resume comparison

[buckchuckler]

MU vs. MSU

http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology/team-comparison/MARQET/MICHST

I think these resumes are very similar, and yet Palm has MSU as a 1 seed and MU as a 5 seed (on his March 1 update).  I certainly don't see that much difference.  Just found it odd/ interesting. 

[Avenue Commons]

MU's loss to UW-GB is a lead weigh around our ankles.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Errrrrbody knows Palm is the worst

[NavinRJohnson]

 I don't know, that was also prior to the win yesterday, and if you were to think of MSU as the last number 1 (4th overall) and MU as the first 5 (17th overall),  is it really that far off?

[ChicosBailBonds]

Errrrrbody knows Palm is the worst

Actually he has done very well over the years, but don't let your bias get in the way

[keefe]

MU's loss to UW-GB is a lead weigh around our ankles.

This hurts more than we want to believe. You stopping seeing zits on your girl friend but others do.

[BM1090]

Actually he has done very well over the years, but don't let your bias get in the way

I've noticed that Palm's brackets are different from almost all of the others in the industry throughout the year, and in his final projection he conforms to what seems to be the popular opinion.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I've noticed that Palm's brackets are different from almost all of the others in the industry throughout the year, and in his final projection he conforms to what seems to be the popular opinion.

He makes his adjustments like anyone else.  There are so many brackets out there, so many experts.  Some years he has beaten Lunardi, some years he hasn't.  First and foremost they try to get the 68 teams right, the seeding lines are much more difficult because of various procedural bumps that can occur.

I think he's off on MSU and MU, for the record, but it's also two weeks until this stuff gets settled...it's meaningless at this point.  If MSU finishes second in the Big Ten, it would not surprise me to have them as the final #1 seed considering the conference.  It also wouldn't surprise me if MU ends up as a 3 seed, but so many things still have to happen.  All I know is Gonzaga is going to get a 1 seed and I pray we are in their bracket.  They are good, I like them a lot, but they aren't #1 seed good.

Right now, MU is a 4 seed for most "experts" (the last 4 seed, by the way), that's only 1 line different than Palm has them.  Many experts have us as a 4 or a 5, a few as a 6 and a few as a 3.

http://bracketproject.50webs.com/matrix.htm

[🏀]

He makes his adjustments like anyone else.  There are so many brackets out there, so many experts.  Some years he has beaten Lunardi, some years he hasn't.  First and foremost they try to get the 68 teams right, the seeding lines are much more difficult because of various procedural bumps that can occur.

I think he's off on MSU and MU, for the record, but it's also two weeks until this stuff gets settled...it's meaningless at this point.  If MSU finishes second in the Big Ten, it would not surprise me to have them as the final #1 seed considering the conference.  It also wouldn't surprise me if MU ends up as a 3 seed, but so many things still have to happen.  All I know is Gonzaga is going to get a 1 seed and I pray we are in their bracket.  They are good, I like them a lot, but they aren't #1 seed good.

Right now, MU is a 4 seed for most "experts" (the last 4 seed, by the way), that's only 1 line different than Palm has them.  Many experts have us as a 4 or a 5, a few as a 6 and a few as a 3.

http://bracketproject.50webs.com/matrix.htm

Wisconsin just dropped out of the four seed line.

[Retire54]

Spent some time looking at the resume comparisons and I think we should be a lock for a 4 and playing for a 3.

We're one of only 11 teams with at least 3 RPI top 25 wins

We're one of only 8 teams with at least 7 RPI top 50 wins

SOS at 11

If you look at other 3 seeds (according to that bracketproject site) I think we compare favorably to Arizona and New Mexico and can sweep into their spots if they fall. It's also easy to bring up the UWGB loss, but it seems as though the big wins matter more than the bad losses when analyzing at the top (Georgetown's loss to USF and Kansas' loss to TCU haven't affected their seeds too much).

I think the only way we could possibly fall to a 5 is if  we go 0-2 in our next two and then lose our first one in the BE tournament.

We lock a 4 if we go 2-1 (either lose at rutgers/STJ and then win one in the BE tournament or win out and lose first one in NY)

I think we should lock a 3 if we win out and make noise in the BE tournament

It obviously depends on what other teams do/ how the committee looks at us, but if you look at our resume it stacks up pretty nicely against the teams at the top

[🏀]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

+1

[muarmy81]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

Ha!  +1

[LloydMooresLegs]

Ha!  +1

+ 1

touch 'em all, kid

[The Process]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

[brewcity77]

Two things stand out. We have a bad loss and they have twice as many road wins. When you go line-by-line, MSU looks just a little bit better in every category (RPI, SOS, best win, etc).

For me, the two biggest games we've lost to date are Green Bay and Villanova. Win those and we are a borderline 1-seed. The problem this year is that everyone is so close that it only takes a few blemishes to drop you 2 full lines. That said, when March starts, there are probably 10 teams that will be legitimate title contenders and another 10 that have an outside shot at winning it all. There will likely be a ton of parity in the field this year.

[TJ]

Two things stand out. We have a bad loss and they have twice as many road wins. When you go line-by-line, MSU looks just a little bit better in every category (RPI, SOS, best win, etc).

For me, the two biggest games we've lost to date are Green Bay and Villanova. Win those and we are a borderline 1-seed. The problem this year is that everyone is so close that it only takes a few blemishes to drop you 2 full lines. That said, when March starts, there are probably 10 teams that will be legitimate title contenders and another 10 that have an outside shot at winning it all. There will likely be a ton of parity in the field this year.

Of course since everyone thinks that this year we will probably all be disappointed and have an IU-KU-Duke-MSU Final Four or something like that.

[reinko]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

[Henry Sugar]

I opened this thread and expected to see keefe comparing his credentials to every other poster here.

[MerrittsMustache]

MU's loss to UW-GB is a lead weigh around our ankles.

This hurts more than we want to believe. You stopping seeing zits on your girl friend but others do.

The UWGB loss is ancient history. It will absolutely no bearing on MU's seed. So-called "bad losses" really only matter to bubble teams.

[🏀]

+1

Ha!  +1

[Silkk the Shaka]

Actually he has done very well over the years, but don't let your bias get in the way

Using what criteria?  He's not very good at projecting several weeks out, which is what this bracket is.  Anybody can get all but 2 or 3 of the field on Selection Sunday morning.  In the immortal words of Shania Twain, that don't impress me much.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Using what criteria?  He's not very good at projecting several weeks out, which is what this bracket is.  Anybody can get all but 2 or 3 of the field on Selection Sunday morning.  In the immortal words of Shania Twain, that don't impress me much.

Every year they do a bit of post mortem on which experts got the 68 teams right.  That's one criteria.  Then they go with seedings.  That's another criteria.

Some years he has been at the top, some years in the middle.  To say he is the absolute worst and EVERRRRYYYYYY body knows it is moronic.  CBS isn't going to risk their credibility by putting someone out there that doesn't do a good job, which Jerry normally does.

[Silkk the Shaka]

Every year they do a bit of post mortem on which experts got the 68 teams right.  That's one criteria.  Then they go with seedings.  That's another criteria.

Some years he has been at the top, some years in the middle.  To say he is the absolute worst and EVERRRRYYYYYY body knows it is moronic.  CBS isn't going to risk their credibility by putting someone out there that doesn't do a good job, which Jerry normally does.

Exactly.  They use the last bracket from Selection Sunday.  Anybody can get 65, 66, 67, or 68 out of 68 right hours prior to the announcement.  Palm is not good with projections several weeks out.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Exactly.  They use the last bracket from Selection Sunday.  Anybody can get 65, 66, 67, or 68 out of 68 right hours prior to the announcement.  Palm is not good with projections several weeks out.

The reality is that many don't get 67 or 68 even on the last day.  The projections today don't mean anything, look at Lunardi's and how much they have changed just in the last 5 days...hell, just within broadcasts the other day he had three teams come in and out.  They all do that.  Go and print all of them today and then check back in two weeks and see how much change there is...they all have change.