I've done this in the past starting with Championship Week, but I thought it would be a fun, revealing exercise to start early. I will include Valpo, as well as any team in the HL who currently holds first place in the standings (this week, that would be Wright State).
A refresher...
Red is bad (these teams would slot ahead of Valpo, based on RPI, if the tournament were seeded today).
Green is good (these teams would slot behind Valpo, based on RPI, if the tournament were seeded today).
At this point, I think it is fair to assume that we sit squarely in the jumble that exists on the bubble...so, for ease of understanding, I will assume that we would have to get an auto-bid in order to make the NCAA Tournament. Thus, every team "behind" us (see: in green) would get slotted in below Valpo on the seed list, and any bubble teams would be ahead of us. This way, we can see what the seeding scenario could look like.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/33woc90.jpg)
Based on this, and a conference title, Valpo would slot ahead of 25 conference champions (there are 26 on the list, but you would have to exclude WSU). Based solely on RPI rankings, Valpo would slot in as the BEST #11 seed, as of today.
Wright State would be the best of the #16 seeds, avoiding a play-in game, but still facing a #1 seed in their first NCAA Tournament game.
I will update this weekly. I think it will be interesting to see teams move up and down as they continue through conference play.
This week's update. RPI numbers are current this morning.
We "moved down" two spots this week, getting jumped by Wichita State and VCU.
If the tournament started today, and was seeded strictly by RPI (and assuming, for the sake of assumption, that we were in the "auto-bid only" category and did not beat any at-large teams on the seed list) we would be the third #11 seed.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/iqwu8x.jpg)
Great stuff! Could you add a line for each seed line though? It'd be easier to see what the 16s, 15s, 14s, etc were.
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 02, 2016, 10:02:02 AMCould you add a line for each seed line though? It'd be easier to see what the 16s, 15s, 14s, etc were.
(http://i65.tinypic.com/23k2n11.jpg)
Ok, maybe next week, I'll think about it.
Oh and RealTimeRPI is kind of terrible for figuring out what RPI is. They use an old formula and it's frequently wrong. LiveRPI, Warren Nolan or even the NCAA site are the best resources for RPI.
Monmouth is ahead of us in RPI. Here's what I figured out.
(http://s10.postimg.org/wwdm7c5ex/Capture.png)
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 02, 2016, 11:15:18 AM
Oh and RealTimeRPI is kind of terrible for figuring out what RPI is. They use an old formula and it's frequently wrong. LiveRPI, Warren Nolan or even the NCAA site are the best resources for RPI.
Monmouth is ahead of us in RPI. Here's what I figured out.
(http://s10.postimg.org/wwdm7c5ex/Capture.png)
My numbers come directly from the NCAA RPI rankings...since that's what I assume the committee would look at.
Quote from: ValpoHoops on February 02, 2016, 11:59:31 AM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 02, 2016, 11:15:18 AM
Oh and RealTimeRPI is kind of terrible for figuring out what RPI is. They use an old formula and it's frequently wrong. LiveRPI, Warren Nolan or even the NCAA site are the best resources for RPI.
Monmouth is ahead of us in RPI. Here's what I figured out.
(http://s10.postimg.org/wwdm7c5ex/Capture.png)
My numbers come directly from the NCAA RPI rankings...since that's what I assume the committee would look at.
It appears to be off slightly. http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi (http://www.ncaa.com/rankings/basketball-men/d1/ncaa-mens-basketball-rpi)
Quote from: ValpoHoops on February 02, 2016, 11:59:31 AMMy numbers come directly from the NCAA RPI rankings...since that's what I assume the committee would look at.
Since the numbers from the NCAA rankings are identical to the Warren Nolan ranking (for VU) are both using the selection committee adjustments ( .6 home win vs 1.4 road win etc.) or neither. Does the NCAA keep running adjusted numbers or is that a one time post season process?
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
I tend to trust both NCAA and WarrenNolan numbers. I believe morgen both to be accurate when issued (ie yes home/away adjustments are made). The NCAA numbers are issued, last I checked, periodically (once a week or so?). Warren Nolan's are updated frequently, and often include a game within an hour or so of its conclusion.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Wow, they are a low end 4, high end 5 seed. That's crazy.
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
QuoteThere are some long shot mid-majors seeking at-large status -- teams like Arkansas-Little Rock (17-2, No. 59 RPI), William & Mary (13-6, No. 38 RPI), South Dakota State (16-5, No. 47 RPI), and Valparaiso (17-4, No. 39 RPI) -- whose relatively similar resumes should all be considered on the cusp. (And not necessarily in that order: Valpo's defense ranks No. 1 in adjusted efficiency and is the only of these teams for whom "they're top 25 in KenPom!" could be wielded in the committee room.)
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Sorry, Kyle, but if our RPIs are close, no way are our resumes are "not even close." Monmouth certainly has more wins against traditional powerhouses, but that doesn't mean their overall accomplishments are better (starting with the idea that the powerhouses may not be as good as we think). And look, I'm not even going to pat them on the back too much for their scheduling, either. They were tabbed to be 3rd in the MAAC after an 18-15 season--who was going to be afraid to schedule them? It's not like they returned everybody from a 28-6 Tourney team that took Maryland to the wire. They surprised some big-conference teams in the beginning of the season and lost to some bad teams since then, but they aren't giant-killers.
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 05:18:48 PM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Sorry, Kyle, but if our RPIs are close, no way are our resumes are "not even close." Monmouth certainly has more wins against traditional powerhouses, but that doesn't mean their overall accomplishments are better (starting with the idea that the powerhouses may not be as good as we think). And look, I'm not even going to pat them on the back too much for their scheduling, either. They were tabbed to be 3rd in the MAAC after an 18-15 season--who was going to be afraid to schedule them? It's not like they returned everybody from a 28-6 Tourney team that took Maryland to the wire. They surprised some big-conference teams in the beginning of the season and lost to some bad teams since then, but they aren't giant-killers.
[/b]
You mean big-conference teams like Wisconsin and Minnesota, on the road?? Teams that good need to be considered for an at-large!! ;)
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 01:16:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Wow, they are a low end 4, high end 5 seed. That's crazy.
Sucks for Trey Lewis, who used the graduate transfer rule to leave Cleveland State for Louisville, so that he could play in the NCAA tourney...
There is a joke here somewhere about his recruiting process with Louisville, but I just can't put my finger on it.
Quote from: vu72 on February 05, 2016, 05:30:56 PM
You mean big-conference teams like Wisconsin and Minnesota, on the road?? Teams that good need to be considered for an at-large!! ;)
Exactly. At least the enthusiasm for that died, though.
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 05:18:48 PM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Sorry, Kyle, but if our RPIs are close, no way are our resumes are "not even close." Monmouth certainly has more wins against traditional powerhouses, but that doesn't mean their overall accomplishments are better (starting with the idea that the powerhouses may not be as good as we think). And look, I'm not even going to pat them on the back too much for their scheduling, either. They were tabbed to be 3rd in the MAAC after an 18-15 season--who was going to be afraid to schedule them? It's not like they returned everybody from a 28-6 Tourney team that took Maryland to the wire. They surprised some big-conference teams in the beginning of the season and lost to some bad teams since then, but they aren't giant-killers.
You seem to be missing the point that they won against USC who is 16th in RPI and Notre Dame who is 36th in RPI. That's 2 for sure NCAA teams (well ND needs another big win to be for sure but their conference tourney should give them one). The middle of their conference is better than ours and the only reason they are near us in RPI is their 5 losses to our 4.
Our best win is Oregon State at 55, their 3rd best win is UCLA who is 70th... Ooh and Georgetown at 73. Our second best win is 82nd Belmont. Ignoring the team names they have 4 better wins in terms of RPI than our 2nd.
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 07:46:51 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 05:18:48 PM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 02:35:31 PM
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
Updated Bubble-Watch blurb (still not listed alongside Monmouth, though):
I hate to bust our "bubble" on the comparisons to Monmouth (we'd totally crush them. They couldn't handle our height) but our resume isn't even close to comparable.
Our #1 win would be their 3rd best win. They have six Top 100 wins vs. our three. And while they have 3 losses that our worse than our worst loss, they have two top 50 wins, one of which was on the enemy's court. Now had we won in Oregon, things would be totally different. That said, I would currently have both teams on the 10 seed line (stay tuned, on Monday I'm going to reveal a Kyle's Bracketology Bracket.)
Quote from: Valpower on February 05, 2016, 02:13:34 PM
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch)
Also how is Maryland not a lock? They are on my 2 line! How are there only 6 teams that are "locks"? What the hell is a lock? A team competing for the 1 line?
Sorry, Kyle, but if our RPIs are close, no way are our resumes are "not even close." Monmouth certainly has more wins against traditional powerhouses, but that doesn't mean their overall accomplishments are better (starting with the idea that the powerhouses may not be as good as we think). And look, I'm not even going to pat them on the back too much for their scheduling, either. They were tabbed to be 3rd in the MAAC after an 18-15 season--who was going to be afraid to schedule them? It's not like they returned everybody from a 28-6 Tourney team that took Maryland to the wire. They surprised some big-conference teams in the beginning of the season and lost to some bad teams since then, but they aren't giant-killers.
You seem to be missing the point that they won against USC who is 16th in RPI and Notre Dame who is 36th in RPI. That's 2 for sure NCAA teams (well ND needs another big win to be for sure but their conference tourney should give them one). The middle of their conference is better than ours and the only reason they are near us in RPI is their 5 losses to our 4.
Our best win is Oregon State at 55, their 3rd best win is UCLA who is 70th... Ooh and Georgetown at 73. Our second best win is 82nd Belmont. Ignoring the team names they have 4 better wins in terms of RPI than our 2nd.
Sent from my XT1058 using Tapatalk
I'm not missing it. They lost against USC at their home and won on a neutral court. Could we not expect the same or better, given the opportunity? I'm not impressed with USC. They're a football school.
Quote from: HC on February 05, 2016, 07:19:17 PM
There is a joke here somewhere about his recruiting process with Louisville, but I just can't put my finger on it.
Quote from: valpotx on February 05, 2016, 06:56:22 PM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 05, 2016, 01:16:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Wow, they are a low end 4, high end 5 seed. That's crazy.
Sucks for Trey Lewis, who used the graduate transfer rule to leave Cleveland State for Louisville, so that he could play in the NCAA tourney...
http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/college/louisville/2016/02/05/sources-u-l-imposing-postseason-hoops-ban/79878760/ (http://www.courier-journal.com/story/sports/college/louisville/2016/02/05/sources-u-l-imposing-postseason-hoops-ban/79878760/)
Do you wonder if Gary Waters is having a slightly more enjoyable season after this announcement?
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Why would anyone think of hiring prostitutes (complete with STD's and track marks) to attract recruits in this day and age? 85% of college-aged girls give it away. Don't most guys that age have sex anytime they want it?
Quote from: wh on February 05, 2016, 11:02:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Why would anyone think of hiring prostitutes (complete with STD's and track marks) to attract recruits in this day and age? 85% of college-aged girls give it away. Don't most guys that age have sex anytime they want it?
I think U of Louisville with large sums in it's recruiting budget would be using more of a service such as this
http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/kristin-davis-defense-prostitution (http://www.xojane.com/it-happened-to-me/kristin-davis-defense-prostitution)
Quote from: wh on February 05, 2016, 11:02:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Why would anyone think of hiring prostitutes (complete with STD's and track marks) to attract recruits in this day and age? 85% of college-aged girls give it away. Don't most guys that age have sex anytime they want it?
Just for fun, I am going to reverse the order of your sentence.
85% of college-aged boys give it away. Don't most girls that age have sex anytime they want it? We need to stop with the narrative that girls are sluts if they want to have sex, where as guys are just getting laid. Boys are supposed to pursue and girls are supposed to say no is an outdated and sexist form of thinking.
Plus, 85% is just ridiculous. Is that really your view of college aged women?
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 06, 2016, 09:36:09 AM
Quote from: wh on February 05, 2016, 11:02:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Why would anyone think of hiring prostitutes (complete with STD's and track marks) to attract recruits in this day and age? 85% of college-aged girls give it away. Don't most guys that age have sex anytime they want it?
Just for fun, I am going to reverse the order of your sentence.
85% of college-aged boys give it away. Don't most girls that age have sex anytime they want it? We need to stop with the narrative that girls are sluts if they want to have sex, where as guys are just getting laid. Boys are supposed to pursue and girls are supposed to say no is an outdated and sexist form of thinking.
Plus, 85% is just ridiculous. Is that really your view of college aged women?
You might want to read this:
Kathleen Bogle, Ph.D., author of Hooking Up: Sex, Dating, and Relationships on Campus, says, "What [college students] do not realize is that approximately 25 percent of college students in the United States are virgins.
http://www.hercampus.com/love/truth-about-virginity-college (http://www.hercampus.com/love/truth-about-virginity-college)
Or this one:
Among those ages 20-24, 12% of women and 13% of men said they were virgins, up from 8% for both sexes in 2002.
http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/dating/story/2011/03/More-hookups-on-campuses-but-more-virgins-too/45556388/1 (http://usatoday30.usatoday.com/news/health/wellness/dating/story/2011/03/More-hookups-on-campuses-but-more-virgins-too/45556388/1)
And, like every element of cultural rot in America, it comes with consequences:
However, new research has found that what happens in college doesn't always stay in college. In fact, many students leave their alma mater with more than just a diploma—they leave with a sexually transmitted disease.
According to Stanford University's Sexual Health Peer Resource Center, 1 in 4 college students have an STD.
http://www.everydayhealth.com/columns/dr-laura-berman-on-love-and-sex/stds-in-college-what-students-need-to-know/ (http://www.everydayhealth.com/columns/dr-laura-berman-on-love-and-sex/stds-in-college-what-students-need-to-know/)
Lest we forget about abortion:
According to a 2008 study about 20 percent of women (that's one in five) will have an abortion by the time she is 25. It's hard to know exactly how many of those abortions occur in college-age women, but some statistics estimate as many as 45 percent. It makes sense: college is notorious for sex, but few college women are emotionally or financially prepared to raise a baby.
http://www.hercampus.com/health/sexual-health/are-college-women-getting-abortions (http://www.hercampus.com/health/sexual-health/are-college-women-getting-abortions)
For sake of time I'll forego trends on porn addiction, phone sex, out of wedlock births, related emotional trauma and suicide, cost to society, effect on families, etc., etc.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 06, 2016, 09:36:09 AM
Quote from: wh on February 05, 2016, 11:02:29 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 05, 2016, 12:54:13 PM
This may help Valpo in moving up to a better seed. Louisville to self-impose postseason ban for alleged violations related to prostitution scandal.
Why would anyone think of hiring prostitutes (complete with STD's and track marks) to attract recruits in this day and age? 85% of college-aged girls give it away. Don't most guys that age have sex anytime they want it?
Just for fun, I am going to reverse the order of your sentence.
85% of college-aged boys give it away. Don't most girls that age have sex anytime they want it? We need to stop with the narrative that girls are sluts if they want to have sex, where as guys are just getting laid. Boys are supposed to pursue and girls are supposed to say no is an outdated and sexist form of thinking.
Plus, 85% is just ridiculous. Is that really your view of college aged women?
I'm not sure you are being exactly PC when you say that. They could be gay. But not in Indiana.
Interesting enough, maybe important, discussion. But, maybe we should move it out of the NCAA Seeding thread?
Quote from: agibson on February 06, 2016, 12:43:30 PM
Interesting enough, maybe important, discussion. But, maybe we should move it out of the NCAA Seeding thread?
Agreed. This tangent belongs in General Off Topic if anyone wants to continue to discuss today's morality. And stuff related to the Louisville scandal can go with it.
Quote from: agibson on February 06, 2016, 12:43:30 PM
Interesting enough, maybe important, discussion. But, maybe we should move it out of the NCAA Seeding thread?
Go right ahead. Be my guest. ;)
Quote from: wh on February 06, 2016, 12:00:48 PMFor sake of time I'll forego trends on porn addiction, phone sex, out of wedlock births, related emotional trauma and suicide, cost to society, effect on families, etc., etc.
Why does Raitis Grafs' face suddenly come to mind?
Using NCAA RPI numbers, which were updated this morning.
This would slot us in as the 2nd #12 seed, which is down three spots from last week (our RPI went in the tank this week...playing UIC didn't help, and our opponents didn't have a great week either).
We were passed by Monmouth, Chattanooga, San Diego State and South Dakota State. We jumped the SEC leader, as LSU took the conference lead in the standings.
(http://i65.tinypic.com/169i6bc.jpg)
One comment about the Summit and how it has a higher ranking this season...they took cues from what the MAC did last year. They made sure that they scheduled a ton of winnable games (and they try to do it against teams that will end up with good records...so they go to the very bottom of D1 and find the "good teams" from those conferences, if they can). This way, everyone has a good non-conference record, and when they start playing each other, their RPI's all rise.
Not only is the SL ranked higher than us but the last several years they have earned higher seeds?
Valpo is a star employee in an organization with bad management, bad employees, and declining results. Hopefully, we're looking for a new employer.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 11:50:33 AM
Not only is the SL ranked higher than us but the last several years they have earned higher seeds?
Not true.
Quote from: ValpoHoops on February 08, 2016, 09:58:20 AMOne comment about the Summit and how it has a higher ranking this season...they took cues from what the MAC did last year. They made sure that they scheduled a ton of winnable games (and they try to do it against teams that will end up with good records...so they go to the very bottom of D1 and find the "good teams" from those conferences, if they can). This way, everyone has a good non-conference record, and when they start playing each other, their RPI's all rise.
Never would have guessed that LeCrone would be so outsmarted by Tom Douple and Jon Steinbrecher, both.
2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed
2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed
2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed
2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed
Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years.
Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:08:44 PM2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed 2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed 2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed 2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years. Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
And if Valpo slips up in Detroit at the tourney and Oakland or anyone else at that matter gets the AQ (we don't get an at-large) the SL will once again get a better seed making it 4 out of 5 years. Oakland or any other HL team will get a 14 or 15 seed.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:08:44 PM
2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed
2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed
2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed
2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed
Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years.
Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
The only reason why the Summit had better seed in those years is because their best team won the conference tournament while ours didn't. And also Valpo was moved up a seed in 2013 to play closer to home. This is a :censored: way to judge conferences.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:10:52 PM
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:08:44 PM2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed 2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed 2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed 2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years. Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
And if Valpo slips up in Detroit at the tourney and Oakland or anyone else at that matter gets the AQ (we don't get an at-large) the SL will once again get a better seed making it 4 out of 5 years. Oakland or any other HL team will get a 14 or 15 seed.
And if South Dakota State loses, they'll end with a 15 or 16 seed.
Quote from: a3uge on February 08, 2016, 06:04:06 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:10:52 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:08:44 PM2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed 2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed 2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed 2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years. Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
And if Valpo slips up in Detroit at the tourney and Oakland or anyone else at that matter gets the AQ (we don't get an at-large) the SL will once again get a better seed making it 4 out of 5 years. Oakland or any other HL team will get a 14 or 15 seed.
And if South Dakota State loses, they'll end with a 15 or 16 seed.
true on if S. Dakota losing who ever takes the AQ for the summit will be a 14 or 15. I don't think I'm judging the conference on what seed they get. I'm looking at rpi's to judge that. But on top of it, thought, they have been getting better seeds as well. Probably because the best SL team is winning it. We better hope thats the case this year for the HL.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 07:30:28 PM
Quote from: a3uge on February 08, 2016, 06:04:06 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:10:52 PMQuote from: oklahomamick on February 08, 2016, 05:08:44 PM2015 Valpo 13 seed > N. Dakota St. 15 seed 2014 UWM 15 seed < N. Dakota St. 12 seed 2013 Valpo 14 seed < S. Dakota St. 13 seed 2012 Detroit 15 seed < S. Dakota St. 14 seed Since Butler left, (2012) the HL representative has been a higher seed than the SL representative 3 out of the last 4 years. Prior to 2012 the HL was always higher. (Butler either as the AQ or at large). I'm looking at post Butler and what has been the case the last 4 years. HL < SL
And if Valpo slips up in Detroit at the tourney and Oakland or anyone else at that matter gets the AQ (we don't get an at-large) the SL will once again get a better seed making it 4 out of 5 years. Oakland or any other HL team will get a 14 or 15 seed.
And if South Dakota State loses, they'll end with a 15 or 16 seed.
true on if S. Dakota losing who ever takes the AQ for the summit will be a 14 or 15. I don't think I'm judging the conference on what seed they get. I'm looking at rpi's to judge that. But on top of it, thought, they have been getting better seeds as well. Probably because the best SL team is winning it. We better hope thats the case this year for the HL.
Our second team has the worst RPI in Horizon League since 2004 at this point. It's terrible. But most mid major conferences are in the same situation, including the Summit. Their second team in RPI is IPFW. The vast majority of mid majors have their top team win, and if not their first team, their second team wins.
While the Horizon is bad this year, its not completely broken. The Horizon kills the Summit in athletic spending and in recruiting every year. I'm not happy with the league right now, but if Cleveland State didn't have the transfer problem, and UIC hadn't cleaned house, the Horizon would be above the Summit.
Not sure which thread this belongs in, so here...
From Jay Bilas' "Bilas Index"
43. Valparaiso Crusaders
The Crusaders are 20-4 and have the No. 1-rated defense in the nation, based upon efficiency. Valpo limits second shots, defends the paint, but is rated 124th in the nation in offensive efficiency. Still, even if Valpo were to lose in the Horizon League tournament, Bryce Drew's team will get into the NCAA tournament. This year, all close calls will go to the mid-majors.
Comparing the Conference Games played by some of the better Mid's
Valpo
The Average RPI of the teams we have already played: 228.7
The Average RPI of the teams we have left on schedule: 190.8 (OAK #124 is highest remaining RPI)
The Average RPI of all of the conference teams we have on schedule: 214
Steven F Austin
The average RPI of the teams they have already played: 286.5 (10-0 in conference)
The average RPI of the teams they have left on schedule: 244.5 (TA&M-CC #131 is highest remaining)
The average RPI of all of the conference teams on their schedule: 267.8
Ark-Little Rock
The average RPI of the teams they have already played: 220.8 (11-1 in conference, lost to #257)
The average RPI of the teams they have left on schedule: 200.0 (UT-Arlington #95 is highest remaining)
The average RPI of all of the conference teams on their schedule: 212.5
Monmouth
The average RPI of the teams the have already played: 217.2 (12-2 in conference, lost to #211 & #220)
The average RPI of the teams they have left on schedule: 234.4 (Iona #147 is highest remaining)
The average RPI of all of the conference teams on their schedule: 222.4
Latest update to the table. We've dropped behind 8 (EIGHT!) more schools based on the RPI.
At this point, the at-large talk is gone...have to win in Detroit. So, we will have chances to push our RPI back higher, but some of the records of teams in the HL this season are really hurting us.
(http://i66.tinypic.com/xyirs.jpg)
Obviously, some of those numbers in "Projected Seed" wouldn't be accurate (Kentucky isn't going to be an 11...), but just left there to show where it would fall if we were strictly placing teams in from the "auto-bid only" category (of which we are now officially part of) and lumping everyone together.
In the history of Valpo basketball I don't ever recall a more devastating loss than last Saturday night. Over night we went from a legitimate 7-10 seed (best in Valpo history, by far) to a possible 14. We'll still be a team that nobody wants to play, but the new narrative will be how Valpo is a team that disappeared from the horizon late in the season, but is still capable of pulling off the upset against (pick Top 15 team of your choice). "Cinderella" Valpo is back in business.
RPI 69 is depressing, so I took a quick peek at the win-out scenarios with RPI Forecast and RPI Wizard.
At the end of the regular season we could be in the 40 or 43 range.
In the tournament, our best RPI options might be Green Bay or Oakland, but the difference between 3rd and 5th or even 6th best RPI isn't so large - hopefully the low RPI teams lose before the semi-finals.
Seems that we could still hope for an RPI of 31, which wouldn't look too shabby on Selection Sunday.
Quote from: wh on February 17, 2016, 12:29:49 PMOver night we went from a legitimate 7-10 seed (best in Valpo history, by far) to a possible 14.
Those are maybe exaggerations on both the high and the low sides.
But as for RPI 69 and a 14 seed, we only stay in that scenario if we lose another two or three games. RPI 69 isn't indicative of our season so far - we're just coming out of the worst RPI stretch of the season: nine games in a row mostly against the RPI 200-300+ set, with losses to the only team in that stretch with an RPI better than 200.
Unless we really do collapse, our RPI is going up from here - and it probably would have bottomed out here even if we swept Wright State.
Our computer numbers (at least from KenPom) dipped after each Wright State loss, but have rebounded nicely - #26 overall, #1 defense.
If you're projecting seeds from RPI, you might as well use projected RPI instead of current RPI. Our RPI dropped in 6 straight games, despite winning 5 of them. Since we're done with the RPI killers, we'd have to have 3 losses to end with a worse RPI than what we currently have.
Quote from: agibson on February 17, 2016, 12:31:32 PM
RPI 69 is depressing, so I took a quick peek at the win-out scenarios with RPI Forecast and RPI Wizard.
At the end of the regular season we could be in the 40 or 43 range.
In the tournament, our best RPI options might be Green Bay or Oakland, but the difference between 3rd and 5th or even 6th best RPI isn't so large - hopefully the low RPI teams lose before the semi-finals.
Seems that we could still hope for an RPI of 31, which wouldn't look too shabby on Selection Sunday.
Encouraging!
Interesting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
I am not one of those. The team I watched last night did not look like a team that is going to win out. Defense led as usual, holding any opponent to 43 points is down right impressive. Unfortunately the offense especially in the first half was awful. Continue to play like that and they will lose a game or two more.
I still think they will be a top 2 seed in the tournament and win the horizon tournament but I am watching the rpi less than I did before.
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 04:03:17 PM
Interesting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
I am not one of those. The team I watched last night did not look like a team that is going to win out. Defense led as usual, holding any opponent to 43 points is down right impressive. Unfortunately the offense especially in the first half was awful. Continue to play like that and they will lose a game or two more.
I still think they will be a top 2 seed in the tournament and win the horizon tournament but I am watching the rpi less than I did before.
Winning 86-63 would have put you more at ease?
If we continue to hold teams to 17 points in a half, our offense can be as awful as it wants. I guess winning with defense isn't all that sexy to some people, but I'm surprised that after 2 years of having a top 10 defense nationally, there's still doubts about winning games in that manner.
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 04:03:17 PMInteresting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
Well having our last at large hopes dashed does have a few positives. Bryce could now focus on peaking individual and team play on a much different schedule. Experimentation and bench development could be expanded. What are the risks vs rewards on attempting to return EVN to previous levels of effectiveness? I have serious doubts about the wisdom of conservatively finishing out the stretch run with few or no significant changes. A static position is seldom good when your confidence has been shaken.
I already know the numbers about the declining success rates seed by lower seed but we now have a team whose biggest worry is catching fire at the proper moment. If Bryce feels that some additional risks might only drop us an additional seed then I would say go for it. I am not suggesting that we deliberately adopt a sandbag approach but this is still a team that can play with anybody in the tournament.
Quote from: a3uge on February 17, 2016, 05:05:25 PM
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 04:03:17 PM
Interesting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
I am not one of those. The team I watched last night did not look like a team that is going to win out. Defense led as usual, holding any opponent to 43 points is down right impressive. Unfortunately the offense especially in the first half was awful. Continue to play like that and they will lose a game or two more.
I still think they will be a top 2 seed in the tournament and win the horizon tournament but I am watching the rpi less than I did before.
Winning 86-63 would have put you more at ease?
If we continue to hold teams to 17 points in a half, our offense can be as awful as it wants. I guess winning with defense isn't all that sexy to some people, but I'm surprised that after 2 years of having a top 10 defense nationally, there's still doubts about winning games in that manner.
Scoring more points would have put me more at ease. Cleveland St has one of the worse offenses in D1, 337 out of 351 according to KenPom. They were not going to score many points, although holding them under 20 in a half was impressive.
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 09:12:26 PM
Quote from: a3uge on February 17, 2016, 05:05:25 PM
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 04:03:17 PM
Interesting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
I am not one of those. The team I watched last night did not look like a team that is going to win out. Defense led as usual, holding any opponent to 43 points is down right impressive. Unfortunately the offense especially in the first half was awful. Continue to play like that and they will lose a game or two more.
I still think they will be a top 2 seed in the tournament and win the horizon tournament but I am watching the rpi less than I did before.
Winning 86-63 would have put you more at ease?
If we continue to hold teams to 17 points in a half, our offense can be as awful as it wants. I guess winning with defense isn't all that sexy to some people, but I'm surprised that after 2 years of having a top 10 defense nationally, there's still doubts about winning games in that manner.
Scoring more points would have put me more at ease. Cleveland St has one of the worse offenses in D1, 337 out of 351 according to KenPom. They were not going to score many points, although holding them under 20 in a half was impressive.
But we hold EVERY team under their defensive average. We've held teams at least 10 pts under their average in 2/3rds of our conference games. We've held teams 15 pts under their average 6 times - insane! The only conference game we didn't hold under their average was the first Wright State game. We literally have the best defense in all of D1 basketball, so I don't really get the sudden panic that the offense won't be able to score enough points down the stretch this season.
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 09:12:26 PM
Quote from: a3uge on February 17, 2016, 05:05:25 PM
Quote from: valpocleveland on February 17, 2016, 04:03:17 PM
Interesting to see how some of us return faster than others from the sky is falling mentality following the Wright State loss.
I am not one of those. The team I watched last night did not look like a team that is going to win out. Defense led as usual, holding any opponent to 43 points is down right impressive. Unfortunately the offense especially in the first half was awful. Continue to play like that and they will lose a game or two more.
I still think they will be a top 2 seed in the tournament and win the horizon tournament but I am watching the rpi less than I did before.
Winning 86-63 would have put you more at ease?
If we continue to hold teams to 17 points in a half, our offense can be as awful as it wants. I guess winning with defense isn't all that sexy to some people, but I'm surprised that after 2 years of having a top 10 defense nationally, there's still doubts about winning games in that manner.
Scoring more points would have put me more at ease. Cleveland St has one of the worse offenses in D1, 337 out of 351 according to KenPom. They were not going to score many points, although holding them under 20 in a half was impressive.
ValpoCleveland, I share
some of the same sentiments about wanting to score more points. After the lackluster 59 points at home against Wright State, I think many of us wanted to just run Cleveland State out of the Q, instead of the more defensive battle that happened last night. I remember before Bryce unloaded the bench I said to my brother that I would love to at least see 70 points after not getting to 30 in the first half. After the game, I was happy with the win, but not hitting 70 left me concerned about the upcoming "run and gun" games ahead against the Michigan Schools.
But...after thinking on it a bit, we did take our starters out with 5-6 minutes left in the game and if they were out for all 40, we would have scored more. Period. Another thing that relieves me a bit is that Wright State and Cleveland State are statistically the #2 and #3 defenses in the Horizon League behind Valpo, of course. And Oakland and Detroit are #8 and #9 in defense respectively. Not shockingly, our offense does score less against good defenses and more against bad ones. (A know, quite the revelation! Haha.) But against #2 Wright State we have an average of 60.5 points per game (lowest) and against #10 YSU we have an average of 96.5 points per game (highest). And continuing on this linear trend, we scored 84 and 92, which are some of the highest point performances in conference. I think those first 10-12 minutes of the second half showed more of what will happen against Oakland than anything we saw on Tuesday.
A final point to reiterate is that our defense looked sharp and outstanding per usual. We actually did better last night defensively than when CSU was at the ARC in late January, holding CSU to only 43 compared to 52. And CSU's scoring droughts were just nasty. I do think that if the starters and routine bench played the full 40, CSU would not have hit 40, which I think would have been a record low. (It was tweeted somewhere...)
Quote from: agibson on February 17, 2016, 12:34:48 PM
Quote from: wh on February 17, 2016, 12:29:49 PMOver night we went from a legitimate 7-10 seed (best in Valpo history, by far) to a possible 14.
Those are maybe exaggerations on both the high and the low sides.
But as for RPI 69 and a 14 seed, we only stay in that scenario if we lose another two or three games. RPI 69 isn't indicative of our season so far - we're just coming out of the worst RPI stretch of the season: nine games in a row mostly against the RPI 200-300+ set, with losses to the only team in that stretch with an RPI better than 200.
Unless we really do collapse, our RPI is going up from here - and it probably would have bottomed out here even if we swept Wright State.
Our computer numbers (at least from KenPom) dipped after each Wright State loss, but have rebounded nicely - #26 overall, #1 defense.
I agree with this. In my mind, if we win the Horizon League Regular Season Title, get a #1 or 2 Seed and win it all in Detroit, we will not be a #14 seed. Yes, the RPI of 69 is only good for the 2nd #14 seed, but our tournament resume is much better than that RPI states. No 200+ RPI losses, three top 100 RPI wins, one of the best defenses in the country, 10-3 in the non-conf with a non-conf SOS of 55, and we had a close loss in the tournament last year. Several of the teams above us on the list don't have the same stats as us and have worse losses. If we make the NCAAs this year, this team is going to finish no worse than last year, which was an RPI of 56 and a 13 seed.
Maybe I'll change my tune after looking at head-to-head comparisons. But, if we win out (by no means a given), I'll be mightily disappointed if we don't get at least a 12.
If Valpo wins out, there's no way they'll be less than a 12 seed. The RPI will be going up with wins the rest of the way. All 6 remaining games will be against teams that are at or above .500
Moved up three places this week, passing the three that are now immediately behind us.
Just keep winning...
(http://i64.tinypic.com/23lxgly.jpg)
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/14820599/the-floor-which-teams-give-conference-best-shot-final-four (http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/14820599/the-floor-which-teams-give-conference-best-shot-final-four)
Five non-Power 5 schools with the best odds to make a Final Four run
Valparaiso: Without Dillon Brooks' 26-point effort, Oregon would have lost to Valpo in late November. Oregon State, a bubble team, lost to Valpo two days later. Bryce Drew's team has proven it can handle opponents from the big leagues on the road. Alec Peters (16.5 PPG, 8.1 RPG), a 6-foot-9 forward, is a terrible matchup for most squads. He's the anchor of a team that is No. 1 in raw defensive efficiency (.87 PPP allowed this season). This team is dangerous.
http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/02/22/ncaa-tournament-bubble-college-basketball-mid-major-cinderella-monmouth-chattanooga-valparaiso/80701366/ (http://www.usatoday.com/story/sports/ncaab/2016/02/22/ncaa-tournament-bubble-college-basketball-mid-major-cinderella-monmouth-chattanooga-valparaiso/80701366/)
USToday chimes in. Valpo first mentioned.
Not to beat a dead horse here, but we are also ranked number one in the College Insider mid-major poll. There are 30 mid major coaches who vote in this poll; we received 25 first-place votes.
I think we are still alive for an at large.
Paul
Could the nation's best mid-major team really miss the NCAA tourney?
http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216)
Quote from: 78crusader on February 22, 2016, 10:07:13 PMI think we are still alive for an at large.
Right now, sure. But the only way we need an at-large is with another loss. To a team not in the RPI top 100. It's not likely...even with the soft bubble.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 23, 2016, 09:08:59 AM
Could the nation's best mid-major team really miss the NCAA tourney?
http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216)
Great read.
Really good article. Another point not as explicitly spelled out is the fact that even if we win the conference tourney, our seeding will be heavily hurt by the lower half of the league, regardless of how bad we beat them.
Quote from: NativeCheesehead on February 23, 2016, 12:33:20 PM
Really good article. Another point not as explicitly spelled out is the fact that even if we win the conference tourney, our seeding will be heavily hurt by the lower half of the league, regardless of how bad we beat them.
This would be key in most years, but the field is really wide open. Heck, even Villanova at the #1 overall might be more beatable than some of the projected 6 seeds.
Quote from: NativeCheesehead on February 23, 2016, 12:33:20 PM
Really good article. Another point not as explicitly spelled out is the fact that even if we win the conference tourney, our seeding will be heavily hurt by the lower half of the league, regardless of how bad we beat them.
Not sure if this is what you were really talking about, but the HL Tournament should not really hurt our NCAAT seeding unless the 7-10 HLT seeds make it through to our first game which is the semi-final game after the double-bye. That first game should be against a team with a RPI between 165 and 146.
Venues hosting the 2015 NIT ...
32 teams, 4-groups seeded 1-8
1 - Old Dominion - 9,100
3 - Murray State - 8,600
2 - Tulsa 8,355
4 - St Marys 3,500
3 - Louisiana Tech - 8,000
1 - Richmond 7,201
3 - Rhode Island - 7,657 (not at Dunkin Donuts Center)
1 - Colorado State - 8,745
along with:
The Palestra
Pitt Arena
College Station, Tx
Storrs, Ct
Champaign, ILL
Miami, FL
Normal, ILL
Stanford
Nashville (Vandy)
Fort Collins (Colorado State)
If we win the tourney, what are the chances of a HL team getting the NIT invite?
Not particularly great. Last season the lowest RPI team getting an at large NIT bid was Vanderbilt at 104, most of the NIT at large bids are under 85. I could see Oakland getting a CBI bid and a couple HL teams (Wright St, Milwaukee, Green Bay) getting CIT bids.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 23, 2016, 02:28:36 PM
If we win the tourney, what are the chances of a HL team getting the NIT invite?
I would think a team from the Horizon would need at least 20 wins. Oakland, should they make it to the title game, would have 22. Wright State could have 21 and I think Milwaukee and Green Bay could have 20 or maybe 21 as they would be playing two extra games in the tourney. I'm thinking only Oakland, but anyone with 20 wins will certainly get invited to play in one of the other minor tourneys.
Oakland has got a lot of pub this year and have one of the most exciting players and intriguing coaches. They might get a bid just for those reasons.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 23, 2016, 02:28:36 PM
If we win the tourney, what are the chances of a HL team getting the NIT invite?
Really depends on how everyone else does. Last year there were 12 automatic bids in the NIT - 12 teams that won the regular season (or tied to win) that lost in their conference tournament. This created a shortage of bids to the NIT.
With that being said, bracketmatrix runs an NIT Bracketology (because of course they do) and they don't even have Oakland in as a considered team: http://bracketmatrix.com/nit.
You lose at home to teams like NKU and YSU, you probably aren't getting an NIT bid. 1-5 against the top 100 rpi isn't going to look good either.
In the old days Oakland would have an NIT shot because Felder is a name, but not anymore. Now the NIT is chosen just like the NCAA Tounament - you have automatic qualifiers and then the most worthy. Oakland does not fit either category.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 23, 2016, 09:08:59 AM
Could the nation's best mid-major team really miss the NCAA tourney?
http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216 (http://www.foxsports.com/college-basketball/story/ncaa-tournament-valparaiso-bryce-drew-mid-major-selection-sunday-022216)
I'd not noticed Kansas. 9-3 against the top 50. Consensus #2 in the country.
And there's a chance that their worst RPI loss will turn out to be worse than ours (OK State, currently 151).
As for their other comparison, Murray State. You'd have to compare the strength of the bubble, but, their numbers last year do bear a certain resemblance to ours
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/schedule/Murray-State (http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/schedule/Murray-State)
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/schedule/Valparaiso (http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/schedule/Valparaiso)
Quote from: agibson on February 23, 2016, 06:13:38 PMAs for their other comparison, Murray State. You'd have to compare the strength of the bubble, but, their numbers last year do bear a certain resemblance to ours
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/schedule/Murray-State (http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/schedule/Murray-State)
http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/schedule/Valparaiso (http://warrennolan.com/basketball/2016/schedule/Valparaiso)
Revising my perception slightly, the WN summary includes their NIT games. Coming into Selection Sunday they were
0-1 against the top 50
3-2 against 51-100
9-1 against 101-200
13-1 against 200+
Still, there are some definite similarities...
But, man, 25 game win streak...One point loss in the OVC tournament final. Two game win streak in the NIT.
Yeah, MSU got screwed.
Ya know, if they weren't a FB school they'd be a great get for the HL. Their USNEWS rating puts them head and shoulders above some of our current members.
Brings us back to the Belmont/MSU package we chatted about 18 months ago. :)
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 23, 2016, 02:28:36 PM
If we win the tourney, what are the chances of a HL team getting the NIT invite?
Who cares?!!!!
Valpo would be almost a favorite to win a first round NCAA tournament game. That is all that matters to me at that point in this season.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 22, 2016, 11:19:06 AMValparaiso: Without Dillon Brooks' 26-point effort, Oregon would have lost to Valpo in late November. Oregon State, a bubble team, lost to Valpo two days later. Bryce Drew's team has proven it can handle opponents from the big leagues on the road. Alec Peters (16.5 PPG, 8.1 RPG), a 6-foot-9 forward, is a terrible matchup for most squads. He's the anchor of a team that is No. 1 in raw defensive efficiency (.87 PPP allowed this season). This team is dangerous.
Can't say we have heard this before about Valpo except maybe the '98 team and possibly one of the Lubos teams.
The Mid-Major Disadvantage: The Power of the Power Conferences -
rushthecourt.net/2016/02/25/the-mid-major-disadvantage-the-power-of-the-power-conferences/#sthash.BG8bicg1.ESKhFrbu.dpuf (http://rushthecourt.net/2016/02/25/the-mid-major-disadvantage-the-power-of-the-power-conferences/#sthash.BG8bicg1.ESKhFrbu.dpuf)
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 26, 2016, 08:19:05 AM
The Mid-Major Disadvantage: The Power of the Power Conferences -
rushthecourt.net/2016/02/25/the-mid-major-disadvantage-the-power-of-the-power-conferences/#sthash.BG8bicg1.ESKhFrbu.dpuf (http://rushthecourt.net/2016/02/25/the-mid-major-disadvantage-the-power-of-the-power-conferences/#sthash.BG8bicg1.ESKhFrbu.dpuf)
Include Oregon State (KenPom 62, a bit past 60) in the analysis and we look more like Arkansas Little Rock. But, it's maybe a bit sad the comparisons we're drawing. (On the other hand, a bit happy that we're talking about being one of the best few mid-majors in the country, better than Gonzaga, etc.)
Warren Nolan bracket at 9:40pm Saturday night
Denver, CO (Philadelphia Regional)
5. Baylor (20-8)
12. Valparaiso (23-5) Horizon
4. Iowa (20-7)
13. Hofstra (21-8) Colonial Athletic
Others on the 12-line:
Ark-Little Rock (Spokane) vs. California
St Mary's (St Louis) vs. Texas
San Diego State (Spokane) vs Notre Dame
=============Going into Games Friday=========
Joe Lunardeee
Oklahoma City
5 INDIANA
12 VALPARAISO
4 KENTUCKY
13 STONY BROOK
Others on the 12 line:
Tulsa / Butler in a Dayton, Play-in vs. Texas A&M in Denver
San Diego State (Spokane) vs Purdue
Ark Little Rock *Denver) vs. Utah
======== Going into Games Friday============
Jerry Palm CBS Sports Bracketology
DES MOINES
5 Texas A&M-
12 Valparaiso-On the Bubble
4 Iowa-
13 Hawai'i
Other 12s:
Ark Little Rock vs. Purdue in Oklahoma City
St. Mary's Vs. Indiana @ Denver
San Diego State Vs. Iowa State @ Spokane
It is interesting to note that Baylor, Indiana and Purdue are all grouped as possible 5 seeds. Of those Baylor would be my 3'rd choice by a wide distance. Notre Dame could also be a 5 or 6 and you all know how I love those cowards guys.
Line em all up and if at-large lightning were to somehow strike, a play-in with Butler could also be delightful.
Looking at RPIForecast today. (not sure if it is completely up to date or not)
Oregon - 3
Oregon St. - 32
IPFW - 69
Belmont - 78
Iona - 104
Rhode Island - 105
Oakland - 114
Iona, Rhode Island, and Oakland COULD sneak into the top 100 RPI, and with a run in the Pac12 tournament Oregon St. COULD sneak into the top 25 RPI. If that happens, and Oakland would have to beat us in the HL final for them to get into the top 100, we would be 7-3 against the top 100.
1-1 vs. top top 25 RPI (both on the road)
7-3 vs Top 100 RPI (5 road games, 1 "neutral" court, 4 home games)
Bad loses = Ball State and Wright St. twice. Both teams would need to finish in the top 150 in RPI. During the mock draft I saw several tweets saying that everyone agreed a loss to a 150+ team was a bad loss.
It is highly unlikely we could get an at-large, but it is not impossible. Everything would have to go right over the next few weeks, with bubble teams losing and not advancing very far in their conference tournaments, and our OOC opponents all playing well to close out the season.
Quote from: SanityLost17 on February 28, 2016, 11:55:31 AMBad loses = Ball State and Wright St. twice. Both teams would need to finish in the top 150 in RPI.
This part, at least, isn't so far fetched. Ball State is at 150 now, and forecast to move higher before their tournament.
Wright State is at 152, so two wins and a loss might be enough... but they'll be playing some bad-RPI competition...
We are now at WN 43 RPI and #8 in their NPI which takes missing players into account. Winning with 2 starting rolled ankles is a great confidence and resume builder (assuming full recovery). Our ESPN BPI still sits at 37 (effectively 35) but it should reset higher as well. Maybe we could still get a 10? Or a #1 seed NIT? :'( :'(
Jerry Palm CBS Sports Bracketology - updated at 3:00pm today - before any of the finals were in...
Providence
5 Iowa State
12 Valparaiso-On the Bubble
4 Maryland
13 Hofstra
Other 12s:
Ark Little Rock vs. Indiana in Oklahoma City
St. Mary's Vs. Kentucky @ Spokane
Chattanooga vs Texas A&M @ Spokane
We have a great record against Steve Prohm...
Quote from: valpotx on February 28, 2016, 11:08:56 PMWe have a great record against Steve Prohm...
I was wondering if we could get them on next years regular season schedule because Prohm should still be itching for revenge.
Warren Nolan bracket after the Sunday games:
Denver, CO
5. Kentucky (21-8)
12. Valparaiso (24-5) Horizon
4. Iowa (20-8)
13. Stony Brook (21-6) America East
Other 12s:
St Marys vs. Baylor @ Providence
San Diego State vs. Purdue @ St. Louis
Ark Little Rock vs. California @ Spokane
=============================
Jerry Palm Updated Sunday Night ... yuuch
DES MOINES
5 Iowa-1
12 Valparaiso-On the Bubble
4 Duke-1
13 Hofstra-
St Marys vs. Kentucky @ Denver
Ark-Little Rock vs Indiana @ Oklahoma City
Chattanooga vs Texas A&M @ Spokane
Give me Iowa!
but NOT in DesMoines!
Big jump this week, both in our RPI numbers and in the positioning on this table. Road wins really help...and the data from the NCAA is dated yesterday (no timestamp). If it was before our game, which I have to believe it was, we will get another nice boost with a road win (1.4 wins to the formula) over a 19-12 team.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/jfbz41.jpg)
http://www.todaysu.com/around-the-u/mid-major-large-resume-evaluation/ (http://www.todaysu.com/around-the-u/mid-major-large-resume-evaluation/)
They list Valpo and Monmouth as the only candidates getting in. (out of Little-Rock, San Diego St. Chattanooga, Stony Brook and UNC Wilmington.
VALPARAISO
Conference: Horizon
Record: 23-5
RPI/BPI/KenPom: 65/37/26
If you hate RPI, take a gander at Valparaiso. The Horizon League-leading Crusaders don't have the strongest RPI of the teams examined here, but their KenPom ranking dictates inclusion in the Field of 68 barring a catastrophic collapse in the coming weeks.
The Crusaders scored a road win over Oregon State in December, which stands as one of the most impressive victories among the teams examined here. Valpo also dominated Oakland away from home and bested them 86-84 at Athletics-Recreation Center. Included in the Crusaders' five losses is a six-point decision against Pac-12 leading Oregon.
The only real knock against Valpo as an at-large team is losing twice to Wright State. The Raiders are hanging around in the Horizon League, but check in at a luke-warm 159 in RPI. They're one spot behind Ball State, which upset Valpo in non-conference play.
Nevertheless, if the committee is looking to reward mid-major conference regular-season champions that played challenging non-conference schedules, and have a proven ability to hang with Tournament competition, Valparaiso is one of the best options.
Death to the RPI; Crusaders get the nod.
Verdict: IN
I just want to see someone new this year. No more Maryland, Michigan State, Kentucky, or Gonzaga (this wouldn't be possible this year in first round).
Quote from: valpotx on February 29, 2016, 11:52:54 AM
I just want to see someone new this year. No more Maryland, Michigan State, Kentucky, or Gonzaga (this wouldn't be possible this year in first round).
I'd love to get Gonzaga this year, that means we're a 6-7 seed, they're a 10-11 seed.
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 29, 2016, 11:04:35 AM
http://www.todaysu.com/around-the-u/mid-major-large-resume-evaluation/ (http://www.todaysu.com/around-the-u/mid-major-large-resume-evaluation/)
They list Valpo and Monmouth as the only candidates getting in. (out of Little-Rock, San Diego St. Chattanooga, Stony Brook and UNC Wilmington.
VALPARAISO
Conference: Horizon
Record: 23-5
RPI/BPI/KenPom: 65/37/26
If you hate RPI, take a gander at Valparaiso. The Horizon League-leading Crusaders don't have the strongest RPI of the teams examined here, but their KenPom ranking dictates inclusion in the Field of 68 barring a catastrophic collapse in the coming weeks.
The Crusaders scored a road win over Oregon State in December, which stands as one of the most impressive victories among the teams examined here. Valpo also dominated Oakland away from home and bested them 86-84 at Athletics-Recreation Center. Included in the Crusaders' five losses is a six-point decision against Pac-12 leading Oregon.
The only real knock against Valpo as an at-large team is losing twice to Wright State. The Raiders are hanging around in the Horizon League, but check in at a luke-warm 159 in RPI. They're one spot behind Ball State, which upset Valpo in non-conference play.
Nevertheless, if the committee is looking to reward mid-major conference regular-season champions that played challenging non-conference schedules, and have a proven ability to hang with Tournament competition, Valparaiso is one of the best options.
Death to the RPI; Crusaders get the nod.
Verdict: IN
RPI is 43 now!
Quote from: oklahomamick on February 29, 2016, 11:04:35 AMConference: Horizon
Record: 23-5
RPI/BPI/KenPom: 65/37/26
42/37/33 are our most recent numbers. Our Sag has also moved to #42. By a mile this is our best combination of numbers ever.
A lot can happen between now and selection Sunday and I am very optimistic.
So my Aleve is kicking in...
Here's the RPI Forecast based on what happens in the HL Tourney.
| Game 1 | Game 2 | RPI | SOS |
| GB | OAK | 30 | 148 |
| UWM | OAK | 30 | 148 |
| GB | UDM | 34 | 155 |
| GB | WSU | 34 | 155 |
| UWM | UDM | 34 | 155 |
| UWM | WSU | 34 | 155 |
| CSU | OAK | 37 | 168 |
| NKU | OAK | 37 | 168 |
| GB | YSU | 38 | 170 |
| UWM | YSU | 38 | 170 |
| CSU | WSU | 41 | 175 |
| CSU | UDM | 41 | 176 |
| NKU | WSU | 41 | 176 |
| NKU | UDM | 41 | 177 |
| GB | UIC | 43 | 178 |
| UWM | UIC | 43 | 179 |
| CSU | YSU | 45 | 187 |
| NKU | YSU | 45 | 188 |
| NKU | UIC | 51 | 202 |
| CSU | UIC | 51 | 203 |
Obviously Oakland is the best option for us, and it looks like it doesn't matter which Wisconsin team we play, it will be the same result. Now if Oakland is to lose, Detroit and Wright State seem pretty equitable. You can see what the worst options for us are, finishing with CSU/NKU and UIC absolutely killing our RPI.
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 29, 2016, 01:45:03 PMYou can see what the worst options for us are, finishing with CSU/NKU and UIC absolutely killing our RPI.
UIC might sting a little. But, if the fates handed us NKU+YSU in the tournament I could probably tolerate the 45 RPI, stomach the poor-to-watch blowouts, and laugh my way all the way to the NCAA tournament.
A piece of me roots for the Wright State rematch, and would enjoy seeing us play Felder again, and in front of a decent crowd. And a piece of me is scared by both Felder and Wright State, and perhaps also by Green Bay (I worry about playing teams that can defend and/or rebound...).
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 29, 2016, 01:45:03 PMHere's the RPI Forecast based on what happens in the HL Tourney.
Game 1 Game 2 RPI SOS
GB OAK 30 148
And, a notion of caution about RPI Forecast numbers until they include the _real_ tournaments for everybody (I assume they don't yet). Presumably a lot of top teams will see RPI improvements as they play other high RPI teams in advanced rounds of tournaments. It seems likely to me that winning these two won't _really_ mean RPI 30.
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 29, 2016, 01:45:03 PM
So my Aleve is kicking in...
Here's the RPI Forecast based on what happens in the HL Tourney.
| Game 1 | Game 2 | RPI | SOS |
| GB | OAK | 30 | 148 |
| UWM | OAK | 30 | 148 |
| GB | UDM | 34 | 155 |
| GB | WSU | 34 | 155 |
| UWM | UDM | 34 | 155 |
| UWM | WSU | 34 | 155 |
| CSU | OAK | 37 | 168 |
| NKU | OAK | 37 | 168 |
| GB | YSU | 38 | 170 |
| UWM | YSU | 38 | 170 |
| CSU | WSU | 41 | 175 |
| CSU | UDM | 41 | 176 |
| NKU | WSU | 41 | 176 |
| NKU | UDM | 41 | 177 |
| GB | UIC | 43 | 178 |
| UWM | UIC | 43 | 179 |
| CSU | YSU | 45 | 187 |
| NKU | YSU | 45 | 188 |
| NKU | UIC | 51 | 202 |
| CSU | UIC | 51 | 203 |
Obviously Oakland is the best option for us, and it looks like it doesn't matter which Wisconsin team we play, it will be the same result. Now if Oakland is to lose, Detroit and Wright State seem pretty equitable. You can see what the worst options for us are, finishing with CSU/NKU and UIC absolutely killing our RPI.
Good information. Thx.
Quote from: agibson on February 29, 2016, 02:10:35 PM
Quote from: Kyle321n on February 29, 2016, 01:45:03 PMHere's the RPI Forecast based on what happens in the HL Tourney.
Game 1 Game 2 RPI SOS
GB OAK 30 148
And, a notion of caution about RPI Forecast numbers until they include the _real_ tournaments for everybody (I assume they don't yet). Presumably a lot of top teams will see RPI improvements as they play other high RPI teams in advanced rounds of tournaments. It seems likely to me that winning these two won't _really_ mean RPI 30.
Yeah, but it gives you an idea of what would help and hurt us the most. I should have figured the UWM/GB would be similar for the help and I knew who in the bottom half helped us the best.
RPI NPI KenPom SAG BPI OOC/SOS
USC 43 70 50 48 44 80
Pitt 39 51 40 31 40 186
Wichita St 37 10 8 19 22 6
U Conn 52 42 28 32 26 87
Providence 44 61 57 54 54 215
Oregon St 32 93 60 59 61 51
Syracuse 54 74 42 40 41 112
Cincinnati 50 46 30 30 25 155
Florida 45 92 44 38 36 3
Vanderbilt 49 66 23 18 24 32
Michigan 56 67 47 37 51 166
Tulsa 40 62 43 55 46 78
VCU 46 38 38 41 31 64
Butler 55 60 39 29 38 220
ST Mary's 47 14 35 33 32 209
Valpo 42 8 33 42 37 42
Monmouth 53 19 70 79 88 92
Temple 59 89 91 91 76 71
St Bonaventure 35 54 81 78 79 153
Gonzaga 65 22 32 28 27 49
Alabama 57 99 82 75 83 26
Colorado 28 65 62 51 48 129
Seton Hall 31 26 31 36 34 237
South Carolina 38 40 53 50 43 268
My apology for not being able to place this in a better organized fashion. Believe me that it wasn't because of a lack of effort.
This is a list of 8 to 12 seed competition for selection Sunday. Keeping in mind that most of these teams played 2 (many only 1) true OOC road games I included their OOC/ SOS's as an additional reference number. By any and all these measures we look to belong right in the thick of any 8 to 12 and bubble conversations.I expect the inevitable "who did they beat" which must be answered with "who would play us"?
Look it over and make your own decisions. I will try to update the numbers as things evolve.
Go USC! What a turnaround year for the Men of Troy. Fight on!
Quote from: justducky on February 29, 2016, 07:42:07 PMRPI NPI KenPom SAG BPI OOC/SOS
USC 43 70 50 48 44 80
Quote from: usc4valpo on February 29, 2016, 08:07:23 PMGo USC! What a turnaround year for the Men of Troy. Fight on!
My placement of USC at the top of the list was a totally random event having nothing to do with their overall ranking. ;) Sorry but they may end up in the first 4 out hopefully not alongside Valpo. :'(
Having realized how difficult my 24 team seeding competitor list is to read, I have tallied up some easier to understand comparisons.
For the RPI list we rank 8'th.
For the NPI list we rank 1'st.
For the Ken Pomeroy list we rank 7'th.
For the Sagarin list we rank 14'th.
For the ESPN BPI list we rank 10'th.
And we have the 5'th best OOC/SOS.
You need to mull those over for when they try to hand us a 12 seed as if it were a great gift from the Gods!
Quote from: valpotx on February 28, 2016, 11:08:56 PM
We have a great record against Steve Prohm...
When I saw that Prohm's Iowa State lost to Baylor twice this year I kind of felt sorry for the former Murray State coach. He had to be thinking "I don't want to face the Drew brothers anymore." He has lost 5 straight games coaching against either Bryce or Scott.
In reality, the probability that USC will be selected as an at large bid is higher than it is for Valpo. The Horizon conference overall is weak, and Valpo needs to get out of it soon.
ESPN Bubble Watch:
Valparaiso [26-5 (16-2), RPI: 42, SOS: 186] Let's throw the Crusaders back on here, if only because there's a chance that their road win at Oregon State -- which, hey, is a top-30 RPI victory! -- will start to look even better before Selection Sunday. Meanwhile, Bryce Drew's team did finish the regular season with a 16-2 record against the Horizon League, the same tally Wichita State racked up in the Missouri Valley Conference. No one here is arguing that Valpo is actually better than the Shockers, and the Horizon is at least a notch behind the Valley in terms of overall league strength. But the same principle applies: This is a really good team that was banged up in nonconference play and -- in the Watch's humble opinion -- probably deserves to be in the tournament at the end of the day. We'll see.
Good! We certainly deserve to be, and will be, part of the conversation.
On Monmouth they say
Quote
Monmouth [25-6 (17-3), RPI: 58, SOS: 215] Monmouth couldn't quite make it through the end of the Bubble Watch purview without adding one last conference loss. Feb. 19's home defeat to Iona didn't knock the Hawks totally out of the picture, if only because the Gaels stand alongside Siena as the only MAAC teams with non-resume-destroying RPIs. Besides, the Hawks still have that win over Notre Dame, plus fading-but-still-in-the-field USC, and their 9-3 mark against the top 150, 5-2 performance against the top 100 and 2-2 split versus the top 50 all look pretty impressive compared to plenty of teams on the bubble.
They don't mention their three losses to the 200+ RPI set. Or that their two top-50 wins (and one of the losses) were at neutral sites. Notre Dame, UCLA, and USC have more name recognition, perhaps. But, I'm not convinced their wins are better than ours, and their losses are worse.
We'd dipped a bit in bracketmatrix, but have now recovered some. Behind only St. Mary's in the "AQ's dreaming of an at-large" (and ahead of Monmouth, Little Rock), but 4-5 spots out of the at-large places.
Nice to see the Crusaders at least on the Bubble Watch. Of course, win the HL tourney and the bubble becomes less of an issue.
Let me propose a reasonable heuristic for the selection committee: No team gets invited to the tournament unless it has a winning (above .500) conference record for the regular season. All the teams in traditional basketball power conferences still have a chance to win their conference tournament and make it in that way.
What would that mean in practice? Well, if the season ended today, Texas Tech, USC, Oregon St., Providence, Butler, Florida and Alabama would not get into the tournament - some of them might still win out and finish above 8-8 in conference, or win their conference tournament and get in.
Texas Tech is a great example - assuming they did not win the Big12 tournament: They are a good team, but are currently 7th in a 10-team conference. As good as the Big12 is, does the committee really need to take seven teams from that conference? Would all of the 8-8 PAC12 teams get in?
Instead, teams that are in second place from non-power conferences at least should get a second look. Wouldn't the tournament be better with at least two of (St. Marys, Gonzaga, BYU) who are all tied for first place in the WCC? How about Evansville (in second place behind Wichita St.)? How about both IPFW and SDSU from the Summit (currently tied for first)? How about Oakland or Wright State? How about Iona? How about Ball State or Ohio?
Quote from: justducky on February 29, 2016, 07:42:07 PMButler 55 60 39 29 38 220
ST Mary's 47 14 35 33 32 209
Valpo 42 8 33 42 37 42
Monmouth 53 19 70 79 88 92
I don't envy the committee comparing, say, a Valpo or a Monmout to a Butler. The schedules are just so different.
Butler 3-7 against the top 50. Best road wins @Cincinnati (RPI 50) and @Seton Hall (RPI 31). Best home wins...Creighton (RPI 100)? Georgetown (RPI 105)? Purdue (RPI 18) at a "neutral" site in Indy.
How would we have done with their schedule? How would they have done with ours? Seems pretty hard to say... Do you turn to computer numbers? Which ones? KenPom and Sagarin seem to disagree...
Here are the lists I use for looking at potential seedings:
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/)
http://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm (http://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm) (through games of 2/28)
Both are averages of the many seeding/ranking systems out there. Bracketmatrix is an average of all the tournament seeding websites/blogs. Massey does a weekly compilation of the college basketball ranking/rating systems. From the Massey site, Valpo should be an 11 seed. Bracketmatrix has us as the highest 12 seed, just ahead of the final at-large berth. Massey has Valpo ahead of many teams that are projected to be 8 or 9 seeds. However, a loss in the HL tournament would put Valpo on the outside looking in.
Looking at the Massey site, I don't get the love for Temple, nor do I understand the feeling that the West Coast conference is a one bid conference this year. Both St Mary's and Gonzaga deserve to be in before Temple, Florida and Michigan.
Quote from: agibson on March 01, 2016, 10:28:09 AMQuote from: justducky on February 29, 2016, 07:42:07 PM
Butler 55 60 39 29 38 220
ST Mary's 47 14 35 33 32 209
Valpo 42 8 33 42 37 42
Monmouth 53 19 70 79 88 92
I don't envy the committee comparing, say, a Valpo or a Monmout to a Butler. The schedules are just so different.
This is an interesting list because we would like to see them all make the tournament. Depending on events any could be placed as 10 seeds or better. On the other hand this could be a complete list of your NIT #1 seeds.
I do want to draw special attention to the final number in each series which is OOC/SOS. Both Butler and St Mary's chose to play it safe (game the system) with weak non conference schedules featuring 1 true road game apiece. Butlers OOC/SOS was #220 and St Mary's was #209. Courageous!
But Wait!!! Others on my competitor list are even worse! How about Providence at #215 with 2 true road game (one being that long drive to Rhode Island), Seton Hall with 2 true road games and a #237 rank and South Carolina at #268 and 1 true road game. Last but not least let me mention Pitt who managed to play zero true OOC road games against a competitive field ranked at #186.
How do they get away with this crap? Does anybody remember Cincinnati's numbers from a few year back when they were maybe the 1'st team out because of their joke non-conference schedule?
I hate to be pessimistic, but... if we lose in the final to Oakland it seems likely Oakland will cross RPI 100. (Wright State or even Green Bay could also cross 100 in win-out scenarios). (Ball State could too, I guess, in win-out scenarios; but I'll ignore these three.)
And Iona's predicted to cross to the good side of 100, or at least plausibly likely to do it. Rhode Island's right on the fence, let's put them better than 100.
Heck, why not, how about some Summit love? IPFW's even got a 16% chance of winning out to an RPI of 39! (If the favorites, South Dakota State, win, 44% chance, their RPI is a mind-boggling expected 19; and bracketmatrix has them as the last of the 13 seeds.)
So, if we fall in the finals, maybe:
1-1 against RPI 1-50 (or even 2-1)
6-2 against RPI 51-100
8-3 against RPI 101-200
10-0 against RPI 201+
RPI 42 or so.
Interesting...
Or, in the happier (and more likely, knock on wood) event that we win out, could be
1-1 against RPI 1-50 (or even 2-1)
4-1 against RPI 51-100
11-3 against RPI 101-200
10-0 against RPI 201+
RPI 27 or 28.
Or, of course, it could look more like our current
1-1 against RPI 1-50
2-1 against RPI 51-100.
Or I guess Belmont could even drop out, making it 1-1 top 50, 1-0 51-100.
Quote from: agibson on March 02, 2016, 11:06:10 AM(If the favorites, South Dakota State, win, 44% chance, their RPI is a mind-boggling expected 19; and bracketmatrix has them as the last of the 13 seeds.)
You have to imagine that South Dakota State and Summit fans are pretty mad. I don't hear much talk about them for an at-large...
Quote from: agibson on March 02, 2016, 11:08:34 AM
Quote from: agibson on March 02, 2016, 11:06:10 AM(If the favorites, South Dakota State, win, 44% chance, their RPI is a mind-boggling expected 19; and bracketmatrix has them as the last of the 13 seeds.)
You have to imagine that South Dakota State and Summit fans are pretty mad. I don't hear much talk about them for an at-large...
The selection committee will see through the horrible SOS the Summit had to boost each teams' RPIs. You can't live on RPI and "good losses" alone. They have 0 projected top 100 wins.
Quote from: a3uge on March 02, 2016, 12:13:49 PMThe selection committee will see through the horrible SOS the Summit had to boost each teams' RPIs. You can't live on RPI and "good losses" alone. They have 0 projected top 100 wins.
Hm? None in true road games. But, IPFW, and Santa Barbara, MTSU if those two hold up. Illinois State could come into the top 100, or maybe one of the other Summit Teams.
RPI Forecast projects them to 3-3 against the top 100.
Not that they're getting an at-large bid. But, they could have a pretty shiny RPI and get left out. (Maybe not a chance at the record; to my surprise a 21 and a pair of 30's have missed. But they could crack the top 10.)
Quote from: agibson on March 02, 2016, 01:01:04 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 02, 2016, 12:13:49 PMThe selection committee will see through the horrible SOS the Summit had to boost each teams' RPIs. You can't live on RPI and "good losses" alone. They have 0 projected top 100 wins.
Hm? None in true road games. But, IPFW, and Santa Barbara, MTSU if those two hold up. Illinois State could come into the top 100, or maybe one of the other Summit Teams.
RPI Forecast projects them to 3-3 against the top 100.
Not that they're getting an at-large bid. But, they could have a pretty shiny RPI and get left out. (Maybe not a chance at the record; to my surprise a 21 and a pair of 30's have missed. But they could crack the top 10.)
I meant OOC games - on RPI forecast, every win projects to a +100 RPI win. Even so, having your best OOC win around a 95 RPI is not 12-seed or near at-large worthy. They also lost to a WAC school.
Quote from: covufan on March 01, 2016, 11:39:15 AMHere are the lists I use for looking at potential seedings:
http://www.bracketmatrix.com/ (http://www.bracketmatrix.com/)
I believe this to be of only limited value. 102 opinions which all carry different metrics, biases, motivations and expertise does little to guarantee the best answers. Many of those contributors could be less qualified and objective than many of us.
Quote from: covufan on March 01, 2016, 11:39:15 AMhttp://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm (through games of 2/28)
Quote from: covufan on March 01, 2016, 11:39:15 AMMassey does a weekly compilation of the college basketball ranking/rating systems. From the Massey site, Valpo should be an 11 seed.
Massey is much more valuable and puts us in the thick of the conversation. BUT..............
I have yet to be convinced that home vs road adjustment values are adequately represented by any of the rating organizations or base measures. There is a reason (other than revenue) why the Massey teams in the 25-50 range average less than 1.9 OOC true road games per year while Valpo and Monmouth had to play 7.
Maybe some one needs to create a "game the system" index which measures true OOC road games played combined with OOC/SOS's. Maybe this would draw attention to some of the BIGS who routinely challenge varied "Polish Cavalries" to attack them on their home floors.
What are NCAA regulations concerning late scheduled games to fill in opening?
I have looked at the St Mary's schedule on Warren Nolan many times. There was ??? no March 1 game listed vs Grand Canyon. Now I see that St Mary's brought them in Tuesday
and beat them thus helping their RPI (Grand Canyon was in the 80's?) and OOC/SOS which dropped from 209 to 151.
If this is a legal last minute move it should be awarded a special category prize for gamesmanship. Need some last minute at large help? Buy another carefully selected home opponent.
They've done it before. Several years ago, Patty Mills was hurt and didn't play in the WCC Tournament, and they lost. They scheduled another game (Eastern Washington, I think) during the final weekend to try and show the committee that Mills was healthy.
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 05, 2016, 07:55:50 PMThey've done it before. Several years ago, Patty Mills was hurt and didn't play in the WCC Tournament, and they lost. They scheduled another game (Eastern Washington, I think) during the final weekend to try and show the committee that Mills was healthy.
If this is allowed to continue I could see a bidding war developing for any non bubble 60-100 RPI teams who have room remaining on their schedules.
Do you have any idea if there is some kind of deadline? When might this deal have been finalized? Had St Mary's paid them some kind of non-refundable fee to maintain this availability?
I don't think there's a "deadline" other than the end of the season.
I doubt they paid any sort of retainer, but I'm guessing GCU got a nice guarantee.
FWIW, both Dickie V and Joe Lunardi said during tonight's telecast of the Virginia-Louisville game that Valpo and similar teams who have achieved at a high level should be rewarded with a spot in the tournament over a mediocre team from one of the power conferences. Lunardi qualified the statement a bit earlier by saying it depends when these teams lose (e.g. earlier than the tournament finals). I don't consider either source to be very reliable, but it's nice to hear us get a little love.
Here are some game notes from November.
http://www.smcgaels.com/pdf9/4138906.pdf?ATCLID=210513633&SPSID=101619&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=21400 (http://www.smcgaels.com/pdf9/4138906.pdf?ATCLID=210513633&SPSID=101619&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=21400)
Grand Canyon's been on St. Mary's schedule, in a strange place, for a long time.
Grand Canyon's evidently a transitional D1, and played in the CIT the last two seasons. They've apparently already made it known publicly they would accept an invite if offered, and their coach talks about wanting to win their last regular season to get some momentum going into the CIT.
Quote from: agibson on March 05, 2016, 09:08:14 PMHere are some game notes from November.
http://www.smcgaels.com/pdf9/4138906.pdf?ATCLID=210513633&SPSID=101619&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=21400 (http://www.smcgaels.com/pdf9/4138906.pdf?ATCLID=210513633&SPSID=101619&DB_LANG=C&DB_OEM_ID=21400)
Grand Canyon's been on St. Mary's schedule, in a strange place, for a long time.
This proves that no last minute gamesmanship was involved so my apology to the west coast Gaels.
So either Warren Nolan didn't initially list it on their schedule or my memory is, could, might, ah, hmmm. What were we talking about again?
Bids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
3 Sunday
3 Monday
4 Tuesday
1 Wednesday
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24b8eah.jpg)
Rooting interests: Teams in dark uniforms (I'll have more on this later!)
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 06, 2016, 08:33:44 AM
Bids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
3 Sunday
3 Monday
4 Tuesday
1 Wednesday
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24b8eah.jpg)
Rooting interests: Teams in dark uniforms (I'll have more on this later!)
One of the most important teams to root against is not on the list - South Dakota State. They are the no. 2 seed in the SL tournament behind IPFW, but their RPI of 37 is better than ours. If they win, they would likely go ahead of us because IPFW's RPI is far better than anyone in the HL other than us.
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 06, 2016, 08:33:44 AMBids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
Yale could be dangerous come seeding time. Current RPI 41. Best win "just" Princeton in New Haven, 1-4 against top 50. But their worst loss is @Illinois, RPI 153. Weak on top-100 wins.
Their computer numbers aren't as shiny as Wichita State, but not too bad at KenPom 41. Hopefully only an outside threat, but we've been snubbed before...
Rooting Interests for the next couple of days:
(RPI in parenthesis)
Sunday Championships:
Atlantic Sun:
#4 Florida Gulf Coast (215) vs. #7 Stetson (299) - NO EFFECT
(Note: if Stetson wins, North Florida (161) gets the bid)
Big South:
#2 Winthop (126) vs. #4 UNC-Asheville (157) - NO EFFECT
Missouri Valley:
#2 Evansville (90) vs. #4 Northern Iowa (84) - EVANSVILLE
(Evansville has the worse RPI, though UNI has the worse seed. I think UNI has a very strange case for their seed.)
Monday Championships:
MAAC:
#1 Monmouth (50) vs. #5 Fairfield (143) - FAIRFIELD - Get Monmouth out!
#2 Iona (98) vs. #3 Siena (99) - IONA - Help Valpo, keep Iona in top 100
Colonial:
#1 Hofstra (55) vs. #5 William & Mary (67) - WILLIAM & MARY
#2 UNC-Wilmington (63) vs. #6 Northeastern (119) - NORTHEASTERN
Southern:
#1 Chattanooga (61) vs. #5 Western Carolina (175) - WESTERN CAROLINA
#2 East Tennessee State (96) vs. #6 Furman (170) - FURMAM
Tuesday Championships:
Horizon
Um, yeah...
Northeast:
#1 Wagner (181) vs. #2 Fairleigh Dickinson (225) - NO DIFFERENCE
Summit:
#2 South Dakota State is RPI #40, so root against them.
#1 IPFW is RPI #65, so we should stay ahead of them...and it would be good for us...so root for them.
West Coast:
#1 St. Mary's (#37)
#2 Gonzaga (#62)
#3 BYU (#74)
#4 Pepperdine (#134) - GO THEM!
Quote from: wh on March 06, 2016, 10:12:14 AM
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 06, 2016, 08:33:44 AM
Bids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
3 Sunday
3 Monday
4 Tuesday
1 Wednesday
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24b8eah.jpg)
Rooting interests: Teams in dark uniforms (I'll have more on this later!)
One of the most important teams to root against is not on the list - South Dakota State. They are the no. 2 seed in the SL tournament behind IPFW, but their RPI of 37 is better than ours. If they win, they would likely go ahead of us because IPFW's RPI is far better than anyone in the HL other than us.
Not true at all with South Dakota State - that's not how the selection process works. Their resume is actually pretty crappy, regardless if they beat IPFW or not. A grand total of 1 bracket of 83 on bracket matrix has them rated higher than Valpo.
Quote from: a3uge on March 06, 2016, 12:30:19 PM
Quote from: wh on March 06, 2016, 10:12:14 AM
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 06, 2016, 08:33:44 AM
Bids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
3 Sunday
3 Monday
4 Tuesday
1 Wednesday
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24b8eah.jpg)
Rooting interests: Teams in dark uniforms (I'll have more on this later!)
One of the most important teams to root against is not on the list - South Dakota State. They are the no. 2 seed in the SL tournament behind IPFW, but their RPI of 37 is better than ours. If they win, they would likely go ahead of us because IPFW's RPI is far better than anyone in the HL other than us.
Not true at all with South Dakota State - that's not how the selection process works. Their resume is actually pretty crappy, regardless if they beat IPFW or not. A grand total of 1 bracket of 83 on bracket matrix has them rated higher than Valpo.
I'm pretty aware of how the selection process works. lol. But, Hoops spreadsheet slots teams strictly on RPI, thus my comment that if SDSU wins the SL tournament, they would take Valpo's spot as the last 11 seed -
on Hoops spreadsheet. Take a deep breath and relax. The final list will look completely different than this anyway. ;)
Quote from: wh on March 06, 2016, 02:12:39 PMI'm pretty aware of how the selection process works. lol.
Wait! Now that you have admitted to being a perfectionist just "pretty aware" doesn't cut the mustard. Its totally aware or nothing. ::)
Quote from: wh on March 06, 2016, 02:12:39 PM
Quote from: a3uge on March 06, 2016, 12:30:19 PM
Quote from: wh on March 06, 2016, 10:12:14 AM
Quote from: ValpoHoops on March 06, 2016, 08:33:44 AM
Bids are starting to roll in now...Yale and Austin Peay yesterday.
3 Sunday
3 Monday
4 Tuesday
1 Wednesday
(http://i65.tinypic.com/24b8eah.jpg)
Rooting interests: Teams in dark uniforms (I'll have more on this later!)
One of the most important teams to root against is not on the list - South Dakota State. They are the no. 2 seed in the SL tournament behind IPFW, but their RPI of 37 is better than ours. If they win, they would likely go ahead of us because IPFW's RPI is far better than anyone in the HL other than us.
Not true at all with South Dakota State - that's not how the selection process works. Their resume is actually pretty crappy, regardless if they beat IPFW or not. A grand total of 1 bracket of 83 on bracket matrix has them rated higher than Valpo.
I'm pretty aware of how the selection process works. lol. But, Hoops spreadsheet slots teams strictly on RPI, thus my comment that if SDSU wins the SL tournament, they would take Valpo's spot as the last 11 seed - on Hoops spreadsheet.
Take a deep breath and relax. The final list will look completely different than this anyway. ;)
Yup - and geography is going to throw out any logic anyways.
Getting some love from Kellogg and Davis on the CBS post MVC championship show (or whatever it is called).
Last update before Horizon League final. Obviously, we have to win that for any of this to be important.
Change to the format today as well, as things "below the line" are now sorted by date...makes it easier (for me at least) to keep an eye on what's coming soon.
As of right now, based solely on RPI, Valpo would slot in as the "worst" of the #11 seeds.
(http://i68.tinypic.com/2zhpb9w.jpg)
See y'all in Detroit!