What does it take for us to get a 2 seed?

[Newsdreams]

Nobody is considering secret scrimmages?

[MUCam]

I think it's important to remember the challenges the Selection Committee can have placing teams in the bracket while following certain guidelines, especially those that require separation of teams from the same conference so they don't meet too early. That can be one reason why there isn't too much movement based on conference tournament results.

This year there are going to be challenges created by having 4 or 5 Big 12 teams and 4 Big East in the top 4-5 seed lines. It is inevitable that teams will not be placed precisely as they would if the seed list established by the Committee were followed strictly in an S curve. In some cases a team might be placed in a different seed line.

Because of that, I don't think it's worth devoting too much energy to movements of one or two places on the seed list. The competitive advantage between being number 8 or number 9 on the seed list is insignificant.

I guess that depends on what you define as significant. I haven't seen odds based on S rank, but the probability of success getting to the Elite 8 is 45% for a 2 and 25% for a 3. For a final four, it is 20% to 11%. I'd say those are pretty significant.

How much of that is based on the seed and how much is based on the quality difference of teams on the two seed lines is beyond the scope of any study of which I am aware.

Seeding matters. I am very confident that if MU wins out and wins the BET, they'll be a 2. But doing those two things is far from a sure thing. Given the potential of the top 5 in the Big East, it is downright difficult and maybe not even to be expected regardless of how we do these next few games.

If MU accomplishes that feat, they deserve a 2. And they will get it barring some strange results elsewhere.

To me, the secret scrimmage is the thing that ensures the 2 and maybe sneaks us into 1 overall. Wouldn't be surprised if we actually get a straight bye to the Final Four in an unprecedented but wholly justified move.

Big East Champ + BET Champ + Secret Scrimmage = Final Four

Thank you to Newsdreams for making dreams a newsworthy reality.

[Newsdreams]

I guess that depends on what you define as significant. I haven't seen odds based on S rank, but the probability of success getting to the Elite 8 is 45% for a 2 and 25% for a 3. For a final four, it is 20% to 11%. I'd say those are pretty significant.

How much of that is based on the seed and how much is based on the quality difference of teams on the two seed lines is beyond the scope of any study of which I am aware.

Seeding matters. I am very confident that if MU wins out and wins the BET, they'll be a 2. But doing those two things is far from a sure thing. Given the potential of the top 5 in the Big East, it is downright difficult and maybe not even to be expected regardless of how we do these next few games.

If MU accomplishes that feat, they deserve a 2. And they will get it barring some strange results elsewhere.

To me, the secret scrimmage is the thing that ensures the 2 and maybe sneaks us into 1 overall. Wouldn't be surprised if we actually get a straight bye to the Final Four in an unprecedented but wholly justified move.

Big East Champ + BET Champ + Secret Scrimmage = Final Four

Thank you to Newsdreams for making dreams a newsworthy reality.

You're welcome

[Coleman]

I think it's important to remember the challenges the Selection Committee can have placing teams in the bracket while following certain guidelines, especially those that require separation of teams from the same conference so they don't meet too early. That can be one reason why there isn't too much movement based on conference tournament results.

This year there are going to be challenges created by having 4 or 5 Big 12 teams and 4 Big East in the top 4-5 seed lines. It is inevitable that teams will not be placed precisely as they would if the seed list established by the Committee were followed strictly in an S curve. In some cases a team might be placed in a different seed line.

Because of that, I don't think it's worth devoting too much energy to movements of one or two places on the seed list. The competitive advantage between being number 8 or number 9 on the seed list is insignificant.

This is a good point. The most important thing is avoiding a 4 seed. You want to go as far as possible without having to play a 1. 2 and 3 are a bit interchangeable

[StillAWarrior]

The most important thing is avoiding a 4 seed. You want to go as far as possible without having to play a 1. 2 and 3 are a bit interchangeable

I agree with this. It's definitely important to get up to the three line, but beyond that, the difference is minimal. I'd love for MU to be a two-seed because that would mean that they finished strong and garnered a lot of respect. But in the grand scheme of things, as long as the reach the three line, it's great.

[mug644]

Except the statistics that MUCam gave just above indicate that there is a valuable difference between 3 and 2. That is, getting a 2 seed rather a 3 seed increases notably the probability of getting to the Elite 8 and the Final Four.

[StillAWarrior]

Except the statistics that MUCam gave just above indicate that there is a valuable difference between 3 and 2. That is, getting a 2 seed rather a 3 seed increases notably the probability of getting to the Elite 8 and the Final Four.

But, those statistics are comparing teams to each other. Overall, teams that get seeded No. 2 are by definition going to be better than teams that get seeded No. 3. So, it's not terribly surprising that twos fare better overall than threes. But we're talking here about the same team -- Marquette's 2022-2023 team. I do not believe the statistics cited by MUCam indicate that the 2022-23 MU team will have a better chance progressing in the tournament as a two-seed than a three-seed.

[The Sultan]

Fundamentally I don't think there is much difference between a two or three seed.  Your first round opponent is going to be a mid-major conference champion that could give you issues depending on your style of play.  Your second round opponent is likely going to be a P6 at large that can definitely beat you if you don't bring your A-game.

[brewcity77]

Planning to dig in later today, but I feel like Alabama, Purdue, Kansas, Houston, Arizona, Baylor, and Texas are pretty well cemented ahead of us. Would take notable collapses to get past them. UCLA is the one I think might be vulnerable to fall, but they have a huge metric edge. Our win column looks a lot better, but maybe if they split the mountain trip and lose to Arizona in the finale, maybe we can sneak past them. At this point, I think top of the 3 line is a lot more likely than making it to the 2, and might even be preferential because it could get us a better regional destination.

[wisblue]

I guess that depends on what you define as significant. I haven't seen odds based on S rank, but the probability of success getting to the Elite 8 is 45% for a 2 and 25% for a 3. For a final four, it is 20% to 11%. I'd say those are pretty significant.

How much of that is based on the seed and how much is based on the quality difference of teams on the two seed lines is beyond the scope of any study of which I am aware.

Seeding matters. I am very confident that if MU wins out and wins the BET, they'll be a 2. But doing those two things is far from a sure thing. Given the potential of the top 5 in the Big East, it is downright difficult and maybe not even to be expected regardless of how we do these next few games.

If MU accomplishes that feat, they deserve a 2. And they will get it barring some strange results elsewhere.

To me, the secret scrimmage is the thing that ensures the 2 and maybe sneaks us into 1 overall. Wouldn't be surprised if we actually get a straight bye to the Final Four in an unprecedented but wholly justified move.

Big East Champ + BET Champ + Secret Scrimmage = Final Four

Thank you to Newsdreams for making dreams a newsworthy reality.

I doubt if it has ever been broken down that far, in part because I don't think the Committee has released the seed list until the last few years. And because of conference issues, number 8 on the seed list isn't always bracketed with number 1 on the seed list.

But, the numbers you gave help to illustrate what I'm saying. It should be apparent that, in a perfect S curve, the number 9 team doesn't have its chances of reaching the Elite 8 suddenly jump by 20 percentage points just by moving up to number 8 on the seed list. On the other hand, team 5 on the seed list should have a significantly better chance of reaching the Elite 8 than team 12 because if the seed list is done well that team might be significantly better.

As of today, I'm guessing that MU is around 10 on the seed list based on its recent victories and losses by other teams. Whatever their chances of advancing to the Sweet 16 or Elite 8 are, I don't think they will change significantly if they can nose up to number 8. In that narrow range, specific matchups are more important than seeding.

I agree with others that getting a 3 seed is much better than getting a 4, but Ii think the marginal difference between the last 2 and the first 3 isn't that great.

Said another way, I think that the higher seeds advance further in the tournament primarily because they are better teams, not because they have been given better seeds.

[The Sultan]

I doubt if it has ever been broken down that far, in part because I don't think the Committee has released the seed list until the last few years. And because of conference issues, number 8 on the seed list isn't always bracketed with number 1 on the seed list.

But, the numbers you gave help to illustrate what I'm saying. It should be apparent that, in a perfect S curve, the number 9 team doesn't have its chances of reaching the Elite 8 suddenly jump by 20 percentage points just by moving up to number 8 on the seed list. On the other hand, team 5 on the seed list should have a significantly better chance of reaching the Elite 8 than team 12 because if the seed list is done well that team might be significantly better.

As of today, I'm guessing that MU is around 10 on the seed list based on its recent victories and losses by other teams. Whatever their chances of advancing to the Sweet 16 or Elite 8 are, I don't think they will change significantly if they can nose up to number 8. In that narrow range, specific matchups are more important than seeding.

I agree with others that getting a 3 seed is mush better than getting a 4, but i think the marginal difference between the last 2 and the first 3 isn't that great.

Said another way, I think that the higher seeds advance further in the tournament primarily because they are better teams, not because they have been given better seeds.

Exactly. Agree on all points.

[Dr. Blackheart]

To note, a 2 seed, although unlikely, would be MU's highest seed since the (current) seeding process began in 1979. And currently as #11 in Pomeroy, this is Shaka's best statistical team ever driven by the offense.

[DoctorV]

Planning to dig in later today, but I feel like Alabama, Purdue, Kansas, Houston, Arizona, Baylor, and Texas are pretty well cemented ahead of us. Would take notable collapses to get past them. UCLA is the one I think might be vulnerable to fall, but they have a huge metric edge. Our win column looks a lot better, but maybe if they split the mountain trip and lose to Arizona in the finale, maybe we can sneak past them. At this point, I think top of the 3 line is a lot more likely than making it to the 2, and might even be preferential because it could get us a better regional destination.

So top of the 3 line would likely be Columbus.

Getting to the 2 could see Marquette head where?

[brewcity77]

So top of the 3 line would likely be Columbus.

Getting to the 2 could see Marquette head where?

That will be the subject of my next bracketology piece. Give me 24 hours or so

[DoctorV]

Haha they must call that a teaser in the biz

[Elonsmusk]

Planning to dig in later today, but I feel like Alabama, Purdue, Kansas, Houston, Arizona, Baylor, and Texas are pretty well cemented ahead of us. Would take notable collapses to get past them. UCLA is the one I think might be vulnerable to fall, but they have a huge metric edge. Our win column looks a lot better, but maybe if they split the mountain trip and lose to Arizona in the finale, maybe we can sneak past them. At this point, I think top of the 3 line is a lot more likely than making it to the 2, and might even be preferential because it could get us a better regional destination.

Curious about Baylor being cemented ahead of us.  Currently 3rd place in the Big 12.  It would seem to me that if we win out regular season schedule and finish 25-6 and 17-3 in BE play, that should trump Baylor finishing 22-9 and 11-7 in Big12 play as projected by Ken Pom.  And of course our head to head win against them.

[goldeneagle91114]

That will be the subject of my next bracketology piece. Give me 24 hours or so

Please tell me there's a chance they end up in Des Moines!

[StillAWarrior]

I doubt if it has ever been broken down that far, in part because I don't think the Committee has released the seed list until the last few years. And because of conference issues, number 8 on the seed list isn't always bracketed with number 1 on the seed list.

But, the numbers you gave help to illustrate what I'm saying. It should be apparent that, in a perfect S curve, the number 9 team doesn't have its chances of reaching the Elite 8 suddenly jump by 20 percentage points just by moving up to number 8 on the seed list. On the other hand, team 5 on the seed list should have a significantly better chance of reaching the Elite 8 than team 12 because if the seed list is done well that team might be significantly better.

As of today, I'm guessing that MU is around 10 on the seed list based on its recent victories and losses by other teams. Whatever their chances of advancing to the Sweet 16 or Elite 8 are, I don't think they will change significantly if they can nose up to number 8. In that narrow range, specific matchups are more important than seeding.

I agree with others that getting a 3 seed is mush better than getting a 4, but i think the marginal difference between the last 2 and the first 3 isn't that great.

Said another way, I think that the higher seeds advance further in the tournament primarily because they are better teams, not because they have been given better seeds.

Precisely the point I was trying to make, but said much better.

[Coleman]

Except the statistics that MUCam gave just above indicate that there is a valuable difference between 3 and 2. That is, getting a 2 seed rather a 3 seed increases notably the probability of getting to the Elite 8 and the Final Four.

Correlation or causation? I'd say its just more likely that the better teams have a better chance of getting seeded higher and also a better chance of going farther. Not because they are seeded higher.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

It's mostly because 2 seeds are better than 3 seeds...but 13 seeds are also better than 14 seeds and 6 seeds are better than 7 seeds. Seeding does play a small role.

[cheebs09]

Please tell me there's a chance they end up in Des Moines!

I would think we'd need to jump both Kansas and Kansas State. Kansas State would be possible, but I still think fairly unlikely. I think Iowa State is behind us.

I wonder if we'd prefer Columbus anyways by being further East.

[Galway Eagle]

As a three seed we've barely scraped by Davidson (13) and Holy Cross (03)  with a comfortable win over BYU (12)  and As a four seed we got shat on by Austin Croshere (97)

Based on these previous experiences I'd be much much happier with us doing everything in our power to get up to a 2 but most importantly we get the hell away from being a 4.

[Uncle Rico]

As a three seed we've barely scraped by Davidson (13) and Holy Cross (03)  with a comfortable win over BYU (12)  and As a four seed we got shat on by Austin Croshere (97)

Based on these previous experiences I'd be much much happier with us doing everything in our power to get up to a 2 but most importantly we get the hell away from being a 4.

They were a 7-seed in '97

Losses as 5-seed to Alabama, Murray State and Tulsa

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Please tell me there's a chance they end up in Des Moines!

I think it will be tough. I think Kansas, Kansas State, Texas, and Baylor will all be in line for that placement. Bama and Houston will fill up Birmingham and Des Moines is the closest second option to Texas and Kansas.

I think Columbus is a good bet. Albany ad the backup

[swoopem]

So top of the 3 line would likely be Columbus.

Getting to the 2 could see Marquette head where?

I'd much rather but a 3 in Columbus than a 2 anywhere else. Columbus will be a sea of gold!!!