We are NOT an 8 seed

[OkaForPrez]

Palm has us as a 7 seed as of this morning.

And the best 7 on the S curve at that

 

[Peacefrog]

Look at the NET ratings. We are an 8 seed right now. Last I checked, Emmert is still in charge. We will not be placed higher than our NET rating would suggest. Need to keep winning to move up. Are we better than an 8 seed? Yes. The NET rating is almost as flawed as the RPI was. It is what it is.

That is not how the selection committee uses the NET rankings. They are used to determine which quadrant a team is in and then look at in which quadrant your wins and losses came. There have been a couple of good descriptions of this either earlier in this thread or in other related threads. Its interesting reading as to what data they look at and how they use it but what you're describing is not one of them.

 

[tzznandrew]

That is not how the selection committee uses the NET rankings. They are used to determine which quadrant a team is in and then look at in which quadrant your wins and losses came. There have been a couple of good descriptions of this either earlier in this thread or in other related threads. Its interesting reading as to what data they look at and how they use it but what you're describing is not one of them.

The conspiracy mindset on this board is just absolutely ridiculous, on pretty much all matters.

 

[Rocktheworld]

UNC, in '09, won their Final Four and Final matches by double digits....strong team.

Great team, scary back court, but our bigs were on another level that year. Our guards with Dyson would have matched theirs well enough and that would be the difference. I was a freshman that year and half of me was pissed I wouldn’t get to watch Hasheem spike a few off Hansborough’s head

 

[billybud]

Bracket Matrix has the Huskies as a 9 as does Lunardi...

KenPom ..23

NET...31

 

[billybud]

Great team, scary back court, but our bigs were on another level that year. Our guards with Dyson would have matched theirs well enough and that would be the difference. I was a freshman that year and half of me was pissed I wouldn’t get to watch Hasheem spike a few off Hansborough’s head

was 09 Hasheem's last year?

 

[ScuderiaDiU]

Yea, people get bogged down in all these little moments. The 2004 team was -6 in the second half of the title game. Was that some great cause for concern or indicative of some deep problems? No!

Well, that WAS the championship game so, by definition, there were no future games to be concerned about.

To Navery's point, I will concede that the context is very different between the last regular season game and an NCAA tournament game. So, no, a 38 point swing is not likely in a big game. My main point was what I said earlier. Excellence is a habit. You don't want "let up" to be a habit. As a coach, that was a point of emphasis to my teams. We won multiple championships.

 

[Rocktheworld]

was 09 Hasheem's last year?

Yup

 

[Ricker]

I think UConn is better than an 8 seed but the reality is that they’ve only beat one surefire tournament team. Win the Big East Tourney and that completely changes.

I know I've been a broken record on this point, but if the Big 10 is being seeded high, why shouldn't we? As a league, the 14 teams all together don't have a single out of conference win as good as our USC win. The best win by the whole conference is vs projected 8 seed Louisville. Their big wins are only against each other and the prestige of those wins is assigned by the 'eyetest' rather than on court proven accomplishment. As I've itemized in other threads, the big 10 is only 14-14 vs other major conferences. The Big 10 is 0-8 vs other top teams projected in the field. There is no huge reason why we should have only earned only an 8 seed. Marquette beats Wisconsin and we beat Marquette twice, Marquette kills NCar, and has a win vs Creighton, yet when a Big 10 team beats Wisc they are credited with a big win. We beat Marquette twice and meh. Xavier's win vs Oklahoma is better than any Big 10 win, but our win vs Xavier is played down. Nova's win vs Texas is a third win better than any Big 10 out of conference win. St Johns beats Nova, meh. We've played and beaten teams that are as good as the Big 10. There is nothing more special this year about victories against, Maryland, Mich St, Minn, Indiana, Penn St, Nebraska, Northwestern, Wisc, or Rutgers, than our Big East conference wins. Mich was my personal preseason #1, and Iowa, Illinois, Purdue, Ohio St, are probably good. Even so, 3rd place in the Big East regular season, and with a stronger out of conference win than any of these teams, should rate better than an 8 seed going into the Big East tournament.

Edit: Using Palm this morning, Louisville has dropped to a 9 seed as the best out of conference Big 10 win. UCLA as an 11 seed is the conferences second best out of conference win, league wide.

 

[StllH8L8ner]

 

[EASTFLA]

We are an 8 or 9 seed right now. Yes, we are 5-0 winning by double digits. That's not how it works though. The last 10 games used to factor in but not anymore. It is the full body of work. Here is the ugly part of our 11-6 Big East record. we had the easiest Big East schedule of any team and this is what we did:

In order of final Big East Standings:

Villanova 0-1
Creighton 0-2
UConn ---
St. John's 0-1
Seton Hall 1-1
Providence 1-1
Xavier 1-0
G'Town 2-0
Marquette 2-0
Butler 2-0
DePaul 2-0

So a recap:

Top 5 excluding us 2-6
Bottom 5 9-0

Breakdown:

We beat teams with a combined overall record of 105-135
We lost to teams with a combined record of 94-53

Our record in the conference vs teams that completed the regular season better than .520 was 1-4

It just so happened that the 4 worst teams in the conference we played 8 games against. That is the ugly side. The positive side is our overall record vs other teams which accurately projects us as an 8,9 seed. See my post on that for reference.

 

[tzznandrew]

We are an 8 or 9 seed right now. Yes, we are 5-0 winning by double digits. That's not how it works though. The last 10 games used to factor in but not anymore. It is the full body of work. Here is the ugly part of our 11-6 Big East record. we had the easiest Big East schedule of any team and this is what we did:

In order of final Big East Standings:

Villanova 0-1
Creighton 0-2
UConn ---
St. John's 0-1
Seton Hall 1-1
Providence 1-1
Xavier 1-0
G'Town 2-0
Marquette 2-0
Butler 2-0
DePaul 2-0

So a recap:

Top 5 excluding us 2-6
Bottom 5 9-0

Breakdown:

We beat teams with a combined overall record of 105-135
We lost to teams with a combined record of 94-53

Our record in the conference vs teams that completed the regular season better than .520 was 1-4

It just so happened that the 4 worst teams in the conference we played 8 games against. That is the ugly side. The positive side is our overall record vs other teams which accurately projects us as an 8,9 seed. See my post on that for reference.

I get this, but it's really hard to ignore the fact that 4 of those losses came without Bouknight and the team looks markedly different with him.

The selection committee has already said they are going to take that into some consideration—not whether a team gets in or not, but in seeding. I suspect whatever seeding our blind resume would give us will get bumped 1-2 seedlines because of that. Especially if they win the BET.

 

[Tenspro2002]

I'll take a 6 or 7 seed over being a 4/5. We can stand toe to toe with any of the 2s or 3s. Give the 1 seed a couple chances to trip and open a path for us. Elite 8 is very possible for us from the 2/3 side of the bracket, then you dig deep for the mojo and just maybe ......

A 6 seed would be a great outcome, but that's equivalent to being ranked around #22, we'd have to leapfrog a number of teams to get there.

With a 6 seed, you get a #11, maybe a play-in winner, a 3 seed (with an outside chance at a 14), and then a chance at a 7 or 10, and by the time you hit the Elite 8 the other side could be busted wide open.

 

[Tenspro2002]

One thing that would have helped our resume is more wins. One way to get more wins is to play more games.

More quality wins.

Not cupcake wins.

 

[Tenspro2002]

If Dyson doesn't blow out his knee in late February we would have 5 titles. We were the best team in the country before that happened and I don't think it was really even that close.

I wouldn't go that far, but us vs. UNC would have been one of the best title matchups this century.

Definitely would have beaten MSU, even in a true road game.

 

[HooperScooper]

That is not how the selection committee uses the NET rankings. They are used to determine which quadrant a team is in and then look at in which quadrant your wins and losses came. There have been a couple of good descriptions of this either earlier in this thread or in other related threads. Its interesting reading as to what data they look at and how they use it but what you're describing is not one of them.

People don't listen but glad you did.

I've posted this a few times and maybe it needs to be tacked to the top of the board because people keep bringing it up.

Q: "Why is [insert your team here] seeded in your bracket much lower than its metrics?"

Talk to the Palm: Because metrics aren't that important. To see what is important, read this link here.

But here is a relatively recent example. In 2017, Wichita State fans were killing me because I had them squarely on the bubble while it was in the top 10 in KenPom. The Shockers won the MVC Tournament, ended up 8th in KenPom's rankings and earned a 10-seed in the bracket. If all you have is metrics, you have nothing. The resume has to back it up.

Even Ken Pomeroy thinks using his metrics in the selection process is a bad idea. At a meeting we attended when the NCAA was exploring replacing the RPI, he told the NCAA folks that they should not use his ratings because he is not measuring what they are trying to reward.

Bracketology: Illinois strengthens grip on its No. 1 seed as loaded Big Ten Tournament approaches

The Illini picked up a massive win over Ohio State on Saturday as its POTY candidate returned from injury

www.cbssports.com

 

[nelsonmuntz]

More quality wins.

Not cupcake wins.

Have you looked at some of the schedules of the teams with better NET rankings than us? Winning games = better NET rating for the most part.

Look at all the SEC teams. Who did Arkansas beat? How about LSU? They have more losses than us. If the field was selected today, would they be above or below us? Those teams suck, and they have better NET ratings than UConn.

But fewer games are better. Or something.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Have you looked at some of the schedules of the teams with better NET rankings than us? Winning games = better NET rating for the most part.

Look at all the SEC teams. Who did Arkansas beat? How about LSU? They have more losses than us. If the field was selected today, would they be above or below us? Those teams suck, and they have better NET ratings than UConn.

But fewer games are better. Or something.

The reason our NET ranking isn't as high as those teams is because, while we've generally kicked ass against weak opponents, we actually haven't beaten a lot of good teams. Lost to Nova, Creighton x2, St. John's. We beat Seton Hall and Xavier once, but those wins aren't looking particularly impressive. USC is our only signature win.

Our eye-test performance is much stronger than our actual resume. And our resume isn't enhanced by scheduling a couple of buy games against Holy Cross.

BTW, Arkansas has 6 Quad 1 wins, so that doesn't seem like a great example to argue that we just needed to schedule more cupcakes.

 

[nelsonmuntz]

The reason our NET ranking isn't as high as those teams is because, while we've generally kicked ass against weak opponents, we actually haven't beaten a lot of good teams. Lost to Nova, Creighton x2, St. John's. We beat Seton Hall and Xavier once, but those wins aren't looking particularly impressive. USC is our only signature win.

Our eye-test performance is much stronger than our actual resume. And our resume isn't enhanced by scheduling a couple of buy games against Holy Cross.

BTW, Arkansas has 6 Quad 1 wins, so that doesn't seem like a great example to argue that we just needed to schedule more cupcakes.

They have 6 quad 1 wins because all the SEC teams played a lot of cupcakes, won those games, and now have inflated NETs simply by virtue of beating mid-majors. I guess you could make the case that because most of the Big East didn't play much in the OOC, there is not much UConn can do to fix it. I still think doing nothing was a bad choice.

Overall, the SEC has a losing record against the other majors, while the Big East is .500. Yet the SEC teams have a much higher NET because they played more games.

 

[ScuderiaDiU]

View attachment 65386

Interesting tidbit. Gillespie's +/- is 7.6. We lost to Villanova by 8 on the road. If we face them, it will be a good game but I like our chances.

 

[auror]

Wisconsin, Florida, and Maryland lose today (all in seeds 7-9 in Bracket Matrix). Good for seeding purposes.

 

[CTBasketball]

I’m fine as long as we get off the 8-9 line.

 

[olehead]

Yes, comfort video?

 

[superjohn]

We are an 8 or 9 seed right now. Yes, we are 5-0 winning by double digits. That's not how it works though. The last 10 games used to factor in but not anymore. It is the full body of work. Here is the ugly part of our 11-6 Big East record. we had the easiest Big East schedule of any team and this is what we did:

In order of final Big East Standings:

Villanova 0-1
Creighton 0-2
UConn ---
St. John's 0-1
Seton Hall 1-1
Providence 1-1
Xavier 1-0
G'Town 2-0
Marquette 2-0
Butler 2-0
DePaul 2-0

So a recap:

Top 5 excluding us 2-6
Bottom 5 9-0

Breakdown:

We beat teams with a combined overall record of 105-135
We lost to teams with a combined record of 94-53

Our record in the conference vs teams that completed the regular season better than .520 was 1-4

It just so happened that the 4 worst teams in the conference we played 8 games against. That is the ugly side. The positive side is our overall record vs other teams which accurately projects us as an 8,9 seed. See my post on that for reference.

Nope.

 

[Waquoit]

What is also pretty simple is that this team is not going +27 and -11 against Baylor or pretty much any team in the top half of the tournament. But you already knew that was what I was saying, didn't you? You just wanted to be a...you know.

So, yeah, against a good team it will be more like +1 and -37. Against a decent team, it could be +18 and -20.

There is no associative property in basketball.