Bear Down Wildcats

I want a 1 because there is a pretty significant power gap from my observation from the 3 line to the 4 line, and no indication that they snake the seeds that low, so as a 2 you could get the best 3 due to region setting, whereas a 1 will get a 4, and even the best 4 is a number of seeds below the worst 1. That 2/3 vs 1/4 matchup is one of the biggest bonuses in the tournament for a #1 seed...if chalk holds, your sweet 16 game is against a 13 to 16 overall seed rather than a 9 to 12 seed as a lower seed yourself. The 2/3 games begin the virtual coin flip portion of the tournament for a #2 seed, where the #1 seed gets a tough, but clearly underdog team in that Sweet 16 matchup.

So 1 vs 2 is a pretty noticible difference come the 2nd weekend. But I'd still rather have a 2 in a decently close region than a 1 in Syracuse. I figure, as it stands now, the Midwest Region, being in Cleveland, is a Kentucky lock. The East in Syracuse is likely a Virginia lock, because the South is nowhere near the South that Virginia considers home. The South is Houston. The West is LA. A #1 seed in the West would be best, but right now, Gonzaga has that locked up and doesn't look too vulnerable...they play junk here on out, and their OOC was good enough to hold the 1. So a #2 seed in the West would be like a #1 in that we would have Gonzaga as our 1, and we can easily flip those, but the 2/3 vs 1/4 is still just one more game of "coin flip play" in a one-and-done tournament, and would be best to be avoided. The way to avoid that without getting shipped to the middle of nowhere is the #1 in the South. Our first two rounds would be in a west pod, so it would just be one weekend, and Houston isn't unreasonable for our fans or a horrible travel from Tucson. I'd take the #1 there, and the 1/4 Sweet 16 assumed matchup over the #2 in the West and a #3 on the 2nd weekend opener. I'd take the #2 in the West over travel to Ohio or Syracuse, tho.

So my personal wishlist in order of want:

#1 in West
#1 in South
#2 in West
#1 elsewhere
The Rest of the Potential List Sucks

That means we are fighting Wisconsin, Villanova (sorta), Duke, Kansas, and Louisville for that 4th #1. The South appears wide open, and would be a reasonable place to play 2 games to get the seed bump.

According to an ESPN graphic I saw at lunch, 8 teams have made it to 20-0 over the past 10 or so years. Not 1 of those teams got to the Final Four

Jefe wrote:According to an ESPN graphic I saw at lunch, 8 teams have made it to 20-0 over the past 10 or so years. Not 1 of those teams got to the Final Four

Anyone have the stones to pick UK to lose before the FF?

Beachcat97 wrote:

Jefe wrote:According to an ESPN graphic I saw at lunch, 8 teams have made it to 20-0 over the past 10 or so years. Not 1 of those teams got to the Final Four

Anyone have the stones to pick UK to lose before the FF?

I do.

Not saying they will lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Jefe wrote:According to an ESPN graphic I saw at lunch, 8 teams have made it to 20-0 over the past 10 or so years. Not 1 of those teams got to the Final Four

Anyone have the stones to pick UK to lose before the FF?

They've already almost lost a few games to teams far worse than they will see in the S16/E8.

CalStateTempe wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:

Jefe wrote:According to an ESPN graphic I saw at lunch, 8 teams have made it to 20-0 over the past 10 or so years. Not 1 of those teams got to the Final Four

Anyone have the stones to pick UK to lose before the FF?

I do.

Not saying they will lose, but I wouldn't be surprised if they did.

So...you don't have the stones then.

If you have the stones, then say they will lose, none of this "...I wouldn't be surprised..." stuff

UK is getting to the FF. Let's not get crazy. But in the FF, depending on who else is there, they could be beaten. I'd like any of these teams' chances: UVA, VCU, Wisconsin, or Arizona. UK is as heavy a favorite as we've seen in recent years, and deservedly so. Can they play loose and composed with the season on the line? Can they withstand a hot-shooting night from a Cinderella? Or conversely, can they survive a cold-shooting night from their key guys (Booker, Harrison, Johnson)?

Since these "heavy favorites" almost always fall short of the goal, I'll go on record and say I don't think UK will win the NC. I do, however, think they'll get to the FF.

A compilation of all of the bracket predictors has us as a 2 seed at the moment.

http://www.bracketmatrix.com/

Jeebus. You're right, Chi.

What the hell is wrong with the RPI formula for it to rank 17-3 KU over 20-0 UK after UK beat them by 35? This one's a real head-scratcher. Taking SOS a tad too far, I guess?

Puerco wrote:Jeebus. You're right, Chi.

What the hell is wrong with the RPI formula for it to rank 17-3 KU over 20-0 UK after UK beat them by 35? This one's a real head-scratcher. Taking SOS a tad too far, I guess?

Just ask enfuego. It's all about quality losses.

The statistic to watch is whether Kentucky slides out of the top 20 on AdjO. That would represent vulnerability for sure, but only at the Final Four stage.

EVCat wrote:I want a 1 because there is a pretty significant power gap from my observation from the 3 line to the 4 line, and no indication that they snake the seeds that low, so as a 2 you could get the best 3 due to region setting, whereas a 1 will get a 4, and even the best 4 is a number of seeds below the worst 1. That 2/3 vs 1/4 matchup is one of the biggest bonuses in the tournament for a #1 seed...if chalk holds, your sweet 16 game is against a 13 to 16 overall seed rather than a 9 to 12 seed as a lower seed yourself. The 2/3 games begin the virtual coin flip portion of the tournament for a #2 seed, where the #1 seed gets a tough, but clearly underdog team in that Sweet 16 matchup.

So 1 vs 2 is a pretty noticible difference come the 2nd weekend. But I'd still rather have a 2 in a decently close region than a 1 in Syracuse. I figure, as it stands now, the Midwest Region, being in Cleveland, is a Kentucky lock. The East in Syracuse is likely a Virginia lock, because the South is nowhere near the South that Virginia considers home. The South is Houston. The West is LA. A #1 seed in the West would be best, but right now, Gonzaga has that locked up and doesn't look too vulnerable...they play junk here on out, and their OOC was good enough to hold the 1. So a #2 seed in the West would be like a #1 in that we would have Gonzaga as our 1, and we can easily flip those, but the 2/3 vs 1/4 is still just one more game of "coin flip play" in a one-and-done tournament, and would be best to be avoided. The way to avoid that without getting shipped to the middle of nowhere is the #1 in the South. Our first two rounds would be in a west pod, so it would just be one weekend, and Houston isn't unreasonable for our fans or a horrible travel from Tucson. I'd take the #1 there, and the 1/4 Sweet 16 assumed matchup over the #2 in the West and a #3 on the 2nd weekend opener. I'd take the #2 in the West over travel to Ohio or Syracuse, tho.

So my personal wishlist in order of want:

#1 in West
#1 in South
#2 in West
#1 elsewhere
The Rest of the Potential List Sucks

That means we are fighting Wisconsin, Villanova (sorta), Duke, Kansas, and Louisville for that 4th #1. The South appears wide open, and would be a reasonable place to play 2 games to get the seed bump.

Just noticed this. Pomeroy would disagree with you:

The worst mistake the basketball committee can make is to leave a deserving team out of the field. Once a team makes it in, seeding mistakes matter most in the bottom half of the bracket. If a Cinderella hopes to make the Sweet 16, it needs to be matched up against teams it can beat. But fans of Duke, Indiana, and Gonzaga, whose objective is to win it all, shouldn’t care about the little number next to their team in the bracket. The debate over who should be No. 1 is a fun intellectual exercise, but when it comes to cutting down the nets in April, it hardly matters at all.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sp ... where.html

He lost me at Indiana's objective is to win it all.

That program is dog doo.

Indiana's objective is to stay out of the NIT right now.

Katzenfreund wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:He lost me at Indiana's objective is to win it all.

That program is dog doo.

That article had been written two years ago. I hope you read your patients' medical records more thoroughly.

nice...cause I didn' even read the article, just the quote.

Beachcat97 wrote:Duke may continue to drop some games in the next few weeks, but when the chips are on the table, they've got the best player in the country. And he's a dominant big man. If Duke is hitting their threes and defending well, they'll be a very tough out in the tourney.

Soft.

USA Today has us as a 1 seed in the South and UCLA amongst the First Four Out . . . which must mean that someone has been taking crazy pills...

http://q.usatoday.com/2015/02/02/ncaa-t ... ce-bubble/

I love this time of year, where every braketologist is full of fail.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Beating Virginia is apparently amazing enough to knock us from a 1 seed. Because winning every game just isn't important.

Olsondogg wrote:I love this time of year, where every braketologist is full of fail.

Yup

I'd rather be a 2 seed in the west than a #1 somewhere else to be honest.

Having said that if both UofA and GU win out, and I'm including conference championships, I'd be shocked if we wouldn't grab that West #1 seed, right?

We need the 97Cats roadmap to the Final Four.

Well does the committee rank a 33-1 gonzaga higher than a 32-2 Arizona even though their only loss is to us, but we have two bad losses?

ASUHATER! wrote:Well does the committee rank a 33-1 gonzaga higher than a 32-2 Arizona even though their only loss is to us, but we have two bad losses?

They should IMO...and they have in the past.

2 years ago the argument was weather the Zags should be a 1 seed. Last year it was Wichita St.

ASUHATER! wrote:Well does the committee rank a 33-1 gonzaga higher than a 32-2 Arizona even though their only loss is to us, but we have two bad losses?

Keep going ... Gonzaga's best win would be No. 22 (at the time) SMU on Nov. 17.

Arizona would have victories over GU and two (possibly three) over Utah. Plus, SDSU could end up a better victory than the SMU one. Ditto, that roadie to UTEP.

Olsondogg wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:Well does the committee rank a 33-1 gonzaga higher than a 32-2 Arizona even though their only loss is to us, but we have two bad losses?

They should IMO...and they have in the past.

2 years ago the argument was weather the Zags should be a 1 seed. Last year it was Wichita St.

Not really.

Head to head and Az will have better numbers if that scenario plays out.

Irish27 wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology

If that West bracket came to pass, it wouldn't be a stretch to see Gonzaga gone in the 2nd round.

ASUHATER! wrote:Well does the committee rank a 33-1 gonzaga higher than a 32-2 Arizona even though their only loss is to us, but we have two bad losses?

In this scenario Arizona is higher on the S-Curve than Gonzaga. Could possibly give Gonzaga the 1 south in the scenario.

If Arizona loses another game or two before the tournament, which is a strong possibility then you could see Gonzaga get ahead of Arizona for better or worse.

This is a good page I've found:

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket ... rojections

TeamRankings also has Gonzaga an eventual 2 seed and Arizona a 1 even factoring the strong likelihood that Gonzaga finishes the season 33-1.

http://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basket ... rojections

Puerco wrote:

EVCat wrote:I want a 1 because there is a pretty significant power gap from my observation from the 3 line to the 4 line, and no indication that they snake the seeds that low, so as a 2 you could get the best 3 due to region setting, whereas a 1 will get a 4, and even the best 4 is a number of seeds below the worst 1. That 2/3 vs 1/4 matchup is one of the biggest bonuses in the tournament for a #1 seed...if chalk holds, your sweet 16 game is against a 13 to 16 overall seed rather than a 9 to 12 seed as a lower seed yourself. The 2/3 games begin the virtual coin flip portion of the tournament for a #2 seed, where the #1 seed gets a tough, but clearly underdog team in that Sweet 16 matchup.

So 1 vs 2 is a pretty noticible difference come the 2nd weekend. But I'd still rather have a 2 in a decently close region than a 1 in Syracuse. I figure, as it stands now, the Midwest Region, being in Cleveland, is a Kentucky lock. The East in Syracuse is likely a Virginia lock, because the South is nowhere near the South that Virginia considers home. The South is Houston. The West is LA. A #1 seed in the West would be best, but right now, Gonzaga has that locked up and doesn't look too vulnerable...they play junk here on out, and their OOC was good enough to hold the 1. So a #2 seed in the West would be like a #1 in that we would have Gonzaga as our 1, and we can easily flip those, but the 2/3 vs 1/4 is still just one more game of "coin flip play" in a one-and-done tournament, and would be best to be avoided. The way to avoid that without getting shipped to the middle of nowhere is the #1 in the South. Our first two rounds would be in a west pod, so it would just be one weekend, and Houston isn't unreasonable for our fans or a horrible travel from Tucson. I'd take the #1 there, and the 1/4 Sweet 16 assumed matchup over the #2 in the West and a #3 on the 2nd weekend opener. I'd take the #2 in the West over travel to Ohio or Syracuse, tho.

So my personal wishlist in order of want:

#1 in West
#1 in South
#2 in West
#1 elsewhere
The Rest of the Potential List Sucks

That means we are fighting Wisconsin, Villanova (sorta), Duke, Kansas, and Louisville for that 4th #1. The South appears wide open, and would be a reasonable place to play 2 games to get the seed bump.

Just noticed this. Pomeroy would disagree with you:

The worst mistake the basketball committee can make is to leave a deserving team out of the field. Once a team makes it in, seeding mistakes matter most in the bottom half of the bracket. If a Cinderella hopes to make the Sweet 16, it needs to be matched up against teams it can beat. But fans of Duke, Indiana, and Gonzaga, whose objective is to win it all, shouldn’t care about the little number next to their team in the bracket. The debate over who should be No. 1 is a fun intellectual exercise, but when it comes to cutting down the nets in April, it hardly matters at all.

http://www.slate.com/articles/sports/sp ... where.html

i guess I will disagree with him. Sure, chalk should hold, but the more games played against opponents with a realistic chance to beat you, the more chance you hve to be eliminated. It really isn't trackable, because it is based upon opinion of where the "can legitimately beat us" line stops from year to year. Of course, virtually every game is loseable, but the amount of suck factor required in the individual game (is that measured by RPI/Pomeroy?) to lose varies by opponent . We need a little suck factor to lose to Stanford on the road. We need a lot of suck factor to lose to ASU at home. The closer the plus/minus due to suck line is to the favorite, the more chance to lose. The total ability to suck is lesser against a 3 than a 4, and that generally holds true in my vast basketball suckology research...

If the Zags win out, they'll get a 1 seed.

Arizona's chances of surviving the rest of games until the dance unscathed is much less than the Zags.

Olsondogg wrote:If the Zags win out, they'll get a 1 seed.

But not in the West, if we win out.

gumby wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:If the Zags win out, they'll get a 1 seed.

But not in the West, if we win out.

Perhaps, but I don't see that happening. Odd for me to admit.

Olsondogg wrote:

gumby wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:If the Zags win out, they'll get a 1 seed.

But not in the West, if we win out.

Perhaps, but I don't see that happening. Odd for me to admit.

I do. I think the committee has shown in past years that Gonzaga's conference has been a hindrance to their seeding.

Chicat wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:

gumby wrote:

Olsondogg wrote:If the Zags win out, they'll get a 1 seed.

But not in the West, if we win out.

Perhaps, but I don't see that happening. Odd for me to admit.

I do. I think the committee has shown in past years that Gonzaga's conference has been a hindrance to their seeding.

I was referring to Arizona winning out. We lose in SLC...I can hear the whistles as I type...

Ahhh...

I actually think a loss at Utah and we'd still have a better resume than Gonzaga for 1 seed out west.

Chicat wrote:Ahhh...

I actually think a loss at Utah and we'd still have a better resume than Gonzaga for 1 seed out west.

Perhaps, and I've heard that. But it hasn't stopped teams with lesser resume's from non power conferences getting 1 seeds before.

Their one loss would be seen as mostly a wash against a team with 2 more losses, and 2 of them "bad" losses.

Losing at Utah wouldn't hurt our seeding nearly as badly as losing to someone other than Utah or Stanford in the Pac tourney.

Beachcat97 wrote:Losing at Utah wouldn't hurt our seeding nearly as badly as losing to someone other than Utah or Stanford in the Pac tourney.

Like Oregon State or Unlv?

Irish27 wrote:http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Lunardi is a moron, there no way you can put Arizona behind Duke and Gonzaga.

that's certainly not the easiest looking bracket

Irish27 wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/bracketology

although having to face sdsu again isn't exactly exciting (tired of seeing them and their yappy fans) that bracket looks fine to me. Definitely not the hardest one.

azcat34 wrote:

Irish27 wrote:http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Lunardi is a moron, there no way you can put Arizona behind Duke and Gonzaga.

You can't be serious. Still a lot of basketball to be played, but Duke and Zaga are looking like higher seeds than AZ. At least at the moment.

Beachcat97 wrote:

azcat34 wrote:

Irish27 wrote:http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Lunardi is a moron, there no way you can put Arizona behind Duke and Gonzaga.

You can't be serious. Still a lot of basketball to be played, but Duke and Zaga are looking like higher seeds than AZ. At least at the moment.

you realize you're quoting a post that came before our assu loss, right?