MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: mwbauer7 on February 12, 2010, 11:42:56 AM

Title: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: mwbauer7 on February 12, 2010, 11:42:56 AM
LAST FOUR IN
Ole Miss
Charlotte
Oklahoma State
Marquette

Detailed Rundown

Marquette
No one is talking much about Marquette, which has quietly won four in a row. The remaining schedule is also fairly benign.

Seed Report:
S-Curve history: 66 (Nov. 9), 78 (Dec. 15), 79 (Jan. 4), 72 (Jan. 11), 68 (Jan. 18), 74 (Jan. 25), 68 (Feb. 1), 66 (Feb. 8), 47 (Feb. 12).

Bracket Bytes:
Odds to remain in NCAA field: 55 percent.

Good Wins

RPI 1-25: N-Xavier, Georgetown
RPI 26-50: none

Bad Losses

RPI 101-200: NC State, @DePaul
RPI 201+: none

edit: Should mention we are playing as a 12 seed (how perfect would that be?) against 5th seeded Temple in NOLA.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: LON on February 12, 2010, 11:50:51 AM
Quote from: mwbauer7 on February 12, 2010, 11:42:56 AM
LAST FOUR IN
Ole Miss
Charlotte
Oklahoma State
Marquette

Detailed Rundown

Marquette
No one is talking much about Marquette, which has quietly won four in a row. The remaining schedule is also fairly benign.

Seed Report:
S-Curve history: 66 (Nov. 9), 78 (Dec. 15), 79 (Jan. 4), 72 (Jan. 11), 68 (Jan. 18), 74 (Jan. 25), 68 (Feb. 1), 66 (Feb. 8), 47 (Feb. 12).

Bracket Bytes:
Odds to remain in NCAA field: 55 percent.

Good Wins

RPI 1-25: N-Xavier, Georgetown
RPI 26-50: none

Bad Losses

RPI 101-200: NC State, @DePaul
RPI 201+: none

Can someone give a really brief explanation on how that S-Curve works...

The change from 66 to 47 is what I'm specifically referring to.  Is that because we had some teams that had beneficial losses in the last few days (beneficial to MU, that is)?
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: ZiggysFryBoy on February 12, 2010, 11:55:23 AM
the s curve is ranking teams 1-65 and then snaking back and forth, so 1, 2,3,4 are all 1 seeds, then snaking back is 5,6,7,8, so the 8th best team is matched up opposite the best team.

it's like a fantasy football draft, if you've done one of those.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Brewtown Andy on February 12, 2010, 11:57:53 AM
Quote from: LancesOtherNut on February 12, 2010, 11:50:51 AM
Can someone give a really brief explanation on how that S-Curve works...

The change from 66 to 47 is what I'm specifically referring to.  Is that because we had some teams that had beneficial losses in the last few days (beneficial to MU, that is)?


The S-Curve is the "natural" seeding lines.  Teams 1-4 are the 1 seeds, 5-8 are the 2s, etc.  For fairness' sake, you want the #8 team (the worst two seed) to end up in the same region as the #1 team (the best 1 seed).  Sometimes teams have to be moved for procedural reasons, so the Curve allows you to see "oh, well, they're really a 7, but had to be an 8 to stop too many Big 12 teams in that bracket" or whatever.

A 20 spot jump is rare, especially when a team doesn't play a game between brackets, so I'm guessing this one is completely about what's been happening with everyone else.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: LON on February 12, 2010, 11:59:13 AM
Much appreciated, all.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: wiscoave on February 12, 2010, 12:00:08 PM
Can someone post the link to the full bracket? I cant find it on espn...
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: DJO's Pump Fake on February 12, 2010, 12:04:54 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology


Go to espn.com and click on Men's Basketball, Lazar looks great!
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: MUFan07 on February 12, 2010, 12:05:24 PM
Quote from: Brewtown Andy on February 12, 2010, 11:57:53 AM
The S-Curve is the "natural" seeding lines.  Teams 1-4 are the 1 seeds, 5-8 are the 2s, etc.  For fairness' sake, you want the #8 team (the worst two seed) to end up in the same region as the #1 team (the best 1 seed).  Sometimes teams have to be moved for procedural reasons, so the Curve allows you to see "oh, well, they're really a 7, but had to be an 8 to stop too many Big 12 teams in that bracket" or whatever.

A 20 spot jump is rare, especially when a team doesn't play a game between brackets, so I'm guessing this one is completely about what's been happening with everyone else.

Our 20 spot jump is mainly due to us being in as opposed to out.  #66 is that first team out.  However, now that we are in the field of 65 we jump to #47 because there are several Automatic bids that will be seeded below us.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: KipsBayEagle on February 12, 2010, 12:15:04 PM
If this bracket were to materialize and come true, I think most intelligent fans would pick Marquette to get to the sweet 16.
Side note:  Lazar hayward looks like he is going to kill someone on the espn college basketball homepage
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: MUfan12 on February 12, 2010, 12:17:09 PM
I would kill for this draw.

And a weekend in New Orleans... please let this happen.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: MU B2002 on February 12, 2010, 12:18:38 PM
Vanderbilt is not exactly a pushover.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: copious1218 on February 12, 2010, 12:20:34 PM
Quote from: MU_B2002 on February 12, 2010, 12:18:38 PM
Vanderbilt is not exactly a pushover.

Nor is Temple - they knocked off Nova early in the year and lost to G'Town by 1.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Sir Lawrence on February 12, 2010, 12:25:40 PM
On another sidenote, it doesn't look like Joe Lunardi has missed many meals lately.....
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: KipsBayEagle on February 12, 2010, 12:27:51 PM
No teams a pushover once you get in the tournament.  That being said, could you ask for a more favorable draw for a 12 seed?
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: KC_Warrior on February 12, 2010, 12:44:00 PM
Quote from: MUfan12 on February 12, 2010, 12:17:09 PM
I would kill for this draw.

And a weekend in New Orleans... please let this happen.

Agreed.  A 5-12 game vs. Temple in NOLA...where do I sign up? 
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Aughnanure on February 12, 2010, 12:48:14 PM
Wow. Lazar does looks like an absolute beast.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Strokin 3s on February 12, 2010, 12:57:52 PM
What I don't get is under the last 4 in it has Ole Miss and Charlotte listed along with MU and Oklahoma St.  However, Ole Miss and Charlotte are 11 seeds and MU and OSU 12.  Shouldn't all 4 truly be 12's if they are the last 4 in?
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: MU B2002 on February 12, 2010, 12:59:58 PM
edit


nm
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: KipsBayEagle on February 12, 2010, 01:00:24 PM
League bids would cut into 12 seeds.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: copious1218 on February 12, 2010, 01:01:06 PM
Quote from: Strokin 3s on February 12, 2010, 12:57:52 PM
What I don't get is under the last 4 in it has Ole Miss and Charlotte listed along with MU and Oklahoma St.  However, Ole Miss and Charlotte are 11 seeds and MU and OSU 12.  Shouldn't all 4 truly be 12's if they are the last 4 in?

Not to mention, there could be some movement for conflict reasons.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: StillAWarrior on February 12, 2010, 01:27:34 PM
I've said it before, and I'll say it again now:  I think Marquette has benefitted from those close losses.  They got so much press from being the "unluckiest" team and I think that is helping them and will help them in the long run.  We've had articles about our coach, Lazar on the front page of ESPN's basketball page, etc.  I think we've gotten more coverage than your average 15-8 team (maybe because we're not an average 15-8 team).

They still have to take care of business, but I think the publicity surrounding all of those heart breaking losses will help this team.

Edited to add:  of course I'd rather have won those games.  But here's an interesting question - what do you think would have helped this team more:  an unremarkable 4 point win over NC State which wouldn't have really garnered any attention and might have reduced the publicity this team has received (resulting in a current record of 16-7) or the publicity the team has received and the reputation of being better than our record indicates?
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: 94Warrior on February 12, 2010, 02:02:10 PM
We would have benefited more from winning.  A win is ALWAYS better than a loss.  If we were 7-4 or 8-3 in conference we would be in better shape.  Same with having one more non-conference win.

As others have said, I'll happily take a 12 seed against Temple right now.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Hards Alumni on February 12, 2010, 02:03:34 PM
Quote from: 94Warrior on February 12, 2010, 02:02:10 PM
We would have benefited more from winning.  A win is ALWAYS better than a loss.  If we were 7-4 or 8-3 in conference we would be in better shape.  Same with having one more non-conference win.

As others have said, I'll happily take a 12 seed against Temple right now.

Hey, stop stealing John Madden's logic.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Skatastrophy on February 12, 2010, 02:06:01 PM
Quote from: Hards_Alumni on February 12, 2010, 02:03:34 PM
Hey, stop stealing John Madden's logic.

You see... what Marquette has to do here is score more points than the other team!!
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Brewtown Andy on February 12, 2010, 02:09:40 PM
Quote from: Strokin 3s on February 12, 2010, 12:57:52 PM
What I don't get is under the last 4 in it has Ole Miss and Charlotte listed along with MU and Oklahoma St.  However, Ole Miss and Charlotte are 11 seeds and MU and OSU 12.  Shouldn't all 4 truly be 12's if they are the last 4 in?

Nope.  If enough mid to low major conference leaders (1 bid automatic qualifiers are covered by the current leaders) are deserving of a seed higher than 11 or 12, then they get them. 
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: NavinRJohnson on February 12, 2010, 02:14:57 PM
Quote from: StillAWarrior on February 12, 2010, 01:27:34 PM
Edited to add:  of course I'd rather have won those games.  But here's an interesting question - what do you think would have helped this team more:  an unremarkable 4 point win over NC State which wouldn't have really garnered any attention and might have reduced the publicity this team has received (resulting in a current record of 16-7) or the publicity the team has received and the reputation of being better than our record indicates?

Guess I don't know what one has to do with the other, but the reality is, all else being equal, that unspectacular win over NC State, would likely have MU in the " solidly in" category  as we sit here on Feb 12th (whatever that's worth).
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: NCMUFan on February 12, 2010, 02:16:38 PM
The ESPN pic of Lazar should be the pic used for SOG.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: MU B2002 on February 12, 2010, 02:24:24 PM
Quote from: NCMUFan on February 12, 2010, 02:16:38 PM
The ESPN pic of Lazar should be the pic used for SOG.


What you don't like Zar doing the robot with the basketball?
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Aughnanure on February 12, 2010, 02:36:00 PM
Quote from: NCMUFan on February 12, 2010, 02:16:38 PM
The ESPN pic of Lazar should be the pic used for SOG.

http://www.gettyimages.com/detail/96159315/Getty-Images-Sport

There it is
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: copious1218 on February 12, 2010, 02:38:33 PM
Quote from: MU_B2002 on February 12, 2010, 02:24:24 PM

What you don't like Zar doing the robot with the basketball?

The pose would be perfect if you replace the ball with a walker.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Skatastrophy on February 12, 2010, 02:49:04 PM
Quote from: copious1218 on February 12, 2010, 02:38:33 PM
The pose would be perfect if you replace the ball with a walker.

Or if he followed that flex up with Hulk Hogan's "listening" pose:

(http://www.a1sportscollectibles.com/images/hulk-hogan-listening-to-crowd-signed-photo.jpg)
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: nathanziarek on February 12, 2010, 08:05:10 PM
Quote from: Skatastrophy on February 12, 2010, 02:49:04 PM
Or if he followed that flex up with Hulk Hogan's "listening" pose:

(http://www.a1sportscollectibles.com/images/hulk-hogan-listening-to-crowd-signed-photo.jpg)

Do you have, like, a directory filled with images and videos JUST IN CASE the subject comes up on MU Scoop? Your knack for the right picture at the right time is uncanny. I was wrong about you. You need to drink MORE.
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Avenue Commons on February 13, 2010, 01:08:57 PM
Quote from: MUfan12 on February 12, 2010, 12:17:09 PM
I would kill for this draw.

And a weekend in New Orleans... please let this happen.

That would be great. I'd definitely travel for that!
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: Ari Gold on February 13, 2010, 03:40:10 PM
out of just about every 4-5-6 team in the bracketology, I would feel most confident playing Temple (maybe Northern Iowa or texas?) the most.  But even looking at the 2nd round, I think we'd be really competitive vs vandy.

Kinda hope that our Stock doesn't rise too much higher. I think it's been covered at length but being a 10+ seed would be better for MU's tournament potential than being an 8-9
Title: Re: Lunardi's 2/12 Bracketology
Post by: The Pickle on February 13, 2010, 04:51:44 PM
Quote from: warrior55 on February 12, 2010, 12:04:54 PM
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/bracketology


Go to espn.com and click on Men's Basketball, Lazar looks great!

I would absolutely LOVE this bracket...Temple and likely Vandy in the 2nd round.  We'd probably get out s*** handed to us by Kansas in the sweet 16, but you never know.  God, I hate Kansas.
EhPortal 1.39.9 © 2026, WebDev