RPI WATCH: 3/4/2011
by BracketCat on Mar 4, 2011 12:00 PM CST
in Men's Basketball
Email
PrintEmporia State and North Florida both advanced in their conference tournaments Thursday night with first-round wins.
The Hornets sprung a mild upset on the boys from T-Town, while the Ospreys did something their less-directionally inclined brethren from Gainesville could not: Beat Jacksonville.
As is usual in the SWAC, Texas Southern toyed with another victim and Alcorn State lost yet another game to a fellow cellar-dwelling denizen.
Finally, Washington State avenged a prior loss to USC to keep itself on the extreme fringe of the NCAA bubble.
Associated Press Ranking = 29
ESPN/USA Today Ranking = 29
Overall Record = 21-9
Big 12 Record = 9-6
Top 50 Record = 3-6
RPI = 19
SOS = 5
Signature Wins (RPI 1-30) = Kansas, Texas
Quality Wins (RPI 31-100) = James Madison, Virginia Tech, Gonzaga, Washington State, Baylor, Nebraska (2), Missouri
Bad Losses (RPI 101 or greater) = none
- James Madison (21-10, 10-8 CAA) | RPI = 72
- Virginia Tech (19-9, 9-6 ACC) | RPI = 63
- Presbyterian (13-18, 7-11 Big South) | RPI = 203
- Gonzaga (22-9, 11-3 WCC) | RPI = 68
- No. 4 Duke (27-3, 13-2 ACC) | RPI = 5
- Texas Southern (17-11, 15-2 SWAC) | RPI = 173: Win over Southern (71-63)
- No. 6 seed Emporia State (16-13, 12-10 MIAA*): Win over No. 3 seed Washburn* (67-61 in the MIAA Tournament)
- Washington State (19-10, 9-8 Pac-10) | RPI = 69: Win over USC (85-77)
- Alcorn State (5-23, 5-13 SWAC) | RPI = 340: Loss at Prairie View (77-96)
- Loyola-Chicago (16-15, 7-11 Horizon League) | RPI = 195
- No. 14 Florida (23-6, 12-3 SEC) | RPI = 11
- UNLV (22-7, 10-5 Mountain West) | RPI = 26
- UMKC (16-13, 9-9 Summit League) | RPI = 211
- No. 6 seed North Florida (14-18, 10-10 Atlantic Sun) | RPI = 160: Win over No. 3 seed Jacksonville (68-64 in the A-Sun Tournament)
- Savannah State (11-18) | RPI = 262
- Oklahoma State (18-11, 6-9 Big 12) | RPI = 54
- Colorado (18-12, 7-8 Big 12) | RPI = 80
- Texas Tech (13-17, 5-10 Big 12) | RPI = 159
- No. 22 Missouri (22-8, 8-7 Big 12) | RPI = 31
- No. 24 Texas A&M (22-7, 9-6 Big 12) | RPI = 30
- Baylor (18-11, 7-8 Big 12) | RPI = 77
- No. 2 Kansas (28-2, 13-2 Big 12) | RPI = 1 (64-51)
- Nebraska (19-10, 7-8 Big 12) | RPI = 73
- Iowa State (16-14, 3-12 Big 12) | RPI = 129
- Oklahoma (12-17, 4-11 Big 12) | RPI = 139
- No. 7 Texas (24-6, 12-3 Big 12) | RPI = 14
*Division II
35 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
"Washington State prepped for the stretch run with a win against USC."
And a little doobage for the star player …
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 12:10 PM CST reply actions
Whoops-a-dasiy
That’s the second Wazzu player to toke it up this year. Guess there isn’t anything else to do in Pullman.
Today's two tourney results proves what I've been saying for a while.
Being a No. 6 seed is just as good as being a No. 3 seed. You beat ‘em, and you become them, and you don’t have to play a No. 1 until two games later.
Not that it matters, for the purposes of KSU this year (anymore) ...
But to further your point (which I’ve agreed with and have posted that 6 was the sweet spot), if you’re a bubble team then you should be hoping for an 11. That’s as good as you could reasonably expect as a bubble team. The good part of the bracket for “mediocre/bad” tourney teams is 6, 11, and 14.
I am much too lazy to provide numbers to back that up. Would be an interesting study in the average length of tourney runs from each seed. Actually, I’m sure that is probably out there somewhere.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 12:31 PM CST up reply actions
Revisiting this idea ... here's a little more nuance to the "tournament run length" thing ...
(note: this theory only applies to seeds lower than 4)
Depends on whether you want your team to have a better (relatively speaking) chance at a long tourney run (think Elite 8, Final 4) and a worse chance at a moderate tourney run (think Sweet 16) … or have a better chance at a moderate tourney run and a much worse chance at a long tourney run.
For a better chance at a long tourney run, you’d want a 6, 11, or 14.
For a better chance at a moderate tourney run, you’d want a 5, 12, or 13. (win 1st round, beat a very beatable 4 to get to the Sweet 16 … then get killed by the 1-seed)
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 12:44 PM CST up reply actions
Ok, this didn't take long to find ...
The data bears out the theory, at least in the case of 5s and 6s.
The data that I used is from this page (tourney win stats from 1985 to 2009 … 24 years of the 64 team field):
http://www.college-basketball-rankings.com/ncaa-basketball-tournament-trends.html
One correction of the source page’s data … they list the 5 seeds as having lost a total of 9 times in the Sweet 16. That is a typo … they really meant 29 times.
Number 5 seed NCAA basketball tournament trends:
Lost 31 times in the first round
Lost 31 times in the second round
Lost 29 times in the Sweet 16
Lost 1 time in the Elite 8
Lost 2 times in the Final Four
Lost 2 times in the championship game
Won the national championship 0 times
(31 * 0 wins) + (31 * 1) + (29 * 2) + (1 * 3) + (2 * 4) + (2 * 5) + (0 * 6) = 110 (an avg tourney run of 1.146 wins)
Number 6 seed NCAA basketball tournament trends :
Lost 30 times in the first round
Lost 32 times in the second round
Lost 22 times in the Sweet 16
Lost 9 times in the Elite 8
Lost 1 time in the Final Four
Lost 1 time in the championship game
Won the national championship 1 time
(30 * 0 wins) + (32 * 1) + (22 * 2) + (9 * 3) + (1 * 4) + (1 * 5) + (1 * 6) = 118 (an avg tourney run of 1.229 wins)
So, you can see that the 6-seeds have a better avg tourney run than 5-seeds … due primarily to more of the long runs (Elite 8, Final 4, etc). Also, a vastly superior number of wins by 6-seeds in the Sweet 16 than the 5-seeds (duh … 5-seeds almost always had to play the 1-seed … only 5 total 5-seeds made it past that point, compared with 12 6-seeds).
Also, note that there are more trips by 5-seeds to the Sweet 16 than 6-seeds (29 vs 22) … they just don’t get further than that very often. So, they have more “moderate” runs to the Sweet 16, but fewer “long” runs.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 1:26 PM CST up reply actions
Very nice work Itchy
I have to be honest, but I never REALLY thought about tournament seeding aside from higher is better. Its like Sabermetrics for the tourney!
by mac attack ict on Mar 4, 2011 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
Looks to me...
If I’m reading that right, it looks to me like there were the exact number of trips (34) to the Sweet 16 by 5 and 6 seeds. 5 seeds had more losses (29 vs. 22) in the Sweet 16.
5 seeds won in the Sweet 16 only five times, whereas 6 seeds won twelve times. So yeah, 6 seed has been better in terms of getting past the Sweet 16.
This page looks at the same period, pretty interesting:
Ah, you are correct about that ...
Actually, there was 1 more trip by a 6 seed to the Sweet 16 (or longer) than a 5 seed … 35 vs 34, but that is, essentially equal … so the part about an easier trip to the Sweet 16 for the 5-seed vs 6-seed hasn’t panned out.
Bah!!!
I still say, if my life depended on it, I’d rather have to beat a 12-seed, then a 4-seed to get to the Sweet 16 instead of an 11-seed then a 3-seed.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 2:03 PM CST up reply actions
Dammit, I need an edit!
You were correct the first time … 34 vs 34.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 2:04 PM CST up reply actions
I really don't care about the seed, I care about the teams...
Georgia, ‘Cuse, BYU/GM? I’ll take that any day. Yeah it sucks we’d have Duke, but we’ve seen them before, they haven’t seen our new offense.
The brackets will change, but if the tourney started today, I’d be happy.
Absolutely, it ends up coming down to the teams vs the seeds ...
This is just a mostly irrelevant analysis of how it all kind of plays out, on average.
But, I do think it would be better for KSU to trend to the 6-seed vs anything else (including a 4-seed) … because, generally speaking, that will result in more favorable matchups over the course of a tournament run.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 2:45 PM CST up reply actions
I think I said it somewhere else
I’d prefer a 6 or 3…don’t think there’s any hope of a 2…or really a 3 so I’ll take a 6.
Just to be clear ...
I still obviously want KSU to win out, take down the Big12 tournament championship, and let the chips fall where they may … and if that means a 4-seed, so bet it (and heads-up to whoever the corresponding 1-seed would be).
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 2:50 PM CST up reply actions
I we win out, we're a 3-seed. in my view.
We would be 25-9, on a 9-game winning streak, Big 12 tourney champions, and — quite simply — the hottest team in the nation.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Mar 4, 2011 4:17 PM CST up reply actions
That would be a rocket-like ascent that I've seen only once before (that I can remember) ...
When Syracuse, as a bubble team, won the Big East Tournament (think it was McNamara’s senior year) and went from outer edge of the bubble to something like a 4-seed.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 6:53 PM CST up reply actions
I don't know, Itchy.
We seem like a pretty solid 6-seed right now, as long as we don’t just crap the bed against ISU and in the quarters of the B12 tourney. So it would only really be a 3 spot jump in seed.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Mar 4, 2011 8:55 PM CST up reply actions
You're right, from where we are now, it's not a stretch ...
Just unbelievable to think about where we came from a couple of weeks ago.
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 5, 2011 12:23 AM CST up reply actions
11s vs 12s
Looking at the Bracket Science page, 12 seeds have had an easier time getting to the Sweet 16 than 11 seeds (17 times vs 11 times), but it seems like a fluke how many times they’ve beaten 4 seeds to get there.
11 seeds have an easier time winning the Sweet 16 than 12 seeds (4 times vs 1 time). I think I’d rather be an 11 seed.
So I think your original premise is correct that the 6 seed is best for mediocre tourney teams and the 11 seed is best for bad tourney teams.
13 and 14 seeds are generally mid-major automatic bids, so those don’t really apply to the Cats.
Frank and entire coaching staff at Planet Sub
He’s gimping around on one crutch. They gave him a hard time when the ESPN “dancing” commercial came on.
by BlackCats on Mar 4, 2011 1:04 PM CST via mobile reply actions
damned. That would have been fun to see.
I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom. - General George S. Patton
RPI sites
I made this comment before but I don’t think you saw it. There are a couple sites that update RPI in real time, as opposed to the free version of Real Time RPI:
http://www.rpiforecast.com/live-rpi.html
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2011/rpi
Seems like using one of those would be preferable to waiting for RTR to update. What do you think?
What, can't wait a whole hour? ;-P
What can I say? I did see your prior post, but I’m a creature of habit who’s set in his ways.
What I like best about RTR is the ability to quickly scan any team’s resume page and count the quality/signature wins and bad losses. Find me something that has that and updates in real time, and I’m on board.
Does what Emporia State does actually matter?
It’s great to show the Hornets some love and all, but I was under the impression that game doesn’t even get factored into the RPI since ESU isn’t D-1. Is that wrong?
That's what I thought too.
I don't measure a man's success by how high he climbs but how high he bounces when he hits bottom. - General George S. Patton
There you going using logic again...
I reject your reality and substitute my own.
by mac attack ict on Mar 4, 2011 1:30 PM CST up reply actions
Wouldn't they still matter for SOS?
Forward into Battle
by ChrisP Wildcat on Mar 4, 2011 1:51 PM CST up reply actions
I am also a creature of overwhelming thoroughness.
Yes, they have no impact on RPI, but I find it interesting to follow what they do, nonetheless, if only for curiosity’s sake.
I'm telling all of you...
And I said this in the last open game thread…
We’re going to have a higher seed than any of you think. The RPI is too high, by the end of the conf. tournaments, we’re going to probably have 23-24 wins, and we’re going to have a boatload of top 100 victories.
If KSU gets to Friday of the Big 12 tournament, I think we’re looking at a 5 or 6. Minimum.
If KSU gets to Saturday…4 or 5.
If KSU wins the Big 12 Tournament…3 or 4.
I don’t want either, personally. I’d lock in a six right now regardless of how the next few games go regardless. Unless we’re looking at a two or three, there’s no seed in the tournament I want more than a six.
Bring on the Cats
"Without getting into specifics, my exit involves a McFlurry machine and a video tape of risque commercials from overseas." -- Jack Donaghy
by Panjandrum on Mar 4, 2011 3:26 PM CST reply actions 1 recs
I'd much rather be a 4 than a 6
4s have much more success in the NCAAs than 6s do.
Because 4s are generally better b/ball teams than a 6 seed
Again, I’d love to see us continue to kick ass, win the frickin post season – and if that gets a 4 seed (meaning we could end up playing a #1 in the sweet 16), I’ll take it, anyday, over lolly groggin around to position yourself for a 6 seed. Momemtum is huge. Continue to kick ass and take NO NAMES! That’s my philosopy.
oh hail the Purple and White
My guess is that's how everyone feels.
Damn sure that nobody here will be rooting for us to lose to the phoggies in the semis just to put us into a 6 seed. :-)
by Itchy n Scratchy on Mar 4, 2011 6:51 PM CST up reply actions
I think that's true, but the impact of the Big East is going to bump some teams up or a down a seed from what they "rightfully" deserve.
11 teams from one conference is such a freakin’ unprecedented wild card that I’m unwilling to absolutely guarantee anything regarding seeding.
I am REALLY relishing the Big East's crash-and-burn in the tourney this year.
The only part I’m NOT relishing is listening to the league’s shills (also known as “ESPN college basketball analysts”) making excuses about how they just “wore each other down” and all that claptrap.
"Coaching a football team is the most engrossing thing in the world. It is playing chess with human pawns." --Walter Camp
by K. Scott Bailey on Mar 4, 2011 8:57 PM CST up reply actions
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
