2013-2014 Bracketology thread

[Play Angry]

Kansas has played a tough schedule and been fairly successful against it, but at some point you have to recognize that barely winning 60% of your games against the RPI Top 50 (with a big sample size) does not merit a #1 seed.

A lot of folks are giving them full credit for 12 wins in that category while completely ignoring the 7 losses. That's not how it works. All else equal, a record like 7-3 vs. the Top 50 is more impressive than 12-7 against the same group.

[rlh04d]

Kansas has played a tough schedule and been fairly successful against it, but at some point you have to recognize that barely winning 60% of your games against the RPI Top 50 (with a big sample size) does not merit a #1 seed.

A lot of folks are giving them full credit for 12 wins in that category while completely ignoring the 7 losses. That's not how it works. All else equal, a record like 7-3 vs. the Top 50 is more impressive than 12-7 against the same group.

People keep trying to pick apart Kansas without going to the next step: who are you going to put above them?

You're using Kansas winning 63.16% of the time against the Top 50 RPI as your argument. That's a legitimate argument. Now go the next step and look at the other teams that could potentially move above them based on that criteria.

Here's the current top 10:
Florida 75%
Wichita State 100%
Arizona 90%
Syracuse 77.778%
Duke 55.56%
Louisville 44.44%
Villanova 57.14%
Creighton 62.5%
Saint Louis 57.14%

Even with seven losses, Kansas has the fifth highest winning percentage against the RPI Top 50 of any top ten team. Only Florida, WSU, Arizona, and Syracuse are higher.

So the real question in your argument is, do you think Syracuse should still be a #1 seed ahead of Kansas? That's all you're arguing here ... whether Kansas should be the last #1 or the first #2. Keep in mind that Syracuse went out of their way to play the 106th best nonconference SOS, only willingly went on the road one time, and their loss at home against 178 RPI Boston College is one of the three worst losses any team in the top 25 has.

No one is arguing that you should ignore Kansas' losses. You're simply keying in on Kansas and not looking at the teams around them.

[rlh04d]

Going down that road, do you think WSU could be moved down for a triple digit SOS?

The selection committee already said that they would take into account teams that tried to schedule up but for whatever reason the schedule was worse than they tried to put together.

Our SOS might still be held against us, but I think we'll also be credited beyond simply having a bad SOS, based on Marshall's attempts to get us the strongest schedule possible. No one can legitimately make the argument that WSU wanted a schedule this bad ... Marshall was trying until the last possible moment to get us into the Dallas tip off against a major name, has been consistently challenging teams like Kansas and Kansas State, and so on. Tennessee and Alabama were both worse than expected, and the CBE Classic gave us a weaker lineup than expected.

We'll get the benefit of the doubt from the selection committee.

Syracuse wanted a bad nonconference SOS. Wichita State wanted the best possible nonconference SOS to make up for what the rest of the Valley has done to us.

[Play Angry]

No one is arguing that you should ignore Kansas' losses. You're simply keying in on Kansas and not looking at the teams around them.

And a 27-7 Kansas might not just be a 1, but the overall 1. Ahead of 34-0 Wichita. Ahead of 32-2 Florida. Ahead of 32-2 Arizona. Ahead of everything. I will say their margin of error is now 0, since the next loss would mean either a) they lost to a non-tourney team, or b) they failed to win the Big 12 championship double.

[rlh04d]

No one is arguing that you should ignore Kansas' losses. You're simply keying in on Kansas and not looking at the teams around them.

And a 27-7 Kansas might not just be a 1, but the overall 1. Ahead of 34-0 Wichita. Ahead of 32-2 Florida. Ahead of 32-2 Arizona. Ahead of everything. I will say their margin of error is now 0, since the next loss would mean either a) they lost to a non-tourney team, or b) they failed to win the Big 12 championship double.

And his reasoning was never that their losses don't matter.

His reasoning has consistently been that Kansas has one of the toughest schedules in college basketball history.

I don't agree with him that Kansas could be the overall #1, but I also don't agree with your reasoning about Kansas not deserving a one seed, which you aren't defending.

[Play Angry]

An argument based primarily on SOS does exactly that- ignores the losses to the tough teams and rewards simply playing them.

And yes, I would place Syracuse above Kansas on the S-Curve if the tournament started today. 7-2 vs. the Top 50 plus one bad loss IMO trumps 12-7 vs. the Top 50 with no bad losses, despite the SOS differential.

[CBB_Fan]

I think it is also important to realize that Wichita State would probably have the #4 RPI behind Arizona, Florida, and KU if they win the MVC tournament. It would be a lot easier to jump one of the ACC teams over them if they didn't have a higher RPI, but I don't think any of them will jump Wichita State (Duke might come close if they don't lose before then).

It also helps that Wichita State has been moving up the other statistical rankings. They are up to #6 in KenPom, #1 in Nolan's Power Index, #1 in Sagarin's Elo Ratings, and of course #2 in the polls. If they continue their slow climb upwards, they'll be ranked ahead of the ACC teams in RPI, in the polls, and in most of the major statistical ratings. I think that will be enough of a cushion to get past the conference prejudice disguised as SoS arguments.

I think that KU is probably still in with a perfect finish, and I think Arizona and Florida are locks (even though Arizona isn't the same team that earned a #1 seed). If KU or Duke loses, I think Wichita State is safe. If both win out, KU probably gets a #1 seed and Duke has a more pressing case.

[TheAsianSensation]

No one is arguing that you should ignore Kansas' losses. You're simply keying in on Kansas and not looking at the teams around them.

And a 27-7 Kansas might not just be a 1, but the overall 1. Ahead of 34-0 Wichita. Ahead of 32-2 Florida. Ahead of 32-2 Arizona. Ahead of everything. I will say their margin of error is now 0, since the next loss would mean either a) they lost to a non-tourney team, or b) they failed to win the Big 12 championship double.

I admit I'm out on an island on that, and on further review tonight, I'm removing Arizona from that post. I think 32-2 Arizona beats out 27-7 Kansas.

There is definitely a opportunity factor you have to throw in with Kansas. They have many more chances at signature wins than anyone else. But rlh04d, as he's done several times by now keeps stealing my points. The winning percentage is better than all but 4 teams, and Syracuse is not in good form and are clearly worse than Kansas. And Kansas does get extra credit for such a brutal schedule, like it or not.

A lot of people have been using the argument of what Wichita would do against Kansas' schedule. Extend that idea to every other team in the country. There's no team in the country that could have 5 or fewer losses against Kansas' schedule.

[TheAsianSensation]

His reasoning has consistently been that Kansas has one of the toughest schedules in college basketball history.

And by the way, this is a wrong statement.

Kansas has THE toughest schedule in college basketball history (in the modern tournament era).

[TheAsianSensation]

Going down that road, do you think WSU could be moved down for a triple digit SOS?

Nope.

Projected non-con SoS is 33. Committee will reward that.