I think it’s a very big deal to get a 3 seed and avoid the 4/5 matchup. The teams penciled in to 4/5 right now scare me a hell of a lot more than the teams at 6. I also believe any of the projected #2 seeds could lose at anytime early in the tournament.
1 Like
Totally agree. We could use 1 or 2 upsets early for Clemson, TN or Wichita… Those would definitely help.
So harking back to the conversation about whether/how Beilein needs to improve scheduling. . . I take it for granted that he wants to maximize our perceived value, that teams surprise by being better or worse than predicted. He’s moving into a period where his teams will be ranked higher from the start of each season; maybe coming where he comes from he’s been timid. What then is the takeaway? Schedule much more aggressively? If we’re one of the country’s eight best teams and we end up with a three seed, does that in fact reveal a huge screw-up? Or is that pretty close to being the breaks of the game? Would one more signature win have (likely) placed us right where we belong? Obviously AL A&M. . . and (probably) the way it works in the real world is you have an open date on X day and you reach out to teams that aren’t scheduled then. . . seems like the actual mechanics might play a real role. Thanks for thotz.
We had Texas, UCLA, UNC, and the Maui Invitational on our schedule. Plenty of chances for big wins or what could have been big wins in most years. If anything is at fault it’s just the Big Ten in general. ACC and B12 teams have a chance for big wins every week.
3 Likes
I’d like to avoid UVA and Duke, but if Duke’s a 2, I’m not sure there’s a big difference. What teams are you worried about? Nova? I’d rather play Xavier or Kansas than most of the 2 seeds.
Generally, 3s do a little better in the first two rounds than 4s, but it’s not a huge difference - the big drop is at the 5 seed, in part because 12s tend to be good. 3s advance to the round of 32 84% of the time, while 4s do 80%, and 5s only 64%.
2 Likes
If we’re a 5 seed on selection sunday, we can definitely say that scheduling bad cupcakes hurt us again. Otherwise, it comes down to us just not being an elite team until February. If we were playing at this level all year, we have a better run in Maui and probably win a couple more B10 games and end up a 1 seed.
3 Likes
Maui really hurt. Losing to LSU and with VCU having down year and of course the playing the locals. Beat LSU, then ND and then WS we would be on the 2 line, but it didn’t work that way. We had the schedule set to optimize non-conference SOS, but blew it.
2 Likes
We may be one of the best 8 teams right now, but we weren’t when we were losing to LSU or getting crushed by NC. UM’s RPI is 13. You can’t lose 7 games and play in a down league and be much higher.
I’m sure that’s one goal, but there are others, like, as you say, filling specific dates, as well as getting better. I think the overall takeaway is give the team opportunities for quality wins and win games.
2 Likes
I believe KenPom weights recent performance. Michigan’s resume doesn’t look as good as its playing because it didn’t play like this all year. The team I watched in Maui wasn’t the same team. Not even close. And they lost games they shouldn’t have and wouldn’t have if they were playing like this.
4 Likes
I don’t think anyone disagrees that Michigan hasn’t played like this all year and so it’s resume won’t entirely reflect the last 9 games. But here’s my problem. Comparison to similar resumes from prior years shows nothing as low as a 4. And in a year with an enormous lack of elite teams I can’t believe a 28-7 Michigan team with 7 Q1 wins is a 4 seed or worse.
1 Like
Polls don’t matter but up to #7 in the country
3 Likes
Wouldn’t the fact that there are no elite teams means there may be more very good teams (i.e. those worthy of a 2 or 3 seed)? It does seem like the 2-4 line is jumbled right now.
3 Likes
LSU could make up for the shockingly great game they played against us and beat TN in round two of their conference tournament. That would help us greatly.
1 Like
Bracketmatrix now has us at the last 3 seed. That’s witha few brackets still not upadted from yesterday’s results. If you only take into account the brackets that have updated today then our avg. seed on those is 3.45. Which would still put as as the last 3 seed.
Be rooting for Kansas, Duke/UNC, Cincinnati.
Root against Arizona, Clemson, Auburn/Tennessee, WVU/TTU
All of the perceived wins being “better” than others in this message make perfect sense to me. CMU has a higher RPI than both Rutgers and Illinois, and beating UCLA at home isn’t nearly as impressive as beating Penn State and Maryland on the road and Nebraska on a neutral court.
Yep–I certainly agree. My wife and I were watching the LSU game in Maui (humble brag) and she literally goes after the game, “maybe we’ll get to see them again for the final four.” (we live in Texas). I may have laughed in her face because it sounded so preposterous at the time.
Now of course–we do look like contenders–but it’s been a night and day difference. I still feel a 4 is most likely…but love how we’ve been improving all year.
UVA to Charlotte is a shorter drive than to Pittsburgh. I’d think that matters more than the distance by air.
I was going off the site Dylan shared. I’m not entirely sure what they use I would imagine most teams are flying. But I honestly don’t know. It’s also not a not a hard rule on it which is what leaves it open to interpretation.
Reading the KPI FAQ page it seems like those rankings are meant to be a ranking of resume. Does it not seem wrong to just randomly throw that in with predictive metrics? Ranking resumes is what the committee is for, this just seems like such a weird thing to have.
I don’t want to spend a bunch of time trying to figure out whether or not MSU deserves a 3 seed but I glanced at the top 16 Lunardi seeded teams and compared those teams against the grades each of the top 16 Lunardi teams received for their wins on realtimerpi. Realtimerpi gives two dollar signs ($$) for great wins and one ($) for good wins. It provides a great visual.
Team 1: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 2: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 3: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 4: $$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 5: $$$$$$$$
Team 6: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 7: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team 8: $$$$$$$$$
Team 9: $$$$$$$$$$$
Team10: $$$$
Team11: $$$$$$$$$$
Team12: $$$$$$$$$$
Team13: $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
Team14: $$$$$$$
Team15: $$$$$$$$
Team16: $$$$$$$
Which team is MSU? Or asked another way: Which team does not belong?
1 Like