Poll Watch (2013-14 Edition)

[Cdizzle]

Meh. Any scenario that results with WSU in the Top 5 in the polls and a 1 seed with the added bonus of being called "overrated" seems like a Win-Win to this Shocker fan.

If you were an opposing team, about to play the Shockers, would you want millions of people telling them they are overrated?

[Steeleshocker]

Meh. Any scenario that results with WSU in the Top 5 in the polls and a 1 seed with the added bonus of being called "overrated" seems like a Win-Win to this Shocker fan.

If you were an opposing team, about to play the Shockers, would you want millions of people telling them they are overrated?

Wow, I never looked at it from that perspective. Just spend five minutes before each game quoting some Twitter and media members saying the Shockers are overrated. I know I would play angry.

[Rlh04d]

Yes, because I WANT the team to sleep on some other team looking to make history.

Bucknell. Belmont. VCU three years ago. Princeton lost to Overall #1 seed Georgetown by 2 back in '89, led them at the half (and I've NEVER seen Dick Vitale sweat like he did at halftime of that game. He vowed to wear a Princeton cheerleading uniform to their next game if they won). You don't get a bye. You have to play the game, and as everybody knows all too well around here, if you sleep on Evansville, you're going to get embarrassed, so no, I was not kidding.

While that's entirely correct, you're still wrong. A 1-seed simply has an easier road to the Final Four.

You can't take any team lightly. But as long as you're treating all teams the same, it's a hell of a lot easier to beat a 16 seed than a 1 seed. The higher the seed you are, the easier the teams you play are. That doesn't mean you take them for granted, because "easier" does not equate to "easy." But they ARE easier. Statistically you are far more likely to make the Final Four given a higher seed. You can name outliers, but they're called outliers for a reason.

[Rlh04d]

...would like a word with you.

Remember folks, after that 16-seed, the 1-seed faces, basically, us last year.

That's simply not true. Almost never does a 1-seed play as good a team as us last year. We were under-seeded due to injuries throughout the season. We were a perfect storm going into the NCAA tournament, after a poor conference driven primarily by lack of perimeter threats. Without Baker we were a 9-seed. With him we certainly weren't.

Historically, 1 seeds are 55-5 against 9-seeds. We are one of five teams to upset the 1-seed since the tournament expanded. We are one of two 9-seeds to make the Elite 8, and the only 9-seed to make the Final Four. Citing us as an example of something that 1-seeds "basically" face every year is ridiculous. No 1-seed has played a 9-seed like us since at least the expansion of the tournament.

1-seeds have a 100% chance to win their first game, and in their second game, nearly a 92% chance to beat a 9-seed. I'm not as sure about the 1/8 game since the expansion ... all time, 1-seeds are 60-14 against 8-seeds.

Basically, 1-seeds go to the Sweet 16 nearly 86% of the time. You have to win the games, but on average I would much rather play a 16 and an 8/9 seed to get to the Sweet 16 than any other pair of teams. Gonzaga is only relevant if we'd have to play Wichita State.

[jdmee]

Here are the numbers of Final Fours, Finals and Championships by seed since 1985 (when the tourney was expanded to 64). Seeds not listed have not made it to the final 4.

Seed	Won	Win%	Finals	Finals%	F4	F4%
1	19	65.5%	28	48.3%	47	40.5%
2	3	10.3%	11	18.9%	25	21.5%
3	4	13.8%	9	15.5%	14	12.1%
4	1	3.5%	3	5.2%	13	11.2%
5	0	0%	3	5.2%	6	5.2%
6	1	3.5%	2	3.5%	3	2.5%
8	1	3.5%	2	3.5%	4	3.5%
9	0	0%	0	0%	1	0.9%
11	0	0%	0	0%	3	2.6%
Total	29	N/A	58	N/A	116	N/A

However, it is more important that we play like a #1 seed rather than be a #1 seed come tourney time.

[jocoshock]

However, it is more important that we play like a #1 seed rather than be a #1 seed come tourney time.

Yeah. Like last year. Playing like a #1 will be the MOST important thing.

[HockeyShock]

1-seeds have a 100% chance to win their first game, and in their second game, nearly a 92% chance to beat a 9-seed. I'm not as sure about the 1/8 game since the expansion ... all time, 1-seeds are 60-14 against 8-seeds.

First of all, I already conceded the point so lay off.

Second of all, this statement of yours is completely and utterly false. 1-seeds do not have a 100% chance to win their first game. 1-seeds have won 100% of the games played so far against 16-seeds. If we're going to pick statistical nits, then try not confusing past results with future performance.

I'm sorry I brought it up.

[WSUwatcher]

Almost never does a 1-seed play as good a team as us last year. We were under-seeded due to injuries throughout the season. We were a perfect storm going into the NCAA tournament, after a poor conference driven primarily by lack of perimeter threats. Without Baker we were a 9-seed. With him we certainly weren't.

Exactly right, Rlh. WSU was a #9 last year like VCU was a #12 the year before. One would think Shocker fans might be more aware than most about the misfortune of drawing an underseeded team, especially one that plays well on their given night.

[Rlh04d]

First of all, I already conceded the point so lay off.

Second of all, this statement of yours is completely and utterly false. 1-seeds do not have a 100% chance to win their first game. 1-seeds have won 100% of the games played so far against 16-seeds. If we're going to pick statistical nits, then try not confusing past results with future performance.

I'm sorry I brought it up.

Nitpicking on word choice.

Your point was that no seed makes a run to a FF easier. That's not true. 1-seeds don't advance to the Sweet 16 86% of the time without an inherent advantage. Once the ball is tipped, it's a hell of a lot easier to beat a 16 seed than a 1 seed. That obviously doesn't mean it can't happen, but it would be monumentally shocking for a reason.

[Rlh04d]

Exactly right, Rlh. WSU was a #9 last year like VCU was a #12 the year before. One would think Shocker fans might be more aware than most about the misfortune of drawing an underseeded team, especially one that plays well on their given night.

It definitely is.

But I'd rather play an underseeded 9 than an underseeded 3, all things equal. I'd prefer to play the numbers and hope we don't get that historically underseeded 9 that we were. Because the numbers say that level of play from a 9 seed is incredibly rare.

[Blackmag]

seeding

I for one would much rather have the path of a no. 1 seed as opposed of an 8 or 9. Why do you think the KUs and Kentuckys of the world have so many sweet 16's in their history. It would be sweet to be a 1 or 2 seed

[Blackmag]

it also would be nice to play somewhere closer to home instead of cross country so more fans could drive to the game. that would be a huge advantage. Just ask Ku, playing in KC or Dallas ect.

[AZ Shocker]

I for one would much rather have the path of a no. 1 seed as opposed of an 8 or 9. Why do you think the KUs and Kentuckys of the world have so many sweet 16's in their history. It would be sweet to be a 1 or 2 seed

Exactly!!!

[pie n eye]

Nitpicking on word choice.

Your point was that no seed makes a run to a FF easier. That's not true. 1-seeds don't advance to the Sweet 16 86% of the time without an inherent advantage. Once the ball is tipped, it's a hell of a lot easier to beat a 16 seed than a 1 seed. That obviously doesn't mean it can't happen, but it would be monumentally shocking for a reason.

1 seeds advance at that rate because they are typically great basketball teams not because they are a 1 seed. You act like you could slap a 1 seed next to any old team and they're going to sleepwalk to the sweet 16.

[ShockerEngr]

1 seeds advance at that rate because they are typically great basketball teams not because they are a 1 seed. You act like you could slap a 1 seed next to any old team and they're going to sleepwalk to the sweet 16.

But if you were to swap say a 1 seed and a 5 seed spots, it becomes easier for the 5 seed and harder for the 1 seed.
The percentages for each would change as the quality of teams are usually different, but it doesn't change the fact that it would be easier for the 5 seed to advance