Bracketology

[sedziobs]

We were 6-5 in column 1 and 2. Hard to justify getting a protected seed when you play about half the number of quality RPI games as others and you roughly split them.

We had 11 column 1 and 2 games last year, and we've already played 9 this year. Of our 11 remaining games, 9 are currently in Groups 1 and 2. Add in the conference tourney and we can almost double the number of quality games compared to last year.

We already have more quality wins this year than we did last year, if you assume the groups to be equivalent.

 

[waterhead]

We were 6-5 in column 1 and 2. Hard to justify getting a protected seed when you play about half the number of quality RPI games as others and you roughly split them.

We had 11 column 1 and 2 games last year, and we've already played 9 this year. Of our 11 remaining games, 9 are currently in Groups 1 and 2. Add in the conference tourney and we can almost double the number of quality games compared to last year.

We already have more quality wins this year than we did last year, if you assume the groups to be equivalent.

This is what I was suspecting. We have to win a greater % if we are behind in totals. The changes this year will make a big difference. But we still have to win a very good %.

As of now it all looks pretty good but certain teams could fall out and we still have to play the tough part of our schedule. Other conferences will get tougher too...but we need to perform significantly better (as a %) given the general strength of ours.

 

[sedziobs]

Agreed. We want to win as many games as possible regardless. The only point of controversy seems to be what group we would like games that we have already lost to be in. I would still prefer as many games as possible in Group 1, no matter the result. The Louisville example from last year shows that you can get a 2 seed even with a losing record against the top tier, as long it has a lot of games in there.

 

[waterhead]

I took a look at the resumes for last year's protected seeds, even though the criteria are different now.

Seed list rank, top 50, 50-100, 101+ losses

1 Villanova 12-2, 5-1, 0
2 Kansas 8-2, 7-2, 0
3 UNC 10-5, 7-2, 0
4 Gonzaga 5-0, 6-1, 0
5 Kentucky 8-4, 10-1, 0
6 Arizona 6-4, 6-0, 0
7 Duke 13-6, 4-1, 1
8 Louisville 7-8, 7-0, 0
9 Oregon 4-3, 10-0, 2
10 Fla St 11-4, 6-2, 1
11 UCLA 6-4, 4-0, 0
12 Baylor 9-4, 5-2, 2
13 Butler 10-4, 6-1, 3
14 Florida 6-8, 9-0, 0
15 WVU 6-4, 7-1, 3
16 Purdue 7-5, 5-1, 1

One thing that sticks out to me is that all of the 1 and 2 seeds had two losses or less outside the top 50. Also, there are two protected seeds who had losing records against the top 50.

I think this is the long and short of it. We went 6-5. The last 4 seed went 12-6. How can you give us a protected seed? You can't. We have to perform better against the top teams.

 

[sedziobs]

I think this is the long and short of it. We went 6-5. The last 4 seed went 12-6. How can you give us a protected seed? You can't. We have to perform better against the top teams.

This is why I don't buy that the committee has no "respect" for the AAC. RPI is flawed for sure, but it is known in advance that the committee uses it as their primary tool. The AAC didn't measure up with other conferences using their criteria. It's not due to preconceived bias that our conference was poorly seeded, it's because we fell short according to the numbers. This year is shaping up to be much better.

 

[kskenyon4]

Nearly every credible Bracketologist has moved UC to the 3 seed line.

4 more games until we get the low down from the committee itself.

 

[waterhead]

This is why I don't buy that the committee has no "respect" for the AAC. RPI is flawed for sure, but it is known in advance that the committee uses it as their primary tool. The AAC didn't measure up with other conferences using their criteria. It's not due to preconceived bias that our conference was poorly seeded, it's because we fell short according to the numbers. This year is shaping up to be much better.

I wouldn't doubt if column 1 is 50% of the equation with column 2 being 25%. The rest of the 25% of adjustments can come from a lot of areas.

How did you play away from home? Any signature wins? What did your SOS look like overall and OOC? Did you win your tourney? Any bad losses? What is your RPI? etc etc etc. We won't have the top end wins and our SOS is not great...but I think we can look good on the rest.

I would guess column 1 and 2 results will put you in a seed. The rest can be adjusted from there. Do we need to drop them 1 or move them up 1 with the other factors. I think we got dropped 2 seeds last year (from our RPI) because we really didn't look very good in column 1.

 

[waterhead]

Nearly every credible Bracketologist has moved UC to the 3 seed line.

4 more games until we get the low down from the committee itself.

If we take care of business we should be in the top 16 this year. Interesting that 4 more games is right before that away game at SMU.

 

[Robert]

I think this is the long and short of it. We went 6-5. The last 4 seed went 12-6. How can you give us a protected seed? You can't. We have to perform better against the top teams.

So far this year, we are 3-2 vs. the top 50 and 5-0 vs. 51-100. We have 4 more opportunities vs. the top 50 and 4 more opportunities vs. 51-100. Let's say we lose at Wichita State and Houston but win the rest of our games... that would put us at 5-4 vs. the top 50 and 9-0 vs. 51-100. Looking at last year's numbers, that should easily put us in the protected seed range.

 

[waterhead]

So far this year, we are 3-2 vs. the top 50 and 5-0 vs. 51-100. We have 4 more opportunities vs. the top 50 and 4 more opportunities vs. 51-100. Let's say we lose at Wichita State and Houston but win the rest of our games... that would put us at 5-4 vs. the top 50 and 9-0 vs. 51-100. Looking at last year's numbers, that should easily put us in the protected seed range.

I would agree....we are in a much better spot so far this year

 

[sedziobs]

I would guess column 1 and 2 results will put you in a seed. The rest can be adjusted from there.

This is why I focus on Groups 1 and 2. It's the starting point, and it's not subjective. All of the adjustments come when comparing individual teams head to head, and it's basically impossible to predict how each person is going to handle them. Although lots of information is available, RPI Groups dominate the team sheet that the committee uses.

 

[waterhead]

If you aren't familiar with it, two sites to use

www.bracketmatrix.com

Compiles over 70 different people who do this. Shows average, high and low ranges, and links to each guys bracket. I think the wisdom of the crowds is pretty much +/- 1 seed line come selection Sunday for the vast majority of teams.


Also really like warren Nolan's site for tracking RPI. We all know the metric is dumb, but the committee use it and this is updated in real time almost instantly, gives projections, impact games that you can see what if stuff for rankings depending on future outcomes etc. Lots of cool features

http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2018/schedule/Cincinnati

Looks like we are at #16 rpi now with a projected rpi around #6. Of course the prediction is that we will win out. Prediction is not really the same as probability though.

We have 1 pickem game left at WSU. That is a 50-50 game whether we are picked by a point or not. We have 3 other games which would average out around 66% so we should expect to win 2 of them WSU home, SMU away, Houston away. The other 6 games average out to around 90% chance of us winning (anywhere between 84% and 96%).

Based on probability alone I think "worst case" here is around 3 more losses. Maybe the most likely outcome being 2 more. "Best case" we take the 50-50 game, we lose 1 of the 66% games, and lose none of the remaining games.

Of course there are obviously worse and better scenarios here but most likely worst and best case seem to center around 2 losses give or take 1 from here on out.

 

[waterhead]

Looks like we are at #16 rpi now with a projected rpi around #6. Of course the prediction is that we will win out. Prediction is not really the same as probability though.

We have 1 pickem game left at WSU. That is a 50-50 game whether we are picked by a point or not. We have 3 other games which would average out around 66% so we should expect to win 2 of them WSU home, SMU away, Houston away. The other 6 games average out to around 90% chance of us winning (anywhere between 84% and 96%).

Based on probability alone I think "worst case" here is around 3 more losses. Maybe the most likely outcome being 2 more. "Best case" we take the 50-50 game, we lose 1 of the 66% games, and lose none of the remaining games.

Of course there are obviously worse and better scenarios here but most likely worst and best case seem to center around 2 losses give or take 1 from here on out.

WSU away 50-50

SMU away...62% (but lost Foster)
Houston away...66%
WSU home...70%

Houston home...84%
Uconn away...86%
Tulane away...90%
UCF home...92%
Uconn home 95%
Tulsa home 96%

 

[UCalum08]

WSU away 50-50

SMU away...62% (but lost Foster)
Houston away...66%
WSU home...70%

Houston home...84%
Uconn away...86%
Tulane away...90%
UCF home...92%
Uconn home 95%
Tulsa home 96%

Unfortunately the games aren't won on paper. Fortunately, we can watch them win out

 

[Jon Rycek]

Looks like we are at #16 rpi now with a projected rpi around #6. Of course the prediction is that we will win out. Prediction is not really the same as probability though.

We have 1 pickem game left at WSU. That is a 50-50 game whether we are picked by a point or not. We have 3 other games which would average out around 66% so we should expect to win 2 of them WSU home, SMU away, Houston away. The other 6 games average out to around 90% chance of us winning (anywhere between 84% and 96%).

Based on probability alone I think "worst case" here is around 3 more losses. Maybe the most likely outcome being 2 more. "Best case" we take the 50-50 game, we lose 1 of the 66% games, and lose none of the remaining games.

Of course there are obviously worse and better scenarios here but most likely worst and best case seem to center around 2 losses give or take 1 from here on out.

The more things play out, the more I think we may only drop one more game this year, at this point I think 2 is the max. I know we will win a game in Texas, and I know we will win one against Wichita state. I just hope we can pull an extra one or two out lol. I really wouldn't mind dropping one game as long as we can win the conference tourney. If we only have 3 losses going in to selection Sunday I don't see us getting any worse than a 3 seed.

 

[ervins84]

Up to an average seed of 3.61 on bracket matrix, and that's with clowns like the guy below putting us an 8 seed. Feel free to go comment and rip on him.

Really, reasonable minds should have us somewhere between a 3 and 5 right now. Maaaybe I could be convinced 6 because well... Dock a seed line based on history of American conference seeding or something... Then drop another line to a 7 seems really dumb but ok, and then there is this guy who has us as the 2nd 8 seed BEHIND Wichita St... AND he is projecting them to win the league even though kpom is projecting we win the league by 3 games.

So keep guys like this in mind when valuing bracket matrix.


https://sportsentiment.com/2018/01/29/brad-ketology-january-29th-edition/

 

[cincrulz11]

Up to an average seed of 3.61 on bracket matrix, and that's with clowns like the guy below putting us an 8 seed. Feel free to go comment and rip on him.

Really, reasonable minds should have us somewhere between a 3 and 5 right now. Maaaybe I could be convinced 6 because well... Dock a seed line based on history of American conference seeding or something... Then drop another line to a 7 seems really dumb but ok, and then there is this guy who has us as the 2nd 8 seed BEHIND Wichita St... AND he is projecting them to win the league even though kpom is projecting we win the league by 3 games.

So keep guys like this in mind when valuing bracket matrix.


https://sportsentiment.com/2018/01/29/brad-ketology-january-29th-edition/

i was looking at the same guy earlier. I thought "well he just hates non power 6, thats gotta be his thing"


and then i saw Rhode Island as a 4.


You should probably at least find some way to make things make sense.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

Up to an average seed of 3.61 on bracket matrix, and that's with clowns like the guy below putting us an 8 seed. Feel free to go comment and rip on him.

Really, reasonable minds should have us somewhere between a 3 and 5 right now. Maaaybe I could be convinced 6 because well... Dock a seed line based on history of American conference seeding or something... Then drop another line to a 7 seems really dumb but ok, and then there is this guy who has us as the 2nd 8 seed BEHIND Wichita St... AND he is projecting them to win the league even though kpom is projecting we win the league by 3 games.

So keep guys like this in mind when valuing bracket matrix.


https://sportsentiment.com/2018/01/29/brad-ketology-january-29th-edition/

They should remove the 2 highest rated and 2 lowest rated.

 

[sedziobs]

The best performing bracketologist over the last five years has UC as a 3 seed: https://bracketville.wordpress.com/bracketology/


He has added these thoughts on twitter:

So here's the quirky thing about Cincinnati ... Metrics have the Bearcats in line with their spot on the Seed List today. UC is 9-2 vs. Quadrants 1 and 2, and 5-1 in true road games. Yet, Bearcats' only "win vs. field" is SMU (Last 4 In)

while Quadrants matter, all teams within a certain grouping are not the same. How Committee discerns that will be interesting

I’ll be curious to see how the Committee views their profile when they release their initial rankings in mid-February.

 

[sedziobs]

The best performing bracketologist over the last 2 years also has UC as a 3 seed: http://www.delphibracketology.com/2018-seed-list.html