Joe Lunardi vs. Jerry Palm

[The Lens]

What did Joe know that Jerry didn't?

Lunardi's models had MU next four out all weekend.  Palm had us in until Davidson won.  In the end Lunardi looked correct.

Has anyone figured out the common metric that put in certain teams and held out others?

[GooooMarquette]

IMHO, it's the lack of a signature win.  Our biggest win @PC (31 RPI) was nice, but nothing like ASU's wins over X (3 RPI) and KU (5 RPI), Oklahoma's win over KU, or Cuse's win vs Clemson (10 RPI).

Most other metrics had us equal to or better than all three, and yet they're in, and we weren't even close.

[brewcity77]

I haven't clawed through it all yet, but one thing I noticed that the snubs had in common was not getting significant non-con results. Not just teams like USC and St Mary's that didn't play anyone, but teams like MTSU, Louisville, and Marquette that played good teams but didn't win those games.

That would also explain why Arizona State, St Bonaventure, Syracuse, and UCLA got in and why Notre Dame, Baylor, and USC were next up. Some of those teams only beat AQs, so it does make me wonder if Vermont winning might have got us closer.

Honestly, the games that cost us the most may have been Purdue and Wichita State.

[frozena pizza]

Yep, a headline win, even if it was in November, seemed to be very important.  If you put Arizona State, Oklahoma, St. Bonaventure and Syracuse up against USC, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State and St. Mary's right now I'd take the latter group.  We had our chances but that's the difference between us getting in last year and not making it this year.

[GrimmReaper33]

Palm is not a good bracketologist.  I know people here were convincing themselves he was a good one to follow because he had MU in the field longer than most, but he's actually one of the worst ones out there.

[injuryBug]

looks like top 15 RPI wins. 
So confusing cause in the past they have said road and neutral court wins are a key item. This year it was knocking off top teams or for that matter a top 15 team as in the case of Nevada, St Bonnie, Cuse.

Just like last 10 games always was a huge thing now that is not a big deal see OK and ASU.
There should be criteria clear cut that they are looking at every year

[cheebs09]

I haven't clawed through it all yet, but one thing I noticed that the snubs had in common was not getting significant non-con results. Not just teams like USC and St Mary's that didn't play anyone, but teams like MTSU, Louisville, and Marquette that played good teams but didn't win those games.

That would also explain why Arizona State, St Bonaventure, Syracuse, and UCLA got in and why Notre Dame, Baylor, and USC were next up. Some of those teams only beat AQs, so it does make me wonder if Vermont winning might have got us closer.

Honestly, the games that cost us the most may have been Purdue and Wichita State.

I wouldn't limit it to Non-Conference. I think most of those teams only shot for a marquee win was non-conference. Gonzaga and Arizona are nice wins, but we still a 4 and 5 seed I believe. If we took down Xavier or Villanova, it would be the same impact of Purdue and WSU.

I think this year it's clear the committee doesn't look at conference standings or anything like that. It reinforces that they look at each team as "How did they do in the 30 games they played."

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

When we beat Seton Hall I was confident that would be enough of a signature win for us. They were #13 at the time and we pounded them from the opening tip. Their mid-season collapse is one of the main reasons we fell off bracketologies mid February even though we were winning IMHO

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

A 3rd place Maui win over Michigan would've been a lot better than beating LSU.

Big East had a big drop from the top two. Two 1 seeds but the rest of the BE tournament teams were 8s and 9s. (Providence and Butler both dropped a line due to bracketing rules.)

A 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 spread might have helped MU more. Fewer chances at great wins but more chances at very good wins.

[GooooMarquette]

looks like top 15 RPI wins.
So confusing cause in the past they have said road and neutral court wins are a key item. This year it was knocking off top teams or for that matter a top 15 team as in the case of Nevada, St Bonnie, Cuse.

Just like last 10 games always was a huge thing now that is not a big deal see OK and ASU.
There should be criteria clear cut that they are looking at every year

Yep.

https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=55925.0

[The Lens]

Palm is not a good bracketologist.  I know people here were convincing themselves he was a good one to follow because he had MU in the field longer than most, but he's actually one of the worst ones out there.

It was posted here this weekend that Palm was 3rd best in last 4 years.  Whereas Lunardi was 43rd best.

A 3rd place Maui win over Michigan would've been a lot better than beating LSU.

Big East had a big drop from the top two. Two 1 seeds but the rest of the BE tournament teams were 8s and 9s. (Providence and Butler both dropped a line due to bracketing rules.)

A 1, 3, 4, 5, 8, 10 spread might have helped MU more. Fewer chances at great wins but more chances at very good wins.

That Michigan loss scared me at the time.  I always felt playing LSU was a bad option.  Agree on drop off in the Big East.  If you use football analogies, it had two 14-2 teams and a bunch of 9-7 teams.  As TAMU said, SHU falling off really hurt us.

[brewcity77]

When we beat Seton Hall I was confident that would be enough of a signature win for us. They were #13 at the time and we pounded them from the opening tip. Their mid-season collapse is one of the main reasons we fell off bracketologies mid February even though we were winning IMHO

Seton Hall lost three games to tournament teams by one point. Villanova, Rhode Island, and Butler. If they get those, probably a good chance we're in. C'est la vie.

[bilsu]

What did Joe know that Jerry didn't?

Lunardi's models had MU next four out all weekend.  Palm had us in until Davidson won.  In the end Lunardi looked correct.

Has anyone figured out the common metric that put in certain teams and held out others?

Common sense. Lose games to DePaul & St. John's and anyone should be able to see we were not an NCAA team.

[MU Fan in Connecticut]

Have a cage match.

[#UnleashSean]

Common sense. Lose games to DePaul & St. John's and anyone should be able to see we were not an NCAA team.

So duke and nova?

[forgetful]

Having MU's position differing by 4 spots on the Bubble doesn't mean much.  In these types of scenarios often the difference is whether you have a strong advocate (and loud mouth) fighting for you in the committee. 

The person best positioned to be our advocate would have been the committee chair, but he likely did not fight hard for the BE out of fear of bias (hence the BE being seeded poorly; and Xavier getting some oddly and unfair bracket placements and matchups).

Also, I wonder how much of an influence ESPN has on the committee by generating story lines.  Notre Dame shouldn't have been close, but ESPN pushed that story line hard for the two weeks leading up to the selection...they ended up first team out.  Similarly, Syracuse had a number of story lines pushed at ESPN leading up to the selection (last team in).  MU and the BE did not get story lines, hence we were actually at a disadvantage.

[dgies9156]

End of the day, we did it to ourselves.

Purdue, we were beaten from almost the outset.

Wichita State, Villanova, Xavier -- Wins over any one of those probably would have made the difference.

St. John's/DePaul -- Win 'em both and we're at 11-7 and probably in as a 9 or 10 seed.

Providence (second game) -- Win this with St. John's and DePaul and we're 12-6 and a lock, I don't care if we had our final record against Wichita State, Villanova, Xavier and Purdue.

What we fail to realize is that we did not take care of business. Even a good team loses games it should win every year (ask Villanova about St. John's and Butler!) but it wins games it should lose as well. We didn't do enough of either, so it's our fault we didn't make it.

[frozena pizza]

I doubt it mattered at the end of the day but I can't imagine it helped us to have barely survived against DePaul and then get thoroughly dominated by Villanova in the BE tournament.

[wojoswarrior]

Maybe the committee chair, who is the Creighton athletic director, didn't fight for us because we beat his team twice!
Just saying?

[Billy Hoyle]

Maybe the committee chair, who is the Creighton athletic director, didn't fight for us because we beat his team twice!
Just saying?

Actually, he would have fought for us because of the tourney revenue to the conference.  And, his boss sits on the MU BOT and Creighton owes its inclusion in the Big East to MU.

MU just wasn't good enough.

[MUDPT]

FWIW, Seth Burn's Wins Above Bubble Metric had us as the last team in.

https://sethburn.wordpress.com

I like how top 15 RPI wins are used to determine who's in and who isn't.  Providence might be a little better than us.  Over two games, we basically played even.  We had a better non-conference. They beat us by a game in conference and won two OT games in the conference tournament.  But the committee thinks there are at least 13 teams that were better than Marquette, but worse than Providence.  That is crazy.

[Herman Cain]

I haven't clawed through it all yet, but one thing I noticed that the snubs had in common was not getting significant non-con results. Not just teams like USC and St Mary's that didn't play anyone, but teams like MTSU, Louisville, and Marquette that played good teams but didn't win those games.

That would also explain why Arizona State, St Bonaventure, Syracuse, and UCLA got in and why Notre Dame, Baylor, and USC were next up. Some of those teams only beat AQs, so it does make me wonder if Vermont winning might have got us closer.

Honestly, the games that cost us the most may have been Purdue and Wichita State.

I made this same point in another thread. Those non conference wins carry great weight with the committee.

[bilsu]

So duke and nova?

You do not understand that and means both teams. I did not say "or".

[burger]

Yep, a headline win, even if it was in November, seemed to be very important.  If you put Arizona State, Oklahoma, St. Bonaventure and Syracuse up against USC, Notre Dame, Oklahoma State and St. Mary's right now I'd take the latter group.  We had our chances but that's the difference between us getting in last year and not making it this year.

I said it even at the time.....Because you could tell Georgia was not that good......

That game was the biggest reason we did not make the NCAA's.....

Terrible non-conference loss at home.......

Either a win in that game or the fiasco against DePaul and we are in.....1 game......that is how close it was.....

[WarriorDad]

What did Joe know that Jerry didn't?

Mr. Palm correctly picked 67 out of 68 this year in the tournament. http://www.bracketmatrix.com/
Mr. Lunardi correctly picked 66 out of 68.


Last year where Mr. Palm was perfect, Mr. Lunardi missed one.  In 2016, Lunardi missed 3.  He needs to pick up his game.