Huh?

what? 

WUT?

I think it's time to bust out the ole' "WHAT IS THIS I DON'T EVEN" images, boys.

Seriously, what are you trying to do here?  It doesn't even make sense from a satire standpoint.

Meth?

I would be very happy with Duke losing to New Mexico.

Let's put it this way, either Kentucky or Syracuse will most likely end with the most impressive season in the country regardless of whether they actually win the NCAA tournament. I for one wish that kind of thing were rewarded.

Hey man, probably not a good idea to be drinking so heavily this early in the day.

Maybe he is trying to poke fun at mgobloggers for using efficiency margins to measure a teams competency?

Will everyone excuse me while I go put some popcorn in the microwave?

I like the concept, but it wasn't executed well. 

Do not speak for me sir!!

I was also bothered by the use of invented KenPom formulas and indicators to detract from our season. KenPom, where MSU is #3, Wisconsin is #7, Duke is #17, and Michigan is #20. Time to recalibrate those formulas, Ken.

I thought it was actually pretty funny.  The concept of game being over before it's played is pretty good, but the OP could have expanded on it more... this probably could have even made into a diary.   I give it an "A" for effort, and I liked the K-Mart remark

I think a better analysis would be to actually take efficiency and kenpom ratings from years past to actually determine how that correlated into NCAA tournament results.  Then debunk or affirm the relative predicting power of kenpom, efficiency, etc. and determine what, if anything, was a good predictor of NCAA tournament success.

I thought it was pretty funny.

Not sure I agree with the somewhat harsh tone of this post, and in some parts even I - who support the OP's basic premise - was all like "WTF?", but I've been feeling this way as well.

Brian's slavish reliance upon the Kenpom numbers feels to me a little lazy and bordering on a cult-like devotion. We get it, they are very valuable statistical figures. However, merely stating "Welp, KenPom says this so this is true" is not the kind of analysis I've come to expect from Brian - who often does a great job of eviscerating the faulty premises of other's statistical analyses. In the latest post he merely states that the 5 seeds are more palatable seemingly because their Kenpom numbers are lower than UNLV/New Mexico. There isn't any thought behind why UNLV/New Mexico are less palatable than Louisville/FSU (the latter of whom has some major wins against major programs), other than "See: Kenpom". Maybe there's more analysis under the surface, but I feel like a lot of basketball previewing/coverage this year from Brian has been "See: Kenpom". 

This is not a flame on Brian, who I think does tremendous work. It is constructive criticism. The only reason I raise it is because I think it is a marked difference from how in depth his other work is/has been.

i just scratched my eyes a lot.

The backgroud or "theme" wasn't very well defined, but it's basically a set of political cartoons in words.  I think it's very current too, even using at least one (i think only the one) quote from Brian's mailbag.

You are correct that Brian has a rather pessimistic view of the team. I believe that the statistic MOV is overrated, and that Beilein has very deliberately game-planned to compensate for Michigan's general lack of length and athleticism. This keeps the MOV low. It also keeps Michigan in games.

My hope is that both Smotz & THJ are peaking, and will be shooting 35 - 40% plus from the three point line. This will open things up so significantly that Michigan would win decisively over most competition.

Goddammit it's

CITE!

Also you seem to be writing this from the perspective of someone who does not get the difference between "Team A and Team B split their season series but Team A scored more and was scored on less over the course of a relatively equal season, therefore I predict Team A would defeat Team B in a hypothetical sixth game between them," and "Team A just beat Team B in their last game, therefore Team A is 'better!'"

That the first thing bothers me more is definitely more my problem than yours. The second is the reason your attempt at lampooning Brian's statement said more about your comprehension of logic than any logical fault with his statement.

a little over the top, but i enjoyed it. frankly i'm scratching my head about how anybody could misunderstand what he's saying.

I understand what you're trying to say, but this is kinda dumb.  No one is trying to take away anything from what the team accomplished.  They came, they saw, they are going to hang up a banner in Crisler. That being said, if you're trying to PREDICT what will happen in the future, then it's a good idea to look at how those wins/losses occured, which is what KenPom does. This doesn't mean Kentucky will win the Title because it has the best efficiency numbers, it just means it's the most likely result. Even if UK were 99% favs in round one and then 90% favs in every subsequent round, they would still only have a 58% chance of winning the title.  Obviously UK wouldn't be that huge favorites in every game so their chances are even slimmer.  Saying that UM has gotten a bit lucky in winning the coin flip games (NW twice in OT, one point win over MSU, @Purdue) doesn't detract from the fact that they won them. It does mean that should the same situation arrive in another close game (I.e the NCAAs) there's a chance it might not go their way. 

to Dylan's B1G Tourney preview at umhoops. Sometimes the fact that it's your school, that you love the players, rooting for the underdog--old-fashioned dumb stuff like that--tends to get a little lost in the shuffle.

I'm to the point with bball and football, happily, where I'm just happy with the coaching staffs, believe they're upright and going to field competitive teams, and not demanding that ten wins a year they strung up Lloyd for failing to obtain (being second-winningest active Div I coach with more than ten years was not enough*). Probably a function of increasing age. OR there may be a point when it's better for the fan to get outside and obtain a little exercise themselves. 

*yeah, he's now on my shit list, too; but one BECOMES a grumpy old man--you are not born one

P.S. I got where you were headed with the post immediately; but you should probably signpost the thing a little bit better, as the English instructors say

doesn't mean it wasn't the best team.  

So, if I'm understanding the OP correctly, your thesis is:

"We need to play the games because statistics can't predict everything correctly. Also, since math can't predict outcomes perfectly, it's useless as a tool to help make predictions."

1. Thanks for the profound statement that Kenpom doesn't predict with 100% certainty.

2. I'd much rather have analysis in the pregame writeups that include statistics rather than your typical WWL talking head or Freep hack making shit up based on his gut. If that's the analysis you want, it's not hard to find.

3. If this was a way more intense response than you intended, sorry. Kind of like the Saban letter, needs MOAR funny.

MGoSatire.  I like it. 

FWIW.  I enjoyed this.  Although I wasn't sure what I was reading at first, the title was pretty clear it was going to be farcical. 

ClearEyesButtHurt

Related question about my bracket: if I'm picking Kentucky to win it all, should I write "Kentucky" or skip ahead a few years and write "VACATED"?

A bit over-the-top, but I agree with the general point.  Not everything can be precisely quantified.

So in one sentence this entire thing breaks down as: In a bet of Kentucky vs. the field you're taking the field. Brilliant!

Advanced Metrics are useful, but not perfect. Satire is funny, even when the position it's arguing for isn't as strong as the position it's arguing against.  Everything's fine.

Everyone is overanalyzing this. The OP's point is that we should play the tournament before crowning a champion because that is the current format of NCAA basketball. Would it be more reliable to pick the best team by using advanced metrics accumulated over a long regular season? Probably, but it wouldn't be nearly as much fun.

Not to rush to Brian's defense or anything but I think everyone was operating under the general understanding that games are not won/loss on paper.  Isn't that a given not worth discussing?  However, I'm definitely using the Kenpom ranking to help with my brackets!

I don't know if I would have commented if so many people weren't so slow to make the connection; I thought it was obvious... but I support the orignal post and think its funny...

jdon

Clear Eyes, funny post, good stuff, but don't get to full of yourself just yet. Try this again tomorrow and you will likely regress to the mean. Your posts' ability to strike a chord with the audience is fraught with variance and luck, but I thought you dug deep this one time and pulled off a clutch performance.

This thread is too smart for you.

It wasn't absurdly submitted as a diary like M-Dog's atrocity was.  MOVE IT TO THE BOARD!

Every time I read a post like this, I think to myself, "Self, if there was a MgoBlog user poker tournament, you'd make a lot of money."