Seeding debate

[balds]

Had a sports argument at work today about which seed you would rather be between he 4, 5 and 6 in the NCAA tourney.

My theory was that I'd rather be the 6. While having to play the 3 in the second round, you avoid playing #1 in the sweet 16.

4 and 5 still have a tough matchup in round 2, but then face the dreaded roadblock in the sweet 16.

Is it worth thinking that far ahead (to avoid #1) or is it just a case of wanting to get to the 16 and seeing what happens?

I know that all 1's are from from invincible, and that the statistics of the debate probably don't support my argument, and that upsets happen that totally shuffle the deck. That said, for the Gophers, If I could choose between the three, give me the 6 seed.

I'd also much rather be a 10,11,12 or 13 seed than an 8 or 9 for the same reason

Thoughts?

 

[bga1]

Had a sports argument at work today about which seed you would rather be between he 4, 5 and 6 in the NCAA tourney.

My theory was that I'd rather be the 6. While having to play the 3 in the second round, you avoid playing #1 in the sweet 16.

4 and 5 still have a tough matchup in round 2, but then face the dreaded roadblock in the sweet 16.

Is it worth thinking that far ahead (to avoid #1) or is it just a case of wanting to get to the 16 and seeing what happens?

I know that all 1's are from from invincible, and that the statistics of the debate probably don't support my argument, and that upsets happen that totally shuffle the deck. That said, for the Gophers, If I could choose between the three, give me the 6 seed.

I'd also much rather be a 10,11,12 or 13 seed than an 8 or 9 for the same reason

Thoughts?

I'd rather be a 4 because that means you are probably a better team and have been chosen as such. Then let the chips fall where they may.

 

[OSUfan]

I'd say it depends on who the #1, 2 and 3 seeds are. Typically you want to avoid the #1 seed as long as possible, but if you have a vulnerable/lacking NBA draft picks #1 seed, such as Pittsburgh in 2011, then it's better to be the 4 than the 6 provided that the #2 and #3 are not particularly weak.

 

[easy]

Is it worth thinking that far ahead (to avoid #1) or is it just a case of wanting to get to the 16 and seeing what happens?

Are you implying that team would purposefully lose a game to possibly be seeded lower? That would not happen.

 

[Monty519]

Are you implying that team would purposefully lose a game to possibly be seeded lower? That would not happen.

I don't know if that's exactly what he's implying, since you can't really do that cause you have no idea what you'll be seeded in the first place. You'd think you always want the highest seed possible, cause it gives you the easiest route to get the furthest. You have to beat a better team earlier in the tourney as a 6 then as a 4, so I'd think you'd want the 4 in any case.

Of course that assumes the seeding is done well, which we all know it isn't.

 

[SelectionSunday]

My line of thinking is in line with Balds. Will take any seed the Gophers get (it means we have a shot), but I pretty much prefer anything but the #8 or #9 seeds. #8 or #9 means a toss-up in your first game, and if you're fortunate enough to win that you get the #1 seed in the next. I don't want to play a top seed until the second weekend.

If you're a #3, #4, #5, #6, #7, #10, #11, #12, #13 or #14, there's a much better chance your "4-team pod" gets blown up by a big upset (or two) and your bracket opens up (see Gophers playing #14 Siena in 1989 and #14 Northern Iowa in 1990).

 

[Ope3]

Seeds

Based on historical performance, I'd go with Seed #4 1st, then # 6 and lastly #5.


-----------------

http://mcubed.net/ncaab/seeds.shtml

Overall tournament record of #4 seeds: (188-135) 58.2%
vs. #1 (19-42) 31.1%
vs. #2 (5-4) 55.6%
vs. #3 (1-5) 16.7%
vs. #4 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #5 (45-37) 54.9%
vs. #6 (2-4) 33.3%
vs. #7 (2-1) 66.7%
vs. #8 (2-6) 25.0%
vs. #9 (2-1) 66.7%
vs. #10 (2-0) 100.0%
vs. #11 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #12 (20-11) 64.5%
vs. #13 (88-24) 78.6%
vs. #14 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #15 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #16 (0-0) 0.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall tournament record of #5 seeds: (158-136) 53.7%
vs. #1 (8-38) 17.4%
vs. #2 (4-1) 80.0%
vs. #3 (2-2) 50.0%
vs. #4 (37-45) 45.1%
vs. #5 (1-1) 50.0%
vs. #6 (1-0) 100.0%
vs. #7 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #8 (1-3) 25.0%
vs. #9 (1-2) 33.3%
vs. #10 (1-0) 100.0%
vs. #11 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #12 (91-41) 68.9%
vs. #13 (11-3) 78.6%
vs. #14 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #15 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #16 (0-0) 0.0%
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Overall tournament record of #6 seeds: (166-134) 55.3%
vs. #1 (5-10) 33.3%
vs. #2 (10-23) 30.3%
vs. #3 (37-42) 46.8%
vs. #4 (4-2) 66.7%
vs. #5 (0-1) 0.0%
vs. #6 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #7 (4-3) 57.1%
vs. #8 (1-3) 25.0%
vs. #9 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #10 (6-4) 60.0%
vs. #11 (88-44) 66.7%
vs. #12 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #13 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #14 (11-2) 84.6%
vs. #15 (0-0) 0.0%
vs. #16 (0-0) 0.0%

 

[balds]

Not implying at all that a team would try to lose to get a lower seed. Nor am I saying that I don't want my team to be as good/do as well as possible.

Maybe a 4 seed should be left out of the debate, since there is a wider disparity between a 4 and 6 than there is than a 5 and a 6.

I'm simply saying that if it's selection Sunday and the Gophers are pegged in the 5-6 range, I'd rather be the 6. Just like I would much rather be the 10 or 11 seed than an 8 or 9.

 

[WanderingGopher]

Not implying at all that a team would try to lose to get a lower seed. Nor am I saying that I don't want my team to be as good/do as well as possible.

Maybe a 4 seed should be left out of the debate, since there is a wider disparity between a 4 and 6 than there is than a 5 and a 6.

I'm simply saying that if it's selection Sunday and the Gophers are pegged in the 5-6 range, I'd rather be the 6. Just like I would much rather be the 10 or 11 seed than an 8 or 9.

I gather that your question assumes the season is over and you're just waiting for your seed, not (as some suggested) you're asking at the beginning of the year, "would you rather have a season resulting in a 4 seed or 6 seed."

That said, I agree with you, I'll take the 6 seed, i.e., the 3-6 matchup in the second round and possible 6-2 matchup in the third, over a 4-5 matchup in the second and 4-1 or 5-1 matchup in the third.