Updated Resume (2/24)

[Kemba15]

Updated for Feb 25:

KenPom: 32
BPI: 28
NET 41

I honestly feel like I'm missing something. How the hell are we "last 4 in/first 4 out?" Because we haven't played enough games?

We have 0 really bad losses, good wins over Xavier (without Bouk) and USC, we are 32 KenPom, 28 ESPN BPI, and 36 SOS per ESPN data. On top of that, we're 8-2 with our best player--who is now back and will be playing in the tournament--compared to 3-4 without, so it's objectively clear to see the difference.

The fact that we are last 4 in/first 4 out makes no sense to me.

 

[AntG168]

I honestly feel like I'm missing something. How the hell are we "last 4 in/first 4 out?" Because we haven't played enough games?

We have 0 really bad losses, good wins over Xavier (without Bouk) and USC, we are 32 KenPom, 28 ESPN BPI, and 36 SOS per ESPN data. On top of that, we're 8-2 with our best player--who is now back and will be playing in the tournament--compared to 3-4 without, so it's objectively clear to see the difference.

The fact that we are last 4 in/first 4 out makes no sense to me.

I don't think we actually are. We're primed for a bunch of "wow didn't expect UConn to be seeded that high" reactions

 

[tzznandrew]

It would be good for us, and any other Big East teams, if Marquette DOES win.

The idea that Marquette losing last night was anything but a win is pure ignorance.

 

[auror]

I honestly feel like I'm missing something. How the hell are we "last 4 in/first 4 out?" Because we haven't played enough games?

We have 0 really bad losses, good wins over Xavier (without Bouk) and USC, we are 32 KenPom, 28 ESPN BPI, and 36 SOS per ESPN data. On top of that, we're 8-2 with our best player--who is now back and will be playing in the tournament--compared to 3-4 without, so it's objectively clear to see the difference.

The fact that we are last 4 in/first 4 out makes no sense to me.

We were in the mid 50s in NET not long ago. But the bracketologists are in horse race mode (you win and you move up, you lose and you go down, someone else wins and they jump you, etc.)

They'll re-evaluate 3 days before and realize we're much safer in than expected.

 

[djct1999]

We were in the mid 50s in NET not long ago. But the bracketologists are in horse race mode (you win and you move up, you lose and you go down, someone else wins and they jump you, etc.)

They'll re-evaluate 3 days before and realize we're much safer in than expected.

Most of these guys have no clue. I am sure at this point, Lunardi has enough data that here is some sort of algo involved. I am fairly certain guys like Palm and DeCourcy are simply winging it. At which, their opinions are no different than ours. If we win 2 of our last 3, we are a lock. At this point, as long as we avoid a "bad" loss, our boys will be dancing.

 

[Marat]

Most of these guys have no clue. I am sure at this point, Lunardi has enough data that here is some sort of algo involved. I am fairly certain guys like Palm and DeCourcy are simply winging it. At which, their opinions are no different than ours. If we win 2 of our last 3, we are a lock. At this point, as long as we avoid a "bad" loss, our boys will be dancing.

Completely agree . They are just guessing/estimating based on their reasoning. UConn just needs to keeping playing and win the games they are supposed to win. Wouldn't be shocked if the team surprises us too on the positive side.

 

[UconnU]

Seton Hall is a must win. Going into the BET 1-5 against teams that have a chance at the tourney (Xavier, SHU, Nova, Creighton) would be bad. Just beating two of the worst teams in the league at home doesn’t move the needle (unless we lose one, of course).

This Seton Hall game is gigantic for us, and for them. All around huge game.

 

[Jbirdp5]

The idea that Marquette losing last night was anything but a win is pure ignorance.

So your saying it would have been better if Marquette has lost? Why?

 

[tzznandrew]

So your saying it would have been better if Marquette has lost? Why?

No. It's obviously the case that Marquette winning was good and suggesting otherwise is ignorance. Perhaps my phrasing there was not the best.

 

[Jbirdp5]

Seton Hall is a must win. Going into the BET 1-5 against teams that have a chance at the tourney (Xavier, SHU, Nova, Creighton) would be bad. Just beating two of the worst teams in the league at home doesn’t move the needle (unless we lose one, of course).

I agree with this sentiment for sure. Gotta beat tourney quality teams.

 

[UconnU]

I hope we don’t get stuck in one of those Tuesday play-in games.

 

[AntG168]

This Seton Hall game is gigantic for us, and for them. All around huge game.

I dont think its gigantic for them. They have to at least get in the BET Finals in order to get in. Win or lose against us

 

[6xChamps]

I dont think its gigantic for them. They have to at least get in the BET Finals in order to get in. Win or lose against us

Don't agree with this... if Seton Hall beats us, St Johns, and then beats say Xavier in the BET opening game they are a lock to get in and would probably be an 8/9 seed.

 

[WestHartHusk]

I honestly feel like I'm missing something. How the hell are we "last 4 in/first 4 out?" Because we haven't played enough games?

We have 0 really bad losses, good wins over Xavier (without Bouk) and USC, we are 32 KenPom, 28 ESPN BPI, and 36 SOS per ESPN data. On top of that, we're 8-2 with our best player--who is now back and will be playing in the tournament--compared to 3-4 without, so it's objectively clear to see the difference.

The fact that we are last 4 in/first 4 out makes no sense to me.

Cuz Lenard works for ESPN amd we are not an ESPN property anymore.

 

[auror]

Don't agree with this... if Seton Hall beats us, St Johns, and then beats say Xavier in the BET opening game they are a lock to get in and would probably be an 8/9 seed.

Yeah they'd be mid 30s KenPom, probably low to mid 40s in NET. Q1 3-7, Q2 5-3, Q3 7-1, Q4 1-0. With a top 30 NET SoS.

But if they lose to us with those other wins, they're probably low 40s KenPom, high 40s NET and now only 4-4 in Q2. Very extremely bubbly.

 

[HuskyHawk]

This was interesting. Didn't want to create a thread for it.

 

[87Xfer]

This Seton Hall game is gigantic for us, and for them. All around huge game.

I think it's only "gigantic" for us if we lose one of the other 2. If we beat Marquette and G'town again, we're probably in.

 

[Tenspro2002]

"Yes, it's the same for all roster changes. What you are describing is more common with a player addition than subtraction, but it does not matter how it happens. The rule of thumb is that teams get evaluated a little more on what they did with the roster it is taking into the tournament than otherwise. The key word there is "little." If a team's resume isn't good enough to get it selected, it won't get selected. The adjustment, if any, typically comes in seeding. Again, don't expect much."

So, basically, the Committee might weight our games with Bouknight a little more than our games without Bouknight, but isn't going to give us a significant boost over our overall resume.

If we don't win 3 more games, they're not going to give us the benefit of the doubt.

 

[businesslawyer]

I suspect the data analyzed doesn't quite measure the spirit of the point. If you beat team A by 15 points twice, and then meet them in a conference tournament as a higher seed vs a lower seed, I bet you win again frequently. If you have 2 teams that can go toe to toe and you win twice by 3 points, I bet that 3rd game is more iffy. The spirit of the tough to win 3 times is more in line with the latter scenario. Analyzing all match ups doesn't really yield a conclusion that is worth much.

Said another way, the team looking to finally win lost 100% of the time the first time they played and lost 100% the time the second time they played. Winning over a quarter of the games the third time they play would seem to prove the point that it is far more difficult the third time around.

 

[businesslawyer]

And people say I am an scalitohole.

LOL. How does me being a scalitohole make you a better person exactly?

 

[Jbirdp5]

Said another way, the team looking to finally win lost 100% of the time the first time they played and lost 100% the time the second time they played. Winning over a quarter of the games the third time they play would seem to prove the point that it is far more difficult the third time around.

More great math from you!

 

[businesslawyer]

More great math from you!

If you think I'm wrong, educate me.

 

[Dutch Boyd]

LOL. How does me being a scalitohole make you a better person exactly?

I know all is right in the world when Nelson is in a pissing match with someone. Lol

 

[Get a Job]

If you think I'm wrong, educate me.

Are you being serious? If you are, please rephrase your position more clearly. If you're saying what I think you're saying, it's easy to explain why it's nonsense. But maybe you aren't saying that.

 

[businesslawyer]

Are you being serious? If you are, please rephrase your position more clearly. If you're saying what I think you're saying, it's easy to explain why it's nonsense. But maybe you aren't saying that.

I am being serious and I asked politely. If you think I am wrong, please explain.