AP and Coaches Poll Watch Thread (2015-16 Edition)

[SHOCKvalue]

WSU received a 1 seed in a year where the conference was ranked 11th overall and the 2nd place team in the conference was a 1-and-done in the NIT. I would love to see the Shox play in a better league, but it is more about entertainment value of good opponents than it is about the MVC currently holding them back.

Come on man! That #1 seed took a statistical improbability in order to become reality for WSU.

Last year we were something like ~15 in AP and Kenpom and we got a freaking #7 seed.

EDIT: SF beat me by seconds.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Last year was an anomaly. 5 in 2012, 9 in 2013, 1 in 2014 were all fair considering the mediocre to bad state of the MVC each of those years.

[MadaboutWu]

KU currently enjoys a higher ranking in the national poll than in the big 12 standings (if you count tied for 4th-5th as 4.5).

[Perezident]

KU currently enjoys a higher ranking in the national poll than in the big 12 standings (if you count tied for 4th-5th as 4.5).

To be fair, when the poll was taken they were in a tie for 1st in the B12, ie before last night's loss. But of course you knew that.

[giskard]

It is really nice being able to go to espn.com to check the score and not have to pick the conference selector to see the Shocker score!

[Shocker-maniac]

WSU received a 1 seed in a year where the conference was ranked 11th overall and the 2nd place team in the conference was a 1-and-done in the NIT. I would love to see the Shox play in a better league, but it is more about entertainment value of good opponents than it is about the MVC currently holding them back.

So, you're saying all of those terrible conference team RPI's do no harm? Come on man, I know that you're smarter than that.

[Shocker-maniac]

WSU received a 1 seed in a year where the conference was ranked 11th overall and the 2nd place team in the conference was a 1-and-done in the NIT. I would love to see the Shox play in a better league, but it is more about entertainment value of good opponents than it is about the MVC currently holding them back.

And if you really want to have full disclosure, you will recall that the year that we got the #1 seed that they put us in a stacked bracket. The message from the committee was, "we really don't think that WSU is good enough to be a #1 seed because of their weak SOS, but since WSU went undefeated we will give it to them, but it will be stacked against them." If we would have lost one conference game that year we would not even have sniffed a #1 seed. I really don't see how a person can come to the conclusion that WSU is not harmed by being in the MVC versus being in a conference with a better RPI.

[proshox]

And if you really want to have full disclosure, you will recall that the year that we got the #1 seed that they put us in a stacked bracket. The message from the committee was, "we really don't think that WSU is good enough to be a #1 seed because of their weak SOS, but since WSU went undefeated we will give it to them, but it will be stacked against them." If we would have lost one conference game that year we would not even have sniffed a #1 seed. I really don't see how a person can come to the conclusion that WSU is not harmed by being in the MVC versus being in a conference with a better RPI.

Actually they help us. Without significant advantage in talent it would have been difficult to do what we did that year or are doing this year. We have tickets to the tournament every year that we play in the Valley. Just like Gonzaga had for the first ten years.

[jdshock]

Actually they help us. Without significant advantage in talent it would have been difficult to do what we did that year or are doing this year. We have tickets to the tournament every year that we play in the Valley. Just like Gonzaga had for the first ten years.

Do you really believe that there's been a time we made it to the tournament because the valley was weak and we did not have the talent to make the tournament in a tougher league?

Our teams have been good enough to make the tournament in other leagues since 2011. The weak MVC causes us to have a razor thin margin of error. Our team in 13-14 was absolutely one of the four best teams in the country. We could have gotten a one seed out of any tough conference. Out of the valley, it required a near statistical impossibility. There's only a risk the valley harms us unless you can point to a year where we made the tournament and we wouldn't have in a tougher conference.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

So, you're saying all of those terrible conference team RPI's do no harm? Come on man, I know that you're smarter than that.

I believe WSU can get a great seed every single year whether they are in the #1 rated conference or the #11 rated conference. I believe there is a falloff point, maybe around the #15 and below rated conferences, where it starts to become difficult for any team to gain a good seed, but I do not see the MVC falling that far in the foreseeable future.

If WSU has #2 seed talent, I believe they will get a 1/2/3 99% of the time whether in the MVC or in a better conference. In the MVC they put up a fancy W/L record. In a tougher conference, they lose more games but gain in SOS. I believe that any handicap that the current system places on a team like the Shox amounts to 1 seed line, at most. In my opinion, it is effectively a non-issue. I know many on here disagree with me on this. That is fine.

I'm one of the loudest voices in the group that says playing in a better conference would be more entertaining as a fan to watch. I admit seeing Loyola come to town isn't always all that exciting. However, I separate the impact on entertainment value from the impact on seeding.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

And if you really want to have full disclosure, you will recall that the year that we got the #1 seed that they put us in a stacked bracket. The message from the committee was, "we really don't think that WSU is good enough to be a #1 seed because of their weak SOS, but since WSU went undefeated we will give it to them, but it will be stacked against them." If we would have lost one conference game that year we would not even have sniffed a #1 seed. I really don't see how a person can come to the conclusion that WSU is not harmed by being in the MVC versus being in a conference with a better RPI.

I believe the stacked bracket theory is overblown. I do not believe the committee was sending a "message" to WSU.

#2 Michigan and #3 Duke both had 8 losses entering the tourney. They were ordinary 2's and 3's. Interestingly, Duke lost to Mercer in the 3vs14 game.

I admit Louisville and Kentucky in the same half of the regional bracket was tough, but I'm much more convinced that the committee was looking to keep popular teams near home (Midwest region) than they were looking to punish or test WSU. I'll even say they screwed up and should have given the #1 seed more favoritism, but I think the motivation of their screw up was too much focus on 2 blue bloods. I don't think it had anything to do with WSU specifically, so WSU playing in a different conference wouldn't have changed anything.

Once again, I realize many here will disagree. That's fine. Just giving some reasoning behind my opinions since you asked.

[proshox]

Do you really believe that there's been a time we made it to the tournament because the valley was weak and we did not have the talent to make the tournament in a tougher league?

Our teams have been good enough to make the tournament in other leagues since 2011. The weak MVC causes us to have a razor thin margin of error. Our team in 13-14 was absolutely one of the four best teams in the country. We could have gotten a one seed out of any tough conference. Out of the valley, it required a near statistical impossibility. There's only a risk the valley harms us unless you can point to a year where we made the tournament and we wouldn't have in a tougher conference.

Yes - NIT team, MT's teams just prior to Miller's senior year.

[Shocker-maniac]

I believe the stacked bracket theory is overblown. I do not believe the committee was sending a "message" to WSU.

#2 Michigan and #3 Duke both had 8 losses entering the tourney. They were ordinary 2's and 3's. Interestingly, Duke lost to Mercer in the 3vs14 game.

I admit Louisville and Kentucky in the same half of the regional bracket was tough, but I'm much more convinced that the committee was looking to keep popular teams near home (Midwest region) than they were looking to punish or test WSU. I'll even say they screwed up and should have given the #1 seed more favoritism, but I think the motivation of their screw up was too much focus on 2 blue bloods. I don't think it had anything to do with WSU specifically, so WSU playing in a different conference wouldn't have changed anything.

Once again, I realize many here will disagree. That's fine. Just giving some reasoning behind my opinions since you asked.

While I'm not saying that I agree with you, I do appreciate your responses and sharing your thoughts. Thank you.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Do you really believe that there's been a time we made it to the tournament because the valley was weak and we did not have the talent to make the tournament in a tougher league?

Our teams have been good enough to make the tournament in other leagues since 2011. The weak MVC causes us to have a razor thin margin of error. Our team in 13-14 was absolutely one of the four best teams in the country. We could have gotten a one seed out of any tough conference. Out of the valley, it required a near statistical impossibility. There's only a risk the valley harms us unless you can point to a year where we made the tournament and we wouldn't have in a tougher conference.

Here's an interesting comparison from 2014 using numbers from KenPom

WSU - 1 seed playing in the #11 conference. #8 offense, #10 defense, #5 overall
Louisville - 4 seed playing in the #7 conference. #10 offense, #6 defense, #2 overall

Louisville played in a conference at exactly the level WSU would reasonably hope to move up to. The AAC in 2014 was like the MVC of 2006. Solid, not elite, but much more competitive than the MVC of the last 5 years. Louisville was also coming off a national championship the year prior. No reason to expect to be disrespected.

According to KenPom, Louisville was very comparable with WSU, and even slightly higher rated overall. What did the better conference get them? A 4 seed! Now I admit that Louisville got a raw deal that year, but isn't that the point? Raw deals happen. Being in the MVC doesn't necessarily cause the chances of being the recipient of a raw deal to skyrocket.

[Jamar Howard 4 President]

Yes - NIT team, MT's teams just prior to Miller's senior year.

2005 - The MVC sent 3 teams dancing that year. Both SIU and UNI received at large bids ahead of WSU. The problem that year was not a weak league, it was WSU finishing 4-7 leading into selection sunday.

2011 - The Shox went 0-2 against the only 2 decent opponents in the non-conf, the proceeded to lose 5 times to MVC foes in a really weak #11 ranked conference that had zero at large worthy teams.

Both teams were close, but both teams can blame themselves, not the MVC, for their NIT bids.