the dumbest article about the tournament I’ve ever read https://www.google.com/amp/www.espn...north-carolina-helped-bracketing?platform=amp
Maybe just maybe...
- Thread starter pisgah101
- Start date
Was he literally implying that Maryland got a break by looking at a match up with LSU?
Like I said last night, I would rather have our 2 seed than the 2 in any of the other regions, but the 3 and 4 seeds in our region are much tougher in my opinion than Purdue and K state in the south. I am fine with our draw though. If we can't come out of that region, I don't think we were winning it all anyway.
Like I said last night, I would rather have our 2 seed than the 2 in any of the other regions, but the 3 and 4 seeds in our region are much tougher in my opinion than Purdue and K state in the south. I am fine with our draw though. If we can't come out of that region, I don't think we were winning it all anyway.
Oh, for sure. But I think that's a very talented team, and not sure how much they will use this for motivation. I am not worried about them at all, but I don't think Maryland should be excited!
I'm pretty sure they said no. If it's true he's on tape arranging for a payment to a recruit, there's no way LSU reinstates him until after a very thorough investigation.
The article is idiotic. Advanced metrics “methodology” are meant to highlight things that we may not notice from scheduling or a traditional box score. It’s just an extra tool to weigh into consideration. I’ve said 1,000 times on here that nothing beats the good (now old fashioned) eye test.
Maryland’s chances increase because LSU doesn’t have their coach, not because of formula based methodology jargon. UNC F4 chances at 41% is generous. Utah’s St size could present a challenging 2nd game. Kansas isn’t as good as they usually are this year but a blueblood is never a layup, Auburn also is finally living up to their preseason ranking. Of course, UK will give UNC havoc in the paint. Who the hell came up with 41%?
GONZAGA AT 65% IS HILARIOUS, LMAO WHAT? Meeting Syracuse in their 2nd game is trouble. Florida state in the S16 will be another hard matchup. I’d only give them a 50% chance to survive both of those. Then likely seeing TxTech or Michigan in E8. I will be SHOOOOOOOK if the Zags make the F4.
Maryland’s chances increase because LSU doesn’t have their coach, not because of formula based methodology jargon. UNC F4 chances at 41% is generous. Utah’s St size could present a challenging 2nd game. Kansas isn’t as good as they usually are this year but a blueblood is never a layup, Auburn also is finally living up to their preseason ranking. Of course, UK will give UNC havoc in the paint. Who the hell came up with 41%?
GONZAGA AT 65% IS HILARIOUS, LMAO WHAT? Meeting Syracuse in their 2nd game is trouble. Florida state in the S16 will be another hard matchup. I’d only give them a 50% chance to survive both of those. Then likely seeing TxTech or Michigan in E8. I will be SHOOOOOOOK if the Zags make the F4.
But even the committee is using these tools. RPI, Net, Q1 wins, ... all these things, while needing context, have REAL value.
I would agree that the percentages seem awfully high. Not sure how they calculate that. It would be hard-pressed for any team to win 65% of the time against a top-10 team, so the odds that Gonzaga win three competitive games in a row would make you think those numbers should be significantly lower. I wouldn't be shocked if Gonzaga makes the FF though, but I certainly wouldn't put it at 65%.
Here are 538's percentages, which seem a little more realistic:
Duke- 52%
Virginia- 49%
Gonzaga- 49%
UNC- 35%
Kentucky- 24%
Michigan State- 22%
Tennessee- 21%
Michigan- 17%
Metrics are a great asset and they definitely have real value, I agree. They help in establishing seeding because noting Q1 wins, schedule strength, etc. are important factors that the eye test can overlook. I was never implying that the eye test should be the only measurement standard, but it should always be the core. Which the committee does, if not we wouldn’t be the #1 overall seed because injury forgiveness was granted. In addition, Houston would be a #1 rather than #3.
Even as great as those metrics are, check this out... St Mary’s is only considered Q1 because they play Gonzaga 3 times, SF twice + NM St. SF is Q1 because of 4 total St Mary’s and Gonzaga games + a game vs Buffalo. That was good enough to bump them into the RPI prerequisites for Q1. Doesn’t it seem silly that Gonzaga has 3 of their 4 Q1 wins against teams who are only considered Q1 for playing them? Flawed logic.
The problem I have is when something is said that is 100% derived from metrics. Like all of the information in this article. For example, let’s push metrics aside and look at the West region. Gonzaga is given a 65% chance to reach the F4. Likely facing Syracuse, Fla St, Michigan. Sure, it’s possible, but 65%? Get real. Gonzaga hasn’t faced a quality opponent since early December. The whole article is just a bunch of junk projections.
They beat Creighton on the road as well, which was one of their Quad 1 wins. So only 2 of their conference wins were Q1. Also, Saint Mary's is a legit top 50 team. They played within 5 points of both Mississippi State and LSU. I agree that Gonzaga doesn't have an overly impressive resume, though. I think Michigan State was a little more deserving of a 1 seed than Gonzaga.
All the methodology jargon written out into a huge formula that looks like a calculus equation is exactly how it’s done. Don’t get me wrong, it’s cool to glance at the odds... But I don’t get hyped up about a bunch of numbers that disregard special circumstances (Missing coaches, injuries, etc.) formulated into a projection.
I get that some people really get into that stuff and that’s cool, different strokes for different folks. Personally, when I filled out my bracket I chose the advancing team based on games that I’ve watched and judging how they’d matchup strengths vs weaknesses. I just think that’s more telling of the truth but hey, I’m no analyst or stat junkie... Just a hoops fan
Both places (538 and the original article) actually use very similar methodologies. You arrive at something like a power index (a number assigned to each team) and then figure out a win probability based on the difference between these numbers. Then, for each round, you know based on the opponent what a team's win probability is and so you know probabilities at all stages.
They arrive at their power rating numbers in different ways. Note: 538 uses ESPN's power rating as an input to their power rating. 538 also tries to make corrections based on things like travel distance. One should also realize, typically with these algorithms, more complicated is usually LESS predictive. I'm not saying 538 is worse, only that typically when given a choice between a more or less complicated model, the less complicated one usually performs better looking ahead.
It isn't that complicated, and any comp sci undergrad in the country could come up with something similar.
Actually, I’m wrong. SF isn’t Q1 anymore, they previously were earlier in the season. Utah Valley was St Mary’s other Q1 win and like you mentioned, Creighton for Gonzaga. Still, St Mary’s wouldn’t be Q1 if Gonzaga didn’t exist in the WCC. Realistically, it should be 2 Q1 wins which is hardly more impressive than 1 like I miscorrectly noted.
We’ll differ on opinions regarding St Mary’s. I’ll give them credit for sticking within 5 of LSU and topping Gonzaga, but I’m otherwise unimpressed. Mississippi State sucks, they played NOBODY out of conference and went around .500 in the SEC losing to everyone noteworthy. I think they beat Auburn, maybe. But yeah, still losing 6 or 7 games to crappy midmajors isn’t top 50 worthy, IMO.
Gonzaga isn’t worthy. They literally smashed St Mary’s by 48 points a month ago then turn around and lose by 13. How in the world do you swing 61 points??? Baffling. If they didn’t shoot 70% by dumb luck (against solid D) against Duke in the 1st half, they would have lost. Making their only Q1 win against Creighton who is 18-14. But hey welcome to the Gonzaga show... Every year everyone drools over them for seemingly no reason.
I saw Saint Mary's play in person in the WCC Tournament. They are solid. Jordan Ford is one of the best guards in the country, and their top 3 scorers all shoot 40%+ from 3. Also, they have a legit big guy who can hold his own. What makes them difficult is they have a very slow tempo, 347th in the country, but they're also very efficient on offense (very similar to UVA). KenPom has them ranked 21st in offensive efficiency. So yes, they got slaughtered by Gonzaga. If they're down by 10+ points, they're in trouble. They're forced to play at a higher tempo, which usually creates a bigger deficit.
As far as Gonzaga, I'm undecided on them. I like them, but I'm not completely sold. Here are 10 reasons I gave on the national board on why I think they deserve a #1 seed (written before they lost to SMC):
1. They're the only team in college basketball to make the Sweet 16 in each of the last 4 years
2. They're undefeated this year with a full supporting cast (Tillie and Crandall were injured in the UNC/Tennessee games)
3. They beat two top 50 teams by a combined 78 points in the span of 48 hours.
4. They have the #1 rated offense in KenPom History
5. They are the #4 rated team in KenPom history ('08 KU, '15 UK, and '19 UVA are ahead of them); remember that KenPom already adjust for the strength of schedule
6. Only Houston and Virginia have a higher winning percentage against Quad 1 and Quad 2 teams
7. They lead the country in field goal percentage by quite a large margin. (53.2%, SD State is at 50.5%, and Tennessee is at 50.4%). They also lead the country in 2-pot field goal percentage
8. They're one of the few schools that has two legitimate All-American candidates (Hachimura and Clarke)
9. They have an average margin of victory of 25.4 points. Duke is 2nd at 18.6. Yes, the schedule is relatively weak (but still the 8th best conference with 3 top 50 teams and 5 top 100 teams), but winning by 25 points a night is no easy task.
10. They lead the country in assist to turnover ratio
Teams are not Q1 etc. Teams are ranked and then quadrants are assigned by rank + location. So St. Mary’s isn’t Q1. St. Mary’s on the road is. St. Mary’s at home is Q2.
Would also qualify as a Q1 game on neutral court, as Saint Mary's (#32) is in the top 50.
In 538's power ranking they are 3rd behind Duke and UVA and in front of UNC. Their power rating is closer to UVA's than UNC's - meaning it would pick Gonzaga over UNC more confidently than UVA over Gonzaga.