Bubble Watch

[Bill Marsh]

the thing that is amazing Bill is how you don't think they have a prayer, but between all the bracketologists who have them either in, or in the 1st 4 out- that would tell a completely different story. Just stop with the idiotic well only 25/91 people have them in the bracket so that proves they aren't in serious consideration. That may be the dumbest thing you have ever said.

I think it's pretty simple for Tulsa. If they win 3 of their final 4 games, they are going to be in the tourney.

The problem also with your logic Bill is you know damn well that advanced metrics are used no where near as much as the RPI.
last year RPI top 53- only 5 teams missed the tourney.
Southern Miss 34
Toledo 38
Missouri 44
Minnesota 48
Belmont 51

Meanwhile 7 top 52 teams from Ken Pom missed the tourney, and 6 of the top 44.

I have no idea on how advanced metrics are used by the committee and neither do you. Neither of us has set in on a single committee discussion. Read Ken Palm's recent article on cbssports.com about what committee members consider, which is basically whatever they want to. They are provided with all kinds of metrics, not just RPI. And my point about BPI and other metrics was not even that the committee uses them, but that they reveal things about Tulsa that are hidden in RPI - things that the committee will have access to in all the information that is provided to them.

As for last year, "only" 5 teams missing the tourney, it simply shows that teams whose RPI would otherwise have them in, do in fact miss the tourney. I'm saying that Tulsa is one of those teams this year.

Let me point out once again that RPI is completely deceptive with regard to Tulsa because it doesn't include the home loss to Southeast Oklahoma State, a team with a sub-.500 record vs D-II competition. How does that equate to a D-I RPI? 250? 300? 350? Whatever it is, it drops Tulsa's precipitously if it were calculated in.

BTW, dispense with words like "idiotic" and " dumbest" - slurs which I have never directed at you. When you resort to that kind of name calling, you just reveal that you can't advance your position with the facts so you have to resort to disparaging mine without any basis.

[stever20]

the thing that is amazing Bill is how you don't think they have a prayer, but between all the bracketologists who have them either in, or in the 1st 4 out- that would tell a completely different story. Just stop with the idiotic well only 25/91 people have them in the bracket so that proves they aren't in serious consideration. That may be the dumbest thing you have ever said.

I think it's pretty simple for Tulsa. If they win 3 of their final 4 games, they are going to be in the tourney.

The problem also with your logic Bill is you know damn well that advanced metrics are used no where near as much as the RPI.
last year RPI top 53- only 5 teams missed the tourney.
Southern Miss 34
Toledo 38
Missouri 44
Minnesota 48
Belmont 51

Meanwhile 7 top 52 teams from Ken Pom missed the tourney, and 6 of the top 44.

I have no idea on how advanced metrics are used by the committee and neither do you. Neither of us has set in on a single committee discussion. Read Ken Palm's recent article on cbssports.com about what committee members consider, which is basically whatever they want to. They are provided with all kinds of metrics, not just RPI. And my point about BPI and other metrics was not even that the committee uses them, but that they reveal things about Tulsa that are hidden in RPI - things that the committee will have access to in all the information that is provided to them.

As for last year, "only" 5 teams missing the tourney, it simply shows that teams whose RPI would otherwise have them in, do in fact miss the tourney. I'm saying that Tulsa is one of those teams this year.

Let me point out once again that RPI is completely deceptive with regard to Tulsa because it doesn't include the home loss to Southeast Oklahoma State, a team with a sub-.500 record vs D-II competition. How does that equate to a D-I RPI? 250? 300? 350? Whatever it is, it drops Tulsa's precipitously if it were calculated in.

BTW, dispense with words like "idiotic" and " dumbest" - slurs which I have never directed at you. When you resort to that kind of name calling, you just reveal that you can't advance your position with the facts so you have to resort to disparaging mine without any basis.

Except as the link that DudeAnon posted- none of those other ratings show up on the ratings sheets the committee gets.
these are the sheets they get:
http://fs.ncaa.org/Docs/stats/MBB_RPI/MBBTeam.pdf

as you can see there's no Ken Pom, no Sagarin, nothing.

[stever20]

I love some of the things on the RPI sheets-
Avg RPI win-
Nova 108
Prov 102
Geo 127
But 129
Xav 104
SJ 132

Avg RPI loss-
Nova 47
Prov 83
Geo 17
But 27
Xav 71
SJ 49

Also the official sheets do confirm the NIT games are considered home games for St John's.

[ta111]

I suggest you go to UDPRIDE and read the very extensive series written by Chris Rieman regarding the selection process. He sat in the mock selection last week and has put together a rather detailed accounting of the process. In short the selection process is centered around the RPI (your record against RPI top 25, 50, and 100-200, 200+). That said, the committee is free to use other analytical data. From reading alot on this subject my hunch is that around 75% of the decisions are made from info centered around the RPI and 25% from other sources (including gut feel).

[stever20]

I suggest you go to UDPRIDE and read the very extensive series written by Chris Rieman regarding the selection process. He sat in the mock selection last week and has put together a rather detailed accounting of the process. In short the selection process is centered around the RPI (your record against RPI top 25, 50, and 100-200, 200+). That said, the committee is free to use other analytical data. From reading alot on this subject my hunch is that around 75% of the decisions are made from info centered around the RPI and 25% from other sources (including gut feel).

Just was looking at it...

One big thing-
http://www.udpride.com/forums/showthrea ... e3&t=26982

SOS is only your opponents records, and not your opponents opponents records.

You say, what does that matter?

It means in terms of the SOS, Tulane is a better opponent than Creighton, DePaul, or Marquette. You say the committee members look deeper. That's true. However, when the committee sees the sheets, the SOS number they see is just opponents records, and not opponents opponents records. That can be a huge difference where they just say Team X has the #85 SOS and Team Y has the #159 SOS.

just looking-
Big East-
Nova SOS on Warren Nolan- 30 NCAA 36
Georgetown WN- 3, NCAA 5
Providence WN- 14, NCAA 14
Butler WN 19, NCAA 21
St John's WN 28, NCAA 33
Xavier WN 18, NCAA 24

So 5 and 6 spot differences for Nova, St John's and Xavier. Just looking for Xavier- I'm guessing part of it is Missouri being only 6-20. Missouri was helping X supposedly out on the opponents-opponents thing because their SOS is #4.

[stever20]

OOC comparison with the AAC-
SMU WN 59 NCAA 51
Tulsa WN 105 NCAA 114
Temple WN 50 NCAA 45
Cincy WN 54 NCAA 48

So 3 of the 4 teams in contention are helped by at least 5 spots.. Interesting that Tulsa of all the teams is hurt- though they have 69-36 left on their schedule which will boost it- starting with 13-12 Tulane(which figures to close the gap considerably just by itself).

[hoyahooligan]

ESPN: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch
Locks: Villanova, Georgetown
Should be in: Providence, Butler, Xavier
Work left to do: St. John's

SI: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/24/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-watch-davidson-jack-gibbs
Locks: Villanova, Butler
In the Mix: Georgetown, Providence, Xavier, St. John's

[gofriars08]

How are Butler/Providence not a lock at this point?

[HoosierPal]

ESPN: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch
Locks: Villanova, Georgetown
Should be in: Providence, Butler, Xavier
Work left to do: St. John's

SI: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/24/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-watch-davidson-jack-gibbs
Locks: Villanova, Butler
In the Mix: Georgetown, Providence, Xavier, St. John's

This shows you two things. CBS and SI don't agree today on the makeup of the tourney...and that's fine.

Tulsa is considered by both sites to be in the bubble discussion. I don't give a rat's behind if Tulsa makes the tourney or not. But to say they aren't in today's conversation is ignoring all facts.

Three - a bonus, this conversation between Bill M and Stever got old a long time ago.

[stever20]

ESPN: http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch
Locks: Villanova, Georgetown
Should be in: Providence, Butler, Xavier
Work left to do: St. John's

SI: http://www.si.com/college-basketball/2015/02/24/ncaa-tournament-bubble-teams-watch-davidson-jack-gibbs
Locks: Villanova, Butler
In the Mix: Georgetown, Providence, Xavier, St. John's

To me Xavier and St John's are in the same category now. Win 1 more game and they're in...

Look at their projected RPI's should they lose out from here-
Xavier- 61.6
St John's- 75.7. Note- I'm even going against the site when they say St John's at 19-12(would mean 1 regular season win and then loss in the BET) is at 62.2 or St John's at 19-13(would mean losing out reg season and then winning QF in BET before losing in SF) is at 61- those 2 numbers just do not seem right at all. Plus I don't think St John's at 18-13 would be down to 75.7 at all either- but still would be down way into the 60's with what would be 2 more home losses and a loss to Marquette on the road.

I'd probably call both on ESPN's scale should be in quite frankly.