[Cracked Sidewalks] Top-16 Reveal Preview

[Dr. Blackheart]

Barry Collier hates MU! 

[PointWarrior]

It's the Wisconsin loss...

[brewcity77]

It's the Wisconsin loss...

For Marquette's seed? Nah, it's the Purdue, Providence, and Xavier losses.

[wisblue]

After seeing the top 16 reveal and looking at the team sheets of the top 20 or so teams, unless and until something dramatic happens, I am going to focus my attention on the other teams that the NCAA listed as 10-16 (Virginia, Iowa State, Kansas State, Indiana, Gonzaga, and Xavier) plus UConn, Creighton, St. Mary's, Miami, TCU, and San Diego State.

I see these 12 teams as MU's competition for the last three 3 seeds, and the 4 and 5 seeds. For now, I am conceding the first 9 spots because those teams all have metrics and/or quality wins that MU will not be able to catch unless somebody completely collapses. With only one Quad 1 game remaining before the BET, MU's chance to significantly improve its resume is pretty limited. A loss at Creighton would make a 3 seed look pretty unlikely.

[DoctorV]

For Marquette's seed? Nah, it's the Purdue, Providence, and Xavier losses.

Here's the thing with that though-

All 3 of those teams have a COMBINED 2 losses at home for the entire season, by 3 total points.

Indiana won at Cintas by 2
Rutgers won at Mackey by 1
Providence has not lost at home.

Marquette lost by 5 at Purdue, after leading for a majority of the game.
Lost by 5 at Providence in 2OT after folding late and by 4 at Xavier.

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, but those road games for Marquette were against teams that are 41-2 at home, and all were extremely competitive.

So, no massive road wins, but the eye test.

I just think that it seems obvious that from what we saw the committee come up with today, even though the "book" says that conference affiliation and conference record no matta, they overvalued the B12 and undervalued the BE.
In the case of the B12, Conference record do matta in the inverse- more losses in conference is "OK" because the B12 is so "beastly."

It's all good though, the 3 seed is still in play if Marquette wants it.
I don't think they will stay on the 4 line if they outright win the BE Conference

[MU82]

It's all good though, the 3 seed is still in play if Marquette wants it.

Ah, if only it were as easy in sports as "wanting it."

[The Sultan]

Isn't part of the problem that the BE is SOOO bad at the bottom whereas the B12 is pretty solid throughout?  West Virginia and Oklahoma are miles better than DePaul and Georgetown. And I would guess Okie State and Texas Tech are better than Butler and SJU.

[TSmith34, Inc.]

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, and NET.

[wisblue]

Isn't part of the problem that the BE is SOOO bad at the bottom whereas the B12 is pretty solid throughout?  West Virginia and Oklahoma are miles better than DePaul and Georgetown. And I would guess Okie State and Texas Tech are better than Butler and SJU.

I think that is exactly the issue for  the Big East. In addition to direct impact on the NET and SOS, the league offers a lot fewer opportunities for those Quad 1 wins that the Committee clearly values highly (see Kansas State).

If you look at the teams that the Committee placed higher than their NET, the reason can usually be found in those high quality wins.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I think that is exactly the issue for  the Big East. In addition to direct impact on the NET and SOS, the league offers a lot fewer opportunities for those Quad 1 wins that the Committee clearly values highly (see Kansas State).

If you look at the teams that the Committee placed higher than their NET, the reason can usually be found in those high quality wins.

It feels like quantity is being overemphasized a little.  For example,  Marquette is 5-5 in Q1 games while Iowa State is 6-6 and Kansas State is 8-8.  All 3 teams have the same Q1 win% but the Big 12 teams have more opportunities.

This is where I feel predictive rankings and NET need to be factored a little heavier.  Marquette and Iowa State are one spot apart in NET but Kansas State is 5/6 spots behind.

That tells me Marquette and Iowa State belong on the same seed line and Kansas State should be a line below.  But the committee favors pure volume of Q1 wins, which will always favor the Big 12 teams.

[Herman Cain]

Isn't part of the problem that the BE is SOOO bad at the bottom whereas the B12 is pretty solid throughout?  West Virginia and Oklahoma are miles better than DePaul and Georgetown. And I would guess Okie State and Texas Tech are better than Butler and SJU.

In addition to the two turkeys , this year  the Big East did not perform as well as it usually does in the non conference part of the schedule . It did not pick up as many signature wins and also had too many losses to weak teams in that period .

[wisblue]

Here's the thing with that though-

All 3 of those teams have a COMBINED 2 losses at home for the entire season, by 3 total points.

Indiana won at Cintas by 2
Rutgers won at Mackey by 1
Providence has not lost at home.

Marquette lost by 5 at Purdue, after leading for a majority of the game.
Lost by 5 at Providence in 2OT after folding late and by 4 at Xavier.

Close only counts in horseshoes and hand grenades, but those road games for Marquette were against teams that are 41-2 at home, and all were extremely competitive.

So, no massive road wins, but the eye test.

I just think that it seems obvious that from what we saw the committee come up with today, even though the "book" says that conference affiliation and conference record no matta, they overvalued the B12 and undervalued the BE.
In the case of the B12, Conference record do matta in the inverse- more losses in conference is "OK" because the B12 is so "beastly."

It's all good though, the 3 seed is still in play if Marquette wants it.
I don't think they will stay on the 4 line if they outright win the BE Conference

I think the point, though, is that the failure to win at least one of those games has kept MU from having a really strong road win on its resume, and that is their weakest point. A win at Creighton would fill in that hole.

It's not that those were damaging losses, but they were damaging lost opportunities.

[Viper]

Ah, if only it were as easy in sports as "wanting it."

thanks for the enlightenment. Profound.

[HowardsWorld]

I get it all the metrics point to the b12 being stronger but at some point our win vs Baylor has to count for something.

You are going to tell me that the winner of the big east which by the way has 5 ranked teams in it and 2 teams that thrashed two teams seeded higher in Baylor and Iowa state deserves to have 5 teams seeded higher than the number 1 big east team?

I know the majority will play itself out but to be honest if you have to pick from UConn, Marquette Kansas st, Iowa St, Creighton and Xavier I'm not sure anyone is going to pick Iowa st and Kansas st to advance further in the tournament.

[MU82]

From The Athletic's Brian Bennett:

What was the biggest surprise?

For me, it was Indiana at No. 13 overall. While the Hoosiers have had some big wins (at Xavier, versus Purdue), they also went through a stretch earlier this year when they lost six out of nine games and have dealt with some injuries. At 17th in the NET, 20th in KenPom and 20th in Strength of Record heading into Saturday, Indiana seemed right on the borderline for a No. 4 seed. Instead, the committee made the Hoosiers the top team on the No. 4 line, ahead of Marquette, which has the same number of Quad 1 wins (five), two fewer losses and a better NET ranking (15th).

But the committee clearly believes in Indiana's potential when the Hoosiers are fully healthy. And by its placement in the South Region, which goes through Louisville, IU could potentially have a more advantageous path than current Big Ten leader and rival Purdue. That's probably not going over too well in West Lafayette at the moment (not to mention in Tuscaloosa, as Alabama would potentially have to deal with a heavily pro-IU crowd in a Sweet 16 game at the KFC Yum! Center). The fact that Reynolds, the committee chair, played for Bob Knight at Indiana will give fuel to any conspiracy-minded fans. But the committee is simply following its own complicated geographic rules.

[real chili 83]

How much do conference tournaments matta, or is it decided by regular season records only for top seeding?

[Uncle Rico]

How much do conference tournaments matta, or is it decided by regular season records only for top seeding?

I believe Cracked Sidewalks guys wrote a piece a few years back saying conference tourney results have had little bearing on seeding

[wisblue]

I believe Cracked Sidewalks guys wrote a piece a few years back saying conference tourney results have had little bearing on seeding

They don't matter a lot because the games are treated just like any other game played during the season. By that time teams have played about 30 games, so the result of one more will have a negligible impact.

I think they have the most impact for teams on the bubble who need a high quality win or two to beef up their resume.

[wisblue]

I get it all the metrics point to the b12 being stronger but at some point our win vs Baylor has to count for something.

You are going to tell me that the winner of the big east which by the way has 5 ranked teams in it and 2 teams that thrashed two teams seeded higher in Baylor and Iowa state deserves to have 5 teams seeded higher than the number 1 big east team?

I know the majority will play itself out but to be honest if you have to pick from UConn, Marquette Kansas st, Iowa St, Creighton and Xavier I'm not sure anyone is going to pick Iowa st and Kansas st to advance further in the tournament.

MU's win over Baylor does count for something. It's a Quad 1A win that factors favorably into the NET and other metrics. But, it's also just one game.

Iowa State and Kansas State both have wins over Baylor too, and KSU's was on the road.

[tower912]

Focus on the number of road wins over good teams.   IU won at Xavier, for example.  I think that carried a ton of weight.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

Focus on the number of road wins over good teams.   IU won at Xavier, for example.  I think that carried a ton of weight.

But UConn dominated both Alabama and Iowa State on a neutral floor.  The committee basically ignored that.  Those wins combined with UConn's computer metrics should have the Huskies in contention for a 3 seed.  Their resume is better than Virginia's.

The inconsistent use of criteria is the most perplexing thing.

[Newsdreams]

But UConn dominated both Alabama and Iowa State on a neutral floor.  The committee basically ignored that.  Those wins combined with UConn's computer metrics should have the Huskies in contention for a 3 seed.  Their resume is better than Virginia's.

The inconsistent use of criteria is the most perplexing thing.

Away wins >> Neutral win >> Home win plus Uconn Q3 loss @ home really hurts.

[NCMUFan]

How much do conference tournaments matta, or is it decided by regular season records only for top seeding?

I have to believe it would benefit bubble teams the most that run the tables.
The rest either already know they are in the NCAA tourney or not.

[wisblue]

Focus on the number of road wins over good teams.   IU won at Xavier, for example.  I think that carried a ton of weight.

Here is a quick summary of the Quad 1 true road wins for MU and the 12 teams I am following as their main competition for the 10-20 spots on the NCAA Seed List.

Marquette: Seton Hall (NET 69), 1-4 overall
Virginia: Michigan (65), Wake Forest (67) 2-3 (also beat Baylor and Illinois on a neutral court)
Iowa State: TCU (22), Oklahoma (63), 2-7
Kansas State: Texas (9), Baylor (12) 2-5
Indiana: Xavier (26), Illinois (27), Michigan (65) 3-6
Gonzaga: 0-2 (Neutral wins over Alabama, Xavier, and MSU)
Xavier:UConn (8) 1-2
Connecticut: Florida (53) 1-5 (Neutral wins over Alabama and Iowa State)
Miami: North Carolina (44), UCF (56) 2-3
Creighton: Seton Hall (69) 1-5
St. Mary's: None (Will be at Gonzaga this weekend) Best at Santa Clara (83)
TCU: Kansas(6), Baylor (12) 2-6
San Diego State: Utah State (35), 1-1

Especially in the case of Kansas State, those 2 top 10 road wins seem to be what is carrying their seeding. Their overall metrics are not that impressive: NET of 20 and RAP score of 22.8 (compared to 14 and 15.4 for MU). Also, the Selection Committee often says that it rewards teams that "put themselves out there" in OOC games, but KSU doesn't help itself there with an OOC schedule strength rated at 301. MU is at 140, which is worse than average for this set of teams

[The Equalizer]

They don't matter a lot because the games are treated just like any other game played during the season. By that time teams have played about 30 games, so the result of one more will have a negligible impact.

I think they have the most impact for teams on the bubble who need a high quality win or two to beef up their resume.

Historically teams that finish .500 in the Big East don't make the NCAA tournament without at least one win in the BET.