Bracketology

[ShockTalk]

My hero.

I think this page tells us a lot more about a teams resume than anything else.

I like the layout also. However, there are 9 of the 15 columns where a team apparently cannot get a positive mark, but can get a negative one. I understand why it would be that way for most of them. This wouldn't apply to WSU, but two of the columns not allowing for a postive mark seems a little unfair.....Non Con RPI and NC SOS.

Look at Belmont and Middle Tennessee. These are two teams that could get knocked out of the Dance due to not winning their league's tourney. Yet, in the above categories, they were 14 and 17 in Non Con RPI and 4 and 12 in NC SOS and had 7-4 and 8-3 records in the non-con. If they do not get in because of losing their tourney, we'll see how many of Marquette, N Carolina, Wisconsin, Southern Miss, Kentucky, Ole Miss, California, and Baylor don't win their tourney, but do get in. All have comparable non-con records, but lower (some much lower) rankings in those two categories, and lower overall RPIs.

[_kai_]

ESPN has a nice little break down on each team if you click on them from the RPI standings or from Lunardi's Bracket.

Here is WSU's: http://insider.espn.go.com/mens-coll.../_/teamId/2724

[Shockthemonkey]

Espn has a new Bubble watch article out. I thought this was a good section that would be appreciated here: The Bluejays are really making me sweat this thing out. Frankly, we were probably a little too rash to put them in as a lock in the first edition two weeks back, and since then three straight losses to Indiana State, Illinois State and Northern Iowa have called the whole into question. Creighton escaped Evansville with a 71-68 win Saturday, and avoided falling prey to the suddenly dangerous Southern Illinois Salukis Tuesday night. So I still have them as a lock. Stubborn as it is, we don't remove locks unless we absolutely have to. Instead, I'll just keep sweating. As for league rival Wichita State? Welcome to Lockville. OK, so maybe that November win at VCU doesn't look quite as impressive anymore, but after back-to-back road wins against Illinois State and Indiana State, it just doesn't feel as though there's any way this first-place team (23-5, 12-4) with a top-35 RPI misses the Dance with only three regular-season games to go. But Shockers, can you go ahead and beat Detroit in BracketBusters just so you don't pull a Creighton on us? Here is the link: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch

[Cdizzle]

"just so you don't pull a Creighton on us?"

You can't make that stuff up. You can wait for February every year though.

[Steeleshocker]

Honestly, I think Creighton will probably be fine as long as they don't add another bad loss. They are 2-2 against the top 50, 7-4 against the top 100, and have a winning road record. The only real advantage we have over them is our 3-0 record against the top 50. Their recent slide will hurt them, but the committee has gone away from looking at the last 10 games as a reason for exclusion. It will likely only affect their seeding.

[GoShockers89]

CU should win either @ SMC or vs. WSU if they want to avoid a nervous St. Louis. Losing to Bradley (50/50 with how they've played recently) will make things extra tingly in Omaha.

[Dan]

Shox move up to #8 seed in Lunardi's latest bracket.

[ShockerPrez]

Shox move up to #8 seed in Lunardi's latest bracket.

Did he not see our wins? We should have moved down based on his previous logic.

Shox need to turn it on and get to a 7 or 6. I think we can with a win at CU. A st louis champ gets us a 6, maybe 5?

Longshot prolly.

[Dan]

If we win the next 3 we could move back into the 6 spot with a decent showing in St. Louis, need to win at least 1 game there.

[GoShockers89]

I think we'll move up to a 7 after beating Detroit and UE, a 6 after winning @ Creighton, and a 4/5 after taking the MVC Tournament. RPI and national poll rankings would line up pretty closely to validate it.

[CBB_Fan]

Shox move up to #8 seed in Lunardi's latest bracket.

I'd rather be a 6/7 or 10/11 seed than fall in the 8/9 range. An 8/9 seed is basically a horrible scenario. Odds are, the game will be 50/50 and the winner almost always loses to the 1 seed immediately afterwards; it basically is a play-in game. For instance compare Lunardi's bracket to Palm's:

In Lunardi's, we are an 8 seed playing 9 seed Oklahoma. Oklahoma has an 18 RPI, with wins against Kansas and Oklahoma State. That game would not be much better than a 50/50 game, and if we win we play #1 seed Indiana, who is the #1 overall seed if I remember correctly. Again, we get a play-in game to face the #1 overall seed.

In Palm's, we get disrespected with a 10 seed. However, our first game is against Minnesota, a team that has lost 8 of their last 11 games (including getting blown out by nearly 30 points by Ohio State). Minnesota is currently behind Iowa in the B1G standings. That is a game I feel pretty confident in. If we win that game, we play against Arizona barring a major upset to Montana. Arizona has an RPI of 12, and losses to 4 teams with worse RPIs than ours. They are one of the most overrated teams, IMHO, and I think we could beat them.

I honestly feel like Palm's bracket is much better for us than Lunardi's regardless of actual seeding.

[SubGod22]

No team scares me this year. Even the 1 seeds are beatable. Hell, the top of the AP has had quite a bit of turnover due to losses. I still say we can play with anybody. Line 'em up.

[CBB_Fan]

No team scares me this year. Even the 1 seeds are beatable. Hell, the top of the AP has had quite a bit of turnover due to losses. I still say we can play with anybody. Line 'em up.

I'm just playing the percentages. I think we "can" beat anyone this year, but that doesn't mean I want a tougher route. I think the best route to the Sweet 16 for us will be as a 6 seed, but I'd still rather be a 7, 10, or 11 seed than an 8/9 seed.

[MadaboutWu]

There is a trade off with losing first round games more as a 10/11. According to the site linked below 8s win the first round 46%, 9s 54%, 10s 40%, and 11s 32%. CBB is right about the second round though. 8s win 19%, 9s are pummeled at 7%, 10s win 35%, and 11s win 36%.

So combining the two probabilities, the odds of making it to the second weekend are: 8s 9%, 9s 4% (the discrepency between 8s and 9s shows how a bad sample size can really skew things but you get the picture), 10s 18%, and 11s 12%.

Nevertheless you always got to want to have the resume that produces the 8/9 over the 10/11. An 8/9 might be going 1-2 in the next three and winning the tournament or 2-1 and making the finals vs. going 1-2 and losing in the finals or semis.

6s make the sweet 16 35% of the time. Let's win out and get to that pole position!

http://mgoblog.com/diaries/historical-performance-ncaa-seeds

[ShockTalk]

RPIForecast projected RPIs:

We win 2 and lose 1 (CU) - 29..............win 2, lose 1 in Valley tourney - 29

It is appearing that, due to the low number of games left and all teams' simulations, that moving up by winning all our remaining games will have less of an impact than if we lose a single game we're not suppose to. Our margin of error is becoming non-existent. That would be the same for other teams that are around us.

My guess is that without doing something special over the last games (like 3-0, then 2-1 tourney or the reverse), getting a 7 seed or better is a long shot.