Updated Resume (2/24)

[nelsonmuntz]

NO, You seem to have a bad take on how the bubble works. A bubble team getting hot DOES NOT increase the odds of other bubble teams getting into the tournament by taking the hot team — in this case UNC — off the bubble and into the Tourney. UNC getting hot REDUCES THE NUMBER OF BUBBLE SPOTS BY 1, making it harder for every other bubble team to get in. Plus, A Marquette win helps the computer numbers of all Big East teams who played or will play them.

Math much?

And people say I am an scalitohole.

 

[BFieldHusky]

Updated for Feb 25:

KenPom: 32
BPI: 28
NET 41

 

[Get a Job]

Hard to beat a team 3 times 🙂

Hate to be that guy (just kidding. I love it.), but this is one of those pieces of conventional wisdom that is not backed up at all by the data. From “It’s Hard To Beat A Team Three Times” | COACH BOB WALSH:

"According to STATS LLC., there have been 981 similar matchups across Division I college basketball over the past 10 seasons. The teams entering the third game 2-0 are a combined 710-271 (.724 winning percentage) in the third meeting.​

​

So over a 10-year period in college basketball including almost 1,000 games, the team that won the first 2 games won the third meeting 72.4% of the time. So it clearly doesn’t follow that it is hard to beat a team 3 times. In fact, it’s actually kind of easy."​

 

[Hi-Low]

Hate to be that guy (just kidding. I love it.), but this is one of those pieces of conventional wisdom that is not backed up at all by the data. From “It’s Hard To Beat A Team Three Times” | COACH BOB WALSH:

"According to STATS LLC., there have been 981 similar matchups across Division I college basketball over the past 10 seasons. The teams entering the third game 2-0 are a combined 710-271 (.724 winning percentage) in the third meeting.​

​

So over a 10-year period in college basketball including almost 1,000 games, the team that won the first 2 games won the third meeting 72.4% of the time. So it clearly doesn’t follow that it is hard to beat a team 3 times. In fact, it’s actually kind of easy."​

Nice find....we'll be the 27.6%. Plus we have Bouk back who was out for 2nd game.

 

[Get a Job]

Nice find....we'll be the 27.6%. Plus we have Bouk back who was out for 2nd game.

I hope so, and I agree with all those who think we would have a great chance should we face Creighton again. I am merely commenting generally on the inaccuracy of this piece of conventional wisdom.

 

[Fatroony5]

Updated for Feb 25:

KenPom: 32
BPI: 28
NET (hasn't been updated yet). I will edit when it has been.

Up to 41 in NET. If they win out & win any games in BET, they’re playing for seeding.

 

[Husky15]

Butler moved up to 130 in NET making our road win against them Quad 2. Just inside the 135 threshold.

 

[Ricker]

Hate to be that guy (just kidding. I love it.), but this is one of those pieces of conventional wisdom that is not backed up at all by the data. From “It’s Hard To Beat A Team Three Times” | COACH BOB WALSH:

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.

 

[Get a Job]

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.

I suppose your point applies to anyone who is aware of the data but still talks about the difficulty for a team to beat a somewhat evenly matched team 3 times. I suspect, however, that the phrase is parroted so much that some casual observers have come to expect powerhouse team A to lose its third game against bottom feeder team B.

Perhaps the cliché should become, "It's tough to beat a good team three times."

 

[HuskyHawk]

Jerry Palm article. He touches on the injured player / roster addition scenario

Talk to the Palm: Bracketology mailbag answers whether NCAA Tournament field should be expanded

Bracketology Expert Jerry Palm answers your questions about the NCAA Tournament field potentially growing

www.cbssports.com

Palms bracketology has us as a 9-seed BEFORE the Gtown game

2024 NCAA Tournament Bracket Predictions - Bracketology - College Basketball

CBS Sports is helping you get ready for March Madness with the latest news, picks, and predictions for the 2024 NCAA Basketball Tournament Bracket.

www.cbssports.com

Whoa there. Slow your roll with the actual content. This thread exists so people can yell at strangers on the internet.

He said what I've always understood. Seeding may reflect what your team did with the roster you have coming in to the tournament. That cuts both ways. Assuming we can get in, I expect our seeding to be better than "last four in".

 

[Brochacho]

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).

 

[navery12]

A few relevant notes for our quad wins/losses:

St John's at 77 in NET, if they can get up to 75 our only Q3 loss becomes Q2

Providence up to 80 in NET, if they move up to 75 that becomes a Q1 loss and Q2 win (currently Q2 loss and Q3 win)

 

[UofCT]

Whoa there. Slow your roll with the actual content. This thread exists so people can yell at strangers on the internet.

He said what I've always understood. Seeding may reflect what your team did with the roster you have coming in to the tournament. That cuts both ways. Assuming we can get in, I expect our seeding to be better than "last four in".

I'm not sure which bracketologist to trust there is such a discrepancy. Palm had us as a 9-seed before the G-town win and Lunardi has us a first four in/out depending on what he eats for breakfast.

 

[Get a Job]

I'm not sure which bracketologist to trust there is such a discrepancy. Palm had us as a 9-seed before the G-town win and Lunardi has us a first four in/out depending on what he eats for breakfast.

I don't see the problem. In that scenario you trust Palm. Duh!

 

[Storrs South]

Here's the latest team sheet if you want to see the whole picture (Providence/SJU/Marquette all have opportunities to get within top 75 of NET which would be a big help)

Connecticut Huskies at Bracketologists

 

[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.

 

[KingAG]

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.

 

[KingAG]

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.