Official SELECTION SUNDAY THREAD - 6PM EST CBS

[dajoka004]

So how about that CBI tournament?

 

[craftsy21]

Here is the two ways of picking your bracket by statistical analysis and looking at trends.. as i promised to post from espn insider.
[h1][/h1]The Risky Way:

[h1]Zero No. 1 seeds in the Final Four? It's possible[/h1]
By Peter Tiernan
Special to ESPN Insider
(Archive)



Updated: March 18, 2008

• Comment
• Email
• Print

In this bracket selection model, we roll out a seriously dangerous strategy. Last year, this strategy placed in the 90th percentile of the ESPN Tournament Challenge. This year, I'm guessing that it plummets in the rankings. Why? Because not a single top seed will reach the Final Four -- and the third-seeded Louisville Cardinals will wind up cutting down the nets.

[+] Enlarge

Charles LeClaire/Getty Images

Rick Pitino would be all smiles if this scenario played out.
Here's the methodology I used: I added each coach's PASE (performance against seed expectations) to the team's PASE and averaged the two figures, then I added the conference PASE and averaged those two numbers. What resulted was an overall overachievement or underachievement value based on historical performance. In all toss-up games (matchups with a seed difference of less than four), I went with the team that had the higher combined PASE value. In upset games, I picked only the underdog when the differences in PASE value were one-half game (0.5) or more.
I did start out by advancing No. 1 seeds three rounds, No. 2 seeds two rounds and Nos. 3 and 4 seeds one round. After that, every game was determined by the PASE rules above. Here's how the first round broke down:
• 1 vs. 16 -- top seeds automatically advanced
• 2 vs. 15 -- No. 2 seeds automatically advanced
• 3 vs. 14 -- No. 3 seeds automatically advanced
• 4 vs. 13 -- No. 4 seeds automatically advanced
• 5 vs. 12 -- Only two No. 5 seeds prevailed -- Michigan State and Drake. Notre Dame was upended by George Mason and Clemson lost to Villanova.
• 6 vs. 11 -- All the No. 6 seeds won
• 7 vs. 10 -- All the No. 7 seeds won
• 8 vs. 9 -- No. 8 seeds UNLV and Mississippi State won; No. 9 seeds Arkansas and Texas A&M won

In the second round, Nos. 1 and 2 seeds automatically advanced, and the remaining eight games went this way:

• George Mason (12) shocked Washington State (4)
• Louisville (3) beat Oklahoma (6)
• Vanderbilt (4) edged Villanova (5)
• Wisconsin (3) defeated USC (3)
• Michigan State (5) upended Pittsburgh (4)
• Marquette (6) surprised Stanford (3)
• UConn (4) beat Drake (12)
• Xavier (3) handled Purdue (6)

In the Sweet 16, top seeds got another free pass, and the only No. 2 seed not to prevail was Tennessee, which was upset by Louisville and Rick Pitino's gaudy +.740 coaching PASE.

The Elite Eight saw four close matchups, with Louisville (+.365 PASE overall) downing North Carolina (+.205), whose chief failing was Roy Williams' +.107 PASE versus Pitino's +.740. Georgetown (+.317) knocked off Kansas (-.024), primarily because Bill Self is a slight underachiever (-.006), as is the Big 12 (-.134). Texas (-.102) edged Memphis (-.127) in a battle of historical underachievers. And, finally, Duke (+.363) defeated UCLA (+.129), largely because of the Pac-10's PASE (-.129) versus the ACC's (+.185).

In the Final Four, Louisville's PASE (+.365) trumps Georgetown's (a solid +.317). Meanwhile, Duke has no trouble with the underachieving Longhorns. And that sets up a Blue Devils-Cardinals matchup that Louisville wins by a scant .002 in terms of PASE value.

What's my reaction to this model? First, last year the combined PASE approach was in the 90th percentile of ESPN's Tournament Challenge. But the difference is that the 2007 model had three top seeds advancing (Florida, North Carolina and Ohio State, with the Gators taking the crown). This year, not a single top seed is projected to reach the Final Four. That's happened only once in the 64-team era. The good news, if you're placing faith in this approach, is that the one exception happened just two years ago. Still, I'm skeptical enough about this model to rate it as dangerously risky.

There are two models left to run: a strategy based on round-by-round attribute PASE that's rated as a low-risk approach, and a medium-risk strategy employing possession-based statistics.
Freelance writer Peter Tiernan has been analyzing the NCAA tournament for 18 years. E-mail him at bracketscience@comcast.net or go to www.bracketscience.com and check out the BracketMaster, which lets you do your own bracket analysis.
The safe way:

[h1][/h1]

[h1]Could Kansas get the monkey off its back?[/h1]
By Peter Tiernan
Special to ESPN Insider
(Archive)



Updated: March 18, 2008

• Comment
• Email
• Print

The rules I've outlined previously for picking the Final Four and champion yielded mostly predictable results, with all of the No. 1 and 2 seeds in contention for a Final Four berth. However, one wild-card No. 6 seed did emerge as a semifinal contender (the Marquette Golden Eagles). Will the numbers send them to the Final Four? Read on. And if you're not happy with this model, hang tight -- this is the "high-risk strategy." I'll lay out three other strategies before the tournament tips off Thursday: one low-risk, one medium and a final "dangerously crazy strategy."

[+] Enlarge

AP Photo/!%+% Whipple

Kansas would love to raise up another trophy come April in San Antonio.
If you haven't read "Rules for picking your Final Four and champion," you might want to give it a quick skim, since I won't go into a lot of detail on why certain teams made the cut (or not). After identifying the Final Four and champion, I'll double back and fill out the rest of the bracket based on the upset and toss-up game rules spelled out in those two articles. But first things first: Here are your Final Four candidates based on the statistical model:
No. 1 seed candidates: For the first time in the three years that I've used these rules, all four top seeds meet the statistical criteria to reach the Final Four.

No. 2 seed candidates: Now this is truly amazing -- all the second seeds also have the numbers to be semifinal contenders. Last year, none of them did.

No. 3 seed candidates: And to continue the craziness, not one of the third-seeded squads had the requisite offensive firepower to be considered a Final Four candidate.

No. 4 seed candidates: Fourth-seeded squads also get shut out of the semifinal pool, since none of them met the criteria of winning eight or nine of their last 10 games.

No. 5-6 seed candidates: So the No. 3 and 4 seeds failed to meet the criteria for a Final Four contender ... there's no chance that a 5 or 6 will make it, right? Wrong. Marquette, believe it or not, met all 10 conditions to be considered in the semifinalist conversation.

Altogether, nine teams made the Final Four cut, presenting three head-to-head matchups: North Carolina versus Tennessee in the East, Kansas versus Georgetown in the Midwest, and UCLA versus Duke in the West. Boring, huh? Well, then there's the South, where three teams -- Memphis, Texas and Marquette -- are battling for the semifinal berth. In the three head-to-head matchups, all the top seeds prevail, primarily because they have higher-scoring starting units. In the one multi-candidate battle, amazingly, Marquette nosed out Memphis because the Golden Eagles' starters contributed to a higher percentage of the team's points.

Picking your champion
Your Final Four is set -- three No. 1 seeds in North Carolina, Kansas and UCLA, and one wild-card No. 6 seed in Marquette. (Hey! What kind of model is this?) Now the question is: Which one of them cuts down the nets? Based on the "champion" rules, Marquette drops out immediately since it isn't seeded No. 1 through 4. UCLA also falls by the wayside since the Bruins don't score more than 76 points per game, as the champ has for 19 straight tourneys. That leaves North Carolina and Kansas -- and the Tar Heels drop out because they're on a "bound for a fall" winning streak of 10 or more games. So, based on the Final Four/champ rules, the Kansas Jayhawks are the 2008 stats champions.

Filling out the rest of the bracket

If you slot your Final Four into the bracket, tab Kansas as the winner and advance all other Final Four candidates as far as possible, you'll take care of 31 out of the 63 games to select. Now, automatically advance all Nos. 3 and 4 seeds one round. That will take care of another eight games. With 39 games out of the way, you have only 24 more to pick. How do you do it? Refer to the toss-up and upset rules laid out in the corresponding articles.

In the first round, that means picking the 5 vs. 12, 6 vs. 11, 7 vs. 10 and 8 vs. 9 games. Let's take the upset matchups first. In the much-ballyhooed 5 vs. 12 matchups, for the second straight year, not a single one of the No. 12 seeds has the historical makeup to spring an upset. (We predicted this last year, and it came to pass ... no guarantees on 2008.) Mainly, the No. 12 seeds don't have solid enough winning percentages. The only one that does -- Western Kentucky -- doesn't have a coach with tourney experience.

In the 6 vs. 11 matchups, both Kansas State and Baylor have what it takes to spring upsets. That means USC and Purdue could be making early exits.

So now it's on to the toss-up matchups. In the 7 vs. 10 games, both St. Mary's and Davidson have the offensive firepower and frontcourt strength to prevail. South Alabama falls just short because it relies too much on guards for scoring. Arizona's offense isn't prolific enough.

In the 8 vs. 9 squeaker games, No. 8 seeds Indiana and BYU have the experience and battle scars to take out their ninth-seeded foes. No. 9 seeds Kent State and Oregon stave off UNLV and Mississippi State.

With these first-round matchups and the Final Four and champion rules out of the way, you have only seven games left to pick in the second round. They are:

Washington State (4) versus Notre Dame (5)
Louisville (3) versus Oklahoma (6)
Vanderbilt (4) versus Clemson (5)
Wisconsin (3) versus Kansas State (11)
Pittsburgh (4) versus Michigan State (5)
Connecticut (4) versus Drake (5)
Xavier (3) versus Baylor (11)

In the two 3 vs. 11 upset games, Kansas State has the credentials to spring a surprise, but Baylor doesn't. So Wisconsin is out of the tourney and Xavier moves on. In the four 4 vs. 5 toss-up games, three fifth-seeded teams -- Notre Dame, Clemson and Michigan State -- all have what it takes to fend off their higher seeded opponent. Connecticut is the only No. 4 seed to advance. And in the one 3 vs. 6 game, Oklahoma pulls off a mild surprise over the Cardinals because of Jeff Capel's status as an up-and-coming coach.

You're almost done. All the Sweet 16 games were resolved through the Final Four/champ advancement rule, as were the Elite Eight games. And since we know that Kansas is predicted to prevail over North Carolina and then win the whole ball of wax, all that is left is to figure out whether UCLA or Marquette reach the title game. Since the Bruins have the longer winning streak, they earn the right to face the Jayhawks for the championship.

So there you have it: Kansas and UCLA reach the finals, with the Jayhawks cutting down the nets. This is the point in every article describing the statistical results in which I forewarn that: (a) past performance doesn't guarantee future results; and (b) even I don't pick strictly by the numbers (though I will submit an ESPN Tournament Challenge bracket with these picks so I can report on their success).

I'm a little suspicious of advancing three top seeds to the Final Four, given the parity of this year's tourney and the trend toward grind-it-out basketball, which might discount the value of high-scoring teams. Also, the Marquette pick seems a little wacky, but there's no doubt that the South region is the toughest one, with any of the top six seeds capable of making Final Four runs. As to whether Kansas can get the underachieving monkey off its back, beat a streaking North Carolina squad, then overcome the Bruins' tough defense, I leave that for you to decide.
Freelance writer Peter Tiernan has been analyzing the NCAA tournament for 18 years. E-mail him at bracketscience@comcast.net or go to www.bracketscience.com and check out the BracketMaster, which lets you do your own bracket analysis.

 

[allen3xis]

Craftsy,

out of curiosity ND or Mason?

I taking Mason, but Pomeroy stats are telling me I shouldn't

 

[newbs24]

Good looks Craftsy. I took some of their advice and I also left a lot of it. For some reason I am looking very hard at a Louisville/GTown semifinal. That mightbe a last minute change for me.

 

[craftsy21]

Originally Posted by allen3xis

Craftsy,

out of curiosity ND or Mason?

I taking Mason, but Pomeroy stats are telling me I shouldn't

I tend to lean ND. It's a scary pick however, because ND has been pathetic away from home this year... their best wins are Kansas State and Villanova,everywhere else on the road they got dominated againts good competition.

However - i do believe they will have learned a lesson from last year's drumming in the first round, and I can't see them coming out flat in thisone. GM isn't the GM's of the past, and i think Gody has his way inside against the smaller Patriots. I also believe McAlarney is a tough matchup forGMU.
I won't be surprised to see it go the other way just because it's a neutral location.. but ND is a much better team than GMU.

 

[airdb]

Anyone else notice how all the mid-majors are facing off against each other in the first round? I'm kind of ticked off by that... sure it ensures that 3 ofthe 6 mid-majors get to the round of 32, but I think it would be better to see these teams in more competitions with teams from major conferences. I'm surea few of them could win too, since their seedings aren't that bad.

I was listening to the Tirico show (Scott Van Pelt was hosting today) and they were saying that a first round match of Gonzaga vs. Davidson was a waste, and Ihave to agree. It's especially bad because it'll virtually be a road game for Gonzaga despite being the lower seed.

I know it seems like nitpicking, but I thought they brought up some good points.

 

[craftsy21]

Originally Posted by AirDB

Anyone else notice how all the mid-majors are facing off against each other in the first round? I'm kind of ticked off by that... sure it ensures that 3 of the 6 mid-majors get to the round of 32, but I think it would be better to see these teams in more competitions with teams from major conferences. I'm sure a few of them could win too, since their seedings aren't that bad.

I was listening to the Tirico show (Scott Van Pelt was hosting today) and they were saying that a first round match of Gonzaga vs. Davidson was a waste, and I have to agree. It's especially bad because it'll virtually be a road game for Gonzaga despite being the lower seed.

I know it seems like nitpicking, but I thought they brought up some good points.

No - i completely agree with you and some others I've head say it.

Everybody wants to see the good mid-majors with the good seeds playing the middle-tier bubble teams that got in from the major conferences.. it's whatwe're all dying to see really, so that big conference supporters and mid-major supporters can finally square off toe-to-toe... It seems like they'vebeen screwing up these potential matchups now for the past few years, and i'm beginning to think it's not entirely by chance.

Zags play Dadvidson in North Carolina

in the early game, no less.. granted it's friday, but that's still going to be like early morning Gonzagatime. Last year Stanford got that treatment and got run out of the gym having to play the early game on the east coast. Then you've got Drake vs WesternKentucky, and of course, Butler (who's seeded to high) traveling TO alabama to play South Alabama (who's seeded too low).

I mean - maybe it's just luck of the draw, but why couldn't they have moved some things around to give us this sort of look: put Butler vs Arizona,Davidson vs West Virginia, Gonzaga vs Texas A&M, South Bama vs Purdue, and Drake vs Villanova...

I mean - don't get me wrong, i'm excited to see all of these games.. but those right there provide for some SERIOUSLY interesting matchups.

I know they aren't supposed to seek out matchups.. but maybe they can try to avoid matchups instead.

 

[scuse7]

So i am the only one who thinks Purdue over Xavier?

 

[allen3xis]

I actually like Baylor over Purdue...

and Xavier over Duke.

 

[allen3xis]

Craftsy, anywhere to see all of those PASE ratings?

 

[craftsy21]

Originally Posted by allen3xis

Craftsy, anywhere to see all of those PASE ratings?

He has them all on his website, www.bracketscience.com, but charges $20/year to see them.. seems pretty silly that he can't throw up some ads to coverthose costs, but everybody's gotta make a living I suppose.

I'm sure if you googled around enough you could find somebody that posted them on a message board somewhere, but i'm swamped this week with school workand other things so I can't go digging too much - I'll definitely post them if i come across it.

Anyways -

Let's talk more about some matchups in here guys - we're supposed to be the experts on THIS board... why do you like Xaiver and Baylor rather than Dukeand Purdue? Don't have a strong opinion either way myself, so i'm very curious to hear your guys' impressions of these teams.

 

[allen3xis]

Xavier and Duke....Xavier is efficient with their offense, solid on D. I'm banking on Lavender being ready to go now. Sean Miller is a great young coachand this team is experienced and is looking to make their mark after last year's OSU game. The seniors left over will be looking for payback against Dukealso. Duke again this year is not looking good down the stretch....they've had success shooting the 3, but now on a neutral floor against a good defensiveteam, I side with Xavier, in a close one.

Baylor over Purdue...Purdue won a tournament game last year but the team is so young this season. I know Baylor has no tournament experience but I think thisis a good spot for them. Plus with Jerrells they should have the best player on the floor. It just looks like a game where the high seed wins..not really anupset tho.

 

[aepps20]

Craftsy and Allen3xis,

Do you guys think Kansas will win it all or will Bill Self pull a Bill Self?

 

[allen3xis]

If Georgetown wasn't in their region...I'd have them in the title game.

Thinking without my homerism.....I think they win it this year.

And for his sake, he better get it done this season...might be his best chance to do so.

They are the most balanced team on offensive and defensive in the country. Good guards, size, athleticism...they have it all.

But..

Bill Self pull a Bill Self?
and Kansas pulling a Kansas doesn't make me too confident.

 

[pdoggy85]

Zags play Dadvidson in North Carolina

in the early game, no less.. granted it's friday, but that's still going to be like early morning Gonzaga time. Last year Stanford got that treatment and got run out of the gym having to play the early game on the east coast. Then you've got Drake vs Western Kentucky, and of course, Butler (who's seeded to high) traveling TO alabama to play South Alabama (who's seeded too low).

Are you saying Butler should be a lower seed (7+)? Or are you saying Butler should be a 4, 5, 6 seed?

 

[craftsy21]

Originally Posted by pdoggy85

Zags play Dadvidson in North Carolina

in the early game, no less.. granted it's friday, but that's still going to be like early morning Gonzaga time. Last year Stanford got that treatment and got run out of the gym having to play the early game on the east coast. Then you've got Drake vs Western Kentucky, and of course, Butler (who's seeded to high) traveling TO alabama to play South Alabama (who's seeded too low).

Are you saying Butler should be a lower seed (7+)? Or are you saying Butler should be a 4, 5, 6 seed?


I'm saying they should be a 5 or a 6 seed, at the minimum... sorry, i never know how to say high and low with seeds so that people will all understandit the same way, my bad. And so then vice versa, USA should be an 11 or 12.


And Allen...

I think you are definitely underestimating Purdue's defense.. they are going to be in Baylor's front and back pockets all night long.. So long as thegame isn't called by sissy standards, I predict Baylor has a hard time scoring 60 points.

On the flip side of that - i'm HOPING Purdue loses, because their style of play annoys the piss out of me and i told a guy who was sackriding their programa few weeks ago that they'll get knocked out before the sweet sixteen because they won't get away with all their holding and grabbing outside the bigten..

I guess what i'm saying is, a lot could depend on officiating in this one.

 

[allen3xis]

Yeah...

I just don't like the idea of relying on such a young team right now.

Officiating is going to be really interesting this month.