PDA

View Full Version : What I don't understand about seeding...



applezag
03-07-2007, 09:11 PM
is that despite the fact that NO ONE thinks Gonzaga will lose in the first round, everyone is putting them at a 10 seed or worse. If they are a 10 seed, and they play a seven, does that not imply that the seven is supposed to beat them? If it is so obvious that they are better than this, then why is it just accepted that the committee will put them in a double digit seed?

I have never understood this process. Sometimes you would think they would throw all of their formulas and diagnostics for seeding out the window and just think "who is the better team"? It's kind of weird this year, because no one seems to be upset about this. After all the Zags have been through, we are all happy just to be here. But really, they deserve better than a ten.

gu03alum
03-07-2007, 09:21 PM
Their RPI (60 according to kenpom) does not justify anything higher than a 10 seed. I don't see them getting better than a 12 seed. Of course I would like a higher seed, but you have to be realistic.

Nevtelen
03-07-2007, 11:26 PM
The problem is that you have to have rules to decide who the better team is and then follow them, even if they sometimes produce weird issues like our seed. According to our body of work this season, compared with others, a double-digit seed is about right for the team. If you just had people deciding "who's the better team" things would get waaaay out of hand quick.

gonzagulous
03-08-2007, 04:48 AM
Their RPI (60 according to kenpom) does not justify anything higher than a 10 seed.

RPI Shmar-PI. No offense to you of course, gu03alum, but I think people (ESPN analysts...) put way too much stock in the computer numbers. Look at how we've been playing lately - does anyone out there honestly think there are 59 teams that are better than us? No way.

kdaleb
03-08-2007, 05:46 AM
RPI Shmar-PI. No offense to you of course, gu03alum, but I think people (ESPN analysts...) put way too much stock in the computer numbers. Look at how we've been playing lately - does anyone out there honestly think there are 59 teams that are better than us? No way.
The RPI is not designed to determine who the better team is. It is designed to compare the results of one team vs the results of another while including a measure of each team's strength of schedule.

The RPI does not determine who does or does not get into the tournament. It is a tool used by the selection committee that tends to have some predictive qualities. Trying to read more into it than that is unwise.

former1dog
03-08-2007, 06:48 AM
RPI Look at how we've been playing lately - does anyone out there honestly think there are 59 teams that are better than us? No way.

As I understand it, the committee does consider the recent performance of a team regarding seeding in the form of the final 10 games. Gonzaga, unfortunately, has not been stellar in terms of W and L's either, with a loss in their to LMU.

Bottom line, we fans know what our team is capable of and we support them. As to the seedings, I propose a no whining rule!

Just like the team, anyone, anywhere, any time!

GO BULLDOGS!

CDC84
03-08-2007, 08:10 AM
I know of one analyst that I respect who believes Gonzaga will surprise the bracketologists everywhere and end up in the 8/9 game.

There are some that feel that once you get to around the 8 seed of lower, the RPI and what you have done on paper becomes less important....that what the committee focuses on is to make sure that 4/5 type seeds are not facing teams in the opening round in that 11-13 range that are better, talent wise, than what their record or RPI number indicates. In all due respect to teams like Old Dominion and Penn that are being projected as 12 seed types...who do you think Tennessee or Louisville want to face: Penn or Gonzaga? The committee knows that GU had a horrific non-league schedule that would've caused most teams in that 11-13 seed range to lose even more games than Gonzaga did. They know that GU needed a period of adjustment after the Heytvelt arrest to get their stuff together. They also know that while Josh was a key figure in GU's biggest non-league wins, they also know that a guy that had two double doubles in the WCC tourney, Micah Downs, didn't play until mid-January. Hence, the reason why GU might be headed to the 8/9 game.

gu03alum
03-08-2007, 09:11 AM
Here's the other thing I'll bet you noticed on the sheet. While UCLA's RPI ranking is hard to find unless you go looking for it, the blue shading that highlights the Bruins' non-conference games leaps off the page. This is not an accident. The committee wants to know what choices Ben Howland made with the part of his schedule he was able to control.

http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2007/writers/seth_davis/03/08/hoop.thoughts/index.html

I found this article interesting about how the committee looks at teams. I think GU stands a better chance at getting a good seed after reading this.

CDC84
03-08-2007, 09:20 AM
BTW...I want no part of a 8/9 game. Gonzaga is much better off with a 12 seed. They need to stay away from 1's and 2's the first weekend.

jonesed
03-08-2007, 09:24 AM
agreed - i'm inclined to trust the intuition of the committee to do the right thing. not too fearful of getting jacked. did i say that? trusting a committee? hmm maybe i'll rethink that.

BobZag
03-08-2007, 09:25 AM
An 11 or 12 seed, please.

ZagFanatic
03-08-2007, 11:35 AM
I seem to recall a couple good runs as a 10 or 12 seed.

jaszag
03-08-2007, 04:07 PM
Total concurrence with CDC. I at LEAST don't want an 8 or 9. The Committee can go ahead and "disrespect" us all they want and not give us an 8 or 9. It'd be nice have a path to the Sweet-16 that is clear of the #1s. While an 11 or 12 would be great, I'll accept a 10 (worked pretty well for the Zags twice).

Bulldog
03-08-2007, 04:57 PM
Seeding is a crapshoot by a few gamblers and a few people who don't have a clue.

applezag
03-08-2007, 06:15 PM
I would agree that we would be better off as an 11 or 12, but I just think the system that produces seedings and rankings is ridiculous. When people will acknowledge that GU is a better team than a six or a seven, but say that they haven't "earned" the seed it just defies common sense. It also is very punative to the better seeded team they play.

As far as RPI goes, I refuse to ever use that as a measure of how good a team is or how successfula season a team has had. It is nothing more than a tool used by the "Power" conferences who pad their early season schedule with cupcakes, build up their records, then spend the rest of the season playing each other and improving their RPIs.