2023-2024 MBB computer projections thread

[HFCS]

Why is there no daily national media story about Alabama manipulating the NET?

They are #7 and have a terrible Quad 1 win % compared to every other team in the top 10. They have 10 losses and their schedule isn't harder than most top ten teams. They score the most points...so somehow that's not manipulating the system but ISU and BYU are?

I can't believe with a recent big loss and and ISU beating #12 we didn't jump them.

Of course I don't think Alabama is actually guilty of any manipulation...but ISU/BYU have been criticized all year and frankly both have an objectively better season and resume.

 

[CyPunch]

Why is there no daily national media story about Alabama manipulating the NET?

They are #7 and have a terrible Quad 1 win % compared to every other team in the top 10. They have 10 losses and their schedule isn't harder than most top ten teams. They score the most points...so somehow that's not manipulating the system but ISU and BYU are?

I can't believe with a recent big loss and and ISU beating #12 we didn't jump them.

Of course I don't think Alabama is actually guilty of any manipulation...but ISU/BYU have been criticized all year and frankly both have an objectively better season and resume.

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

 

[HFCS]

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

Yeah, I don't think it's intentional but if ESPN and ACC coaches want to cry about "frauds" and manipulating the system they can start with a few SEC teams.

#6 Auburn, 1-7 quad one, #13 AP
#7 Alabama, 4-9 quad one, #16 in AP
#8 ISU, 7-5 quad one, #6 in AP
#12 BYU, 6-6 quad one, #20 AP

BYU especially was just written off as some fluke of the system the entire year, probably more than us until the jealous Clemson coach publicly cried.

 

[CascadeClone]

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

Everybody knows that "good loses" vs quality opponents are more important than "good wins" vs quality opponents.

 

[clone52]

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

They also played only 3 quad 4 games total. I think thats a bigger reason why they are so high. Also why they will be seeded well below what their NET says.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

Joe Lunardi had a pretty good take on the “NET Manipulation” thing in the Wilner and Canzano pod. Basically, “everyone is “manipulating” the NET in some way.”

But his main point is there isn’t really a way to manipulate it because the games have to be played.

 

[ClubCy]

Why is there no daily national media story about Alabama manipulating the NET?

They are #7 and have a terrible Quad 1 win % compared to every other team in the top 10. They have 10 losses and their schedule isn't harder than most top ten teams. They score the most points...so somehow that's not manipulating the system but ISU and BYU are?

I can't believe with a recent big loss and and ISU beating #12 we didn't jump them.

Of course I don't think Alabama is actually guilty of any manipulation...but ISU/BYU have been criticized all year and frankly both have an objectively better season and resume.

Because you can control who you schedule but can’t control how many points you score.

 

[Dale]

Alabama's NET manipulation came in the form that they played a really tough non-conference schedule but didn't actually win any of the games. So they are/were being rewarded for taking a bunch of "good losses." Sort of like Michigan State but at least Alabama has performed well in SEC play.

That's a little of it, but much more of it is massive wins over overmatched -- but mostly not Q4 -- teams:

32 over Morehead State (117)
22 over Indiana State (30)
58 over South Alabama (242)
31 over Mercer (221)
24 over Arkansas State (158)
36 over Eastern Kentucky (216)
27 over South Carolina (47)
21 over LSU (89)
32 over Mississippi State (39)
25 over Texas A&M (49)

That's an impressive set of large-margin victories, and the Vegas-esque prediction models (NET, KenPom, Torvik) love wins like this. And for what these models are trying to do, this is exactly what they should take into account.

This is also why the NET is primarily used in NCAA seeding for judging your OPPONENT'S strength, not for where YOU should be seeded. NCAA seeding is primarily a result-based metric, caring very little for margin of victory, which is why seeding correlates much closer with other result-based metrics like KPI/SOR/WAB then it does with NET/KenPom.

In short: Don't worry that Alabama is too high in NET. It doesn't matter.

 

[bawbie]

View attachment 125103

I think the chances of a 3-seed is much higher than 22%, even beating KSU and winning a game in KC. I've read too much about Non-Conf SOS from people doing "mock selection committees" to discount it. Not saying it's going to happen, but there is a significant chance that there's voices "in the room" that will discount ISU's seed based on that

 

[Daserop]

I think the chances of a 3-seed is much higher than 22%, even beating KSU and winning a game in KC. I've read too much about Non-Conf SOS from people doing "mock selection committees" to discount it. Not saying it's going to happen, but there is a significant chance that there's voices "in the room" that will discount ISU's seed based on that

I truly hate the double standard. This is the exact thing the SEC says for football. "Since we play in the best league in college football, we can play extra non-conference games). When the Big 12 (the best college basketball league) puts up the same argument, it's ignored.

 

[HFCS]

That's a little of it, but much more of it is massive wins over overmatched -- but mostly not Q4 -- teams:

32 over Morehead State (117)
22 over Indiana State (30)
58 over South Alabama (242)
31 over Mercer (221)
24 over Arkansas State (158)
36 over Eastern Kentucky (216)
27 over South Carolina (47)
21 over LSU (89)
32 over Mississippi State (39)
25 over Texas A&M (49)

That's an impressive set of large-margin victories, and the Vegas-esque prediction models (NET, KenPom, Torvik) love wins like this. And for what these models are trying to do, this is exactly what they should take into account.

This is also why the NET is primarily used in NCAA seeding for judging your OPPONENT'S strength, not for where YOU should be seeded. NCAA seeding is primarily a result-based metric, caring very little for margin of victory, which is why seeding correlates much closer with other result-based metrics like KPI/SOR/WAB then it does with NET/KenPom.

In short: Don't worry that Alabama is too high in NET. It doesn't matter.

I agree with all this.

It's just interesting that there's no national media narrative about Auburn and Alabama manipulating the Net.

 

[NoCreativity]

I agree with all this.

It's just interesting that there's no national media narrative about Auburn and Alabama manipulating the Net.

I dont understand Auburn at all. Their best wins are home against Alabama and South Carolina. It would be like us if our best wins of the entire year were BYU and TCU in Ames.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I agree with all this.

It's just interesting that there's no national media narrative about Auburn and Alabama manipulating the Net.

I don't even know why it matters so much. Even the most skillful "manipulation" depends on you winning basketball games and winning them by large margins and can only affect things at most a few slots in the rankings. Maybe you can manipulate yourself from a #3 to a #2 or something like that, but that level of distinction is pretty meaningless considering how many random and compounding factors (e.g., matchups, location, officiating, time of day, etc.) that can influence how the ~30 or so teams that have at least a dark horse's chance of winning a national title are going to perform in the NCAA tournament with all the weirdness of single-elimination games.

We might be better off as a #3 in a region with a weak #2 (e.g., Kansas if they end up overseeded) and a relatively weak #1 (want to stay far away from Connecticut until the Final Four, for instance) compared to being a #2 in a region with a dangerous #3 (e.g., Baylor, who has beat us, or say like Alabama, who sucks at defense but can go thermonuclear from three and beat anybody on any given night) and one of the scarier #1 seeds (mostly UConn and Houston). There's just so much to account for a little NET boost here and there isn't going to make a perceptible difference for a team at this level compared to all these other interlocking factors.

 

[herbicide]

 

[cycloneML]

SIAP. What happens if we tie Houston after tomorrow? Are they still number one seed? Why?

 

[cydnote]

While watching one of the late games last night they did their Lunardi clip about seeding and a question out of the blue was raised that if Iowa State won the big 12 tourney and tied for the regular season championship would they deserve a one seed? Joe answered without hesitation and almost arrogantly (paraphrasing) "NO! You can't have a team with a non-con in the 300's be a one seed

 

[MeowingCows]

SIAP. What happens if we tie Houston after tomorrow? Are they still number one seed? Why?

If I checked correctly, if they lose and Baylor loses, we take #1 seed from them by tiebreaker. Any other scenario, they are #1. This is separate from the regular season title, which would be shared if we win and they lose.

 

[Cyclonepride]

SIAP. What happens if we tie Houston after tomorrow? Are they still number one seed? Why?

Someone mentioned (and I assume that they're correct) that if we tie, we have to hope Baylor also loses.

 

[Cyclonepride]

Someone mentioned (and I assume that they're correct) that if we tie, we have to hope Baylor also loses.

Which, by the way, makes that .1 second late buzzer beater sting just a bit more, as we'd be tied right now, and would have the tie breaker too.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Saw this on Reddit...