Bracket Junkie: Dissecting a convoluted bubble picture

 

Bracketing challenges: Man, did I have bracketing challenges! We’ll cover the disaster zone that is the bubble in a bit, but let’s start at the top. The last No. 2 seed came down to Wake Forest and Missouri. I’ve noticed that the Tigers are only rarely even a No. 3 seed in the Bracket Matrix projection grid. I’m not sure I can find a legitimate reason why Missouri should be lower than a No. 3 and, in fact, it’s not that hard to make the case that Mizzou should be the last No. 2. In this case, though, Wake gets the slight nod over Missouri after the admittedly inconsistent Deacons’ impressive win over Florida State. That last No. 2 seed is really there for the taking for any team that finishes strong. Read More »


Bracket Junkie: It was moving Saturday (and Sunday)

 

Edit: I’ve made a couple of small changes with the bracket that put it better in line with bracketing principles. 1) I made the mistake of placing Dayton in a Dayton regional, which obviously can’t happen. 2) I also decided that I’d be better off forcing a change in regional assignments to avoid having the “Opening Round” game winner play on Thursday. To resolve both issues, I switched Pittsburgh’s pod to Dayton and Louisville’s pod to Philadelphia. I’ve also moved Princeton opposite Connecticut and the “Opening Round” game winner opposite Pittsburgh. These principles become more crucial when we are looking at the final brackets and aren’t as essential in February, but it’s still good to go by the book right now.

 

Bracketing challenges: There were a few separate challenges in compiling this bracket, which was perhaps the most difficult of the season for me so far, since there was so much movement. The first challenge was placing the eight ACC teams, since six of them fell on seed lines that are on the same side of a bracket. That caused me to move Boston College up one and Virginia Tech down one from each team’s true seed line.

 

The second challenge was due to the many losses that teams in the field suffered this week, including several surprising ones — either because of the margin or the opponent. This is something that we’ll get into in greater depth as we do the conference breakdowns, but I’ll just point out a few of the specific challenges that this created. Marquette’s loss to USF dropped the Golden Eagles into a position where they were vying with UCLA for the last No. 3 seed. How far does one move a team down when it losses a close game to a far inferior team on the road? Marquette won out over UCLA on this one. Another was Tennessee’s narrow loss to Auburn, which dropped the Vols to the No. 8 seed line, a line that also includes Texas and Syracuse, two teams that also lost and were in poor form on Saturday. Gonzaga’s 18-point loss at home to Memphis was another example of a team for which it was difficult to determine a true seed after a bad loss. Read More »


Bracket Junkie: Big Ten shuffle on the bubble

 

Bracketing challenges: The distribution of seeds for the Big East continues to be a major hurdle for creating a balanced bracket. Here are the true seeds for the eight Big East teams in the field — 1, 2, 2, 2, 6, 6, 10, 11. That means that seven of the eight Big East teams should rightfully be placed in the bottom half of the four regions. But with only four spots, that means three teams have to move. This time, I moved two up — Villanova and Syracuse — and one down — Georgetown — at the expense of Minnesota and Dayton and to the benefit of Siena. If the Big East were to earn a ninth bid, then the job of bracketing the teams would actually become easier, because a ninth team would give me the flexibility to place one team in the same half of a region as another team from the league. Until then, though, no two teams from the same conference can be in the same group of eight.

 

The Bubble: There was a lot of movement on either side of the bubble but very little crossover. Georgetown, Virginia Tech and Oklahoma State all stayed just in the field despite losses. All three teams were 0-2 last week and will have a tough time justifying a continuance with another loss. The schedule shifts in the favor of each team, so the three must take advantage. The Hoyas host Rutgers and the look for revenge against Cincinnati on Saturday. VaTech has the mid-week off before hosting Georgia Tech next Sunday. OSU hosts Texas Tech for what should be a brief respite before traveling to Kansas on the weekend. Read More »


Bubble Watch: Three rematches highlight matchups to watch

Here’s a look at the five Saturday games that should have the biggest effect on the NCAA Tournament bubble:

 

Oklahoma State (30th in BTI; Bracket Junkie No. 11 seed, 7th-to-last in) at Texas A&M (54th; 8th-to-last out): When these two teams first met on Jan. 10 in Stillwater, the Cowboys had a huge advantage in shooting and turnovers and leveraged that into a comfortable, 72-61 win.

 

When the two teams meet on Saturday at 2 p.m. ET in College Station, the Aggies will have to handle the Cowboys’ aggressive, risk-taking defense. If Texas A&M can avoid the turnover, then it can take advantage of its superior size to exploit the the small and thin Pokes. The Aggies premier interior threat, Bryan Davis, had a miserable game the first time around, turning it over five times and shooting just 1-of-6 from the field. Chinemelu Elonu’s 20-point, 12-rebound, 8-for-9 shooting performance is more typical of the offensive production Mark Turgeon might expect from his frontcourt on Saturday. Read More »


Bracket Junkie: Jostling continues in wild week of hoops

 

A few bracket notes before we begin the breakdown: First, the automatic bids are now based on teams that are currently in first place in their conferences. Tie-breakers were determined first by head-to-head record and then by who rated higher in our Baseline Tournament Index (BTI). Second, you may wonder why teams have moved up or down in opposition to a recent win or loss. The answer is two-fold — 1) I always try to create each bracket from scratch. I feel that’s the best way to avoid having teams stuck too high or too low. 2) This is the first bracket that is integrating our new BTI, so that has shed some light on previous seeding discrepancies. Finally, It’s not ideal to move two teams from the same conference up a seed line at the expense of two teams from another confernce, which I’ve done for Villanova and Syracuse (at the expense of Illinois and Ohio State), but the way the seeding set up for the Big East — 1, 2, 2, 3, 6, 6, 8, 10 — meant that six of the eight teams were on the same side of a region’s bracket. So, the option was to move two teams up one line each (from 6 to 5 and 10 to 9) or to move one team up one line and one team down two lines (presumable West Virginia or Villanova moving from 6 to 8 or Syracuse moving from 10 to 12). In each case, the Big Ten team was the lowest team on the seed line where I was moving the Big East team. You probably don’t care very much about the thought process that went into it, but, just in case, I thought you should know.

 

Bracket Breakdown: Let’s start with the top seeds. Oklahoma is my No. 1 overall seed (the top overall seed will always be No. 1 in the upper-left-hand region in my projection). The Sooners’ profile is better than anyone else’s, and our model actually has Oklahoma well in front of the other two prominent one-loss teams (Wake and UConn). Wake Forest jumps to second overall with its win over Duke. The Blue Devils get the nod over UNC for the last No. 1 seed thanks to a tougher schedule that has enabled Duke to get six wins over top-50 foes. Read More »