Wednesday, March 1, 2017

3/1 S-CURVE

Bracket Matrix primer:  only change is Georgia Tech into the field as an 11 seed, in Kansas St's spot.  There's going to be some whimsy over the next few days between the last 4 in/last 4 out spots.

Even as I type, I want to take Vandy and Cal out, I'm thinking there's no way they get a bid.  Then I look at KSU and Marquette and can't physically bring myself to put them in.  I don't know what to do.  Rooting for Vandy to lose again to make my job easier.

The 1 line:  Kansas (27-3), Villanova (27-3), Gonzaga (29-1), North Carolina (24-6)
The 2 line:  Louisville (23-6), Oregon (25-4), Baylor (23-6), UCLA (26-3)
The 3 line:  Kentucky (25-5), Arizona (26-4), Florida (23-6), Butler (23-6)
The 4 line:  Duke (23-7), Florida St (23-7), West Virginia (23-7), Purdue (24-6)
The 5 line:  Virginia (20-9), Notre Dame (22-7), Minnesota (22-7), Cincinnati (25-4)
The 6 line:  St Mary's (26-3), Creighton (22-7), Iowa St (20-9), SMU (25-4)
The 7 line:  South Carolina (21-8), Maryland (22-7), Oklahoma St (19-10), Wisconsin (22-7)
The 8 line:  Miami (20-9), Michigan St (18-11), Virginia Tech (21-8), Dayton (22-5)
The 9 line:  Northwestern (20-9), Xavier (18-11), Michigan (19-10), Arkansas (22-7)
The 10 line:  VCU (23-6), Middle Tennessee (24-4), Seton Hall (19-10), Wichita St (26-4)
The 11 line:  USC (21-8), Syracuse (17-13), Providence (18-11), Georgia Tech (16-13), Vanderbilt (16-14), California (19-9)
The 12 line:  Texas-Arlington (21-6), Nevada (23-6), Illinois St (24-5), UNC-Wilmington (24-5)
The 13 line:  Monmouth (26-5), Vermont (25-5), Akron (22-7), Princeton (18-6)
The 14 line:  Belmont (21-5), Bucknell (23-8), Winthrop (21-6), UNC-Greensboro (20-8)
The 15 line:  Oakland (22-7), South Dakota (19-10), Cal St-Bakersfield (18-7), FGCU (21-7)
The 16 line:  Texas Southern (18-11), North Dakota (15-8), New Orleans (14-10), Mount St Mary's (16-15), North Carolina Central (19-7), UC-Davis (16-11)

Next 4 in:
Seton Hall
Wichita St
USC
Syracuse

Last 4 in:
Providence
Georgia Tech
Vanderbilt
California

Last 4 out:
Kansas St (17-12)
Marquette (17-11)
TCU (16-12)
Wake Forest (16-12)

Next 4 out:
Illinois (16-12)
Rhode Island (19-9)
Houston (20-8)
Indiana (16-14)

7 comments:

Draco said...

Why r u so seemingly down on the A-10?
VCU a 10th seed?!? Rhode Island way out of the field?
You, of all people, know how weak the bubble is this year.
C'mon.

Draco said...

My prediction is that if VCU beats Dayton tonight you will still have them as a 10th seed. You are like the anti-Jerry Palm (you're welcome) who actually may like the A-10 a bit too much. (See, I'm a fair minded critic - LOL).
Like you work, but you've been pretty consistently down about the A-10 over the last couple of years. I see a bias towards mediocre middle of the pack Power 5 leagues. I mean just look at your current 11 line. I'm not sure it's justifiable. In fact, IMO, it's kind of crazy.

Andrew said...

Yeah, part of the reason the bubble is weak is because the A-10 is weak.

VCU is a good example of looking past the numbers. 7 Top 100 wins...includes UNC-Asheville, Princeton, Richmond 2x, Bonaventure. Best win is over Dayton...the committee usually likes to see a better signature win. However VCU is in good shape in all the typical vital signs (good SoS, road wins, etc.). Even though they're a 10 that's pretty close to their floor, they'll be safe.

URI I'm a bit more down on. First problem is that the committee seems to be down on Cincy, which hurts their signature win, and there's a couple marginal losses in there.

I think both teams are hurt by the other teams. Richmond, Bonaventure, Davidson, GMU, and a couple others. All are good enough to beat anyone but are bad enough to not really count as a signature win for anyone. I don't think the committee will put much of any value into wins over those teams.

Andrew said...

I think I'd move VCU to a 9 for sure, maybe even an 8 depending on Northwestern/Michigan. Each quality win dis-proportionally helps VCU because they're missing signature wins.

Yep, there's a bias towards mediocre teams from major conferences. Remember I'm trying to simulate the committee's biases, not my own. Based on recent trends, I think this is setting up as a really ugly year on that front.

Draco said...


Good point regarding Cincy, the committee seems to like them less than most pundits. I had forgotten about that. Regarding the A-10 being down, it's all relative as you know. MANY leagues are "down" this year - Big 10, AAC, WCC, MWC, MVC - so I'm not sure if it matters as the A-10 is still the 7th-9th best league in the nation.

My issue is with the school of thought (and I realize that you're just trying to replicate the committees reasoning here) that places a team like GA Tech or Vandy (at best .500 in league play) over a team like Rhode Island which will go 13-5 in a league only a step down from the big boys - even in a "down" year (c'mon 9 teams in Ken Pom top 150 doesn't mean the league is necessarily gangbusters, but it is fairly deep). Also the inclusion of Illinois St. baffles me (on this for once I totally agree with Palm's reasoning - they just don't have the resume even in this wretched year for the bubble) I just don't see how they get in ahead of RI and a half dozen other teams. It's nuts.

Anyway, with the committee it's a guessing game and, of course, they likely don't much like the A-10 in light of past snubs (hello SBU). Again, I generally like your work and have recommended your site to my sports friends.

HenryMuto said...

Northwestern's going dancing!!!!!!!

What a finish!!!!!!!

This is March Madness!!!!!!!!!!!!

Andrew said...

Thanks much for the patronage. I do generally agree that we need more mid-majors, but the committee seems to disagree. I do wonder if that one big A-10 year (2014?) when all teams had big-time RPIs and got great seeds, only to bomb out of the tournament collectively, shied the committee away from mid-majors in general.