I welcome everyone to Service Hold Sunday - every team even remotely relevant held serve.
Cincinnati 76, @SMU 51
Duke 80, @Georgia Tech 69
Michigan 83, @Wisconsin 72
Louisville 94, @Pitt 60
@Syracuse 78, Wake Forest 70
UCF 68, @Memphis 64
@Colorado 64, Stanford 56
@Houston 73, Tulane 42
Penn St 74, @Illinois 52
@Oregon 94, Washington St 57
Monday, February 12, 2018
Sunday, February 11, 2018
Mock the selection committee mock
The 1 line: Villanova, Virginia, Xavier, Kansas
The first 3 are easy. But man I don't know. Can you leap Michigan St all the way up there? I almost left Purdue on the 1 line. Clemson, TTU, and Cincy (and Auburn) all have thin enough resumes. In the end, Kansas has: the #1 SoS, 9 Group 1 wins, and an average RPI win of 80. These are magic bullets.
The 2 line: Michigan St, Purdue, Clemson, Texas Tech
MSU has concerning metrics which caused them to drop, but winning cures all ailes. And now with a signature win in tow, here they are. I wouldn't argue against almost any order of these four teams. The SoS numbers aren't great for MSU and Tech so I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up on the 3 line.
The 3 line: Cincinnati, Auburn, Duke, Ohio St
I think these teams are pretty self explanatory. I wouldn't be surprised if the committee cites SoS numbers and puts Duke on the 2 line.
The 4 line: North Carolina, Arizona, Rhode Island, Tennessee
All of a sudden, we're running out of quality teams for the back end of this list. WVU and Oklahoma are punting...Gonzaga and St Mary's aren't quite good enough. Creighton has SoS issues and Seton Hall is losing games now. I just don't know who else you can put here except for these teams.
EAST 34
1) Villanova @Pittsburgh
2) Clemson @Charlotte
3) Ohio St @Wichita
4) Rhode Island @Boise
WEST 36
1) Kansas @Wichita
2) Michigan St @Detroit
3) Duke @Pittsburgh
4) Arizona @San Diego
MIDWEST 31
1) Xavier @Nashville
2) Purdue @Detroit
3) Auburn @Dallas
4) North Carolina @San Diego
SOUTH 35
1) Virginia @Charlotte
2) Texas Tech @Dallas
3) Cincinnati @Nashville
4) Tennessee @Boise
As you can see, a balancing issue persists. There's no real way to solve it. The problem? The ACC has 4 teams in the top 4, meaning someone has to go west. But Arizona is the only western team, which means North Carolina (sharing the same line as Arizona) can't go west. Therefore it's Duke who has to go, and having a weak 3 seed go in with a weak 1 and 2 seed makes for a soft region. The other solution is to send Clemson to the west, which really isn't fair to them.
Don't be surprised if the selection committee in March artifically fudges the seeds of a couple ACC teams, to make the regions seem more balanced than they are. I also wouldn't be surprised if they automatically put #4 and #5 overall in the west, especially if there's a lot of debate over who should be a 1 seed.
The first 3 are easy. But man I don't know. Can you leap Michigan St all the way up there? I almost left Purdue on the 1 line. Clemson, TTU, and Cincy (and Auburn) all have thin enough resumes. In the end, Kansas has: the #1 SoS, 9 Group 1 wins, and an average RPI win of 80. These are magic bullets.
The 2 line: Michigan St, Purdue, Clemson, Texas Tech
MSU has concerning metrics which caused them to drop, but winning cures all ailes. And now with a signature win in tow, here they are. I wouldn't argue against almost any order of these four teams. The SoS numbers aren't great for MSU and Tech so I wouldn't be surprised if they wind up on the 3 line.
The 3 line: Cincinnati, Auburn, Duke, Ohio St
I think these teams are pretty self explanatory. I wouldn't be surprised if the committee cites SoS numbers and puts Duke on the 2 line.
The 4 line: North Carolina, Arizona, Rhode Island, Tennessee
All of a sudden, we're running out of quality teams for the back end of this list. WVU and Oklahoma are punting...Gonzaga and St Mary's aren't quite good enough. Creighton has SoS issues and Seton Hall is losing games now. I just don't know who else you can put here except for these teams.
EAST 34
1) Villanova @Pittsburgh
2) Clemson @Charlotte
3) Ohio St @Wichita
4) Rhode Island @Boise
WEST 36
1) Kansas @Wichita
2) Michigan St @Detroit
3) Duke @Pittsburgh
4) Arizona @San Diego
MIDWEST 31
1) Xavier @Nashville
2) Purdue @Detroit
3) Auburn @Dallas
4) North Carolina @San Diego
SOUTH 35
1) Virginia @Charlotte
2) Texas Tech @Dallas
3) Cincinnati @Nashville
4) Tennessee @Boise
As you can see, a balancing issue persists. There's no real way to solve it. The problem? The ACC has 4 teams in the top 4, meaning someone has to go west. But Arizona is the only western team, which means North Carolina (sharing the same line as Arizona) can't go west. Therefore it's Duke who has to go, and having a weak 3 seed go in with a weak 1 and 2 seed makes for a soft region. The other solution is to send Clemson to the west, which really isn't fair to them.
Don't be surprised if the selection committee in March artifically fudges the seeds of a couple ACC teams, to make the regions seem more balanced than they are. I also wouldn't be surprised if they automatically put #4 and #5 overall in the west, especially if there's a lot of debate over who should be a 1 seed.
Saturday, February 10, 2018
2/10 recap
@St Bonaventure 97, Richmond 88
Virginia Tech 61, @Virginia 60 (OT) - wat. VT finds a signature win out of nowhere and Virginia punts their #1 overall seed for the time being
North Carolina 96, @NC State 89
@Boston College 72, Miami 70 - and speaking of stupid losses, what is Miami doing punting this game? Is BC friskier than we thought? (I like to pretend that the Duke game was a hallucination)
@Notre Dame 84, Florida St 69 - and this ACC loss might be dumber than all the others! UND is in the tank and FSU gives up a lot of bubble equity in this one
Temple 73, @South Florida 55 - oh boy, we're going to be doing this, aren't we. This is going down, isn't it
@Wichita St 95, UConn 74
Texas Tech 66, @Kansas St 47 - Tech is now winning road games with ease and I don't know what's right in the world anymore
@Baylor 80, Kansas 64 - we'll deal with the 1 line later. For now, let's focus on Baylor suddenly having at-large life? I guess they have to be in play now
@Iowa St 88, Oklahoma 80 - I think most people assume this is a top 12 team....nope. Those teams don't consistently lose swing games like this
Oklahoma St 88, @West Virginia 85 - man, didn't we just finish burying OSU's at-large hopes? Do we need to dig those back up? And what the hell do you do with WVU's seed now? This Big 12 is utter chaos
@TCU 87, Texas 71 - finally a game with 2 bubblers where the home team holds, and we can move on
Xavier 72, @Creighton 71 - X to the 1 line
@Villanova 86, Butler 75 - Nova back to 1 overall
@St John's 86, Marquette 78 - I'm so mad at St John's right now. So might the league, if they start ruining bubble resumes, starting with Marquette's
@Georgetown 83, Seton Hall 80 - in a day filled with inexplicable losses, this might be the most. I think everyone including me assumed SHU would fly along at cruising altitude to the tournament
DePaul 80, @Providence 63 - actually I take that back, THIS is the dumbest loss of the day. Home to DePaul? Bubble teams don't do this!
@Michigan St 68, Purdue 65 - now what....Purdue has a lack of quality wins, needed this week to cement their 1 seed, and instead went the other way. Both of these seeds are quite frankly up in the air now
@Ohio St 82, Iowa 64
@Maryland 73, Northwestern 57
@Nebraska 67, Rutgers 55 - I kind of wish NU would just lose and get out of the way on the bubble already
@Middle Tennessee 79, North Texas 73
@Western Kentucky 83, Florida International 76
@Nevada 83, San Diego St 58
@Utah St 71, Boise St 65 - oh no
@Arizona 81, USC 67
@Arizona St 88, UCLA 79
@Utah 77, Cal 43
@Oregon 97, Washington 94 (2OT) - sigh
Auburn 78, @Georgia 61
@Alabama 78, Tennessee 50 - whoa UT, what are you doing. You were really climbing the seed lines, and this was just ugly
@Texas A&M 85, Kentucky 74 - alright, A&M is fully back and we can seed them accordingly
Florida 65, @South Carolina 41
@Missouri 89, Mississippi St 85 (OT) - near disaster
@LSU 82, Ole Miss 66
@Arkansas 72, Vanderbilt 54
Gonzaga 78, @St Mary's 65
Virginia Tech 61, @Virginia 60 (OT) - wat. VT finds a signature win out of nowhere and Virginia punts their #1 overall seed for the time being
North Carolina 96, @NC State 89
@Boston College 72, Miami 70 - and speaking of stupid losses, what is Miami doing punting this game? Is BC friskier than we thought? (I like to pretend that the Duke game was a hallucination)
@Notre Dame 84, Florida St 69 - and this ACC loss might be dumber than all the others! UND is in the tank and FSU gives up a lot of bubble equity in this one
Temple 73, @South Florida 55 - oh boy, we're going to be doing this, aren't we. This is going down, isn't it
@Wichita St 95, UConn 74
Texas Tech 66, @Kansas St 47 - Tech is now winning road games with ease and I don't know what's right in the world anymore
@Baylor 80, Kansas 64 - we'll deal with the 1 line later. For now, let's focus on Baylor suddenly having at-large life? I guess they have to be in play now
@Iowa St 88, Oklahoma 80 - I think most people assume this is a top 12 team....nope. Those teams don't consistently lose swing games like this
Oklahoma St 88, @West Virginia 85 - man, didn't we just finish burying OSU's at-large hopes? Do we need to dig those back up? And what the hell do you do with WVU's seed now? This Big 12 is utter chaos
@TCU 87, Texas 71 - finally a game with 2 bubblers where the home team holds, and we can move on
Xavier 72, @Creighton 71 - X to the 1 line
@Villanova 86, Butler 75 - Nova back to 1 overall
@St John's 86, Marquette 78 - I'm so mad at St John's right now. So might the league, if they start ruining bubble resumes, starting with Marquette's
@Georgetown 83, Seton Hall 80 - in a day filled with inexplicable losses, this might be the most. I think everyone including me assumed SHU would fly along at cruising altitude to the tournament
DePaul 80, @Providence 63 - actually I take that back, THIS is the dumbest loss of the day. Home to DePaul? Bubble teams don't do this!
@Michigan St 68, Purdue 65 - now what....Purdue has a lack of quality wins, needed this week to cement their 1 seed, and instead went the other way. Both of these seeds are quite frankly up in the air now
@Ohio St 82, Iowa 64
@Maryland 73, Northwestern 57
@Nebraska 67, Rutgers 55 - I kind of wish NU would just lose and get out of the way on the bubble already
@Middle Tennessee 79, North Texas 73
@Western Kentucky 83, Florida International 76
@Nevada 83, San Diego St 58
@Utah St 71, Boise St 65 - oh no
@Arizona 81, USC 67
@Arizona St 88, UCLA 79
@Utah 77, Cal 43
@Oregon 97, Washington 94 (2OT) - sigh
Auburn 78, @Georgia 61
@Alabama 78, Tennessee 50 - whoa UT, what are you doing. You were really climbing the seed lines, and this was just ugly
@Texas A&M 85, Kentucky 74 - alright, A&M is fully back and we can seed them accordingly
Florida 65, @South Carolina 41
@Missouri 89, Mississippi St 85 (OT) - near disaster
@LSU 82, Ole Miss 66
@Arkansas 72, Vanderbilt 54
Gonzaga 78, @St Mary's 65
2/9 recap
@Rhode Island 72, Davidson 59
@Indiana 80, Minnesota 56 - um why again is the Big 10 playing Friday night games?
quiet night as per usual. Toledo with another win and look like they might stretch Buffalo out to the end for the MAC title. Penn still undefeated in the Ivy meanwhile.
@Indiana 80, Minnesota 56 - um why again is the Big 10 playing Friday night games?
quiet night as per usual. Toledo with another win and look like they might stretch Buffalo out to the end for the MAC title. Penn still undefeated in the Ivy meanwhile.
Friday, February 9, 2018
2/9 S-CURVE
*Boise St is currently listed as the Mountain West champ, if you're wondering about the machinations of their current seed. I can't seed them on the 11 line because their presence would mess with the seed of the play-in game winners.
The 1 line: Virginia, Villanova, Purdue, Kansas
The 2 line: Xavier, Clemson, Auburn, Duke
The 3 line: Cincinnati, Texas Tech, Michigan St, North Carolina
The 4 line: Tennessee, Ohio St, West Virginia, Arizona
The 5 line: Oklahoma, Rhode Island, St Mary's, Miami
The 6 line: Kentucky, Seton Hall, Gonzaga, Florida
The 7 line: Butler, Texas A&M, Nevada, Creighton
The 8 line: Louisville, Florida St, TCU, Michigan
The 9 line: Wichita St, Texas, Alabama, Arizona St
The 10 line: Missouri, Providence, Arkansas, Middle Tennessee
The 11 line: North Carolina St, UCLA, Houston, USC, Washington, Syracuse
The 12 line: Boise St, New Mexico St, Buffalo, Loyola
The 13 line: Charleston, Louisiana, East Tennessee St, South Dakota St
The 14 line: Vermont, Rider, Montana, UC Santa Barbara
The 15 line: Belmont, Wright St, Bucknell, Wagner
The 16 line: Penn, UNC Asheville, FGCU, Nicholls St, North Carolina A&T, Arkansas-Pine Bluff
Next 4 in:
Providence
Arkansas
Middle Tennessee***
North Carolina St
UCLA
Last 4 in:
Houston
USC
Washington
Boise St***
Syracuse
Last 4 out:
Marquette
Virginia Tech
Kansas St
Western Kentucky
Next 4 out:
St Bonaventure
New Mexico St***
Utah
SMU
Nebraska
Break it down!:
ACC 9
SEC 8
Big 12 6
Big East 6
Pac-12 5
B1G 4
AAC 3
MWC 2
WCC 2
The 1 line: Virginia, Villanova, Purdue, Kansas
The 2 line: Xavier, Clemson, Auburn, Duke
The 3 line: Cincinnati, Texas Tech, Michigan St, North Carolina
The 4 line: Tennessee, Ohio St, West Virginia, Arizona
The 5 line: Oklahoma, Rhode Island, St Mary's, Miami
The 6 line: Kentucky, Seton Hall, Gonzaga, Florida
The 7 line: Butler, Texas A&M, Nevada, Creighton
The 8 line: Louisville, Florida St, TCU, Michigan
The 9 line: Wichita St, Texas, Alabama, Arizona St
The 10 line: Missouri, Providence, Arkansas, Middle Tennessee
The 11 line: North Carolina St, UCLA, Houston, USC, Washington, Syracuse
The 12 line: Boise St, New Mexico St, Buffalo, Loyola
The 13 line: Charleston, Louisiana, East Tennessee St, South Dakota St
The 14 line: Vermont, Rider, Montana, UC Santa Barbara
The 15 line: Belmont, Wright St, Bucknell, Wagner
The 16 line: Penn, UNC Asheville, FGCU, Nicholls St, North Carolina A&T, Arkansas-Pine Bluff
Next 4 in:
Providence
Arkansas
Middle Tennessee***
North Carolina St
UCLA
Last 4 in:
Houston
USC
Washington
Boise St***
Syracuse
Last 4 out:
Marquette
Virginia Tech
Kansas St
Western Kentucky
Next 4 out:
St Bonaventure
New Mexico St***
Utah
SMU
Nebraska
Break it down!:
ACC 9
SEC 8
Big 12 6
Big East 6
Pac-12 5
B1G 4
AAC 3
MWC 2
WCC 2
2/8 recap
@North Carolina 82, Duke 78 - a fatal blow to Duke's 1 line hopes, and re-invigoration to the 2 line hopes of UNC
@Clemson 72, Pitt 48
@Louisville 77, Georgia Tech 54
St Mary's 83, @Loyola Marymount 62
Gonzaga 71, @Pacific 61
UCLA 82, @Arizona 74 - a signature win to differentiate yourself from the other Pac-12 bubble teams is golden right now
@Utah 75, Stanford 60
@Oregon 65, Washington 40 - sigh, Pac-12 bubble team
@Arizona St 80, USC 78
@Houston 67, SMU 58 - Houston is your definitive #3 team in the AAC, right?
@Georgia St 106, Louisiana 92 - UL finally drops one in the Fun Belt
@Middle Tennessee 94, Rice 75
@Western Kentucky 75, Florida Atlantic 63
@Clemson 72, Pitt 48
@Louisville 77, Georgia Tech 54
St Mary's 83, @Loyola Marymount 62
Gonzaga 71, @Pacific 61
UCLA 82, @Arizona 74 - a signature win to differentiate yourself from the other Pac-12 bubble teams is golden right now
@Utah 75, Stanford 60
@Oregon 65, Washington 40 - sigh, Pac-12 bubble team
@Arizona St 80, USC 78
@Houston 67, SMU 58 - Houston is your definitive #3 team in the AAC, right?
@Georgia St 106, Louisiana 92 - UL finally drops one in the Fun Belt
@Middle Tennessee 94, Rice 75
@Western Kentucky 75, Florida Atlantic 63
Bubble watch part 6 (Pac-12 fail edition)
Locks:
Arizona (19-6) (9-3) RPI 21 SoS 39
Vital signs:
7-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 51
avg RPI win 129
2-3 vs. Group 1
6-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: A&M, Alabama, Arizona St
Bad losses: @Colorado perhaps, Atlantis was a disaster
You do have to remember that there's not that much high-end success on this resume. I do think they'll get a bump for being a conference champ from the committee, but the @Colorado and @Washington losses are more damaging to them than usual because of the lack of high-end wins.
Bubble:
Arizona St (18-6) (6-6) RPI 34 SoS 66
Vital signs:
7-4 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 111
avg RPI win 137
3-3 vs. Group 1
7-5 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: @Kansas, N-Xavier, USC?
Bad losses: Oregon, @Colorado, and just too many in-conference in general
The high end wins will carry the resume for the time being, but they're losing too many swing games in the conference to be safe.
UCLA (17-7) (8-4) RPI 51 SoS 64
Vital signs:
5-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 68
avg RPI win 143
2-3 vs. Group 1
3-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: N-Kentucky, @Arizona
Bad losses: @Oregon St, Colorado, @Stanford?
Two high-end wins save the rest of what is a mediocre overall resume. Did have some other big games, lost them. It's really your standard, stock version of a bubble profile. Only 2 true road wins, with many opportunities coming, so there's a resume flaw and a direct path for them to fix it coming up.
USC (17-8) (8-4) RPI 44 SoS 48
Vital signs:
7-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 33
avg RPI win 142
2-5 vs. Group 1
4-2 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: N-MTSU, N-New Mexico St
Bad losses: @Stanford, Princeton
Diamond Head has wins over MTSU and NMSU. Those are better than you think. Those also aren't enough if those are your best wins. USC will need to obtain quality wins, and they're sorta kinda running low on opportunities. The good news is they avoided the bad loss in conference play, mostly. The bad news is the loss to Princeton removes a lot of that gain.
Washington (17-7) (7-4) RPI 39 SoS 38
Vital signs:
4-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 43
avg RPI win 147
4-3 vs. Group 1
1-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: @Kansas, @USC, Arizona St, Arizona
Bad losses: Cal, @Wazzu
The good news here is the high end wins are enough to get them to the tourney. The bad news is there's a couple troubling losses ruining everything. Their finish will be more about bad loss avoidance than quality win pickups.
Utah (14-9) (6-6) RPI 58 SoS 52
Vital signs:
5-7 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 202
avg RPI win 158
2-6 vs. Group 1
2-2 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: Mizzou, @Arizona St, Washington?
Bad losses: @UNLV
Their issue is the raw number of losses, especially in conference...they've had plenty of chances against the upper crust of the conference and lost probably 1 or 2 too many. It's an uphill climb for them going forward.
I think we can cut off the bubble from there. Oregon and Stanford lack quality wins. Colorado has them but has lost a few too many questionable games.
Arizona (19-6) (9-3) RPI 21 SoS 39
Vital signs:
7-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 51
avg RPI win 129
2-3 vs. Group 1
6-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: A&M, Alabama, Arizona St
Bad losses: @Colorado perhaps, Atlantis was a disaster
You do have to remember that there's not that much high-end success on this resume. I do think they'll get a bump for being a conference champ from the committee, but the @Colorado and @Washington losses are more damaging to them than usual because of the lack of high-end wins.
Bubble:
Arizona St (18-6) (6-6) RPI 34 SoS 66
Vital signs:
7-4 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 111
avg RPI win 137
3-3 vs. Group 1
7-5 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: @Kansas, N-Xavier, USC?
Bad losses: Oregon, @Colorado, and just too many in-conference in general
The high end wins will carry the resume for the time being, but they're losing too many swing games in the conference to be safe.
UCLA (17-7) (8-4) RPI 51 SoS 64
Vital signs:
5-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 68
avg RPI win 143
2-3 vs. Group 1
3-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: N-Kentucky, @Arizona
Bad losses: @Oregon St, Colorado, @Stanford?
Two high-end wins save the rest of what is a mediocre overall resume. Did have some other big games, lost them. It's really your standard, stock version of a bubble profile. Only 2 true road wins, with many opportunities coming, so there's a resume flaw and a direct path for them to fix it coming up.
USC (17-8) (8-4) RPI 44 SoS 48
Vital signs:
7-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 33
avg RPI win 142
2-5 vs. Group 1
4-2 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: N-MTSU, N-New Mexico St
Bad losses: @Stanford, Princeton
Diamond Head has wins over MTSU and NMSU. Those are better than you think. Those also aren't enough if those are your best wins. USC will need to obtain quality wins, and they're sorta kinda running low on opportunities. The good news is they avoided the bad loss in conference play, mostly. The bad news is the loss to Princeton removes a lot of that gain.
Washington (17-7) (7-4) RPI 39 SoS 38
Vital signs:
4-5 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 43
avg RPI win 147
4-3 vs. Group 1
1-3 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: @Kansas, @USC, Arizona St, Arizona
Bad losses: Cal, @Wazzu
The good news here is the high end wins are enough to get them to the tourney. The bad news is there's a couple troubling losses ruining everything. Their finish will be more about bad loss avoidance than quality win pickups.
Utah (14-9) (6-6) RPI 58 SoS 52
Vital signs:
5-7 road/neutral record
non-con SoS 202
avg RPI win 158
2-6 vs. Group 1
2-2 vs. Group 2
Signature wins: Mizzou, @Arizona St, Washington?
Bad losses: @UNLV
Their issue is the raw number of losses, especially in conference...they've had plenty of chances against the upper crust of the conference and lost probably 1 or 2 too many. It's an uphill climb for them going forward.
I think we can cut off the bubble from there. Oregon and Stanford lack quality wins. Colorado has them but has lost a few too many questionable games.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)