember, no other team is viewed by its fans through the UConn lens. And no other team is viewed this way by the AP voters or the NCAA Committee, and the computers are not trustworthy.

No other fan base subjects its team to such scrutiny, and no other team catastrophizes their teams or its losses:

Not Miami for losing at home to Florida State after being up 25. That was a fluke, and all teams have a let down and it doesn't matter that FSU isn't very good, and besides, Alabama lost to Oklahoma a bottom-dweller in the Big 12 but it was a road game, and besides, Oklahoma just beat Iowa State on the road, and Iowa State was a Top 16 reveal, even if they've lost 3 in a row, so that UConn's neutral court 18-point win back in December doesn't count much. And besides, Big 12. And, oh yeah, Miami is only 1 game behind the Pittsburgh in the ACC, which is a much better conference that people think, because ACC.

Not Purdue for being swept by Indiana. That just means that Indiana is really good, and besides, B1G.

When UConn plays DePaul on Wednesday, nothing good can come of it. It's a home game against a perennial bottom dweller. NO matter how large a victory margin is, so what? That's supposed to happen, so it's meaningless. ANYTHING less than a huge margin means (you guessed it), we're not that good at best, and every worst fear has been confirmed at worst. In the latter case, we may be relieved of pain by the world ending.

And next Saturday holds only the slimmest possibility of anything good. If UConn wins convincingly on the road against a full-strength Nova team, who will take notice and care? Nova is a .500 team in a non-P5 conference, with a new coach who might be in over his head after being hastily-chosen after the unexpected retirement if a legend, so how good a victory can it be considered? But anything other than a convincing win will be regarded as something ranging from troublesome to horrifying. OK, maybe not horrifying, but it would hurt UConn while pushing the narrative that Nova is back!

In other words, after these many many words, there is NO winning EXCEPT for winning the games, as they are played...

One
Game
At
A
Time

Go Huskies
Expand ...
And continue to develop. We are getting better. I think of how they looked at Florida. We are rising. We have enough pieces to be a very difficult out. NA is getting more comfortable - obviously. This is extremely helpful. If we play well - it’s possible - in my ‘fan opinion’. The BE tourney (may be) additional or needed as a developing environment. I don’t know. But - lots of little things seem to be improving… The whole idea of picking us to win a NC (on the current trajectory and eye test) is not a stretch. We need to just keep improving - as we are obviously doing… :-)
 
DaveHuskiesFan said:
Pulled team sheets back to 2018.

No team with 8 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

No team with 7 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

1 Team with 6 Q1 wins has missed the tournament.

Average seed of teams with 8 Q1 Wins = 3.26

Last year's Iowa St got in as an 11 seed with a much worse resume. I don't think Iowa St. is in trouble.
Expand ...
Again, how many of those teams with 7 or 8 Quad 1 wins finished three games above .500.
 
shizzle787 said:
Again, how many of those teams with 7 or 8 Quad 1 wins finished three games above .500.
Expand ...
You really aren't very good at this...not sure how or why you decided to become the Boneyard expert on March Madness seeding, but you should probably pick a different topic and stick with that. There is ZERO chance that Iowa State misses the tournament just like there was ZERO chance that Houston who has likely solidified itself as the overall #1 seed ever should have been in the "more work to do" category in the month of February. I'm not sure now if you just post this garbage to get people riled up, but you really need to try something different because it's a bad look.
 
JohnFSilver said:
Lol. Iowa State is making the ncaa tournament. I guess if they lose out. But come on. They are in today .
Expand ...
That’s the discussion. If they lose out, I think they will be out.
 
.-.
Beat Creighton in the fist BE tournament game and we get a 3 seed. That’s what it comes down to. No matter what happens with Nova.
It will be a tough game
 
Tyler2Rings said:
So in your bracketology update above you are assuming they lose out? Seems like a stretch
Expand ...
No. I’m not assuming that. I think they win tonight. All I said is IF they lose out, I think they will be out.
 
Hurleyman216 said:
You really aren't very good at this...not sure how or why you decided to become the Boneyard expert on March Madness seeding, but you should probably pick a different topic and stick with that. There is ZERO chance that Iowa State misses the tournament just like there was ZERO chance that Houston who has likely solidified itself as the overall #1 seed ever should have been in the "more work to do" category in the month of February. I'm not sure now if you just post this garbage to get people riled up, but you really need to try something different because it's a bad look.
Expand ...
CBS agreed with me on Houston back in February so if my bubble watch was practically copied by a major sports website, I’m not that bad. Oh, and my update last week had every team but one they had (and they published a day later).
 
Hurleyman216 said:
You really aren't very good at this...not sure how or why you decided to become the Boneyard expert on March Madness seeding, but you should probably pick a different topic and stick with that. There is ZERO chance that Iowa State misses the tournament just like there was ZERO chance that Houston who has likely solidified itself as the overall #1 seed ever should have been in the "more work to do" category in the month of February. I'm not sure now if you just post this garbage to get people riled up, but you really need to try something different because it's a bad look.
Expand ...
Houston has not solidified anything either. If they lose just two more games the rest of the way, they may drop to the 3 line due to a weak SOS. There is literally precedent for my above statement based on Houston last year.
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Based on the first round of seedings, the Committee is clearly including momentum in how they seed teams, even though they are not supposed to. With UConn's momentum, all the quality wins, and everyone else losing, I think UConn should be comfortably on the 3 line. It is hard to move up from there.
Expand ...
5:46 PM and @Storrs South gives you a like. I can give a pass for his coming to The Boneyard on his wedding weekend but supporting you on this occasion (or any for that matter :cool:) is a step too far!
 
.-.
ucp990411 said:
Who cares? We are going to win 14 straight
Expand ...
I agree with you in not caring.
And I'd love a 14-0 season finish, but make no predictions.

I think we'll all benefit most from focusing on winning each next game.

If we fans are incapable of or disinterested in doing so, then I hope that the coaching staff and the players don't spend their time and attention on these distracting & divisive opinion battles, because they weaken rather than strengthen the ability to win each game.
 
shizzle787 said:
Houston has not solidified anything either. If they lose just two more games the rest of the way, they may drop to the 3 line due to a weak SOS. There is literally precedent for my above statement based on Houston last year.
Expand ...
Lol…keep going, if nothing else this is entertaining.
 
Iowa State lost again. Now 17-12.
 
Our non-conf has been disintegrating down the stretch. Iowa St (4 straight), Florida (6 of 7), and Ok St (5 straight) all with major losing streaks this month. Florida and Ok St. have major starters out with injury (Castleton and Avery Anderson respectively).

Oregon got swept on the Washington road trip to take themselves off the bubble, too.

Alabama still good, if problematic.
 
.-.
willie99 said:
The most important variable. George Mason should not have been selected in 2006. In their own conference, Hofstra finished higher, had a better RPI, beat them twice and eliminated them in the conference tournament. But Mason's AD was on the committee and Mason got the at large, not Hofstra
Expand ...

Given that they made the Final Four, hard to say the committee made a bad choice giving them an at large bid.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
167,567
Messages
4,528,266
Members
10,403
Latest member
jerm10


Top Bottom