Bracketmatrix 2021-22

#903
#903
I'm no Lunardi defender, but he's not the only one that has Wisconsin as a 2 still. Bracketville for instance has been 1 of the best in bracketology over the past 5 years, and he still has Wisconsin as a 2 this morning. They do have 2 Q3 losses which are big time eye sores, but they're also 8-3 against Q1. On the other hand, their quality metrics remain bad. So how will the committee judge them on Sunday? They had them at 13th overall on Feb 19. Since then, they've won 4 of 5, including games against Purdue, Michigan, and @Rutgers. If Michigan and Rutgers each go up 1 spot in the NET, they will acquire 2 more Q1 wins.

All I'm saying is, we're splitting hairs here, and it's not preposterous to have Wisconsin above us, though I would argue what we've done since the committee's reveal is just as good as what they've done, minus the embarrassing home loss to a bad team. I think I would have us around 9th or 10th overall with Wisconsin just behind us.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong, chuckiepoo and Sudden Impact
#905
#905
wtmvol said:
I'm no Lunardi defender, but he's not the only one that has Wisconsin as a 2 still. Bracketville for instance has been 1 of the best in bracketology over the past 5 years, and he still has Wisconsin as a 2 this morning. They do have 2 Q3 losses which are big time eye sores, but they're also 8-3 against Q1. On the other hand, their quality metrics remain bad. So how will the committee judge them on Sunday? They had them at 13th overall on Feb 19. Since then, they've won 4 of 5, including games against Purdue, Michigan, and @Rutgers. If Michigan and Rutgers each go up 1 spot in the NET, they will acquire 2 more Q1 wins.

All I'm saying is, we're splitting hairs here, and it's not preposterous to have Wisconsin above us, though I would argue what we've done since the committee's reveal is just as good as what they've done, minus the embarrassing home loss to a bad team. I think I would have us around 9th or 10th overall with Wisconsin just behind us.
Click to expand...
The totality of the résumés leans toward Tennessee, though. Wisconsin has lost twice at home to a bubble team in Rutgers and a terrible Nebraska team. The Nebraska loss is even worse than it seems on the surface because they played without their best player, Bryce McGowens, who averages 17.2 ppg.

Tennessee has lost 1 more game, but every loss has been on the road and to a team that will make the NCAAT.
 
  • Like
Reactions: wtmvol
#907
#907
cncchris33 said:
The totality of the résumés leans toward Tennessee, though. Wisconsin has lost twice at home to a bubble team in Rutgers and a terrible Nebraska team. The Nebraska loss is even worse than it seems on the surface because they played without their best player, Bryce McGowens, who averages 17.2 ppg.

Tennessee has lost 1 more game, but every loss has been on the road and to a team that will make the NCAAT.
Click to expand...
all we have to go by is what the committee revealed on Feb 19 and what’s happened since then. I would agree that knowing the committee considered us better than them on Feb 19 that it’s hard to justify them jumping us since then. Our best wins are better than theirs and our loss is WAY better than their loss.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong, chuckiepoo, cncchris33 and 1 other person
#908
#908
wtmvol said:
I'm no Lunardi defender, but he's not the only one that has Wisconsin as a 2 still. Bracketville for instance has been 1 of the best in bracketology over the past 5 years, and he still has Wisconsin as a 2 this morning. They do have 2 Q3 losses which are big time eye sores, but they're also 8-3 against Q1. On the other hand, their quality metrics remain bad. So how will the committee judge them on Sunday? They had them at 13th overall on Feb 19. Since then, they've won 4 of 5, including games against Purdue, Michigan, and @Rutgers. If Michigan and Rutgers each go up 1 spot in the NET, they will acquire 2 more Q1 wins.

All I'm saying is, we're splitting hairs here, and it's not preposterous to have Wisconsin above us, though I would argue what we've done since the committee's reveal is just as good as what they've done, minus the embarrassing home loss to a bad team. I think I would have us around 9th or 10th overall with Wisconsin just behind us.
Click to expand...
Hes the only one ranked in the top 30 with an updated bracket that has Wisconsin as a 2. He’s been sliding down the rankings in recent years. Maybe legacy thinking now that the committee is leveraging advanced metrics
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong, chuckiepoo and wtmvol
#912
#912
golfballs said:
An average of the teamsheet rankings. Wisconsin 15th. Would be quite the leap to a 2 seed
View attachment 437675
Click to expand...
Is it a fair statement that if ky, auburn, and UT all make the semi’s and play decent, that the one of those that wins the SEC tourney (assuming one does) then they will be a 1 seed and the other 2 will be 2 seeds?
 
  • Like
Reactions: chuckiepoo
#913
#913
walkenvol said:
Is it a fair statement that if ky, auburn, and UT all make the semi’s and play decent, that the one of those that wins the SEC tourney (assuming one does) then they will be a 1 seed and the other 2 will be 2 seeds?
Click to expand...
I’m not sure we’d be a 2 just by making the semis. That would just mean a win over USC/Miss St while others competing for the 2 could have much better wins in their conference tourney. If Auburn or UK win, I think they’re definitely a 1 seed. The other is a 2. And Tennessee needs at least a championship appearance to get a 2 IMO.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Lankykong, Willy14, chuckiepoo and 3 others
#917
#917
Any chance we play in the Indianapolis region for the first weekend? I’m in the middle Tennessee area and the drive to Indy would be very enticing…
 
#918
#918
Reckoner84 said:
Any chance we play in the Indianapolis region for the first weekend? I’m in the middle Tennessee area and the drive to Indy would be very enticing…
Click to expand...
Technically yes, if the committee sticks to the seed line priority… if we finish over under Duke/Auburn but above Purdue or Kentucky then Indy is closer than Pittsburgh so we’d go there.
 
Last edited:
#919
#919
I understand Wisconsin lost to a bad team on their home floor. I still think we should be above them but their resume is pretty good so I guess I can fathom them being ahead of us (kinda) but in absolutely no way can you put Purdue ahead of us right now. There’s no possible way to explain that. Our NET, KPI, SOR, BPI, and KenPom is higher than Purdue’s. The only metric they are higher than us in is Sagarin. We have more Q1 wins, less losses in Q2-Q4 range, and have a better road record. There’s absolutely no way Purdue can be ahead of us right now. There’s zero explanation. But yet, Lunardi has them ahead. I have never put a lot of weight on his judgements but I’m starting to lose all respect for his projections.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#920
#920
BallerVolFan said:
Before Saturday, I thought both teams had every right of being ahead of us. But now, there’s no possible way you can keep us behind them. At the worst, we should be the 10 overall seed. I think we’re more deserving of the 9th spot tho ahead of Purdue, Texas Tech, and Wisconsin.
Click to expand...
Just playing Nebraska would’ve dropped UW in most metrics. Losing to them should be at least as punitive as the mileage they got out of beating Purdue. It won’t be but it should.
 
#921
#921
golfballs said:
I’m not sure we’d be a 2 just by making the semis. That would just mean a win over USC/Miss St while others competing for the 2 could have much better wins in their conference tourney. If Auburn or UK win, I think they’re definitely a 1 seed. The other is a 2. And Tennessee needs at least a championship appearance to get a 2 IMO.
Click to expand...
We very well may end up playing UK for a 2 seed. Winner gets a 2, loser a 3.
 
#923
#923
hUTch2002 said:
Just playing Nebraska would’ve dropped UW in most metrics. Losing to them should be at least as punitive as the mileage they got out of beating Purdue. It won’t be but it should.
Click to expand...
Based on the projections I’ve seen so far, they’re valuing the win over Purdue more than the loss against Nebraska. Doesn’t make a lot of sense because we win big games without any bad losses and they refuse to move us very far. Most jumped Wisconsin almost a whole seed line with the win over Purdue but then dropped them 1-2 spots with a terrible loss?! Beats me. But who really knows... they are “bracketologists” not the committee and the committee seems to favor us a little more than the rest.
 
  • Like
Reactions: hUTch2002
#924
#924
walkenvol said:
Then the winner might play Auburn for a one 1/2 seed winner/loser.
Click to expand...
I’ve already ruled out the 1 seed. That’s not gonna happen. Even if we win the SEC tourney. I’m not saying I don’t think it should happen if we win out... we would just have to jump Auburn, UK, Duke, and either Kansas or Arizona. The committee just isn’t going to do that.
 
#925
#925
golfballs said:
Don’t love the 6 seeds here except for Ohio St
Click to expand...

In just a numbers sense I like Texas as a 6.

Their adjusted O is 33rd and D is 12th. They have played 20 Q 1&2 games winning 10…..and they have 2 really good wins in Tennessee and Kansas. They are 17th in the net and have the 11th rated SOS.

while not a ton stands out……it’s pretty solid for around the 24 spot.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top