What will be interesting is:

1) How high will Northern Iowa be seeded?
2) Does Wichita State get much help from beating them earlier in the season?


Northern Iowa did beat #1 at the time North Carolina, and #5 at the time Iowa State

(03-07-2016 11:29 AM)Wedge Wrote:  Wichita State is an interesting case because the list of who they've beaten isn't strong, their RPI (47 today) is marginal for an at-large team, but for the advanced-metric fans, KenPom still loves them (#11 today, actually #10 because ineligible Louisville is ahead of them).

Lunardi almost seems to be averaging RPI and KenPom to seed a lot of the teams (e.g. he gives Wichita a 7-seed today).

Two things, though: (1) Any of these bracket guys who claim to be accurate only brag about getting the correct teams in the field and maybe the top 2 seeds, they don't claim to be predicting every seed perfectly; and (2) By the tournament committee's own admission, they spend most of their time discussing who should get the at-large bids and much less time on seeding and placing the teams at the different sites.

there are metrics though- and Lunardi IS one of the most accurate the last 3 years(want to say #12).

The ESPN bracket is wrong- it's the same as Friday... like they just messed up uploading it.

(03-07-2016 10:10 AM)_C2_ Wrote:  But the deal is, who has Wichita beaten? Utah and..? Sure it's not their fault the Valley has declined and Creighton isn't there anymore but it is what it is. Not to sound like a homer but Houston has more notworthy wins and about the same amount of bad losses, granted with a worse non-conference schedule. Even fellow bubbler Tulsa beat them head to head and aside from a loss to Oral Roberts in a rivalry game, doesn't have a loss nearly as bad as Illinois State or even Northern Iowa (I suppose Memphis also counts despite the fact they're better than they've played).

If the standard being used is that their best player was injured then that needs to be used for every other bubble team because I guarantee they aren't the only team that's had to deal with that type of adversity (UH didn't have Rob Gray in some of its losses for example).

So, a loss to the #121 RPI team (@ Illinois St) is worse than a loss to the #230 RPI team (vs. South Florida) or the #147-148 RPI teams (vs. Oral Roberts, @ Memphis)? I guess that's Houston math!

Wichita St. And Tulsa have comparable numbers, even though the eye test goes to the Shockers IMO. The H2H won't matter that much as I don't think they'll be in the same groupings during the discussion. Also, injuries are always part of the discussion, more so than others. Van Vleet's injury is probably going to carry more significance than others because of the timing, and who they were plying at the time.

There's really no point in comparing Houston to Wichita St, as they would have to win the AACtourney to have a shot IMO. They screwed themselves with their OOC schedule.

you wonder if Wichita is going to make folks rethink the advanced metrics craze.

look at this comparison between Wichita and Providence:
PC- 44 RPI, 76 SOS, 227 OOC SOS 44 OOC RPI 160 avg win, 55 avg loss, 55 KP 5-3 road/neutral vs RPI top 100
WS- 48 RPI, 106 SOS, 22 OOC SOS 81 OOC RPI 188 avg win, 61 avg loss, 11 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100

Wichita St has the OOC SOS. Providence has everything else- and in a lot of cases, pretty decisively.

(03-07-2016 12:03 PM)stever20 Wrote:  you wonder if Wichita is going to make folks rethink the advanced metrics craze.

look at this comparison between Wichita and Providence:
PC- 44 RPI, 76 SOS, 227 OOC SOS 44 OOC RPI 160 avg win, 55 avg loss, 55 KP 5-3 road/neutral vs RPI top 100
WS- 48 RPI, 106 SOS, 22 OOC SOS 81 OOC RPI 188 avg win, 61 avg loss, 11 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100

Wichita St has the OOC SOS. Providence has everything else- and in a lot of cases, pretty decisively.

That's a better comparison to Wichita St than Houston or Tulsa.

In that comparison, it's hard to pick the Shockers over PC. However, they may not be in the same grouping during the discussion.

Providence is in the tournament, though, pretty safely by most projections. So that doesn't make the case for leaving out Wichita.

WS- 48 RPI, 106 SOS, 22 OOC SOS 81 OOC RPI 188 avg win, 61 avg loss, 11 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100
Tulsa- 51 RPI, 53 SOS, 111 OOC SOS, 90 OOC RPI, 162 avg win, 67 avg loss, 46 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100

pretty close to each other. close enough to where the head to head would matter.

(03-07-2016 12:09 PM)stever20 Wrote:  WS- 48 RPI, 106 SOS, 22 OOC SOS 81 OOC RPI 188 avg win, 61 avg loss, 11 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100
Tulsa- 51 RPI, 53 SOS, 111 OOC SOS, 90 OOC RPI, 162 avg win, 67 avg loss, 46 KP 2-6 road/neutral vs RPI top 100

pretty close to each other. close enough to where the head to head would matter.

If Lunardi is close to correct, and WSU is a 7-9 seed, then the H2H won't matter, because they would be "solidly" in, while Tulsa is a bubble team. I think he's saying that the committee will weigh FVV's injury heavily. I don't necessarily disagree, but that's where the subjectivity comes into play.

the thing that will be interesting is if Wichita is way ahead of Providence. I know Lunardi with today's bracket has Wichita still at a 7 and PC at an 8.

Something that the committee will probably consider, at least in the privacy of their own heads: Do all of the at-larges really come from 8 conferences? (P5, BE, AAC, A-10)?

great article about Wichita....
http://mweb.cbssports.com/ncaab/eye-on-c...in-history

(03-07-2016 12:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something that the committee will probably consider, at least in the privacy of their own heads: Do all of the at-larges really come from 8 conferences? (P5, BE, AAC, A-10)?

Other than those, there are only two other conferences with any reasonable chance at getting an at-large team in:

If Wichita State is in, the MVC gets one.

Saint Mary's is probably in even if they don't win the WCC tournament, so that would be one more conference getting an at-large, and there's an outside chance Gonzaga would get in if they beat BYU tonight and then lose to Saint Mary's tomorrow.

(03-07-2016 11:46 AM)leofrog Wrote:  So, a loss to the #121 RPI team (@ Illinois St) is worse than a loss to the #230 RPI team (vs. South Florida) or the #147-148 RPI teams (vs. Oral Roberts, @ Memphis)? I guess that's Houston math!

Wichita St. And Tulsa have comparable numbers, even though the eye test goes to the Shockers IMO. The H2H won't matter that much as I don't think they'll be in the same groupings during the discussion. Also, injuries are always part of the discussion, more so than others. Van Vleet's injury is probably going to carry more significance than others because of the timing, and who they were plying at the time.

There's really no point in comparing Houston to Wichita St, as they would have to win the AACtourney to have a shot IMO. They screwed themselves with their OOC schedule.

We agree on some levels but while USF was a bad loss, the SMU win was better than anything Wichita has done. Looking at UH's profile both appear to be anamolies and should thus be thrown out in the evaluation. Houston's worst loss otherwise was to Rhode Island and they faired consistently well against good competition, which for the sake of this conversation we'll call top 100-ish teams. Without looking it up, I'd venture to say UH went 6-6 in such games.

It'll be a close call but looking at things fairly, injuries or not, it's not fair to place Wichita so safely in the field over some of the other contenders, especially one in Tulsa that won head-to-head, has minimal bad losses and numerous solid wins. Part of it is merely their reputation, which is also benefiting Gonzaga, who probably shouldn't be so close to the field.

(03-07-2016 12:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something that the committee will probably consider, at least in the privacy of their own heads: Do all of the at-larges really come from 8 conferences? (P5, BE, AAC, A-10)?

I hope it doesn't weigh in at all. Bring in the best teams, not diversity. It's not like the workplace. I'd imagine on a conspiratorial level, the networks and radio have some sway on both teams in the field and matchups but if that were the case, you'd never see a George Mason or VCU WTF selection that puts everyone up in arms or a St. Joe's getting a top seed. With rare exception, the top conferences completely dominate the Final Four and later rounds and the Cinderellas are a major reason why people pay attention, so why discriminate?

(03-07-2016 03:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 12:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something that the committee will probably consider, at least in the privacy of their own heads: Do all of the at-larges really come from 8 conferences? (P5, BE, AAC, A-10)?

Other than those, there are only two other conferences with any reasonable chance at getting an at-large team in:

If Wichita State is in, the MVC gets one.

Saint Mary's is probably in even if they don't win the WCC tournament, so that would be one more conference getting an at-large, and there's an outside chance Gonzaga would get in if they beat BYU tonight and then lose to Saint Mary's tomorrow.

They'll never say this in so many words, and I have no way of proving it, but I suspect one of the functions the First Four serves is to allow the selection committee to pick an off-the-grid team for an at-large bid. VCU in 2011 is the exemplar, but also Iona in 2012 and Middle Tennessee in 2013. I could see Monmouth getting in this way.

(03-07-2016 04:54 PM)Cyniclone Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 03:07 PM)Wedge Wrote:  

(03-07-2016 12:44 PM)johnbragg Wrote:  Something that the committee will probably consider, at least in the privacy of their own heads: Do all of the at-larges really come from 8 conferences? (P5, BE, AAC, A-10)?

Other than those, there are only two other conferences with any reasonable chance at getting an at-large team in:

If Wichita State is in, the MVC gets one.

Saint Mary's is probably in even if they don't win the WCC tournament, so that would be one more conference getting an at-large, and there's an outside chance Gonzaga would get in if they beat BYU tonight and then lose to Saint Mary's tomorrow.

They'll never say this in so many words, and I have no way of proving it, but I suspect one of the functions the First Four serves is to allow the selection committee to pick an off-the-grid team for an at-large bid. VCU in 2011 is the exemplar, but also Iona in 2012 and Middle Tennessee in 2013. I could see Monmouth getting in this way.

That's what Monmouth will be hoping for now that they lost the MAAC final to Iona.

Another #1 seed, IPFW, lost today in the Summit semifinals to North Dakota State. No shot at an at-large for IPFW, they'll be in the NIT.

Hofstra is gone, and Valpo is likely gone as well.... bad night for #1 seeds....

yay Iona. We actually beat a Tourney team!

Horrible night for the bubble, and a horrible one for top seeds.

Valpo (41 RPI/33 KenPom)
Monmouth (49/66) <-- how are they and not Valpo the conversation about getting in? Monmouth has tanked. Haven't been the same since one of their top guys got hurt.
Hofstra (56/85) (though, UNCW had better numbers)
IPFW (63/123) (again, SDSU has the better numbers)

UT-C looking like they can follow through (they don't look too bad, either...could be a dangerous draw depending on the seeding), and SMC looking like they've got it for a trip to the final. Stony cleared Hartford...something tells me they lay another egg in the final to Vermont, though. They choke out there on the Island, it seems.

Valpo down to 51 after today RPI/38 kp
Monmouth down to 52/66
Hofstra 55/85
IPFW 68/124

Going to be tough for any of the 4 to make it.