Sunday, January 08, 2012

W-9 BP68

One of the rites of the tale end of winter is the media complaining that the bubble stinks. You'll see the articles all throughout February. I have a theory that the writers re-use the same articles every year and just change the proper nouns. The irony being that, of course, on Selection Sunday these same writers will whine that some very good team got left out of the NCAA Tournament.

I'll spare you that because it actually isn't true this year, in a sense. I actually think that the teams near the bottom of the Field of 68 are pretty strong this year. I feel good about putting every team I've given an 11 seed or better into the NCAA Tournament. The weakness isn't there, it's in the teams just narrowly out of the field. The reality is that right now there is just a huge gulf between the last few at-large teams and the best teams outside of the Tournament. Look at how small the "Teams Seriously Considered..." category is. And honestly, a few of those teams don't impress me at all and would be in a lower category in an ordinary year. A team like Iowa State jumped into that top category just because of one nice week.

I only made one change to the Field of 68. I finally dropped Florida Atlantic from the Sun Belt auto bid and replaced them with Middle Tennessee State. Winning the Sun Belt East Division is important because it will most likely mean avoiding Denver in the Sun Belt tournament semifinals. FAU's loss today to UALR is a killer to their hopes of winning that Sun Belt East over MTSU. So I'm giving Middle Tennessee the edge.

Next week is the week I bring back the "full bubble". That means I'll include every team with a mathematical hope of an at-large bid. It means adding in dozens of teams I'm not including in this post because their odds are so long. The point is that no new teams will be added the rest of the season. Each week teams will be eliminated, and I'll narrow down the bubble until Selection Sunday itself. It's always a fun thing to do.

Now let's get to the bracket. Remember, this is a projection of the final bracket on Selection Sunday, and not a listing of how I think teams would be seeded if the season ended now:


1. KENTUCKY (SEC)
1. NORTH CAROLINA (ACC)
1. OHIO STATE (BIG TEN)
1. SYRACUSE (BIG EAST)

2. Duke
2. Kansas
2. Florida
2. TEXAS (BIG 12)

3. Georgetown
3. Marquette
3. UNLV (MWC)
3. Indiana

4. Louisville
4. Wisconsin
4. Baylor
4. Alabama

5. UConn
5. TEMPLE (ATLANTIC TEN)
5. Michigan State
5. Missouri

6. GONZAGA (WCC)
6. Michigan
6. Vanderbilt
6. New Mexico

7. BYU
7. Saint Louis
7. West Virginia
7. Purdue

8. San Diego State
8. MEMPHIS (CONFERENCE USA)
8. Virginia
8. Pittsburgh

9. Kansas State
9. CREIGHTON (MVC)
9. ARIZONA (PAC-12)
9. Xavier

10. Illinois
10. Saint Mary's
10. Florida State
10. Wichita State

11. Stanford
11. Seton Hall
11. Northwestern
11. Southern Miss

12. HARVARD (IVY)
12. California
12. Virginia Tech
12. Northern Iowa
12. Dayton
12. LONG BEACH STATE (BIG WEST)

13. BELMONT (ATLANTIC SUN)
13. MURRAY STATE (OVC)
13. IONA (MAAC)
13. BUTLER (HORIZON)

14. GEORGE MASON (COLONIAL)
14. OHIO (MAC)
14. ORAL ROBERTS (SUMMIT)
14. UTAH STATE (WAC)

15. MIDDLE TENNESSEE ST (SUN BELT)
15. ROBERT MORRIS (NEC)
15. DAVIDSON (SOUTHERN)
15. BUCKNELL (PATRIOT)

16. MONTANA (BIG SKY)
16. COASTAL CAROLINA (BIG SOUTH)
16. VERMONT (AMERICA EAST)
16. LAMAR (SOUTHLAND)
16. MORGAN STATE (MEAC)
16. ALABAMA STATE (SWAC)

Teams seriously considered that just missed the cut:
NC State, St. Joseph's, Cincinnati, Minnesota, Iowa State, Oklahoma, Texas A&M, Marshall, Mississippi State

Other teams with a decent shot, but that need to improve their resume:
Miami (Fl), Notre Dame, Villanova, Oklahoma State, VCU, Central Florida, Cleveland State, Illinois State, Missouri State, Colorado State, Colorado, Oregon, Oregon State, Washington, Arkansas, LSU, Mississippi

Other teams I'm keeping my eye on, but that need to dramatically improve their resume:
Clemson, Georgia Tech, Maryland, Duquesne, La Salle, Richmond, St. Bonaventure, Providence, Rutgers, South Florida, Iowa, Nebraska, Drexel, Georgia State, Tulane, UW-Milwaukee, Kent State, Indiana State, Boise State, Wyoming, UCLA, Washington State, Auburn, Georgia, Tennessee, Charleston, Denver, Nevada, New Mexico State

25 comments:

DMoore said...

There are two teams that I just have trouble seeing turn it around: Pitt, and Florida State.

Pitt has been playing especially badly lately, but they've been bad defensively the entire season. I see no reason why that will change this year. I would look at Cincinnati instead. Despite their recent loss, they have shown potential to get hot and pull themselves into the tourney.

Florida State has been plain bad all year long. If you want to look at an ACC team that might turn things around, look at NC State. Their record is nothing great, but they have definitely show signs of life in their losses, so I can see how a turnaround would at least be possible.

Jeff said...

If Pitt has another week like their past two weeks, I'll probably drop them out of the field. I'm just trying not to overreact to two awful weeks. Knowing the roster and the head coach, it just seems inconceivable that they could be playing this badly.

As for Florida State, the thing is that their defense is still terrific (the game against Clemson notwithstanding). I think that's enough to give them a good shot at 9 or 10 wins. I'm not a fan of Mark Gottfried, so I need more convincing that his team can win enough games to get into the Tournament.

Tom said...

So 3 from the Pac-12 currently, and two of them you're very confident in (11 seed or better, according to your write up). Better than a one-bid league.

Here's my question though. I know you don't care much for the RPI (neither do I because it really doesn't make sense) but Stanford is somewhere in the mid 70's with a projected RPI somewhere in the high 60's I believe. Considering New Mexico (RPI 74) is the worst to ever get an at-large bid, can a Stanford, Arizona or Cal get in if they're somewhere in the 70's, even if they go say 13-5 in the conference?

Tom said...

Just checked out RPI forecast. Let's say 14-4 wins the league and somebody steps up to do so... looks like they'd all be set:

At 23-8/14-4 Arizona is projected RPI 52
At 24-6/14-4 Stanford is projected RPI 47
At 24-7/14-4 Cal is projected RPI 29

At 22-9/13-5 Arizona is projected RPI 62
At 23-7/13-5 Stanford is projected RPI 57
At 23-8/13-5 Cal is projected RPI 36

At 22-9/12-6 Arizona is projected RPI 74
At 22-8/12-6 Stanford is projected RPI 69
At 22-9/12-6 Cal is projected RPI 46

In fact, 21-10/11-7 Cal is projected RPI 57

so, does this indicate anything with regards to a target W/L record? Looks to me like Arizona needs at least 13 wins, Stanford at least 12 and Cal at least 11 to have a shot. That is, if RPI actually means anything to the committee and if this forecast is at all accurate.

Thinking out loud I guess...

Jeff said...

Well, I hesitate to worry about the RPI at all, since it's such a silly metric that the Selection Committee basically ignores. The RPI only really gets used to put together things like "RPI Top 50 wins". And keep in mind that with the expanded field, last year we had two different teams with RPIs in the mid-60s earn at-large bids.

That said, I do think I more or less agree with what you said about the wins - and they pretty much line up with what I said in that post on the Pac-12 being a one-bid league. Stanford and Cal need 11 or 12 wins at a minimum, and Arizona needs 12 or 13.

I don't actually think the Pac-12 will be a one-bid league. I just believe it's a real possibility.

Anonymous said...

What is it you see in Texas that no1 else in the country sees? I was looking at the bracket matrix...you have them at 2 seed the next highest is a 7 seed and 7 0f the brackets don't even have them in the tournament

Jeff said...

There are a lot of silly things in that Bracket Matrix. I don't ever even look at it.

Texas has lost four games this season, but two of those losses came when J'Covan Brown missed the bulk of the second half. They had a nice win yesterday considering that Brown was playing on only one leg and wasn't anything close to himself.

Texas is improving each month, and I think they'll continue to improve.

Also, look at the other contenders for that last 2 seed. Do you really think any of those would be ahead of a Texas team that goes 12-6 or 13-5 and wins the Big 12 tournament? I don't.

DMoore said...

The issue isn't whether Texas would get a 2 seed if they went 12-6 in conference and won the Big 12 tourney, it's how they will do in conference. It's just a very shaky prediction. They've already lost a road game at Iowa State, so they would need to go 11-5 the rest of the way.

The Big 12 has a full home and home schedule, so they will go on the road to Kansas, Missouri, Baylor and Kansas State. That's 4 of their 5 losses right there, and I would expect to lose to at least two of those teams at home. They may turn it around, but they certainly haven't yet. This team is still young and inconsistent. I don't see how they can go through conference play and do better than 10-8.

Jeff said...

They only lost the Iowa State game because J'Covan Brown got hurt, and Iowa State just went out an destroyed Texas A&M, so they're no slouch.

It would be a mistake to just pencil in losses for those four road games, as well. The odds of them losing all four games are pretty low.

Anonymous said...
This comment has been removed by a blog administrator.
Jeff said...

I warned you multiple times that I would start getting rid of your posts if you didn't stop with the name calling.

If you think I did something wrong, present facts. You've exhausted all your warnings for bad behavior.

Anonymous said...

If Texas goes lets say 13-5 they will be 24-9 and you think that is 2 seed material...Yes I see many teams better...Baylor, Mich St, Indiana, Michigan..even Mizzou That 2 in there own league

Jeff said...

No Big 12 team that fails to win either the regular season or tournament title will earn a 1 seed or 2 seed in the NCAA Tournament.

So, no, forget about Missouri or Baylor getting 2 seeds unless they win one of those two titles.

A second Big Ten team is possible, but I think the top of the conference is too balanced. It's hard to see Indiana or Michigan State or anybody other than Ohio State finishing better than 12-6.

Anonymous said...

Love your site ....but your very hard to follow...So by your last reply I guess your saying that Texas wins the Big 12 and I guess Kansas wins the Big 12 Tourney and they will both be 2 seeds?

Jeff said...

The teams in capital letters with the conference names next to them are my project conference tournament champions.

So I think Kansas will have the best resume of any Big 12 team heading into the Big 12 tournament, but I'm giving the edge to Texas in the Big 12 tournament itself. If that comes to pass I think they'll both earn 2 seeds.

Anonymous said...

Texas as a 2 seed is the most clueless prediction I've ever seen.

Anonymous said...

You're not the only culprit here (Lunardi having them in AS OF RIGHT NOW is definitely worse), but I don't get why you have FSU in the field. They're 9-6, their best win is UCF, and they have losses against Princeton and Clemson. The computers don't believe they'll turn it around either, as pomeroy projects them to finish 8-8 in ACC play. With the ACC being down and their weak OOC, they need to finish 10-6 or better to even have a chance.

What makes you think they'll magically turn it around? Because I just don't see it.

Jeff said...

I think Florida State's computer ratings are a little off because of two games. First, that game against Clemson was incomprehensibly bad - the shooting for both teams was so far outside the statistical expectations. Second, that Princeton game, where FSU clearly didn't come in focused - after the first half they dominated the game, but some bad missed free throws in overtime doomed them.

Because they play such low-scoring, ugly games, they're going to be inconsistent. They'll have a few games this season where they look great. I'm just not ready to give up on them because of two really bad games.

Anonymous said...

"Because they play such low-scoring, ugly games, they're going to be inconsistent. They'll have a few games this season where they look great."

I think you just proved my point. That's fine if you think they'll get a couple wins against the Top 3 of the ACC, but you're missing the big picture on this one. You just admitted they're inconsistent, so why do you expect them to go 10-5 or better the rest of the way? 9-7 with a run to the ACC semi's would put them at 20-13 in the 5th best conference with multiple sub-100 losses. It's VERY iffy that would be enough to get them in.

Jeff said...

Well, the ACC is down, but I don't see a big gap between the ACC, Big East and SEC. Certainly not enough for a 10-6 ACC record to be worth less than a 10-6 SEC record, particularly since a majority of the SEC's potential bubble teams (Mississippi State, Arkansas... LSU?) have an SEC West schedule (even though the SEC West technically doesn't exist in basketball anymore) and so will have a weaker conference SOS than FSU.

Keep in mind that FSU's schedule is manageable, and they'll get to play home games against Duke, North Carolina and Virginia, not to mention games in the ACC tournament potentially against one or more of those teams. I think they'll collect a big win or two and get to 10-6, and I think that gets them into the Tournament.

If they do finish 8-8, though, then obviously they'll probably be NIT-bound.

Tom said...

Thinking it might be time to drop Pitt out of the field...

Jeff said...

Not sure I'm going to drop them all the way out, but they're definitely being dropped at least a couple of lines. Their performance tonight against Rutgers was a joke.

Tom said...

I don't know how they can recover from 0-4 in conference, honestly.

camtron said...

Hey Jeff, after watching Texas play last night, I'm really concerned about your 2 seed projection, bc as you mentioned earlier they were an improving team, but last night proved otherwise.

Jeff said...

I'm not sure I'd be too concerned about a ten point win over a Texas A&M team that is better than their record. Also note that J'Covan Brown is still not totally healthy - he was pretty invisible last night.