2013-2014 Bracketology thread

[rlh04d]

The Massey Composite is interesting, but all ranking systems aren't created equal. I look at LRMC, KenPom, Sagarin Predictor, Massey itself, and maybe Warren Nolan, generally. In those, we're #6, #6, #18, #2, #1. We're very clearly an elite team by those rankings. Not a unanimous #1/2, though.

In other news, Duke just bombed one against a previously 5 win ACC team that had lost eight of its last nine.

[FearDaTrees]

Wichita State's best win keeps getting worse. St. Louis drops their THIRD game in a row and could possibly drop them out of the top 25, leaving WSU with 0 wins against the top 25. Not good to see when there are already talks of not getting a top seed.

[Cdizzle]

Wichita State's best win keeps getting worse. St. Louis drops their THIRD game in a row and could possibly drop them out of the top 25, leaving WSU with 0 wins against the top 25. Not good to see when there are already talks of not getting a top seed.

Getting a one seed is no longer dependent on WSU's opponents. If WSU goes undefeated, they are a 1 seed. This was, IMO, probably always the case, but it is definitely the case now. Without a loss, WSU is way closer to being the overall #1 seed than not a #1 seed.

The "multitude of teams" that some people have been claiming are far more deserving of a #1 seed than WSU just keep piling up losses, some of them bad losses. The only people still on this train are pure BCS homers, or full-on WSU haters (or both).

IMO, there may even be a chance a 1-loss WSU could nab a #1 seed at this point (this loss would probably need to occur in the MVC Final).

[bigdawg]

Are WSU fans at all worried that the 31-0 record is an aberration because of the obvious watered down schedule? Zero wins that will impress the committee at this point. What happens when someone better than Missouri St jumps up by 10 early? Will WSU be good enough then considering they just haven't been adequately tested?

[Play Angry]

I guess we'll find out. It's a nice problem to have.

[Mike]

Unfortunately, the Shockers are having what I would call a "Yea, but . . . " kind of year.

They have gone undefeated during the regular season and many are saying: "Yea, but look at their RPI rating and strength of schedule."

When they win the MVC Tournament, people will say: "Yea, but Creighton was no longer in the MVC.

[Cdizzle]

Unfortunately, the Shockers are having what I would call a "Yea, but . . . " kind of year.

They have gone undefeated during the regular season and many are saying: "Yea, but look at their RPI rating and strength of schedule."

When they win the MVC Tournament, people will say: "Yea, but Creighton was no longer in the MVC.

The RPI rating is just fine....

There is no logic in any of these arguments. There is absolutely nothing unfortunate about this Shocker season. And it is incredibly fun to witness.

[rlh04d]

"Yea, but look at their RPI rating

Wichita State's RPI is #6.

[rlh04d]

Are WSU fans at all worried that the 31-0 record is an aberration because of the obvious watered down schedule? Zero wins that will impress the committee at this point. What happens when someone better than Missouri St jumps up by 10 early? Will WSU be good enough then considering they just haven't been adequately tested?

WSU is 10-0 against the RPI top 100. 3-0 against the RPI top 50. Possibly five or six wins against NCAA tournament teams (Saint Louis, BYU, Tennessee, assuming at least two of NC Central, Davidson, Western Kentucky, & Tulsa make the tourney -- all are top four in their conferences).

WSU's SOS was #91 last year. It's #101 this year. Are ten spots going to make WSU a worse team? I'd say our team is far better prepared for the tourney this year against that schedule that it was last year, because the team has been playing one-and-done basketball for a long time now to maintain the perfect record, and has been playing against teams that are giving it absolutely everything in front of the best crowds they've had all season. That wasn't the case last year.

I doubt WSU would be 31-0 against a better SOS. I think they'd still be a favorite for a one seed, though.

[TheAsianSensation]

Let's groupthink this out and think what Wichita would be with a tougher SoS, for giggles.

Let's give Creighton back to the Valley for Loyola...make Indiana St a little more tourney-worthy and Missouri St a bit more NIT worthy. Let's replace BYU with Texas in the CBE classic, get Oklahoma St to sign up to play them in Dallas, and make Alabama a .500 SEC team.

Wichita would probably split in neutral site games with Texas and Oklahoma St. They'd split with Creighton and lose once to the MSU/ISU combo. We'll give them the Alabama win and make that a bit better. We'll also let them keep @St Louis as a signature win.

All this would probably take Wichita to around SoS number 35.

Signature wins:
@St Louis
Creighton
N-Texas
Tennessee
@Alabama (on NCAA bubble in hypothetical)
Indiana St (on NCAA bubble in hypothetical)
6-3 vs. RPI Top 50 (losses @ISU, N-Oklahoma St, @Creighton
9-3 vs. RPI Top 50 (add in MSU wins and Tulsa)
12-3 road/neutral record
RPI 3, SoS 35ish

Arizona and Florida have better resumes. Kansas? Wisconsin? Or Wichita? It's a debate. Since you actually have more relevant data points, it allows the comparison to be more even. In a way, mystery is good for Wichita's profile. I actually think the undefeated chip helps. It's the trump card.

And besides, this is a borderline 1 seed resume anyways, so it's not like I'm dissing it or anything. But you get the idea.