(04-07-2015 04:36 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  Let's just back this up. I made a particular point about FINAL polling. You counter with something that is true, however in no way is relevant to FINAL polling. We're on 2 different tracks here. Neither is wrong, however your response is in no way relevant to my assertion, which remains.

All those poll ratings you cite go to h*ll when you consider that we fall off in the final polling. Sure, the committee thought highly of us. However in all but 1 go of it in the dance we were found to not be worthy of further ranking. I.e we vastly underperformed relative to our seeding. So, what's that ultimately say about said seeding?

Why you place more onus on seeding over final polling is for you to explain. If you care to, of course.

It's a familiar UC fan divide. Many of us are happy for the regular season rankings/ performance, and then there's those of us who see the postseason as a better tool to gauge program success. And by postseason I don't mean, 'appearances.'

All those poll ratings you cite go to h*ll when you consider that we fall off in the final polling. Sure, the committee thought highly of us. However in all but 1 go of it were we ranked highly afterwards.



mc

Sure, the people who actually have some authority think you're a top 25 team, but what's really important is coaches and writers poll that doesn't matter at all (being in the final poll doesn't get your scores on the ESPN crawl or your highlights on Sportscenter)? The fact that UC's 2012 team wasn't in the final poll even when they got a 6 seed and made the Sweet 16 just goes to show how stupid the thing is.

Anyway, the preseason polls have actually been shown to be pretty accurate when it's all said and done.

(04-07-2015 03:42 PM)Overrated Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 03:24 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  There is no tournament committee Top 25. That thing that you're referencing is non-existent....and trust me, I'm not trying to be a d!ck by saying that.

Yes there is. You may not be trying to be a d*ck, you just have no clue what you are talking about. They have been releasing the seed list each of the last 4 years.

2015: 29
2014: 17
2013: 37
2012: 22

Unfortunately, they didn't make the seed list public in 2011, but since we were a 6 seed it can reasonably be inferred we were in the top 24.

As for the poll I did link, no sh*t it was a midseason poll. It was clearly to show that even in our worst year under Mick in the last 5, it was actually going quite well until Cash got hurt and things fell off the rails. You are just being obtuse on that one. To cite another source: We were 16th in KenPom after the game at Depaul that year (when Cash got hurt). We finished the season 42nd by closing 7-9 down the stretch after getting off the a 15-3 start.

Anyway, we are one of 11 teams to make the tournament in 5 straight seasons, and we consistently do it by being a top 25-30 team. That certainly isn't elite. But there aren't a ton of programs that could match that.

Also, it's pretty baffling that the 2011 and 2012 teams didn't make the AP top 25 after the tournament. I don't pay attention to postseason polls, so I completely missed that. But both teams deserved to be in there.

Oh holy hell just give it up already

(04-07-2015 04:54 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 03:42 PM)Overrated Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 03:24 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  There is no tournament committee Top 25. That thing that you're referencing is non-existent....and trust me, I'm not trying to be a d!ck by saying that.

Yes there is. You may not be trying to be a d*ck, you just have no clue what you are talking about. They have been releasing the seed list each of the last 4 years.

2015: 29
2014: 17
2013: 37
2012: 22

Unfortunately, they didn't make the seed list public in 2011, but since we were a 6 seed it can reasonably be inferred we were in the top 24.

As for the poll I did link, no sh*t it was a midseason poll. It was clearly to show that even in our worst year under Mick in the last 5, it was actually going quite well until Cash got hurt and things fell off the rails. You are just being obtuse on that one. To cite another source: We were 16th in KenPom after the game at Depaul that year (when Cash got hurt). We finished the season 42nd by closing 7-9 down the stretch after getting off the a 15-3 start.

Anyway, we are one of 11 teams to make the tournament in 5 straight seasons, and we consistently do it by being a top 25-30 team. That certainly isn't elite. But there aren't a ton of programs that could match that.

Also, it's pretty baffling that the 2011 and 2012 teams didn't make the AP top 25 after the tournament. I don't pay attention to postseason polls, so I completely missed that. But both teams deserved to be in there.

Oh holy hell just give it up already

Wait....I'm not sure what I was trying to respond to. Not this, sorry. I cant delete it off my phone either. My apologies.

I'm willing to overlook the rather arbitrary 'worthiness' of polls. Preseason is valid, yet postseason aren't?!? That's a bit inconsistent.

To acknowledge the solid point abt that SS team let's say that's 2 out of 5 years. That's less than half the time....of the last 5 years.

Also, as an act of acknowledgement, I see i missed the seedings that Overrated listed. Hey, my mistake there. I guess those rankings also justify the 2 in 5 years (with a question make b/c there's no ranking data available for '11) edit I made above.

We'll see what happens next year. I don't really care to prognosticate at this moment b/c it never really matters. At this point in my Bearcat fandom I prefer to just see where the chips may fall. As they stand now I'd say UC is abt a consistent top 25 - 40 team. We rack up regular season wins and underperform, on avg, in the postseason. Just my take on things.



mc

Let's face it, regularly playing on the second weekend is what separates the men from the boys. It was totally unreasonable for Mick to get us there in years 1-3, but I think if most of us could go back in time to 2006, look in the crystal ball, and see one Sweet 16 in nine years, we'd have been disappointed.

I think we usually have a better team than the polls indicate. I think our lack of a strong offensive game is holding us back from tournament success, albeit ridiculously good defense keeps us churning out 20+ win seasons on a consistent basis. I "think" next year's team will be able to put the ball in the basket better than possibly any Cronin team to date. Whether or not this will translate into tournament W's- who can say?

(04-07-2015 04:56 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 04:54 PM)Cataclysmo Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 03:42 PM)Overrated Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 03:24 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  There is no tournament committee Top 25. That thing that you're referencing is non-existent....and trust me, I'm not trying to be a d!ck by saying that.

Yes there is. You may not be trying to be a d*ck, you just have no clue what you are talking about. They have been releasing the seed list each of the last 4 years.

2015: 29
2014: 17
2013: 37
2012: 22

Unfortunately, they didn't make the seed list public in 2011, but since we were a 6 seed it can reasonably be inferred we were in the top 24.

As for the poll I did link, no sh*t it was a midseason poll. It was clearly to show that even in our worst year under Mick in the last 5, it was actually going quite well until Cash got hurt and things fell off the rails. You are just being obtuse on that one. To cite another source: We were 16th in KenPom after the game at Depaul that year (when Cash got hurt). We finished the season 42nd by closing 7-9 down the stretch after getting off the a 15-3 start.

Anyway, we are one of 11 teams to make the tournament in 5 straight seasons, and we consistently do it by being a top 25-30 team. That certainly isn't elite. But there aren't a ton of programs that could match that.

Also, it's pretty baffling that the 2011 and 2012 teams didn't make the AP top 25 after the tournament. I don't pay attention to postseason polls, so I completely missed that. But both teams deserved to be in there.

Oh holy hell just give it up already

Wait....I'm not sure what I was trying to respond to. Not this, sorry. I cant delete it off my phone either. My apologies.

Let's hope it wasn't in response to your wife.

(04-07-2015 05:49 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  I'm willing to overlook the rather arbitrary 'worthiness' of polls. Preseason is valid, yet postseason aren't?!? That's a bit inconsistent.

--------

We'll see what happens next year. I don't really care to prognosticate at this moment b/c it never really matters. At this point in my Bearcat fandom I prefer to just see where the chips may fall. As they stand now I'd say UC is abt a consistent top 25 - 40 team. We rack up regular season wins and underperform, on avg, in the postseason. Just my take on things.

I just meant that it's been shown that preseason polls are actually pretty good at predicting tournament success. You can read this nerd stuff here if you're interested, which you're surely not.

Why do you think UC underperforms in the postseason? The only time they've lost to a worse seed was in 2014 against Harvard.

(04-07-2015 07:12 PM)levydl Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 05:49 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  I'm willing to overlook the rather arbitrary 'worthiness' of polls. Preseason is valid, yet postseason aren't?!? That's a bit inconsistent.

--------

We'll see what happens next year. I don't really care to prognosticate at this moment b/c it never really matters. At this point in my Bearcat fandom I prefer to just see where the chips may fall. As they stand now I'd say UC is abt a consistent top 25 - 40 team. We rack up regular season wins and underperform, on avg, in the postseason. Just my take on things.

I just meant that it's been shown that preseason polls are actually pretty good at predicting tournament success. You can read this nerd stuff here if you're interested, which you're surely not.

Why do you think UC underperforms in the postseason? The only time they've lost to a worse seed was in 2014 against Harvard.

Fan of FiveThirtyEight and their metric over narrative focus.

This is a good link with a lot of relevance to this conversation...strangely enough. It offers a metric driven comparison of the highly knocked writers (b/c they know nothing...or so the story goes) AP poll vs the poll the Selection Committee uses. Turns out they're pretty much a dead heat in predictive value.

"Although we all like to make fun of sportswriters, these predictions are actually pretty decent. Since 2003, the team ranked higher in the A.P. preseason poll (excluding cases where neither team received at least 5 votes) has won 72 percent of tournament games. That’s exactly the same number, 72 percent, as the fraction of games won by the better seed. And it’s a little better than the 71 percent won by teams with the superior Ratings Percentage Index, the statistical formula that the seeding committee prefers. (More sophisticated statistical ratings, like Ken Pomeroy’s, do only a little better, with a 73 percent success rate.)"

Anywho, regarding UC's torney performance relative to seeding....you're correct. We have seemingly performed according to seeding. Perhaps 'underperform' is a bad choice of words. Maybe just up to our seeding, w/even a cpl upsets to boot. Having said that, I am perhaps persuaded by the idea that a program like ours needs to be playing on the 2nd weekend....at least. I kinda feel like that needs to be our standard. As someone noted above.....a 1 SS birth in 9 total years (we can use 5 or 6) is disappointing. In this broader sense I can't help but to feel as though we are underperforming.




mc

(04-07-2015 05:49 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  Also, as an act of acknowledgement, I see i missed the seedings that Overrated listed. Hey, my mistake there. I guess those rankings also justify the 2 in 5 years (with a question make b/c there's no ranking data available for '11) edit I made above.

Exactly how weren't we a top 25 team in 2011 when we were a 6 seed, then dominated Missouri before losing to the eventual national champions?

So that puts us at 3 times in 5 years. With a 4th year being just outside the top 25 at 29 entering the tournament with nothing that happened in the tournament changing that ranking much.

(04-08-2015 11:34 AM)Overrated Wrote:  

(04-07-2015 05:49 PM)marcuscan Wrote:  Also, as an act of acknowledgement, I see i missed the seedings that Overrated listed. Hey, my mistake there. I guess those rankings also justify the 2 in 5 years (with a question make b/c there's no ranking data available for '11) edit I made above.

Exactly how weren't we a top 25 team in 2011 when we were a 6 seed, then dominated Missouri before losing to the eventual national champions?

So that puts us at 3 times in 5 years. With a 4th year being just outside the top 25 at 29 entering the tournament with nothing that happened in the tournament changing that ranking much.

Maybe they were, maybe they were not so deserving of a final ranking. Unlike 2012 the case isn't nearly as certain.

A win over an 11 seed in the opening round and a lose in the next round isn't quite approaching the accomplishments of a SS 2012 team.

Guessing here, but by tourney seeding we were likely #20 - #24 ( as a 6 seed).

Final AP poll 2011: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketba.../year/2011

We were a borderline team that won one game. #33 is debatably a lil low, but I find it hard to say we were definitely Top 25.

2 in 5 years. Seems fair.



mc

Yeah, I'm gonna disagree. 3 out of 5 seems fair. Another year just outside the top 25. For reference, the 3 other 6 seeds all lost in the first round that year. None of the 7 seeds made it to the sweet 16. Only one 8 seed made it out of the sweet 16 (Butler, the year they made lost to UConn in the final), and no 9 seed made it to the sweet 16. I don't really feel like looking further than that, but there is no reason we should have been jumped that year.

A deep tourney run or championship is what we all want.

For purposes of recruiting, I think being in the Top 25 most of the year is really key. Get the extra television exposure, while recruits are deciding where to go. The tournament gets a lot of attention, but the television exposure of being in the Top 25 most of the year helps a lot.