ESPN: MU Not a Lock

[Lennys Tap]

Best seed if not in the top 4? 5,6,11,12,7,10 in that order. Worst seed other than 14,15 and 16 is 8 or 9. 13 is about the same as being an 8 or 9 - you'll more likely lose your first but if you do win there's a much better chance you'll win your second.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Let's remember many last year thought MU would be a 10 or 11 and were very surprised by the 6....if I recall correctly our RPI last year was somewhere in the ballpark of 50-60.  However, our Pomroy and Saragin were in the 25-30 range.

Though the committee does not REQUIRE the use of Saragin and Pomroy data, they do have it as a supplement.  Considering we are 30 in today's Pomroy...just don't see ANY WAY POSSIBLE we miss the tourney.  Think we may surprise again and get a higher seed than expected.  Win tonight and I could see us getting a 6 or 7.  Lose..probably an 8-10.

Question for you...using your data (Ken Pom)

Last year MU was 33 in the Ken Pom ratings and got a 6 seed
Old Dominion at 34...did they get a 6 seed?  How about a 7 seed?  A 5 seed?  No, they got an 11 seed.

Vanderbilt...35 in Ken Pom...that's worse than the 33 MU had, so certainly they got a worse seed than MU....wait...they were seeded 4th, 2 lines above Marquette

Virginia Tech was a 36 Ken Pom...they were seeded....wait...they were left out of the tournament (despite 37 through 45 making it)

Missouri...19th in the Ken Pom...significantly better than MU.  Must have been a 5 seed or a 4 seed...certainly.  Nope...a 10 seed.

Richmond...Ken Pom of 48....seeded 12th?  Nope.  Seeded 13th?  Nope.  Seeded 7th...one line below MU.

My point....be weary of using any of these for seeding purposes or comparing to last year or any other year.  You're bound to be scratching your head if you do, more likely than not.

[ChicosBailBonds]

+1
spot on.

-1  Most definitely not spot on with many examples provided showing that isn't the case..see post above.

[NersEllenson]

-1  Most definitely not spot on with many examples provided showing that isn't the case..see post above.

Guess we'll see how it plays out this year.  I'm sure it is hard for you to fathom that MU could be anywhere from a 6-10 seed, considering you still have been floating we aren't a lock, and that if we get blown out by WVU we could be in trouble.  From most of your post content pertaining to this tourney, it seems you are suggesting MU will get an 11 or 12 seed.  Correct?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Guess we'll see how it plays out this year.  I'm sure it is hard for you to fathom that MU could be anywhere from a 6-10 seed, considering you still have been floating we aren't a lock, and that if we get blown out by WVU we could be in trouble.  From most of your post content pertaining to this tourney, it seems you are suggesting MU will get an 11 or 12 seed.  Correct?

Incorrect.  First of all, I'm not the only one floating that we aren't a lock...Lunardi, ESPN, etc, etc are saying the same thing.  It's all how you define a lock.  I believe my expectations are not out of line at all...I fully expect a bid and we should be in.  Saying 98% is pretty darn close to lock.

On seeding...incorrect.  I have no idea where the committee will put us. I  used your data source and showed that the committee was all over the damn place using that data source.  Teams ranked right around us were significantly lower or higher than us in seedings.  Teams ranked much better than us in Pomeroy had much worse seedings.  Teams with much worse Pomeroy ratings had nearly identical seedings as us.  Wherever the committee puts us they will put us, but using Pomeroy or any of these other services as some kind of proof of seeding has been fully destroyed...IMO.  No seeding would surprise me.  Getting a seed of 6-10 would NOT surprise me....especially with that wide a range.

Am I wrong to think you were saying we should get around a 6 because last year we got a 6 and had a WORSE KenPom rating?  That sure seemed to be what you were saying....now you're saying 6 to 10?  Which is it?   Personally, I think we'll get a 9 to 11 depending on what happens tonight but I believe we could move all the way up to a 6 based on how the committee has shown no rhyme or reason on this stuff....certainly nothing correlating to the Ken Pom data.

[brewcity77]

Figuring out seeding is definitely an inexact science. I think that it's the one place where you can really say that recent form makes a big difference. I also think conference comes into place heavily in regards to seeding. Last year we got a 6 when most people had us as an 8 at the highest. But we won 9 of our last 11 Big East games and made it to the tourney semis. So while our numbers might have figured to around 8, the SC boosted us up because we had played well of late and did so in a brutal conference.

Then look at ODU. They finished 6-3 in their final 9 conference games, and only one of those wins was against a kenpom top 100 team. They also play in the comparatively lowly CAA. Two strikes against them.

So why was Vandy higher than us? I think the difference is that we largely played ourselves out of contention when we fell to 11-8. Vandy was consistently good in a major conference. They weren't fighting for position at the end, so they didn't have to bust ass to increase their seed. In addition, their RPI was 28 spots ahead of ours. I do think kenpom matters, but it's not the only thing that matters.

Looking at Missouri, I don't get that. Their 43 RPI and 18 kenpom rating indicates they probably should have been in the 5-6 range. They did have more bad losses than we did, and that Nebraska loss easily could have dropped them a full seed line, how do they go from 6 to 10? I have no idea...sometimes the SC just throws you a curveball.

Richmond, well, they were lower in kenpom, but had the highest RPI of any of these teams at 26. They also came in having won 12 of 14, with their only losses in that stretch to eventual 5-seed Temple and 6-seed Xavier.

At the end of the day, it's an inexact science. I think it's a combination of how worthy you are, which determines your initial seed. That can be moved up or down by both RPI and the computer rankings. If you are playing hot, you'll move up. If you're barely staying above water (think 'Nova right now) then expect your seed to drop. And the bigger your conference, the better the odds you'll be seeded higher.

So where do we come in this year? I'd say that when you account our record, quality wins, and bad losses, we deserve to be on the 10-11 lines. Our RPI might drop us a line, but our kenpom could move us up 2 lines. I'd probably call us a 8/9 right now (and let's be honest, between those, does it matter?). If we beat WVU, we probably become a solid 8. Beat Louisville, we become a 7. Win the Big East tourney, we're a 6. And all that said, it's guesswork.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Guess we'll see how it plays out this year.  I'm sure it is hard for you to fathom that MU could be anywhere from a 6-10 seed, considering you still have been floating we aren't a lock, and that if we get blown out by WVU we could be in trouble.  From most of your post content pertaining to this tourney, it seems you are suggesting MU will get an 11 or 12 seed.  Correct?

That's correct....how'd I do?   

[ChicosBailBonds]

Dance Card got 92%...missed 3   http://www.unf.edu/~jcoleman/dance.htm

I think Palm missed 2 but need to double check....

Lunardi missed 3...

[NersEllenson]

That's correct....how'd I do?   

You were right..I was wrong.  That said, I have no doubt the Big 10 got preferntial treatment due to OSU president overseeing the operation.  No justification for MIchigan being an 8.  Either way, I'm very pleased with the draw of Xavier..and it is better to be a 10 or 11 than an 8 or 9.

[ChicosBailBonds]

You were right..I was wrong.  That said, I have no doubt the Big 10 got preferntial treatment due to OSU president overseeing the operation.  No justification for MIchigan being an 8.  Either way, I'm very pleased with the draw of Xavier..and it is better to be a 10 or 11 than an 8 or 9.

You think the Ohio State AD wants to benefit the Michigan Wolverines?

[Silkk the Shaka]

You think the Ohio State AD wants to benefit the Michigan Wolverines?

I don't necessarily think there was a conspiracy either, but don't conferences get to split up money based on "win shares" or something?  So more Big 10 teams equals more potential money to split?

[NersEllenson]

You think the Ohio State AD wants to benefit the Michigan Wolverines?

I understand the OSU - Michigan rivalry, yet also don't doubt for a second that conference pride/association allows for some bias to creep into these selections/seedings..

As I said..you were right, I was wrong in this example.  Take comfort in that.