Is Xavier Overrated?

[Lennys Tap]

In early January I shared a very unpopular opinion - . that Xavier at #5 was overrated. I even said (while admitting hyperbole) that they were a borderline top 25 team. Since then they have virtually run the table, winning 11 of 13 (losing only to Villanova twice). It looks like they'll win the Big East and get a #1 seed. I certainly hold them in higher regard than I did in January, but my (admittedly fallible) "eye test" still tells me they're not all that. Guess what? Ken Pomeroy agrees!

In the current Pomeroy rankings. the Muskies are #14. That would tie Xavier with Washington (2005) as the lowest rated #1 seed in Pomeroy history. Only 2 other #1 seeds (Oregon in 2016, Stanford in 2004) finished the regular season outside of Pomeroy's top 10. Why is their record so much better than their ranking? Well, according to KenPom Xavier is the 3rd luckiest team (out of 351) in college basketball! Is Pomeroy all wet? What say you, scoopers?

[PBRme]

They beat us twice

How much luckier could they get

[GGGG]

In early January I shared a very unpopular opinion - . that Xavier at #5 was overrated. I even said (while admitting hyperbole) that they were a borderline top 25 team. Since then they have virtually run the table, winning 11 of 13 (losing only to Villanova twice). It looks like they'll win the Big East and get a #1 seed. I certainly hold them in higher regard than I did in January, but my (admittedly fallible) "eye test" still tells me they're not all that. Guess what? Ken Pomeroy agrees!

In the current Pomeroy rankings. the Muskies are #14. That would tie Xavier with Washington (2005) as the lowest rated #1 seed in Pomeroy history. Only 2 other #1 seeds (Oregon in 2016, Stanford in 2004) finished the regular season outside of Pomeroy's top 10. Why is their record so much better than their ranking? Well, according to KenPom Xavier is the 3rd luckiest team (out of 351) in college basketball! Is Pomeroy all wet? What say you, scoopers?

I think they are overrated as a #1 seed.  For instance, I think the first #2 seed according to Bracket Matrix, Duke, would be favored over them.  And Purdue, MSU and UNC (the other #2s) could be as well.

But I think they should at least be a #2.

[ZiggysFryBoy]

I think they are overrated as a #1 seed.  For instance, I think the first #2 seed according to Bracket Matrix, Duke, would be favored over them.  And Purdue, MSU and UNC (the other #2s) could be as well.

But I think they should at least be a #2.

I'd be surprised if Duke is still around for a potential E8 match up.

But it's a crapshoot, ai'na?

[tower912]

2 seed. 

[wadesworld]

Lucky or not, their resume is that of a 1 seed and there's no question about it.

Outright conference champions of one of the two best conferences in America.  You are what your record says you are.

[muwarrior69]

Lucky or not, their resume is that of a 1 seed and there's no question about it.

Outright conference champions of one of the two best conferences in America.  You are what your record says you are.

They hope they don't play Nova until the Championship game when everyone will see how over rated they are.

[Goose]

Lenny

I think they are very, very good team and will make a very deep run. They might be my NC pick in my bracket.

[forgetful]

I think they are overrated as a #1 seed.  For instance, I think the first #2 seed according to Bracket Matrix, Duke, would be favored over them.  And Purdue, MSU and UNC (the other #2s) could be as well.

But I think they should at least be a #2.

Interesting.  I think Duke is by far the most over-rated team in the nation.  I wouldn't be shocked if they do not make the sweet 16.

They have talent, but haven't seem to be able to put it all together.

[MarquetteDano]

I agree they are overrated as a top 5 team. But they are definitely one of 10-15 teams who could end up in the Final Four.

Not Natl Champ quality tho.

[Spotcheck Billy]

This year's Duke team isn't consistent enough to win 6 in a row. Heck, coach K has to play a zone so much because the OADs can't learn M2M. Duke teams used to be exciting to watch because of their ability to play intense M2M.

[MU82]

X is probably overrated, Lenny.

But I did pick them as my FF long shot before the season, so I guess I had them rated high, too.

In many recent years, people have said there is no clear favorite and the tourney is wide open ... but I really do think that's the case this season. There are no teams that make me say, "Damn, they're the ones!"

I really could see any of a dozen teams winning it all, maybe even more. Is X one of those teams? Probably.

[GooooMarquette]

X is a great team, and it would be awesome if the BE got two #1 seeds.

But IMHO they probably are a bit overrated and deserve a #2.  Needless to say, even as a #2, they could very plausibly win it all.

[tower912]

Big East champs.  1 loss out of conference.  If they are overrated, then the conference is overrated.

[WarriorDad]

Not overrated.  The conference is rated second best in the NCAA and Xavier won the conference.  Maybe where you are going is they are more likely to be upset in the tournament than Villanova, which I agree with.  This season there are so many teams with holes, Xavier no exception.

I hope that when they do lose we don't hear the I Told You so they are are overrated.  Let's judge them on their season, not on one game loss whenever that happens to occur in the tournament.

[MUDPT]

Overrated? Maybe. Lucky- YES. Currently the 2nd luckiest team in the country according to KenPom. 9-0 in games decided by 5 points or less. Headed for heartbreak in the tourney.

[Lennys Tap]

Not overrated.  The conference is rated second best in the NCAA and Xavier won the conference.  Maybe where you are going is they are more likely to be upset in the tournament than Villanova, which I agree with.  This season there are so many teams with holes, Xavier no exception.

I hope that when they do lose we don't hear the I Told You so they are are overrated.  Let's judge them on their season, not on one game loss whenever that happens to occur in the tournament.

You don't understand the concept of luck. They're really, really good, no doubt, but if you believe in Pomeroy's statistical analysis (are you a man of science?) they are really, really, really lucky. That luck will result in a #1 seed rather than the #4 seed that average luck would give them - so their road in the tournament will be much easier than the one they deserve. So all the stars are aligned for them - why, if they're all that, are you already talking about "when they do lose"? They can't play another #1 until the semifinal game at the earliest.

[wadesworld]

You create your own luck.

[WarriorDad]

You don't understand the concept of luck. They're really, really good, no doubt, but if you believe in Pomeroy's statistical analysis (are you a man of science?) they are really, really, really lucky. That luck will result in a #1 seed rather than the #4 seed that average luck would give them - so their road in the tournament will be much easier than the one they deserve. So all the stars are aligned for them - why, if they're all that, are you already talking about "when they do lose"? They can't play another #1 until the semifinal game at the earliest.

Do you believe  there is much difference between a 1 and 2 seed?  The way the NCAA uses an S curve in seeding, the last 1 and the first 2 are virtually identical.  At times teams are underseeded or overseeded, so without knowing who they are going to play it doesn't mean much right now.  As a for instance, you can have a 12 seed with a rating of around 30 and another 12 seed with a rating about 50.  Not all seeds are created equal even if they have the same number next to them.  Where is the game being played, what are the matchups.  I cannot answer your question until those details come out.

Luck, some say luck is manufactured.  Others don't believe that.  Is luck, scientific?

[wadesworld]

This is a guy who tried to make a bet that Xavier was overrated when they were ranked 5th or 6th in the country and tried to tell people that if they finished the year ranked 1 spot below where they were ranked at the time of the bet he deserved money.  So I think Lenny thinks there is actually a big difference between a 1 and a 2 seed, even the worst 1 seed and the top 2 seed.

This is his way of now saying he wasn't wrong when he said things along the lines of "We'll see in a few months" when talking about how he expected Xavier to drop in the rankings.  Now it's just that they were lucky all year long and they are still overrated, despite actually moving up in the rankings, and deservedly so.  Whether they are lucky or not, we just saw Kansas and Michigan State go down today.  Give me a "lucky" team that finds a way to simply continue winning (Xavier) over an "underrated" team that continues to lose to bad teams (Kansas).

For Lenny, if Xavier loses in the Elite 8 in overtime to a team that goes on to win the NCAA Title it'll be "proof" that they were overrated because as a 1 seed they were expected to at least make the Final Four.  At this point of the season he thought he would be able to look at the rankings and say, "Hey look!  Xavier was ranked 6th when I tried to bet people they were overrated and they're ranked 12th now, I was right!"  Since that hasn't happened and they're now ranked 3rd it's shifted to, "They're one of the luckiest teams in the country and that luck is bound to run out.  When they don't make the Final Four you'll all know I was right."

The reality is Xavier has been a top 10 team all season long.  If you want to say they're the 7th best team in the country and consider that being "overrated" sure, but their resume is exactly what they are, the third best team in the country.  They're rated right where they deserve to be rated based on the only thing that matters, the results on the floor.  They've played the 4th toughest schedule in the country and have lost to 3 teams.  They might go cold for 40 minutes and lose to a lower seeded team.  To Lenny that'll be vindication.  To anyone who follows the sport that'll just be the nature of a one and done format following an unbelievable season for the Musketeers, a deep, balanced, experienced, talented team.

[WarriorFan]

In general I think it's a weak year for the NCAA and none of the top 10 teams are as good as they "normally" are.  No science behind this, just the eye test.  The elite teams in each conference all carry some questionable losses and there don't seem to be any obvious South Carolina's or Davidsons this year who will come from mid- low seeds and make a deep run.  The last statement, however will play out in the form of several upsets, bizarre games and unusual teams advancing while several of the top 10 get eliminated.  It's really year where anyone in the top 50 can beat anyone in the top 50. 

It's not really about X at all, but they do have experience like few others in the tournament with 2 excellent seniors plus a grad transfer who must be 30 years old who are their key contributors.  This level of experience will win close games. 

[Lennys Tap]

This is a guy who tried to make a bet that Xavier was overrated when they were ranked 5th or 6th in the country and tried to tell people that if they finished the year ranked 1 spot below where they were ranked at the time of the bet he deserved money.  So I think Lenny thinks there is actually a big difference between a 1 and a 2 seed, even the worst 1 seed and the top 2 seed.

This is his way of now saying he wasn't wrong when he said things along the lines of "We'll see in a few months" when talking about how he expected Xavier to drop in the rankings.  Now it's just that they were lucky all year long and they are still overrated, despite actually moving up in the rankings, and deservedly so.  Whether they are lucky or not, we just saw Kansas and Michigan State go down today.  Give me a "lucky" team that finds a way to simply continue winning (Xavier) over an "underrated" team that continues to lose to bad teams (Kansas).

For Lenny, if Xavier loses in the Elite 8 in overtime to a team that goes on to win the NCAA Title it'll be "proof" that they were overrated because as a 1 seed they were expected to at least make the Final Four.  At this point of the season he thought he would be able to look at the rankings and say, "Hey look!  Xavier was ranked 6th when I tried to bet people they were overrated and they're ranked 12th now, I was right!"  Since that hasn't happened and they're now ranked 3rd it's shifted to, "They're one of the luckiest teams in the country and that luck is bound to run out.  When they don't make the Final Four you'll all know I was right."

The reality is Xavier has been a top 10 team all season long.  If you want to say they're the 7th best team in the country and consider that being "overrated" sure, but their resume is exactly what they are, the third best team in the country.  They're rated right where they deserve to be rated based on the only thing that matters, the results on the floor.  They've played the 4th toughest schedule in the country and have lost to 3 teams.  They might go cold for 40 minutes and lose to a lower seeded team.  To Lenny that'll be vindication.  To anyone who follows the sport that'll just be the nature of a one and done format following an unbelievable season for the Musketeers, a deep, balanced, experienced, talented team.

Total bullshyte. I said I felt Xavier was overrated in January when they were rated #5. Since then they've won 12 of 14 and moved up to #3. In spite of that, Pomeroy (not me, Wades, Pomeroy) has them as the #14 team in the country - IOW, a #4 seed. According to Ken Pomeroy, the reason they are overrated is that they've been incredibly lucky, the second luckiest team of 351 D1 teams. If they receive a #1 seed, they'll be the lowest Pomeroy ranked team to ever achieve that distinction. I'm not looking for "vindication" - I've been wrong many times here and am not shy about admitting it and even apologizing (something I don't ever recall you doing).

Anyway, I thought it was interesting that there was such a wide variance in how Xavier was valued by the AP and the "bracketologists" and the analysts like Pomeroy and Sagarin. I've always put more faith in the latter - you prefer the former. Fine. Could be the makings of an interesting discussion - if you weren't so hell bent on turning it into a personal attack.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that Xavier hasn't EARNED their ranking - they most certainly have. My question is - are they the 3rd best team (AP), the 14th best team (Pomeroy) or something in between?

[Frenns Liquor Depot]

Luck is just the unexplained variance from the prediction formula when applying something that fits broadly to a specific team.

I think it is a word that doesn't really describe what it measures personally.  MU wasnt 'unlucky' last year and X isn't 'lucky' this year. 

[wadesworld]

Total bullshyte. I said I felt Xavier was overrated in January when they were rated #5. Since then they've won 12 of 14 and moved up to #3. In spite of that, Pomeroy (not me, Wades, Pomeroy) has them as the #14 team in the country - IOW, a #4 seed. According to Ken Pomeroy, the reason they are overrated is that they've been incredibly lucky, the second luckiest team of 351 D1 teams. If they receive a #1 seed, they'll be the lowest Pomeroy ranked team to ever achieve that distinction. I'm not looking for "vindication" - I've been wrong many times here and am not shy about admitting it and even apologizing (something I don't ever recall you doing).

Anyway, I thought it was interesting that there was such a wide variance in how Xavier was valued by the AP and the "bracketologists" and the analysts like Pomeroy and Sagarin. I've always put more faith in the latter - you prefer the former. Fine. Could be the makings of an interesting discussion - if you weren't so hell bent on turning it into a personal attack.

Don't get me wrong - I'm not saying that Xavier hasn't EARNED their ranking - they most certainly have. My question is - are they the 3rd best team (AP), the 14th best team (Pomeroy) or something in between?

How do you define “X best team?” You admitted yourself that they have EARNED their ranking. So isn’t that the answer right there? If this were late December sure you could say, “Well Arizona is ranked below Xavier but I think they’re the most talented team in the country and I think when all is said and done they’ll be the better team this year.” But the regular season is literally over. It’s no longer about floor and ceiling, now it just comes down to one hot streak. But we’ve seen what teams are the “best” and what teams aren’t based on a 30 game season already and Xavier is clearly one of the five “best” teams in the country.

Kenpom is based on projections. How good can a team be. There’s not much more need for projections at this point. We’ve seen the season play out. And Xavier’s season has played our incredibly well. 4th roughest schedule in the country, losses to 3 total teams all season.

Luck is just the unexplained variance from the prediction formula when applying something that fits broadly to a specific team.

I think it is a word that doesn't really describe what it measures personally.  MU wasnt 'unlucky' last year and X isn't 'lucky' this year. 

Yup. Trying to knock a team for having a good record in tight games is beyond silly to me. If you ask me, that’s just more of a sign of a good team.

[g0lden3agle]

How do you define “X best team?” You admitted yourself that they have EARNED their ranking. So isn’t that the answer right there? If this were late December sure you could say, “Well Arizona is ranked below Xavier but I think they’re the most talented team in the country and I think when all is said and done they’ll be the better team this year.” But the regular season is literally over. It’s no longer about floor and ceiling, now it just comes down to one hot streak. But we’ve seen what teams are the “best” and what teams aren’t based on a 30 game season already and Xavier is clearly one of the five “best” teams in the country.

Kenpom is based on projections. How good can a team be. There’s not much more need for projections at this point. We’ve seen the season play out. And Xavier’s season has played our incredibly well. 4th roughest schedule in the country, losses to 3 total teams all season.

Yup. Trying to knock a team for having a good record in tight games is beyond silly to me. If you ask me, that’s just more of a sign of a good team.