Joe Lunardi

[Dan]

Just for kicks I looked at his bracket projection from March 16th, just one day before the results show, to see how accurate he was. He did correctly pick 66 of 68 teams, bid deal. He is absolutely terrible at projecting seeds and sites. He accurately placed only 10 teams in the correct regions. He was 26 of 68 on picking the correct seeds.

It's funny to see how worked up everyone was getting with our seed projections. He was wrong on 62% of his projections.

[kcshocker11]

Always wonder how accurate he is

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Projecting regions is nearly impossible when you aren't part of the committee's discussions. A high % of the teams are placed in a region simply because it doesn't result in conflicts, not because it is where the committee thinks they deserve to play. Rules about teams from the same conference not meeting early on, trying to avoid regular season rematches, etc. result in a lot of shifting from region to region.

As for the Joe's final bracket, he had 34 seeds exactly right (I had 35) and 58 within 1 line (I had 60). Joe is good, but nowhere near good enough to deserve ESPN's spot. I've beaten him 4 years in a row and I do it in my free time. For him, it's his job.

[SubGod22]

There's a reason he was being called LOLunardi on here by some. I kept telling people around me to ignore him and that we'd be a 10 at the worst but I expected a 9.

All the evidence you needed to know he was an idiot was how during our late win streak we dropped 3 or 4 seed lines on his bracket. How could anyone take him seriously when that was going on?

[small tyme baller]

To fault Lunardi on places teams in the correct region is unreasonable ... and if you put all your stock in what Joe says, you are a fool. Noone should base, and get their hopes up off of what Lunardi says ... hes merely projecting & is not involved in the selection committee's process in selecting destinations. Use him as a mid - late season guide

[DoubleJayAlum]

As for the Joe's final bracket, he had 34 seeds exactly right (I had 35) and 58 within 1 line (I had 60). Joe is good, but nowhere near good enough to deserve ESPN's spot. I've beaten him 4 years in a row and I do it in my free time. For him, it's his job.

Actually, his day job is assistant SID at St Joseph's.

Joe is a good guy ad one of the biggest advocates for non-BCS schools you will find at ESPN. He's pretty funny too.

[SubGod22]

To fault Lunardi on places teams in the correct region is unreasonable ... and if you put all your stock in what Joe says, you are a fool. Noone should base, and get their hopes up off of what Lunardi says ... hes merely projecting & is not involved in the selection committee's process in selecting destinations. Use him as a mid - late season guide

I don't worry about his locations. He should be judged on seed lines though. And that's where he proves to be about average at this

[kcshocker11]

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/tournament/2013/story/_/page/videopreviews13/video-previews-every-team-joe-lunardi

Dont know if this has been posted but heres Lunardis videos of each team

[jocoshock]

There's a reason he was being called LOLunardi on here by some. I kept telling people around me to ignore him and that we'd be a 10 at the worst but I expected a 9.

All the evidence you needed to know he was an idiot was how during our late win streak we dropped 3 or 4 seed lines on his bracket. How could anyone take him seriously when that was going on?

The mere fact that he continues to use and S-curve when the selection committee does not tells me that his best days are behind him...

[jocoshock]

Just for kicks I looked at his bracket projection from March 16th, just one day before the results show, to see how accurate he was. He did correctly pick 66 of 68 teams, bid deal. He is absolutely terrible at projecting seeds and sites. He accurately placed only 10 teams in the correct regions. He was 26 of 68 on picking the correct seeds.

It's funny to see how worked up everyone was getting with our seed projections. He was wrong on 62% of his projections.

Our average seeding on the Bracket Project website a couple of days ago was 10.1. There were very few projections of us being higher than 10. I tend to believe that our 9 seed was more the product of shuffling teams across regions, than anything. It certainly was responsible for Pitt being underseeded as an 8.

[wsushox1]

Joe does a good job, and is passionate about what he does. I don't mind him.

Also, to not find fault in his locations but then fault him for his seeding is strange. Are Seedings notchanged to accomodate locations, and various other things?

[shockerfanmas]

I'm pretty sure Joe Lunardi is better than predicting a bracket than most of us.. in fact all of us. The fact that he correctly picked all the teams in the bracket is pretty impressive. I could give a crap less about seeding cause lets be honest.. seeding doesn't mean jack anymore. All it means is who gets to wear the light colored jersey. If that's all you people are worried about is seeding then my goodness I feel bad for you. I'll take Joe Lunardi any day because he predicts the right teams, and that's all that really matters.

[The Mad Hatter]

I'm pretty sure Joe Lunardi is better than predicting a bracket than most of us.. in fact all of us. The fact that he correctly picked all the teams in the bracket is pretty impressive. I could give a crap less about seeding cause lets be honest.. seeding doesn't mean jack anymore. All it means is who gets to wear the light colored jersey. If that's all you people are worried about is seeding then my goodness I feel bad for you. I'll take Joe Lunardi any day because he predicts the right teams, and that's all that really matters.

You do realize you posted this in a thread in which a poster on this board noted that he has had a better record at predictions than Lunardi 4 years running correct? The fact is that there are numerous people that do this better than Lunardi. That doesn't mean you have to dislike him, but the fact that he is mediocre at this amongst his peers is a matter of record, not opinion.

[rialaigh]

You do realize you posted this in a thread in which a poster on this board noted that he has had a better record at predictions than Lunardi 4 years running correct? The fact is that there are numerous people that do this better than Lunardi. That doesn't mean you have to dislike him, but the fact that he is mediocre at this amongst his peers is a matter of record, not opinion.

I think if Joe is in the top 100 at guessing the bracket out of the millions of basketball fans in this nation we can accurately describe him as an expert. I would also argue he is very good among his peers. If you include all the "paid writers" who put out brackets I am guessing Joe is way ahead of most of them. And if he is indeed mediocre among his peers then it would appear that his peers are damn good...

[SubGod22]

Of course he's better than most of us as most of us don't spend most of our time working on such things. JH4P does it in his free time and is still better than Lunardi who gets paid to do it. Joe is average when it comes to those who do it. I believe even Henry Muto who posts here from time to time did better than Joe. So that's two posters on this board who are better than him.