Lunardi has Michigan as a 6 seed in the East
Think we have a good shot at a 5 after today's win. Can't wait to watch Beilein and the boys cut down the nets in my hometown. Zak - it's your day, man.
March 12th, 2017 at 11:55 AM ^
March 12th, 2017 at 10:26 AM ^
Has us at 7, playing 10 seed Seton Hall.
That would be an interesting matchup, actually.
March 12th, 2017 at 10:33 AM ^
damn interesting. I would like to stay away from a team that took Villanova to the brink yesterday and prob should have won. Would much rather have Marquette, Providence or Xavier if we are looking at low Big East seeds...
March 12th, 2017 at 11:18 AM ^
That is how it looks to me, so I do think a 6 seed would be potntially very beneficial and I think we have to win today to get it. The dreaded 8-9 line really doesn't seem significantly worse than the 7 line this year. That said, the specific matchup is still the most important thing.
March 12th, 2017 at 11:44 AM ^
Right we want our 2/3/4 seed to be as Purdue-ish as possible where Wagner and Wilson can exploit their bigs.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:53 PM ^
Not much separating the top 8-10 teams in the country this year. As always, and even moreso for Beilein system teams, it will be about matchups as much as seeding.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:00 PM ^
I don't think we can get a 5 seed but I'm OK with that. The 6 seed arguably has an easier path to the Elite Eight.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:20 PM ^
Doesn't have us wasted for the real tournament. Walton and Irvin have been playing major minutes, and almost certainly will again today. It's good to boost our seed, but it only helps if we're not too worn out to play at something like our best in the first tourney game.
Despite the fact that Purdue lost to us, they're probably not feeling too bad right now. Their seed will be about the same, and they have a full week's rest and two fewer games' worth of fatigue than if they'd gone to the finals.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:49 PM ^
team over the past month. Every loss has been a close one on the road to a quality team, and many of the wins have been straight up smack downs, not to mention that we have the best guard play and overall talent across the top 7 in th rotation across the conference.
Win today and we probably deserve the best tourney seed of any B1G team, but Purdue's resume probably gets them a 4 or 5 seed. That's about where we should be, but will probably end up with a 6 or 7 with a win.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:51 PM ^
FUN FACT: Last 6 seed to reach the Final Four was the Fab Five back in 1992.
not going to speculate on why
In spite of great individual talent. They only finished 11-7 in the Big Ten, four full games behind OSU and three behind Indiana. They played terrible team defense, lost a lot of games to teams with less individual talent and athleticism, and rarely dominated anyone in the Big Ten.
Maybe you can argue they should have been a 4 or 5 seed, but no higher than that. They got hot in the tournament, but they were nothing special in the regular season.
and the Big Ten was very strong. Indiana and OSU were both top 5 teams and we tied for 3rd. They should have been a 4 or 5 seed. There was no justification for making them a 6. As I recall, it was the most criticized part of the bracket nationally.
March 12th, 2017 at 12:52 PM ^
Starting next year, the RPI (with UM now #8) will be toast and ratings like KenPom will figure prominently. You would think that the committee will now recognize the RPI’s limitations. So it might be wise to look at a broader range of polls.
UM rank (before today’s game is: #6 KenPom and Massey, #7 Sagarin.
A win today clearly would make us #6 in Sagarin (who has us now as the 25th ranked team). It should also probable help us up there in a larger--but much lower quality--composite poll index (in which we are now among the first four out of the #6 seed).
Could UM possibly argue for the #5 seed? Yes, if the committee strongly weighs "best wins."
Astonishingly, with a win today, we would be a #1 seed according to the (standardized) win pct vs the top 25 teams (see technical post below) . This may be at least somewhat relevant, as committees tend to look at “best wins” (as well as “worst losses”),
Since the NCAA selection committee is still chaired by the MSU AD, the weight placed on best wins may not be as great as it should be, however. Also, the MSU AD may want to ignore computer polls like Massey
---which has MSU among the 1st four teams OUT of the NCAA tourney.
http://kenpom.com/
http://www.usatoday.com/sports/ncaab/sagarin/
http://www.masseyratings.com/madness.php
http://www.masseyratings.com/cb/ncaa-d1/ratings
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncb/rpi/
March 12th, 2017 at 12:56 PM ^
Since committees tend to look at “best wins” (as well as “worst losses”), it is interesting to compare teams win pct vs top 25 teams.
If UM beats WIsc today, it would be a the 4th best team in the nation (#1 seed accoding to standardized win pct) (ie controlled for differences in the number of such games played per Sagarin).
Currently, there are 3 teams tied for 4th best win pct vs top 25 teams. UM is 4-2, Duke 8-4, Cinci 2-1. Based on playing twice as many teams as UM and 4 times as many for CInci, Duke would today have the highest standardized win pct. But Duke has already played all its games.
What happens If UM and Cinci both wins their conference tourney today—making UM 5-2 and Cinci 3-1? Then the best team is UM followed by Duke, then Cinci.
UM 5-2 mean win proportion .714 Std error .17 Mean/Std error =4.2
Duke mean win proportion .5 Std error .14 Mean/Std error=3.6
CInci m=.75, se=.22 m/se=3.4
result. With rest this team can advance into sweet 16 in Lunardi's East bracket, and from there, who knows.
Syracuse, ND, Baylor? That seems close to ideal compared to the alternatives....
is likely where we end up
not too shabby