We could’ve won this tournament

[5DollarPitcher]

They were outside on both when the tournament started. #31 offense, #36 defense. They weren't a contender when this tournament started.

So they've played like one of the best teams in the country over the last 4 games such that their full season metrics now identify them as a national championship contender? Doesn't seem very crapshooty to me.

[Vander Blue Man Group]

Factually correct. KenPom stats were able to narrow this field to like 7-10 teams before the first game was even played.

Two of them are in the Final Four and two others are playing for a spot today.

Just saying "incorrect" is not sufficient to support your emotional opinion.

You said the champ, Final 4, and even the Elite 8 are easily predictable.  My response saying that is incorrect is not based on emotion.  It's based on logic. 

Your argument in regards to where a group of teams rank in offensive and defensive efficiency is not remotely the same as saying the champ, Final 4, and Elite 8 are easily predictable.  Saying the final 4 is likely to come from this group of teams that rated top XX in offensive and defensive efficiency is not the same thing as actually predicting the specific teams. 

If they were easily predictable, a lot more experts and even non-experts would get them right year after year yet that never happens.  Weird. 

[MU82]

I think too many people are underestimating how good a setup we had this year to make a good run at a championship. The chances we have a better season than this one are slim.

We'll see.

We could go 14-6 and finish 3rd in the Big East, lose in the second round of the BET, and then reach the Final Four. Would that be "better" or "worse"?

Based on what we know today -- that all of our key players will return -- I believe we'll have a very good 2023-24 season. I see no reason why any Marquette fan would believe otherwise.

[lawdog77]

So they've played like one of the best teams in the country over the last 4 games such that their full season metrics now identify them as a national championship contender? Doesn't seem very crapshooty to me.

They played a 16 seed in game 2, correct?

[Uncle Rico]

You said the champ, Final 4, and even the Elite 8 are easily predictable.  My response saying that is incorrect is not based on emotion.  It's based on logic. 

Your argument in regards to where a group of teams rank in offensive and defensive efficiency is not remotely the same as saying the champ, Final 4, and Elite 8 are easily predictable.  Saying the final 4 is likely to come from this group of teams that rated top XX in offensive and defensive efficiency is not the same thing as actually predicting the specific teams. 

If they were easily predictable, a lot more experts and even non-experts would get them right year after year yet that never happens.  Weird.

Yup.  Crapshoot

[5DollarPitcher]

You said the champ, Final 4, and even the Elite 8 are easily predictable.  My response saying that is incorrect is not based on emotion.  It's based on logic. 

Your argument in regards to where a group of teams rank in offensive and defensive efficiency is not remotely the same as saying the champ, Final 4, and Elite 8 are easily predictable.  Saying the final 4 is likely to come from this group of teams that rated top XX in offensive and defensive efficiency is not the same thing as actually predicting the specific teams. 

If they were easily predictable, a lot more experts and even non-experts would get them right year after year yet that never happens.  Weird.

I don't see how not predicting each and every game or predicting the EXACT Elite Eight, Sweet Sixteen, etc as if you were a fortune teller means the tournament, on the whole, is a crapshoot.

If your point is that the rankings / order of Kenpom, TRank, name your stats website, is the definitive ranking / order of "best" teams and any deviation from this makes it a crapshoot then I think the fundamental misunderstanding is the meaning of the word crapshoot.  Everything is a crapshoot then and you might as well hang banners based on stats.

[5DollarPitcher]

They played a 16 seed in game 2, correct?

KenPom's AdjO and AdjD stats take into account quality of opponent. Thanks.

[forgetful]

It is fully random what shows up on the dice when you throw them. There are more combinations of faces that can make a 7 but the faces that come up are fully random.

Which is why you can bet on things like a hard or soft number.

The NCAA tournament is not a crapshoot.

Well, now regardless of what I thought before, you have convinced me that it is indeed a crapshoot, by your definition.

Because, even if statistically it may be more likely for certain higher seeds to win, there are way more combinations (think scores, turnovers, shooting percentage, fouls called) by which they can win (especially in relation to the numbers in actual craps), so the way in which they win is completely random.

So, definitely a crapshoot.

[WolfganghisKhan]

We'll see.

We could go 14-6 and finish 3rd in the Big East, lose in the second round of the BET, and then reach the Final Four. Would that be "better" or "worse"?

Based on what we know today -- that all of our key players will return -- I believe we'll have a very good 2023-24 season. I see no reason why any Marquette fan would believe otherwise.

I hope so too MU

[Uncle Rico]

Well, now regardless of what I thought before, you have convinced me that it is indeed a crapshoot, by your definition.

Because, even if statistically it may be more likely for certain higher seeds to win, there are way more combinations by which they can win (especially in relation to the numbers in actual craps), so the way in which they win is completely random.

So, definitely a crapshoot.

It's been great to watch 😂

[lawdog77]

KenPom's AdjO and AdjD stats take into account quality of opponent. Thanks.

You're welcome? My point is that FAU did not have to play the #1 seed. 9 times out of 10 they lose that game

[brewcity77]

So they've played like one of the best teams in the country over the last 4 games such that their full season metrics now identify them as a national championship contender? Doesn't seem very crapshooty to me.

Umm...you really don't get how this works, do you?

First, using tournament data to prove your point fails because the crapshoot aspect is based on where things stand when the tourney starts, not where it ends.

Second, if you sort Torvik starting the day after Selection Sunday, FAU ranks 27th overall. That's only third best in C-USA behind North Texas & UAB. Despite going 4-0, they are barely ahead of #29 Marquette who went 1-1.

Third, FAU is at #29 on offense & #52 on defense. Which means during their tourney run they are even further from being a contender by your own criteria than they were coming in. They were #33 & #35 per Torvik through Selection Sunday. So minimal offensive improvement & their defense has been worse.

The more you debate, the weaker your argument gets.

[panda]

You're welcome? My point is that FAU did not have to play the #1 seed. 9 times out of 10 they lose that game

How do you factor in Purdue being hot garbage into that equation ?

[Vander Blue Man Group]

I don't see how not predicting each and every game or predicting the EXACT Elite Eight, Sweet Sixteen, etc as if you were a fortune teller means the tournament, on the whole, is a crapshoot.

If your point is that the rankings / order of Kenpom, TRank, name your stats website, is the definitive ranking / order of "best" teams and any deviation from this makes it a crapshoot then I think the fundamental misunderstanding is the meaning of the word crapshoot.  Everything is a crapshoot then and you might as well hang banners based on stats.

A variety of metrics give us indicators throughout the season about the quality, strengths, and weaknesses of the teams in the tournament.  On the whole, it makes sense that a higher percentage of the teams that rank a certain way will make the elite 8, final 4 and championship game.  Yet more often than not their are multiple unexpected outcomes throughout the 63 games of the tourney, and I'm not talking about a 10 beating a 7.  And sometimes those unexpected outcomes throw things further into flux. 

Take the 2002 Indiana Hoosiers, for example.  I hate IU because I never liked Bobby Knight but more because I have a couple of close friends that are delusional and believe IU is still a blue blood even though all objective indicators tell them otherwise.  IU made the Final 4 in 2002 as a 5 seed.  They beat one single digit seed to get there.  Otherwise they beat a 12, a 13, and 10.  Beating 3 double digit seeds to get to a final 4 is an indicator of the randomness of the tourney as whole.  IE a crapshoot.  Do they Hoosiers make it that far if they faced chalk?  The chances are much, much lower that would have been the case. There are all sorts of examples like this. 

[5DollarPitcher]

You're welcome? My point is that FAU did not have to play the #1 seed. 9 times out of 10 they lose that game

9 times out of 10 FAU would lose to Purdue?

I would take that bet if I could.

[lawdog77]

How do you factor in Purdue being hot garbage into that equation ?

They just won the big 10 tourney, 

[5DollarPitcher]

Umm...you really don't get how this works, do you?

First, using tournament data to prove your point fails because the crapshoot aspect is based on where things stand when the tourney starts, not where it ends.

Second, if you sort Torvik starting the day after Selection Sunday, FAU ranks 27th overall. That's only third best in C-USA behind North Texas & UAB. Despite going 4-0, they are barely ahead of #29 Marquette who went 1-1.

Third, FAU is at #29 on offense & #52 on defense. Which means during their tourney run they are even further from being a contender by your own criteria than they were coming in. They were #33 & #35 per Torvik through Selection Sunday. So minimal offensive improvement & their defense has been worse.

The more you debate, the weaker your argument gets.

So how did they come into the tournament 36th in AdjD per your own stat, since then they are 52nd per the stat you just gave me, but their current AdjD on KenPom's website is 29th?

[ATL MU Warrior]

Do you guys even realize there is a pretty competitive game happening right now?

[Uncle Rico]

Do you guys even realize there is a pretty competitive game happening right now?

I like blowouts, like this argument

[brewcity77]

So how did they come into the tournament 36th in AdjD per your own stat, since then they are 52nd per the stat you just gave me, but their current AdjD on KenPom's website is 29th?

Once you figure out Pomeroy's algorithm, you can tell us, but the simple reality is at no point have they been playing at a national title contender level by your definition. Not before the tourney and not during the tourney.

[5DollarPitcher]

Once you figure out Pomeroy's algorithm, you can tell us, but the simple reality is at no point have they been playing at a national title contender level by your definition. Not before the tourney and not during the tourney.

It's a mathematical impossibility.

[PointWarrior]

Damn, I was just preparing the "we had 4 wins against the final 4 teams" banners for  all of you. 

[tower912]

While true, moot.  MSU played better on that day.   They deserved the win.

[Herman Cain]

Does the title of national champion also mean "best team in the country"?

I think an analogy is the winner of The British Open ( now called The Open Championship)

At the award ceremony , when they give The Claret Jug to " The Champion Golfer of The Year "

[brewcity77]

Y'all are insane with this takes. Feel like a coping mechanism more than anything.

If Marquette goes to the Elite 8 next year, and finished say, third in conference this season will be a blip on the radar.

If the question is "would you rather have Marquette's season or Creighton's?" this year, the answer is obviously Marquette's and for me it's not close. Not remotely close.