Bracketology Thread

[bearcat jeff]

Umm...sagarin predictor, kpom, and inpredictable (betting market regressed) are actually a lot better predictors of future results than "bottom line results" aka won/loss record (e.g. actual results).

Also those intangibles you referenced in UC/ville game sounded pretty tangible to me.

Everything can't be put in numbers my friend. Titus Rubles is proof of this.

 

[ervins84]

Everything can't be put in numbers my friend. Titus Rubles is proof of this.

That's obviously indisputable. That is also not what you were saying in your previous post.

 

[bearcat jeff]

That's obviously indisputable. That is also not what you were saying in your previous post.

Let's say it was what I was trying to say and evidently not well.

 

[Not Guilty]

"But metrics strongly suggest that Louisville is better. And those are far more predictive than simple win/loss record against different levels of competition. "

It doesn't get much more "predictive" than bottom line results. I will say until I die that metrics are good but they fail to take into account intangibles that win games. Yes they are a good indicator but the old adage "that's why they play the games" always has value. Numbers can be padded and inflated. Hustle and heart can't be measured. Case in point is the second UC/UL game. If I told you UC would shoot 28%, commit 13 turnovers, have only 8 assists and give up 40% shooting you would tell me UC was blown out. But Cincinnati out rebounded them by 8 and outscored them at the foul line by 9 and lost on a rainbow shot with 2 seconds left. Games are won and lost on the court and numbers tell a story but not the whole story.

The bold is simply wrong Jeff. Not to be disrespectful, but it just is.

Anyway, I would never say that numbers could measure everything. And like I said, bottom line results are why UC is slightly ahead of Louisville on S-curves. But that statement is you made originally is wrong.

 

[Scheids21]

Louisville just move to the 3 seed in front of Iowa State in Joes latest bracket. That doesn't make sense to me because neither of them has played. Is it just because teams they played have won and lost?

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

Louisville just move to the 3 seed in front of Iowa State in Joes latest bracket. That doesn't make sense to me because neither of them has played. Is it just because teams they played have won and lost?

It's to keep him with a job. If you look at bracket matrix, Lunardi is around 35th in most accurate bracket. That hasn't stopped him from pimping the hell out of ESPN for this "fame"....

 

[Scheids21]

It's to keep him with a job. If you look at bracket matrix, Lunardi is around 35th in most accurate bracket. That hasn't stopped him from pimping the hell out of ESPN for this "fame"....

Valid point. Does bracket matrix do accuracy per seed?

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

Valid point. Does bracket matrix do accuracy per seed?

Yeah, they give credit if you were within 1 seed line +/-.

 

[Bearcat04]

The fact that anyone would have Louisville seeded ahead of us right now is beyond comprehension. We have the better RPI, SOS, OOC SOS, more top 50 wins, and more top 100 wins.

 

[Bearcat04]

The other one that I can't quite wrap my head around is why is SMU considered a lock, but Nebraska is right on the bubble? SMU has 1 more top 50 win, but other than that Nebraska has the better resume.

 

[cincrulz11]

The other one that I can't quite wrap my head around is why is SMU considered a lock, but Nebraska is right on the bubble? SMU has 1 more top 50 win, but other than that Nebraska has the better resume.

Because the RPI isn't used a the dominant factor anymore.

SMU has a much better kenpom/bpi than nebraska.

The fact that anyone would have Louisville seeded ahead of us right now is beyond comprehension. We have the better RPI, SOS, OOC SOS, more top 50 wins, and more top 100 wins.

and Louisville is #5 in bpi and #2 on kenpom.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

The other one that I can't quite wrap my head around is why is SMU considered a lock, but Nebraska is right on the bubble? SMU has 1 more top 50 win, but other than that Nebraska has the better resume.

Of all the metrics, RPI has been the worst in predicting both seeds and likelihood of making the NCAA tournament. Actually the polls have been better indicators...

 

[Bearcat04]

Because the RPI isn't used a the dominant factor anymore.

SMU has a much better kenpom/bpi than nebraska.


and Louisville is #5 in bpi and #2 on kenpom.

As much as I hate the RPI, the committee still uses it to compare resumes. No one outside of ESPN cares about the BPI.

 

[Nayers]

I know Lunardi's bracketology isn't that great at predicting seeding and regions, but I like that current draw he has us in now. Ohio State in the round of 32, wichita st. In sweet 16. I think those matchups really work to our advantage. Seeing Kansas in the elite 8 would be tough but they've shown they aren't unbeatable. Thoughts on those potential matchups?

 

[aronius]

I know Lunardi's bracketology isn't that great at predicting seeding and regions, but I like that current draw he has us in now. Ohio State in the round of 32, wichita st. In sweet 16. I think those matchups really work to our advantage. Seeing Kansas in the elite 8 would be tough but they've shown they aren't unbeatable. Thoughts on those potential matchups?

I think UC could get by O$U but I'd rather not play another top defensive team, just feels like a game that would come down to the last few possessions 9/10 times.

Of all the 1 seeds I would prefer to play Wichita St, unless Nova somehow holds on to a 1.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

Jerry Palm said UC and Louisville are still in play for a #1 seed. Michigan was one of the teams we needed to lose to jump over.