Wednesday, March 7, 2018

7 March Bracket

Louisville is in the process of wrecking Florida State's shit, so they should move up a few spots.  They're closing schedule was pretty brutal, and losing home games to FSU and Cuse to kick it off narrowed the margins.  Cuse has to be feeling the pinch.  They will have to beat UNC to have a realistic shot.  A Louisville loss would have given the committee a chance to take the hotter team.

Anyway, here is the bracket:



One error. The Auburn/TCU pod will not be located in Dallas.  After the 1/2 seeds snap up all the Auburn-friendly sites (Nashville, Charlotte), this would likely be shipped to Wichita to preserve neutrality (Montana would have an advantage in Boise, ASU in San Diego).

I figure it is time to cover some of the bracketing rules so that this makes sense.

1. Each of the first four teams selected from a conference shall be placed in different regions if they are seeded on the first four lines.
* This shouldn't be an issue for anyone except the ACC if Clemson (or Miami) makes a run.

2. Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional final if they played each other three or more times during the regular season and conference tournament. Teams from the same conference shall not meet prior to the regional semifinals if they played each other twice during the regular season and conference tournament. Teams from the same conference may play each other as early as the second round if they played no more than once during the regular season and conference tournament.
* Hard to really pin this one down right now. I do my best to evenly distribute the conferences to each region, giving preference to the highest ranked teams and conference champions.  If there is a matchup occurring prior to the regional finals, typically it will be because two lower seeded teams upset their opponents, such as Baylor/Texas above.

3. Any principle can be relaxed if two or more teams from the same conference are among the last four atlarge seeded teams participating in the First Four.
* Unnecessary, but plays to the committee's advantage to saturate the field with Power conference teams.

4. To recognize the demonstrated quality of such teams, the committee shall not place teams seeded on the first four lines at a potential “home-crowd disadvantage” in the first round.
* The stunning lack of decent West Coast Teams this year and Top Teams within a short drive of Cincinnati has made this a little difficult. The weaker 2 seeds could get shipped out west.  Also, no guarantee that UNC ends up in Charlotte, especially if they lose to Cuse tonight.  The idea that the "closest-to-home" site for the number 1 overall seed (UVA) may be off-limits to them is somewhat disconcerting, but nobody ever said the NCAA is fair.

5. Teams will remain in or as close to their areas of natural interest as possible. A team moved out of its natural area will be placed in the next closest region to the extent possible. If two teams from the same natural region are in contention for the same bracket position, the team ranked higher in the seed list shall remain in its natural region.
* Never seen the secret sauce here, but assume that this is relaxed to maintain balance with the number of large, diverse conferences. For instance, what the hell is West Virginia's "natural region? The are certainly in the East, but drivable to the South, and play in a conference that is based mainly in the Southwest.  I tend to hold this standard more when seeding the autobid leagues.  UCLA fans will travel.  Hampton may not even be able to afford Boise.  Right now, I also have both 16-seed winners going to Pittsburgh (fair, as opposed to the west coast), and split the 12-seed winners between Boise and San Diego (less fair, but these teams haven't earned anything by being "at-large").

6. A team will not be permitted to play in any facility in which it has played more than three games during its season, not including exhibitions and conference postseason tournaments. A host institution’s team shall not be permitted to play at the site where the institution is hosting. However, the team may play on the same days when the institution is hosting. Teams may play at a site where the conference of which it is a member is serving as the host.
* Wichita State is affected here, as is Lipscomb, TCU (by proximity), and possibly Boise State and San Diego State.  There are probably one or two others.

7. A team may be moved up or down one (or in extraordinary circumstances) two lines from its true seed line (e.g., from the 13 seed line to the 12 seed line; or from a 12 seed line to a 13 seed line) when it is placed in the bracket if necessary to meet the principles.
* If this were not allowed, this would be impossible.

8.
1. The committee will place the four No. 1 seeds in each of the four regions, thus determining the Final Four semifinals pairings (overall 1 vs. 4; 2 vs. 3). The overall No. 1 seed has the opportunity to select its preferred first- and second-round site and preferred region.
2. The committee will then place the No. 2 seeds in each region in true seed list order. The committee may relax the principle of keeping teams as close to their area of natural interest for seeding teams on the No. 2 line to avoid, for example, the overall No. 5 seed being sent to the same region as the overall No. 1 seed. The committee will not compromise the principle of keeping teams from the same conference in separate regions.
3. The committee will then place the No. 3 seeds in each region in true seed list order.
4. The committee will then place the No. 4 seeds in each region in true seed list order.
* This is actually pretty simple.

9.
If possible, rematches of non-conference regular-season games should be avoided in the First Four and first round. If possible, after examining the previous two years’ brackets, teams or conferences will not be moved out of its natural region or geographic area an inordinate number of times. If possible, rematches from the previous two tournaments should be avoided in the first round.
* Absolutely stress IF POSSIBLE. For mock brackets, it is hard to spend the extra time combing the team sheets and past schedules to assure this.  The Final Bracket this weekend will apply all the rules.

The rules mention the "Seed List" which implies that they have a "master" ranking metric, which we know defaults to the RPI.  The NCAA is bought into the RPI for at least the next season, but let's be honest.  They know the RPI is cheap and easy.  While I use Sagarin and KenPom to their maximum potential, and many other Bracketologists integrate BPI, SOR, KPI, etc, it's foolish to expect a room full of politicians to use anything other than the simplest analytical metrics.  I use 5 different values to bracket the teams, and while it may make the most sense to create a "master" seed list, it is an unnecessary step with the rules above.

It should also be noted that never have both HBAC schools been dropped into the First Four.  While this is unwritten, and chaos in the other autobid tournaments has justified it, up until last night the SWAC and MEAC best potential qualifiers were light years behind the next worst contender.  LIU took care of one spot, and Radford's position is much lower than Winthrop or Asheville, but even if no other upsets occur, I expect the MEAC winner (if it is Hampton, Bethune-Cookman, NC Central, Norfolk State, or Savannah State) to be in Charlotte playing an ACC team.

Speaking of different metrics, here how each of mine pit the Bubble contenders:
T-Factor (best for seeding, uses RPI to "cut" the raw numbers)


Total Efficiency (Takes into account weighted Quadrant Wins)


Quadrant Win Score (strictly focuses on how you performed in each quadrant, and how "valuable" those wins are)

 * Notre Dame is 75th, SDST 81st. A Q-Rating under 0.0 means that you either a) didn't win enough high quality games (Q1) to offset any losses, or b) had too many bad losses (Temple).

Trend (how efficient has the team been in its last 5/10 games; rewards conference performance)

* Alabama is 88th

Strength (more or less RPI blended with efficiency numbers, but with emphasis on Non-Conference, to understand who can compete at different level of competition)


And Basic Efficiency


Bottom line: there are many ways to skin this cat, and you never know who/what the committee is championing at any given moment.  I do know, that if I am Providence, I am not getting my hopes up. With Louisville's win, they have to think that they need a similar performance to keep ahead of the bid thieves.

No comments:

Post a Comment