It was a good night, and maybe this is just the pessimist in me, but it didnāt move the envelope that much.
Feels like we are gonna be a 4 (maybe 5) absent something dramatic.
1 Like
Given that the committee seems to not move the needle too much based on conference tourney results, I think this is right. Maybe if we get to ACCT finals and a few of our 3 seed and 4 seed foes, flame out early, thereās a chance. But will be slim.
3 Likes
If TTU (@BYU), Kansas (K-State), Bama (Auburn), and Vandy (@Tenn) all win and assuming we beat VT, then we would only trail Bama in that group in terms of WAB. We would also finish above Gonzaga (pending whatever tourney results they have).
Iād feel pretty good about a 4 seed regardless of Tourney results if all win out. Exception of Vandy going on a deep run and us losing early.
I think Kansas is most vulnerable and Zags losing in the WCC tourney most worth monitoring. Iām also not ruling out total ISU or Purdue implosions to make things interesting.
2 Likes
Also, unless youāre a WABsolutist, our predictives, at least Pom, fell in rough accordance with our resume boost.
2 Likes
Lives here:
Also, you can check womenās water polo RPI there
3 Likes
Iām in favor of a 64 team tourney personally, but I always think this is a dumb argument for not expanding:
https://x.com/goodmanhoops/status/2029188269636804730?s=46
As you expand, the minds eye version of what is a tourney team / bubble team / etc, will eventually expand with it.
@AdventiveQuasar so most sports still living in the Jerry palm RPI dark ages, I guess
3 Likes
I forget, but do the predictives matter more for seeding than WAB?
I thought results based metrics were more important (thatās why we got in that one year we wonāt speak of).
I think the resume stuff matters more in general (?), but will leave that to the bracketologists
(Oops, I gues RES is results, not resume)
1 Like
I think results-based for overall at large bid for sure. Not sure about seeding though.
My gut is no, at least not last season. Looking at T-Rank filtered to games before the tournament WAB correlates with seeding better than the overall rank: T-Rank - Customizable College Basketball Tempo Free Stats - T-Rank
Underseeded teams (relative to T-Rank) had relatively worse WABs (Gonzaga, Illinois, Maryland, Kansas) and overseeded teams had better WABs (St Johns, Michigan St, Texas A&M).
And then you have Louisville, who kinda just got screwed.
3 Likes
Re-analyzing the Top 16 released in Feb - dialing in on 3s and 4s.
No team was seeded worse 2 spots of their WAB rank. Florida and Kansas seeded 4 and 5 spots ahead.
Using NET, Zags 7 spots below (but 2 spots above WAB). Texas Tech was seeded above their WAB (2) and NET(4), Michigan State seeded below their WAB (-2) and NET (-2).
Iām being lazy looking at NET but I think weāre maybe still firmly a 4-seed, potentially ahead of Kansas based on metrics and right there with Bama,
I do think Gonzaga will be another we can jump. Ahead in T-Rank/WAB, below in NET (which committee showed maybe they didnāt value) and KP.
2 Likes
Yea the resume metrics matter way more than the predictives, I think of predictives as more of a tiebreaker when resumes are close. Gonzaga got an eight seed last year when they finished 8th overall in KenPom.
3 Likes
I wish professional leagues populated their playoffs using RPI & NETā¦ it would be better. /s 
1 Like
Virginia has jumped to 11th in WAB this morning. Will drop to 12th if Purdue wins @ NU tonight but should be top 12 entering Saturdayās games and I think a win over VT would keep us there entering conference tourneys.
Illinois .06 aheadā¦Im not sure a win over VT is worth .06 more than a win @ Maryland but if it is then could pass them on Saturday with a win.
Should also pass Purdue if they drop one of their last two, Nebraska if they lose to Iowa, and Alabama if they lose to Auburn. Would also be nice if Houston dropped a game. Top 3 WAB are untouchable at this point, and I think passing any of 4-6 would require winning the ACCT plus maybe a little help from those teams.
I think a 3 seed is in play with a win over VT and 1 win in ACCT, depending on what other teams do.
8 Likes
Fwiw CBS already has us back at a 3 seed after last nights games
6 Likes
CBSā Bracketology is computer generated so I donāt really trust it, this is their first year so weāll see how it is. Torvik also has us as a three in their model but they were wrong on the bracket reveal IIRC.
2 Likes
VT win is 0.29 for us. Would be 0.33 @UMD for Illinois.
At least according to Torvik WAB (which is different from what NCAA uses?): WAB Watch
3 Likes
Honestly I know the RPI got a bad rep but life was so much simpler before all these metrics got involved.
Literally even just 5 years ago it would have been a lot less with just NET, SOS, NCSOS, and who you beat as a resume (maybe KenPom 5 years ago), and maybe a metric Iām forgetting here like BPI. If you go back 10 years even simpler.
Within the last 5 years youāve gotten NET, WAB, KenPom, Torvik, BPI, KPI, Sagarin (no longer used), etcā¦I would hate to be a committee member nowadays.
2 Likes