Bracketology

[waterhead]

Lunardi with X at 1 and UC at 3. Wow.

I certainly don't think X is a 1 seed but I noticed something on the barttorvik site. We have a pretty nice resume when looking at all the metrics and even our column 1 and 2 look pretty good.

Here is the only big problem with our resume right now IMO. "Tournament quality" games and wins. I don't know how big of a factor this will be but...it lists our games as X, FLA, and UCLA. We are 1-2. It does show us as having 4 more opportunities.

I will use X because they are in the comparison here....even though I don't want to use them...lol. They are currently 5-3 with "tourney quality" games and have 3 more chances. Overall our column 1 and 2 game totals are very close with us at 12-2 and them at 12-3.

I think we can move ourselves up if we can take care of some of our remaining chances. At least 2 but 3 would be better. I think to get consideration for a 1 seed we will probably have to win all 4. I think we can get a 2 seed if we win 3 of them. Maybe a 3 seed if we win 2. Of course this assumes we don't lose any others.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

I certainly don't think X is a 1 seed but I noticed something on the barttorvik site. We have a pretty nice resume when looking at all the metrics and even our column 1 and 2 look pretty good.

Here is the only big problem with our resume right now IMO. "Tournament quality" games and wins. I don't know how big of a factor this will be but...it lists our games as X, FLA, and UCLA. We are 1-2. It does show us as having 4 more opportunities.

I will use X because they are in the comparison here....even though I don't want to use them...lol. They are currently 5-3 with "tourney quality" games and have 3 more chances. Overall our column 1 and 2 game totals are very close with us at 12-2 and them at 12-3.

I think we can move ourselves up if we can take care of some of our remaining chances. At least 2 but 3 would be better. I think to get consideration for a 1 seed we will probably have to win all 4. I think we can get a 2 seed if we win 3 of them. Maybe a 3 seed if we win 2. Of course this assumes we don't lose any others.

Lots of teams could finish the season strong and contend for a number 1 seed. Both us and X are in that conversation. The homestretch will be very important for a bunch of teams when it comes to where they are seeded. Right now X has as good a chance as anyone in that group. Yuk!!! I got a little throw up in my mouth when I wrote typed that.

 

[Fullam33]

Lunardi with X at 1 and UC at 3. Wow.

Lunardi tweeted out yesterday "Xavier must win at Butler, otherwise Auburn is next in line for a No. 1 seed. Cincinnati is next in line for a No. 2 seed if either Michigan State or Kansas loses."

I'm more shocked Kansas is still ahead of use for the 2 spot as of right now...

 

[waterhead]

Lunardi tweeted out yesterday "Xavier must win at Butler, otherwise Auburn is next in line for a No. 1 seed. Cincinnati is next in line for a No. 2 seed if either Michigan State or Kansas loses."

I'm more shocked Kansas is still ahead of use for the 2 spot as of right now...

We were so so close to seeing both X and MSU slip up too. Kansas had a tight game as well. That could have been a huge night for our seeding.

 

[sedziobs]

It's not just Lunardi. Xavier is a 1 seed on bracketmatrix, and we are a 3. It's hard to argue with that. The last 1 seed and all of the 2 & 3 seeds are for the most part indistinguishable. It depends on how much weight you give to different metrics. We'll find out what the committee thinks on Sunday.

 

[cincyguy13]

I certainly don't think X is a 1 seed but I noticed something on the barttorvik site. We have a pretty nice resume when looking at all the metrics and even our column 1 and 2 look pretty good.

Here is the only big problem with our resume right now IMO. "Tournament quality" games and wins. I don't know how big of a factor this will be but...it lists our games as X, FLA, and UCLA. We are 1-2. It does show us as having 4 more opportunities.

I will use X because they are in the comparison here....even though I don't want to use them...lol. They are currently 5-3 with "tourney quality" games and have 3 more chances. Overall our column 1 and 2 game totals are very close with us at 12-2 and them at 12-3.

I think we can move ourselves up if we can take care of some of our remaining chances. At least 2 but 3 would be better. I think to get consideration for a 1 seed we will probably have to win all 4. I think we can get a 2 seed if we win 3 of them. Maybe a 3 seed if we win 2. Of course this assumes we don't lose any others.

If you don’t think x should be a 1, who should be. MSU isn’t more deserving than them. They win ugly but wins have to matter

 

[waterhead]

If you don’t think x should be a 1, who should be. MSU isn’t more deserving than them. They win ugly but wins have to matter

I don't know...but X has been pushed to the brink in a lot of games this year. Their luck factor on Kenpom is #8. Yes, they can pull out some games in the end but they are very susceptible to lower quality teams. We have pulled out a couple of close games. Our luck factor is #191.

I don't know who to put in as the last 1 seed...but I don't think they are a 1 seed. I guess we will find out with the remaining games.

 

[waterhead]

I don't know...but X has been pushed to the brink in a lot of games this year. Their luck factor on Kenpom is #8. Yes, they can pull out some games in the end but they are very susceptible to lower quality teams. We have pulled out a couple of close games. Our luck factor is #191.

I don't know who to put in as the last 1 seed...but I don't think they are a 1 seed. I guess we will find out with the remaining games.

To put that in perspective...the next two closest teams on Kenpom in luck in the top 25 are Clemson #50 and Purdue #94.

 

[cincyguy13]

I don't know...but X has been pushed to the brink in a lot of games this year. Their luck factor on Kenpom is #8. Yes, they can pull out some games in the end but they are very susceptible to lower quality teams. We have pulled out a couple of close games. Our luck factor is #191.

I don't know who to put in as the last 1 seed...but I don't think they are a 1 seed. I guess we will find out with the remaining games.

I wouldn't put any stock in the luck factor on kenpom. Luck is impossible to measure. The results have to matter. If they don't, there is no point in playing the games

 

[justinhub2003]

Lets just hope Xavier loses 3 in a row. They play @Creighton, Seton Hall (who will want revenge) and Villanova who is almost unbeatable.

 

[cincyguy13]

Lets just hope Xavier loses 3 in a row. They play @Creighton, Seton Hall (who will want revenge) and Villanova who is almost unbeatable.

I think we just have to win. If we only lose 1 game the rest of the way, we will be in great shape, no matter what everyone else does. Probably at least a 2 seed. It is interesting to try to figure it all out though.

Also I think it would be cool to play X late in the tourney. Bragging rights forever. Put it all on the line.

 

[cincrulz11]

It's not just Lunardi. Xavier is a 1 seed on bracketmatrix, and we are a 3. It's hard to argue with that. The last 1 seed and all of the 2 & 3 seeds are for the most part indistinguishable. It depends on how much weight you give to different metrics. We'll find out what the committee thinks on Sunday.

we can hate it but the fact is at this point xavier has as much of a right to that last 1 seed as any other team does. as people say your seed is your resume, not how good you are.


i think team wise they are probably more of a 3-4, but resume wise, at this point, is likely a 1. out of their remaining 6 games they could lose any one of them. at georgetown and at depaul aren't easy considering what it took for them to win those games at home. at creighton, seton hall, nova, and providence could all go either way.


but if they do end up with a 1 seed, they will have very likely earned it.

 

[justinhub2003]

There is no luck factor when you have a killer like Trevon Blueitt and a play caller like Chris Mack.


Look I hate Xavier, but they create their own good luck.

Mack is one of the best play designers in basketball. He also seems to call the right plays to get his best players open.

And Trevon Blueitt is absolutely clutch in big games. He won them the game against Butler and it was exceptional play calling that got him open.

They suck on defense. And they basically mirror what Duke is; elite on offense and bad on defense, but the difference is; X has multiple older players who make smart plays at the end of games that make up for their defensive problems. Duke doesn't.


If Xavier is within 5, in the last 2 minutes, they will win. Its that simple. And they are getting battle tested for the tourney, unfortunately we aren't. Our 37 point domination of UCF did nothing to make us a better team. but Xavier winning back to back OT games does.

In a normal year, Xavier would be a 2 or 3 seed but this season, they absolutely deserve a 1 seed at this point.


Also, do not be surprised to see UC ahead of Michigan state this sunday when they announce the top 16 seeds.

 

[waterhead]

I wouldn't put any stock in the luck factor on kenpom. Luck is impossible to measure. The results have to matter. If they don't, there is no point in playing the games

I don't put too much stock into luck overall because some teams have a way of digging deep and pulling most close games out. But it's not something you can do 100% of the time. My issue is more with the fact they can get in a lot of close games (even with average teams)...and at some point the other team can make the shots they need to as well...even if you are incredibly good at closing things out. Butler went to overtime...they were 1 point from winning in regulation. The luck factor here is not so much that Eggs can win tight games but that Butler didn't make 1 more shot to end it.

 

[waterhead]

There is no luck factor when you have a killer like Trevon Blueitt and a play caller like Chris Mack.


Look I hate Xavier, but they create their own good luck.

Mack is one of the best play designers in basketball. He also seems to call the right plays to get his best players open.

And Trevon Blueitt is absolutely clutch in big games. He won them the game against Butler and it was exceptional play calling that got him open.

They suck on defense. And they basically mirror what Duke is; elite on offense and bad on defense, but the difference is; X has multiple older players who make smart plays at the end of games that make up for their defensive problems. Duke doesn't.


If Xavier is within 5, in the last 2 minutes, they will win. Its that simple. And they are getting battle tested for the tourney, unfortunately we aren't. Our 37 point domination of UCF did nothing to make us a better team. but Xavier winning back to back OT games does.

In a normal year, Xavier would be a 2 or 3 seed but this season, they absolutely deserve a 1 seed at this point.


Also, do not be surprised to see UC ahead of Michigan state this sunday when they announce the top 16 seeds.

I agree. If they deserve it they deserve it. I think they would be a weak 1 seed though.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

The Xavier talk is getting out of hand again. Smh. So disappointing...

 

[cincrulz11]

The Xavier talk is getting out of hand again. Smh. So disappointing...

its just going to happen in a season like this where both are fighting for the same seed line and it being a top 3 seed.


and with both teams doing it in very different ways its an interesting topic.

 

[waterhead]

I don't put too much stock into luck overall because some teams have a way of digging deep and pulling most close games out. But it's not something you can do 100% of the time. My issue is more with the fact they can get in a lot of close games (even with average teams)...and at some point the other team can make the shots they need to as well...even if you are incredibly good at closing things out. Butler went to overtime...they were 1 point from winning in regulation. The luck factor here is not so much that Eggs can win tight games but that Butler didn't make 1 more shot to end it.

We were #322 in luck 2 years ago. I think we all remember losing all the close games. You can look at that in one of two ways or both ways which I am inclined to do. We either weren't good at closing games or we had our share of bad luck (or both). The following year we either had luck on our side or we learned how to win more (or both).

Either way...when you are down to 1 possession games...luck is a big factor...even if you play the last possession very well. It just takes a lucky shot to beat you. I remember Adams making a 3/4 court shot on us. I remember Ellis being about .2 seconds too late on a buzzer beater. etc etc

 

[sedziobs]

The Xavier talk is getting out of hand again. Smh. So disappointing...

Out of hand in which direction?

 

[jflight21]

There is no luck factor when you have a killer like Trevon Blueitt and a play caller like Chris Mack.


Look I hate Xavier, but they create their own good luck.

Mack is one of the best play designers in basketball. He also seems to call the right plays to get his best players open.

And Trevon Blueitt is absolutely clutch in big games. He won them the game against Butler and it was exceptional play calling that got him open.

They suck on defense. And they basically mirror what Duke is; elite on offense and bad on defense, but the difference is; X has multiple older players who make smart plays at the end of games that make up for their defensive problems. Duke doesn't.


If Xavier is within 5, in the last 2 minutes, they will win. Its that simple. And they are getting battle tested for the tourney, unfortunately we aren't. Our 37 point domination of UCF did nothing to make us a better team. but Xavier winning back to back OT games does.

In a normal year, Xavier would be a 2 or 3 seed but this season, they absolutely deserve a 1 seed at this point.


Also, do not be surprised to see UC ahead of Michigan state this sunday when they announce the top 16 seeds.

A team is allowed to be both good and lucky. Those aren't mutually exclusive things.

Xavier is 9-0 in games decided by 7 points or less. That is fluky.

They aren't the first team in history to have a great player, a good X and Os coach and good free throw shooters. There is a randomness element to any two minute stretch of basketball no matter the two teams playing. Xavier has come out on the right side of every single one of those scenarios.

That's not to say Xavier isn't a very good team, I think they are. But, all the predictive metrics have them as a low 2 seed at best. By resume just based on wins and losses, yes they probably deserve a one seed, but I know I would love to have X as UC's one seed.