Bubble Watch

I had noticed this in a prior post and it is the only metric in which Virginia was ahead of the BE teams. I did not look at the other marginal teams but its use does seem to line up with the committee's choices.

Oddly, the committee has not (thus far) pointed to KPI as a basis for its decision instead of mouthing insubstantial rationalizations. I wonder if the reason is that while teams had notice (clearly falsely) that NET mattered, I am not aware of anyone ever saying that KPI was the relevant metric. So if in fact that committee used KPI it can't say so because that would amount to a bait-and-switch.

Personally, this is the first time in my long life of watching basketball that I think the committee's choices were heavily influenced by political considerations, and if they used KPI it was only to justify doing what they wanted to do. There have been some controversial decisions in the past but I always felt those had some basketball logic to them and they often played out in a way that justified the committee's decision.

Possibly Virginia and a couple of other teams will live up to that standard and make the committee look good in the end, but it is not a good look.
I get the feeling that they use the various “metrics” to muddy the water so to speak.
 
Lunardi just published an article on the teams who got snubbed. Check out this comment:

I also wonder if the ACC had more powerful in-room lobbying than the Big East. The latter had three legitimate bubble teams to the ACC's one, yet only Virginia broke through.


That’s why I said in a previous post, the AD from Butler was on the committee, what the hell was this guy doing????!!!
 
St. John's had thousands of possessions this season and our entire season was crushed because of quad 1 end-of-game coin-tosses @Creighton (and a missed call), Marquette, @Marquette, @Providence, @Xavier, and @ UConn. 0-6 in those games and I believe they were all at least within 2 with under 4 to go. In quad 1 close games we were 0-6- 4 of them against top 15 teams. You cannot convince me that losing all 6 of those games is anything but bad luck with zero reflection on the team's abilities. For that to be the sole reason we did not make it, and to completely ignore any predictive measure like Kenpom or NET that actually credits teams for being close in really hard games seems absurd to me.

Kenpom and NET look at every second of every game and say we are 25 and 32 respectively. The committee looked at the 6 coin flips we lost and moved on.
 
That’s why I said in a previous post, the AD from Butler was on the committee, what the hell was this guy doing????!!!

"Pitino! This is payback for what you did to Posh! Hahahahahaah! Payback's a bitch, ain't it!"

(My 80s action flick version of events)
 
If you think my argument is wrong then there is zero justification for Seton Hall being out. Either you like predictive measures or you like results. Either way either we should be in or SH should be in.

bcollier@butler.edu
 
It's truly the first tournament that has no juice to me because of that. Bait and switch is exactly right.

After attending the Duke/Vermont & Wisconsin/James Madison games, I'm probably not watching anything else before or after. Just rooting for the three Big East schools from afar.
I am going to Barclays for the Friday night session also. I admit not that excited for this tournament and I will be home to watch all the games Thursday and Friday (except for Friday night).
 
I am going to Barclays for the Friday night session also. I admit not that excited for this tournament and I will be home to watch all the games Thursday and Friday (except for Friday night).
I filled out my obligatory bracket 15 minutes after the selection show, and haven't looked at it once since.
 
each of our big east teams has a chance to go to the final 8. and I hope, for what it's worth, that our schools do well in the NIT. But it probably won't matter much to the selection committee next year.

sadly, as of today, i will not follow the tournament except following news about UConn, Creighton and MQ. Will not even do a pool.

Maybe my outlook changes in a day or 2.

Rather than knowing my team was not even on the bubble, this travesty of having so many undeserved teams leapfrog over us has deflated my enthusiasm for a time of year that I truly love and normally look forward to.

At least I can redirect my travel budget for this month to another trip; perhaps the Bahamas in November?
 


They're not even saying KPI still. Instead just engaging in the same nonsense that doesn't make any consistent sense.

Also, aren't conference and non-conference games supposed to be treated the same? Who cares if their best non-conference win was missouri, they literally beat the best team in the country. I think it's clear the committee will just say anything to justify any decision, which its the problem with having no real criteria. We should just accept that no system will be perfect and implement a system with transparency.
 


They're not even saying KPI still. Instead just engaging in the same nonsense that doesn't make any consistent sense.

St. John's: "When you start talking about St. John's, they were 4-10 in Quad 1. They had seven opportunities at the Top 3 teams from the BE and went just 1-6 with a home win over Creighton and no non-conference win of real note"

He's not wrong about this.

Seton Hall got screwed though, no doubt about it.
 
St. John's: "When you start talking about St. John's, they were 4-10 in Quad 1. They had seven opportunities at the Top 3 teams from the BE and went just 1-6 with a home win over Creighton and no non-conference win of real note"

He's not wrong about this.

Seton Hall got screwed though, no doubt about it.
I can't be outraged about STJ not making it but Michigan State was 3-9. Dayton has NO WINS over at-large teams in the NCAA. FAU has one, Arizona, which is equal to ours. This basis just doesn't hold up.
 
Back
Top