Sunday, February 18, 2007

W-3 BP65

I know, I've been AWOL the last few days. Let's just get the new BP65 out and I'll have more commentary later today:

1. NORTH CAROLINA (ACC)
1. FLORIDA (SEC)
1. UCLA (PAC 10)
1. OHIO ST. (BIG 10)

2. Wisconsin
2. PITTSBURGH (BIG EAST)
2. TEXAS A&M (BIG 12)
2. Kansas

3. Oregon
3. MEMPHIS (CONFERENCE USA)
3. Washington State
3. Georgetown

4. SOUTHERN ILLINOIS (MVC)
4. Texas
4. AIR FORCE (MWC)
4. Kentucky

5. Duke
5. NEVADA (WAC)
5. Arizona
5. Virginia Tech

6. USC
6. Marquette
6. Alabama
6. Villanova

7. Tennessee
7. Virginia
7. West Virginia
7. Indiana

8. Creighton
8. BUTLER (HORIZON)
8. Stanford
8. BYU

9. Boston College
9. Missouri State
9. Clemson
9. Oklahoma State

10. Vanderbilt
10. Louisville
10. XAVIER (ATLANTIC 10)
10. UNLV

11. Maryland
11. GONZAGA (WCC)
11. Bradley
11. VCU (COLONIAL)

12. Kansas State
12. Texas Tech
12. Michigan State
12. WINTHROP (BIG SOUTH)

13. Florida State
13. APPALACHIAN STATE (SOUTHERN)
13. AKRON (MAC)
13. SOUTH ALABAMA (SUN BELT)

14. MARIST (MAAC)
14. VERMONT (AMERICA EAST)
14. TEXAS A&M-CORPUS CHRISTI (SOUTHLAND)
14. ORAL ROBERTS (MID-CON)

15. PENN (IVY)
15. BUCKNELL (PATRIOT)
15. WEBER STATE (BIG SKY)
15. EAST TENNESSEE STATE (ATLANTIC SUN)

16. DELAWARE ST (MEAC)
16. LONG BEACH STATE (BIG WEST)
16. AUSTIN PEAY (OHIO VALLEY)
16. JACKSON STATE (SWAC)
16. CENTRAL CONNECTICUT STATE (NORTHEAST)

And now the best of the rest, separated into different groups. Keep in mind that within each group, teams are not ranked. Rather, they are just put in conference alphabetical order (ACC teams before Big East teams, etc.):

Teams that might be in some brackets, but just miss the cut:
Notre Dame
Syracuse
Illinois
Arkansas
Georgia
Mississippi State

Good resumes, but need a little bit more:
Georgia Tech
Michigan
Old Dominion
Drexel
Washington
Mississippi

Plausible bubble teams, but need a big turnaround:
Massachusetts
Providence
Depaul
Purdue
Missouri

Still alive, but pretty much need a miracle:
Dayton
UConn
Oklahoma
Hofstra
Wichita State
Davidson
LSU
Santa Clara
Utah State
Posted by at

10 comments:

Anonymous said...

I don't understand how Davidson College isn't on your list, anywhere. I was offended when you put them under the category of needing a miracle, now that they aren't even on the list offended no longer applies. I cannot take offense because it is clear you are not following the Wildcats or the Southern Conference and therefore have no idea what you are talking about. Choosing App State over Davidson is down right ignorant. App State continues to take major loses to teams like Western Carolina (at app state mind you) and Davidson continues to blow teams like C of Charleston and Western Carolina away (at their homes mind you). App State came to Davidson and barely beat the Wildcats. Anyone at the game, including an honest App State fan would have told you that Davidson was the better team that messed up a few key plays which App State capitalized on. So pay attention to the SoCon tourney, and the rest of the season and give the Wildcats a chance, or at least defend your seemingly mindless SoCon predictions. and GO WILDCATS!

February 18, 2007 11:29 AM
Anonymous said...

The reader has a point about how good Davidson is, but his prediction that they are less likely to get an at large than Appalachian is wrong. ASU has three notable wins: Virginia, Vandy, and Wichita State. Davidson has none, although they also have zero upset losses. Why Davidson didn't play a bracketbuster game is puzzling to me. They really could have used it.

My surprise is seeing Purdue not only out of the field, but in the third tier of not included candidates. Comparing with Michigan State, one of your last in the field, shows that their records are pretty comparable. Purdue with some slightly better wins and some slightly worse losses, and a slightly weaker RPI (37 vs 31). The main difference is that Purdue squished Michigan State when they played them, and has a very good chance to end up two games better than them in the Big 10 standings (10-6 vs 8-8). You also have Illinois as closer to being in the field than Purdue. Again, they lost head to head, have no notable wins (well, both teams split with Indiana), and have a much weaker RPI (46). Huhn? I is confoozed, Mr. Wizard.

February 18, 2007 12:13 PM
Anonymous said...

Sorry, I meant the reader's hope that Davidson was more likely to get an at large than Appalachian State was wrong.

February 18, 2007 12:14 PM
Anonymous said...

Your Pac-10 analysis needs some work.

You still have Oregon as the second highest seed from the Pac-10, despite the fact they have lost their last 5 of 6 -- and that was a narrow win over Arizona State, who hasn't won a conference game

You have Washington listed as "good resumes, but need a little bit more". After losing yesterday, they are now 16-10, with no quality wins that didn't come at home. Their road record is pathetic. I think the more likely category for them is "looking forward to the NIT".

While I'm at it, more predictions I just don't get:
-Georgetown as a 3 seed
-Florida State getting in at all - (5-8) in conference and losers of their last 4 games
-Arizona and Duke as 5 seeds - reputation shouldn't get them that high of a seed based on their play

February 18, 2007 2:40 PM
Anonymous said...

neither Davidson or App state will get an at large bid, i think that is a safe bet. but whoever wins the socon tournament is guaranteed a bid, so it comes down to who will win this. my bet is on davidson.

also, as to why Davidson didn't play a bracketbuster game is probably because this was supposed to be a rebuilding year and were not expected to do this good. they did however win their christmas tournament in arizona with some big names in it. but not quite bracketbusters.

February 18, 2007 3:26 PM
The Indiana Hoosier said...

You're not a big basketball guy are you?

Samueltstory@gmail.com

February 18, 2007 3:53 PM
Anonymous said...

Who isn't a big basketball guy?

February 18, 2007 4:28 PM
Anonymous said...

I missed the Florida State pick. You're right, they won't make it. They should end up 7-9 in the ACC, and their big wins (Florida & Duke) shouldn't quite make up for that.

On the other hand, Duke and Arizona as 5 seeds are reasonable. They are that high because of their RPI rankings (11 and 10th), because they both project to have 20+ wins (including conference tourneys) against two of the top 3 toughest schedules in the country. Arizona's seed is slightly dicier than Duke's, at this point.

As for Georgetown as a 3 seed, are you saying that's too high or too low? If you're saying they'll be a 2 seed after beating Pitt at home and assuming they'll win the Big East tourney, then I can see that.

Finally, App State does have a chance for an at large bid, because they're 2-2 against top 50 teams and 3-0 against top 100 teams. An RPI of 54 is reasonable, if the rest of the bubble is weak.

February 18, 2007 6:56 PM
Anonymous said...

Not sure why you don't get Georgetown as a 3 seed...they are 10-2 in the Big East and tied for 1st with Pitt. They are 17 in the RPI (which is certainly in the neighborhood, with some teams ahead of them clearly going to be seeded behind see e.g. Tennessee).

The are also 9-1 in their last 10. They have 4 wins over top 50 teams (Marquette, West Virginia, @ Villanova, @ Vanderbilt). They also have 4 wins over teams that are 51-60 (two on the road). They have 0 losses outside of the top 50.

February 18, 2007 7:00 PM
Jeff said...

Hey all, I'm enjoying the debate. That's the great thing about this time of year, you can debate this stuff all day. Anyway, I know I've been a bit AWOL lately, but I'm back and ready now, so let's try to go through these one by one:


Duke and Arizona: Both have played very tough schedules and had a lot of good wins. They have RPIs of 10 and 11 respectively. It's hard to argue that teams with RPIs that high will be really "overranked" at 5 seeds. And remember, this isn't about what I think SHOULD happen but what I think WILL happen, so we have to acknowledge that there is a little bias in the Selection process to glamor teams like Duke and Arizona.

As for Georgetown, I'm with DMoore... do you think they're too high or too low? They've been without a doubt one of the ten best teams in the nation over the past two weeks. And they have the talent to sustain this kind of run (let's remember that most people had them in the Top Ten in the preseason). But I put them at a 3 seed because I think a 2 seed is really pushing it. You can't ignore their struggles in December and January, and I also find it hard to argue giving them the same seed as a Pitt team that has clearly had a superior season. If Georgetown can win the Big East Tournament, then we'll talk about that two seed.

Moving to the SoCon, I know that fans of teams tend to be biased, but trust me - I'm a fan of this conference this year. I think Appalachian State and Davidson are both very exciting teams. But that said, there is no way Davidson gets an at-large bid. They have an RPI of 60, which is almost a disqualifier for a small-conference team as is. But on top of that, they're a pitiful 1-4 against the RPI Top 100. And even that statistic is deceptive, because that one win was over 98th ranked Ohio. Appalachian State is an outstanding 5-2 against the RPI Top 100, including wins over Virginia, Wichita State and Davidson - at Davidson.

Either way, I don't think either team is likely to get an at-large bid, so I think it's going to come down to the conference Tourney. And there, I'm going with the experience of Appalachian State. I talked about this about a month ago ( http://basketballpredictions.blogspot.com/2007/01/status-quo-saturday.html ). The seven players leading the Mountaineers in minutes per game are all Juniors and Seniors. Davidson's best player is a freshman, and they don't have a single senior getting anything but garbage time. When push comes to shove with a Tournament bid on the line, I'm going with the experience of Appalachian State. But like I said in the aforementioned post, I think Davidson is going to be a real force next year. They should return everyone and be a real legitimate at-large bid. Next year.

February 18, 2007 7:14 PM

Post a Comment

Subscribe to: Post Comments (Atom)