At Northwestern is now a Quadrant 3 loss
Hate to be the messenger of bad news today, but that loss to them is looking a lot worse now after they got punked by Wisconsin on Senior Night. This could be what's affecting our seeding in a negative fashion with the bracketologists. Unfortunately I don't see us getting higher than a #5 seed unless we win out probably
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:21 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:23 PM ^
Hollis is gone from the selection committee. It's a wash.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:25 PM ^
I could even argue I want the six, to avoid the one seed in the regional semis.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:25 PM ^
I highly doubt an in-conference Q3 loss is going to matter. More importantly is we beat Maryland and Nebraska and all of @PSU, neutral Neb, @Maryland continue to be Q1. I actually think we have a good shot at 4 seed, even if we lose to MSU in the semis.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:31 PM ^
Gotta admit. I sorta thought all this quadrant buisness was a joke.
No legitimate formula would group teams into 4 sections as a grading scheme. It's absurd. The last Q1 team isn't all of a sudden that much better than the top Q2 team.
If you have the formula to put teams into quadrants to begin with, you automatically have the formula (as a precursor step) to do it right and just grade as a continuum.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:38 PM ^
Yes, it's serious. And you're absolutely correct; in fact, KenPom wrote up a nice blog post on that exact topic even as he introduced his Tier A & B: https://kenpom.com/blog/tiers-of-joy/
Quadrant 1-4 is a massive improvement over the system used up until this year, which was also four quadrants (although they didn't call it that): RPI 1-50, 51-100, 101-200, and 201+. The difference is that Q1-4 are adjusted for game location, since there's a massive difference between beating the 50th best team at home and doing so on the road.
If the RPI were any good, they wouldn't need quadrants; you'd just use the results of the RPI. The quadrants are an implicit admission that the RPI is terrible, but since the quadrants are themselves based on the RPI, they're not a very good fix.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:33 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:35 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:35 PM ^
As long as we are not a 7 or 8 we will be fine.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:43 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:36 PM ^
I would love to be at least a 5. Honestly, I feel like the difference between a 4 and a 5 is minimal.
Outside of being a 5, being a 6 is critical. Once you are a 7, you are screwed into playing a top 8 team in round 2, which is probably an 80-85% loss situation.
So, I would love to be a 5. If we are a 6 I'm fine. If we are a 7+ we're screwed.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:44 PM ^
an 8 or 9 seed I don't really care to be honest
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:49 PM ^
want to be off the 7 line too.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:54 PM ^
of any of the 2-seeds
no one is that scary this year to be honest
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:48 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:52 PM ^
RPI emphasis for the quadrants is killing the Big Ten and Michigan. Northwestern on the road is a Q3 game!? NW is not good, but they aren’t the 140th best team. I believe it was Bart Torvik that said the hardest Q2 game possible was @ Penn St and the hardest Q3 game possible was at Wisconsin. Although the Wisconsin game has for now moved up to Q2, I imagine the NW game has replaced it as the toughest Q3 game.
February 23rd, 2018 at 1:59 PM ^
He's really making an impact on that NW staff. Great career move getting out from under beilein. I don't think anyone predicted that they'd be .500 at this point in the season.
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:04 PM ^
8 or 9 seed Im happy...4,5,6 would be ideal
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:10 PM ^
trust a bracketologist who can you trust?
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:20 PM ^
But you know the committee is going to put way too much emphasis on it. That it doesn't think there is a difference between a win @ #75 vs @#1 is.... not great. It should be used as a first draft criteria, and then each team should move up or down based on how they compare to the teams above and below them. Alas...
Regardless, a single Q3 loss isn't as much of an impact as a single Q1 win. Bad games happen. So do good games. But good wins mean you can beat better teams, and that's what the committee should be looking at more for seeding teams.
So yeah, I'd rather not have a Q3 loss, but I don't think it really moves the needle.
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:22 PM ^
Michigan currently is one of the top 6-seeds but there is a wide gap between the 6 and 5 line as of now (relative to the 6-7-8 lines). A four seed is very unlikely barring a deep run in the BTT.
February 23rd, 2018 at 2:33 PM ^
A 6 seed is ideal IMO, if you aren't going to be a 1-3 seed. You play a 3 seed and 2 seed in the second and third games. A five seed plays a 4 seed and 1 seed in the second and third games. I'd rather put off a match up against one of the top four teams as long as possible and hope they get upset before the elite eight game, taking my chances against a 2 seed. I don't think the difference between a 3 seed and a 4 seed in the round of 32 as being a big difference. I'd be happy for UM to get a 6 seed.
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:01 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:19 PM ^
Dog sooner or later. May as well get it done sooner and clear your own path.
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:22 PM ^
May not get it later if a one seed gets upset in the sweet sixteen. More chances for a one to lose before we are scheduled to face them means less chance we face them at all.
February 23rd, 2018 at 4:08 PM ^
Between the 1s and 2s this year. There's just as many chances for that 2 to lose in this scenario.
It doesn't matter to me all that much. You will have to likely beat a top 5-10 team to get to the F4.
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:05 PM ^
- Villanova @ home to St John's
- UNC @ home to Wofford
- KU @ home to OK State
- Wichita State @ home to SMU
- OSU @ home to PSU
- Nevada (RPI of 13) has two Q3 losses (neutral vs. U San Fran & home to UNLV)
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:12 PM ^
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:16 PM ^
...and be a goddamn SIX seed? That is idiotic.
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:20 PM ^
Being uderseeded probably an advantage this time. Being a four or five seed would actually be a harder draw. UM would end up playing a one seed in the sweet sixteen. The idiocy of the selection process could help us by giving us an overseeded 3 in the round of 32.
February 23rd, 2018 at 3:43 PM ^
You keep saying that but the odds of winning each round before the Sweet Sixteen are higher as a 5 than a 6, which in turn helps your chances of making the Elite 8. I always want to be a the highest seed possible unless specific matchups or locations dictate otherwise.
I'd rather get Xavier or Kansas as a 1 seed than pretty much any of the 2 seeds
February 23rd, 2018 at 4:09 PM ^
The odds aren't higher at the third round. That's my point.
Also, I think the difference in the win percentage odds against the 10th best team in the tournament vs. the 18th best team (ie the difference between us being a 6 seed rather than a 4 seed) is smaller than the differnce in win percentage against the second best team in the tournament as compared to say the 6th best team, which is the difference we would be facing in the third round.
Basically, I think we would gain a dramatically better win percentage in the third round, while giving up a marginally better win percentage in the second round.
February 23rd, 2018 at 4:06 PM ^
I thought the quadrants were determined at the time of game and were not updated. Am I wroing?
February 23rd, 2018 at 4:58 PM ^
February 24th, 2018 at 7:27 AM ^