Road to Selection Sunday: Initial February Field of 68 Projection includes Wisconsin

Donate To GopherHole
S

SelectionSunday

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 12, 2008
Messages
24,609
Reaction score
4,681
Points
113
Wisconsin sneaks into the Road to Selection Sunday Field of 68 as one of the "last 4 in". The Badgers, whose RPI is now in respectable territory at #65, give the Big Ten 7 teams in the tournament field. The ACC leads with 9 bids.

An * denotes conference leader/best RPI in multiple-bid conference.

FIELD OF 68 (through Jan. 31)
America East (1): Stony Brook (54)

American (2): UConn (55), *Cincinnati (58)

ACC (9): *North Carolina (8), Virginia (9), Miami (16), Louisville (26), Duke (27), Pitt (31), Notre Dame (35), Syracuse (42), Florida State (44)

Atlantic Sun (1): North Florida (102)

Atlantic 10 (3): Dayton (13), Saint Joseph's (30), *VCU (33)

Big East (5): *Villanova (2), Xavier (4), Providence (24), Seton Hall (46), Butler (67)

Big Sky (1): Montana (138)

Big South (1): NC-Asheville (152)

B1G (7): Maryland (6), *Iowa (7), Michigan State (21), Purdue (25), Michigan (29), Indiana (48), Wisconsin (65)

Big XII (6): *Oklahoma (1), Kansas (5), Iowa State (11), West Virginia (15), Baylor (17), Texas (22)

Big West (1): UC-Irvine (72)

Colonial (1): Hofstra (70)

Conference USA (1): UAB (108)

Horizon (1): Valparaiso (36)

Ivy (1): Yale (81)

MAAC (1): Monmouth (37)

MAC (1): Akron (66)

MEAC (1): Hampton (188)

Missouri Valley (1): Wichita State (32)

Mountain West (1): San Diego State (47)

Northeast (1): Wagner (203)

Ohio Valley (1): Belmont (86)

Pac 12 (7): *Oregon (3), Utah (14), USC (19), Colorado (20), Arizona (34), Washington (49), UCLA (68)

Patriot (1): Bucknell (174)

SEC (4): *Texas A&M (12), Kentucky (18), Florida (23), South Carolina (28)

Southern (1): Chattanooga (45)

Southland (1): Stephen F. Austin (145)

SWAC (1): Texas Southern (211)

Summit (1): South Dakota State (40)

Sun Belt (1): UALR (51)

West Coast (2): *Saint Mary's (41), Gonzaga (71)

WAC (1): New Mexico State (148)
____________________________________
Last 4 In: UConn (55), Wisconsin (65), Butler (67), UCLA (68)

First 4 Out: Cal (39), Kansas State (50), George Washington (52), Clemson (88)

Last 4 Automatic Bids: Bucknell (174), Hampton (188), Wagner (203), Texas Southern (211)

Others Considered (4): Stanford (57), BYU (59), Georgetown (74), LSU (82)

Non-Power 6 At-Larges (4): Dayton (13), Saint Joseph's (30), UConn (55), Gonzaga (71)
 

They seem to be forgetting that Minnesota is going to win the big 10 tournament and get an automatic bid
 


SelSun, do you ever look at KenPom for this? I think the committee is incorporating that more now, right? Is there a site that keeps an updated Easy Bubble Solver (RPI + KenPom)/2 out there?
 

Good question

justthefacts said:
SelSun, do you ever look at KenPom for this? I think the committee is incorporating that more now, right? Is there a site that keeps an updated Easy Bubble Solver (RPI + KenPom)/2 out there?
Click to expand...

I look at KenPom occasionally, not often. I'm a little stubborn, sticking with RPI for the most part until I know for sure the Selection Committee values KenPom significantly. I don't look at things like Easy Bubble Solver (first I've heard of it) or others like it. Try to avoid those so that I'm (as much as humanly possible) not letting other opinions sway my thinking. Make sense?

That said, would say one change I've made in last couple years is I'm more willing to consider teams with pretty high RPIs, teams in the high 50s, 60s, and even 70s. In the past I pretty much wouldn't give those teams much of a look when Selection Sunday rolled around. Now I will. So many coaches have figured out how to "finesse the RPI' in their favor, so have to be cognizant of "RPI paper tigers" who have a good RPI but haven't really beaten (m)any high-caliber teams. #28 South Carolina and #43 Texas Tech are examples of that this season.
 


The Committee has publicly acknowledged that they use other rankings: http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...nswers-questions-about-conference-tournaments I don't know that they've said they value KenPom significantly, but they've also somewhat downplayed the role that RPI has in their decisions. I do tend to think the RPI will have its role continue to be reduced as the quants in the sport continue to complain about it.

I definitely understand you wanting to approach this 'fresh,' with no outside opinions influencing your thoughts. However, Easy Bubble Solver isn't really an opinion. It's just a combination of the RPI and KenPom. I don't think it's any different from using RPI, except for it's more predictive:

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2053

That being said, combining the two ranking systems would be a bit of a chore (answering my own question from above, I've not yet found a site that keeps EBS up to date), so I'm by no means saying you owe it to us to use it. I'm more just enjoying a conversation about bracket prediction methodology.
 

justthefacts said:
The Committee has publicly acknowledged that they use other rankings: http://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball...nswers-questions-about-conference-tournaments I don't know that they've said they value KenPom significantly, but they've also somewhat downplayed the role that RPI has in their decisions. I do tend to think the RPI will have its role continue to be reduced as the quants in the sport continue to complain about it.

I definitely understand you wanting to approach this 'fresh,' with no outside opinions influencing your thoughts. However, Easy Bubble Solver isn't really an opinion. It's just a combination of the RPI and KenPom. I don't think it's any different from using RPI, except for it's more predictive:

http://www.basketballprospectus.com/article.php?articleid=2053

That being said, combining the two ranking systems would be a bit of a chore (answering my own question from above, I've not yet found a site that keeps EBS up to date), so I'm by no means saying you owe it to us to use it. I'm more just enjoying a conversation about bracket prediction methodology.
Click to expand...

Yep, no sweat. Certainly many ways to go about the selection process. I've always used the RPI much more as a grouping tool (record vs. top 50, vs. record vs. top 100, etc.), not so much a team's individual RPI.
 

Roughly 18 teams sitting squarely on the bubble

There are 3 "bracketologists" I keep tabs on, either via the "Interweb" or Twitter. The staples are Joe Lunardi (ESPN) and Jerry Palm (CBS), and a third one I've added is Bracketville (@BracketguyDave) via Twitter.

With just under 6 weeks until Selection Sunday, here's a list of teams at least one of us feel resides squarely on the bubble. For clarity, am defining "on the bubble" as teams that are 1 of the "last 4 in" or "first 4 out". Current RPI + number of times first 4 in/first 4 out is noted in parentheses. Highlighted teams = unanimously "in" among the 4 of us.

On the Bubble
#30 Saint Joseph's (2)
#39 Cal (2) -- 3 have in the Field of 68
#42 Syracuse (1)
#43 Texas Tech (1) -- none have in the field
#44 Florida State (2) -- 3 have in the field
#46 Seton Hall (2)
#50 Kansas State (2) -- none have in the field
#52 George Washington (4) -- 1 has in the field
#55 UConn (1)
#60 Vanderbilt (1) -- none have in the field
#63 Tulsa (1) -- none have in the field
#65 Wisconsin (1) -- 1 has in the field
#67 Butler (4) -- 2 have in the field
#68 UCLA (4) -- 3 have in the field
#71 Gonzaga (1)
#74 Georgetown (1) -- none have in the field
#81 LSU (1) -- 1 has in the field
#88 Clemson (1) -- 2 have in the field
 

I really hope we're only a couple of years away from doing away with RPI. It's a joke that the committee still uses it
 



The Lorax said:
I really hope we're only a couple of years away from doing away with RPI. It's a joke that the committee still uses it
Click to expand...

They'll always have & use measuring tools. They have to. It's just a matter of which ones -- and how many -- they use, and that they don't solely rely on those tools. I'm confident they don't.

As long as they don't just rely on the "eye test". ... that would be a huge mistake. To me when someone cites the eye test about a team, it usually means they haven't beaten anyone, and that the team "looks like Tarzan, but plays like Jane."
 

I keep wondering whether, if Wisconsin makes the Field, they'll hire Gard. My gut tells me no, even though that would be a very nice accomplishment with a not very talented team.
 

Bad Gopher said:
I keep wondering whether, if Wisconsin makes the Field, they'll hire Gard. My gut tells me no, even though that would be a very nice accomplishment with a not very talented team.
Click to expand...

Our group was discussing exactly this @ Sally's prior to the Purdue game. The general feeling was we'd like to see Wisconsin do just well enough where Gard keeps the job. Thought was Alvarez would likely find someone much better long term (and worse for the Gophers) on the open market.

Personally, I don't think Gard is getting the job no matter what he does. If Alvarez wanted Gard he would have named him the permanent head coach when Bo stepped down.
 

SelectionSunday said:
Our group was discussing exactly this @ Sally's prior to the Purdue game. The general feeling was we'd like to see Wisconsin do just well enough where Gard keeps the job. Thought was Alvarez would likely find someone much better long term (and worse for the Gophers) on the open market.

Personally, I don't think Gard is getting the job no matter what he does. If Alvarez wanted Gard he would have named him the permanent head coach when Bo stepped down.
Click to expand...

Word on the street is that they'll take a run at Tony Bennett, and he'll turn them down. Will be interesting to see if they dismiss Gard first and, if so, what their backup plan would be.
 



SelectionSunday said:
They'll always have & use measuring tools. They have to. It's just a matter of which ones -- and how many -- they use, and that they don't solely rely on those tools. I'm confident they don't.
Click to expand...

Measuring tools are great, just use ones that are decent. Kenpom to RPI is like calculus to 1st grade arithmetic.
 


SelectionSunday said:
Our group was discussing exactly this @ Sally's prior to the Purdue game. The general feeling was we'd like to see Wisconsin do just well enough where Gard keeps the job. Thought was Alvarez would likely find someone much better long term (and worse for the Gophers) on the open market.

Personally, I don't think Gard is getting the job no matter what he does. If Alvarez wanted Gard he would have named him the permanent head coach when Bo stepped down.
Click to expand...

I've been told by Badger friends that Alvarez cannot do that. He got in trouble when naming fatass to be his replacement. State law says it needs to be posted for a period of time for applicants even if it is a foregone conclusion of who they're going to hire.
 

I would not underestimate Gard as a basketball coach. Very good in preparation and had made excellent in game decisions so far. Badgers are woefully short of a shooting guard this year and are very young and they have started to get on a roll. For all the deficiencies, Hayes had been very good lately and if he continues, he can carry a team.

I would be shocked if they land Bennett, would never offer even close to what he may want to consider it. I would think they would make a run at Miller and maybe Jacobson and then go with Gard. There have been other long time assistants that have done very well and Gard has a ton of respect in the Wisconsin BB community.

Thanks for the vote of confidence SS. Conjecture on our board is 10-8 will get us in because of top 100 wins and strength of schedule. No easy task with our schedule, but certainly doable.
 

GVBadger said:
I would not underestimate Gard as a basketball coach. Very good in preparation and had made excellent in game decisions so far. Badgers are woefully short of a shooting guard this year and are very young and they have started to get on a roll. For all the deficiencies, Hayes had been very good lately and if he continues, he can carry a team.

I would be shocked if they land Bennett, would never offer even close to what he may want to consider it. I would think they would make a run at Miller and maybe Jacobson and then go with Gard. There have been other long time assistants that have done very well and Gard has a ton of respect in the Wisconsin BB community.

Thanks for the vote of confidence SS. Conjecture on our board is 10-8 will get us in because of top 100 wins and strength of schedule. No easy task with our schedule, but certainly doable.
Click to expand...

That sounds like a solid plan. Like I was discussing with one of our season ticket group, this will be one of the more compelling off season stories to watch.
 


I would assume Archie. You'd think Sean is already in a better job than Wisconsin down at Arizona.
 

Archie Miller isn't going to Wisconsin. I have a higher opinion of Wisconsin basketball than most here, but there's zero chance Miller goes there. He'll get snatched up by the next blue blood that needs a coach.
 

I would imagine Archie Miller would command as much on the open market at Tony Bennett. I would think someone like Ben Jacobson would be in play, it'll be interesting to see how they handle it, can't do a search and keep Gard in limbo. I think he's done enough to earn a shot at it. They found something that worked with Bo Ryan, the apprentice is overachieving this year, if I was a fan of that program I would want to see it through
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom