Xavier, Auburn, Clemson Lose Posbang
The three line may have gotten less crowded. Down goes Auburn, down goes Clemson. Projected 1-2 seed Xavier goes down.
Unfortunately, Tennessee won.
And that Tennessee game was close, too.
I think the only one of these that directly effects us is the Auburn loss. Have to think the committee will recognize that they went 1-5 down the stretch.
might be right - but Clemson was a high 5 seed heading into this game, and may have made a move towards a 3 with a couple big ACC wins.
But as Auburn proved - bad night to be a Tiger...
March 10th, 2018 at 12:14 AM ^
in any sport, it's a good thing.
But right now in basketball, a Clemson loss is a great thing and POSBANG-worthy.
The Committee does not look at record down the stretch. Which is good, because there's no correlation between performance in your last 10 games and performance in the tourney.
The Committee looks at overall resume, regardless of when wins and losses came.
Cite a source, otherwise I'm calling bullshit. These are humans, doing human work. These people watch games and scores, and they know this is a different team since the Mclemore injury.
Also, if you've stated this a million times, you should probably stop saying it. Youre wrong, and it makes you sound stupid.
https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/bracketiq/2018-02-15/march-mad…
The committee no longer uses last 10 as a selection criterion.
Thanks for the ammo. Pulled this directly from your source.
"Now subjectively, committee members may look at it and say, `OK, this team really started playing well in February because a player became eligible or an injured player became healthy,' so that could come in."
Are you now suggesting that they will only consider players getting healthy, but not an injury that takes a player off a team?
The Committee will seed Auburn lower because it'll decide the injury makes it a fundamentally different team. It was "the Committee will see that they've gone 1-5 down the stretch."
Which is explicitly, expressly not how they do things. And Anfernee Mclemore is not Kenyon Martin.
Pedantic. You provided the source as a direct response to a comment where I referenced the Mclemore injury. Furthermore, the skid started in the first game after he was injured. This was a team that had lost 2 games all year up until the injury, then lost 5 of 6 immediately after.
Went 2-3 after he went down (including a win over Alabama). 2-4 if you include the game where he got hurt. Which is a pretty thin reed for the Committee to hang it's hat on. Particularly when we're talking about a guy averaging like 7 and 5, not Kevin Durant.
I stand corrected on the record.
Set... Match!
(Corn holed with his own member.)
but I would like to see some support (I doubt any exists) for your assertion that there is not correlation between a team's performance in its last 10 games and its performance in the tournament. It seems like these would obviously correlate.
Would you not expect to see a correlation between a team's performance throughout the entire regular season and its post season performance? Yes, we clearly would. So why would one think that the most recent 10 games are not important?
You are apparently right about the committee not using most recent 10 games as a metric for inclusion/exclusion, but you are obviously wrong to think that the performance in a team's most recent 10 games does not have any predictive value on tournament performance.
Now, of course, if you are arguing whether the most recent 10 games is more important than the entire body of work, that is a different story.
http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/basketball-statistics-…
Basically, it's a version of the hot hand myth, and there's no obvious correlation. 10 games is a smaller sample than an entire season, so will likely be less predictive and more subject to variance.
The hot hand is not a myth. Guys have hot nights and cold nights. The research that supposedly debunks this is riddled with problems.
Although statisticians like to argue about this, it is profoundly true that people (not just sports fans) regularly perceive sequences where only random variance exists:
http://www.cs.colorado.edu/~mozer/Teaching/syllabi/7782/readings/gilovi…
March 10th, 2018 at 12:55 AM ^
Not a fan of that article. He's using scatter plots to prove his point, but all the points in the scatter plot are stacked on top of each other on the 56 different spots of the grid. It's impossible to tell how many data points fall on each spot.
I commented specifically on your assertion that "performance over the last 10 games does not correlate with tournament success."
If you define performance as W-L record, then sure, it's not that predictive. But your link answers its own questions in that regard. W-L record isn't *generally* predictive in the tournament anyway due to the wide range in SOS.
As always, we know it is sos-adjusted margin of victory that matters. So, to restate my claim: it is obviously true that adjusted MOV in that last 10 games is predictive of tournament success.
Finally, as mentioned elsewhere, those are some terrible scatter plots.
March 10th, 2018 at 12:13 PM ^
Would argue that how you finish could effect your tourney run. We don’t have our run last year if we don’t run through the BTT. A team who goes 1-5 could be a sign of a team hitting a wall. Obviously 2 games in 3 days wouldn’t help that team.
Well they should. We are direct eveidence that teams can improve dramatically by March and that of course impacts how they play in the tournament.
What you do in March should matter more than what you do in December.
So we’re playing in Detroit?
I want LCA as much as the next guy. However, seeding or location - does it really matter that much? This team is on a mission, and they are going to be hard to stop!
Hard to stop, yes, particularly against inferior competition on the first weekend. Hence the reason seeding is important.
Time zone, less travel time, more fans in attendance.
I think it would help that they already played a game at LCA and would have an idea of depth perception if they play there again.
I'm sure the team will make it out of the first weekend but I'd take all available advantages if possible.
Vs other arenas? Serious question.
The Pistons suck, so maybe.
March 10th, 2018 at 12:53 AM ^
seem to have depth perception problems at most other arenas too. Call me crazy, but might not be that the NBA is filled w difficult arenas to shoot in - could be that the Piston just suck ass period. Just my theory...
stick with the latter there.
Agreed but wouldnt it be nice to get to witness a part of that mission in person. If they get to San Antonio however i will be there regardless
I mean, Iowa took us to OT. Right now, there’s nobody who really scares me, and I think we’d beat anybody from 2 or 3 seed down at least 5 times out of 10. But the Tourney is single elimination, and sometimes single games are weird. I’d like any breaks we can get.
So, we need some weird guys for the weird games?
Don't forget that Iowa had played in MSG the night before, and was thus acclimated to the arena, unlike us (remember our 3-19 shooting from 3).
In the real tourney, no team gets that advantage.
But have to clarify: "No team gets that advantage" (...) Excepting the winners of play-in games
It's a technical detail but nevertheless real
The First Four teams play in Dayton and then move to their first-round site. They have no more familiarity with that site than their opponents.
March 10th, 2018 at 11:49 AM ^
Oh, no way. Thanks for the info. I was incorrect and concede.
i would love to have a detroit venue, but if this team can't beat mediocre teams on a neutral site, then they aren't going to the final four.
i have faith either way. go blue!!!
Feeling quite POSITIVE about these results. Bring on the dance.
In the game that matters most the rest of the night, UCLA leads Arizona, 17-13. Go Bruins!
Need Arizona, Wichita st and Tennessee to not win their brackets. It's gonna be close
The level of salt on Xavier twitter, which does exist in small and isolated pockets, I have discovered, is probably at what would be record level of salt for most teams. Probably a good thing they are not in that locker room right now as some of them would have, well, things to say about how that overtime went.
And Clarkson loses in hockey...
Yeah, we'll take that 3 seed in Detroit, committee. Thank you very much.
If UCLA can pull this out it would go a long way towards getting us a protected seed. Still might not be enough to keep us at LCA but I think we'll get it done regardless of where we play. Team is hungry.
Would be nice if UCLA and UNC win
brecketology or whatever it’s called. I would take tha all day long. I will take a three with that group
As far as the layoff is concerned, we'll be playing an inferior opponent and even IF we come out rusty we should heat up by halftime and we're a really good 2nd half team!
Go Blue!!!
They must really suck if they manage to lose a posbang.
but the committee can send us anywhere with confidence in the attendance. Michigan fans travel. They'll put MSU in Detroit because that's the only site Sparties will watch their team en masse.
Beauty in the world would result in Spartans in Detroit and they not make it out of the weekend. Their ignorant fan base would be so deserving