PDA

View Full Version : We're # 6 this week



thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 09:16 AM
And Joey Brackets locked us up as a 7 seed.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 09:21 AM
And Joey Brackets locked us up as a 7 seed.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

Lunardi has GU as a 5 seed

zagzilla
03-05-2018, 09:24 AM
#16 in ESPN College Hoops Power rankings this week-down from 15 last week...http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22645127/college-basketball-power-rankings-got-right-wrong

"16. Gonzaga Bulldogs
Record: 28-4
Last week: 15

Gonzaga is going to be one of the most interesting cases for the committee on Sunday. The Bulldogs have only four Quadrant 1 wins and six Quadrant 1 and 2 wins, the fewest among any team in the power rankings this week. But they're top-10 in multiple metrics and have won 12 straight."


I'm reading multiple articles describing that GU is particularly hard to rank/seed this year. Comments above illustrate the dilemma: Great predictive scores in BPI, Kenpom, Sagarin, etc... but lower rankings in the traditional results based rankings like RPI, SOR.

Despite that 7 seed seems pretty harsh. Only metric that supports it is our RPI of about 29.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 09:28 AM
Lunardi has GU as a 5 seed

It was sarcasm

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 09:30 AM
#16 in ESPN College Hoops Power rankings this week-down from 15 last week...http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/22645127/college-basketball-power-rankings-got-right-wrong

"16. Gonzaga Bulldogs
Record: 28-4
Last week: 15

Gonzaga is going to be one of the most interesting cases for the committee on Sunday. The Bulldogs have only four Quadrant 1 wins and six Quadrant 1 and 2 wins, the fewest among any team in the power rankings this week. But they're top-10 in multiple metrics and have won 12 straight."


I'm reading multiple articles describing that GU is particularly hard to rank/seed this year. Comments above illustrate the dilemma: Great predictive scores in BPI, Kenpom, Sagarin, etc... but lower rankings in the traditional results based rankings like RPI, SOR.

Despite that 7 seed seems pretty harsh. Only metric that supports it is our RPI of about 29.

He did not give us a seven seed, I was being sarcastic because we moved up in the polls but are not seeing a similar rise in the seedings. Which is also another reason we should join MWC.

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 09:52 AM
He did not give us a seven seed, I was being sarcastic because we moved up in the polls but are not seeing a similar rise in the seedings. Which is also another reason we should join MWC.

The polls should be ignored when it comes to seeding though. The polls are so "what have you done for me lately" while the seedings represent the whole resume.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 09:57 AM
The polls should be ignored when it comes to seeding though. The polls are so "what have you done for me lately" while the seedings represent the whole resume.

Yes, but my point is the "blue bloods", i.e Puke, Zona, Kansas, Sparty, etc. can go 1-1, drop a spot or two and either stay the same seed or even rise. Where as we can keep winning and not only not move up, but even move down in seeding, despite our continual rising in the polls. There isn't a level playing field between us and the P5 schools. It's a blatant double standard and most point to rpi as the reason for it.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 10:01 AM
North Carolina has lost 2 in a row, at home to Miami and on the road at Puke, dropped in the polls from 9th last week to 12th this week, are tied for 6th in the ACC with NC State and Miami, yet Joey Brackets has them as a 2 seed. It's a flipping joke! Might as well just seed teams by the name on the front of their jersey. Did I mention that it's a flipping joke?!?!

willandi
03-05-2018, 10:07 AM
The polls should be ignored when it comes to seeding though. The polls are so "what have you done for me lately" while the seedings represent the whole resume.

Unless you are a P5 school then the 'what have you done for me lately' doesn't count. Not even the 'what have you done".

P5 school? You're the best!

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 10:08 AM
Yes, but my point is the "blue bloods", i.e Puke, Zona, Kansas, Sparty, etc. can go 1-1, drop a spot or two and either stay the same seed or even rise. Where as we can keep winning and not only not move up, but even move down in seeding, despite our continual rising in the polls. There isn't a level playing field between us and the P5 schools. It's a blatant double standard and most point to rpi as the reason for it.

I mean....it is what it is. You can only beat who is on your schedule and unfortunately for the Zags they dropped 3 tight games they all had chances to win and got blown out by Nova. If you want to compare resumes between Kansas, Duke, Michigan State we can. The P5 teams get more a lot more chances than a team like the Zags, you know that. It's not a double standard. Duke gets more games at home against potential tournament teams than the Zags will play all season. We as Gonzaga fans, playing in the WCC should know by now that if we want a top seed, they need A) Good OOC wins B) To dominate the WCC schedule and C)Hope the rest of the OOC doesn't suck.

Using advanced metrics and past seeding, Gonzaga's resume this year stacks up best with past 4-6 seeds. It is what it is.

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 10:12 AM
North Carolina has lost 2 in a row, at home to Miami and on the road at Puke, dropped in the polls from 9th last week to 12th this week, are tied for 6th in the ACC with NC State and Miami, yet Joey Brackets has them as a 2 seed. It's a flipping joke! Might as well just seed teams by the name on the front of their jersey. Did I mention that it's a flipping joke?!?!

North Carolina also has wins over Michigan, Tennessee, Ohio St, Clemson and Duke. All teams projected to be seeded 5 seeds or high in the tournament. Resumes are about who you beat just as much as you lost to. It is what it is. UNC's resume is better than Gonzaga's this year. I don't even think it's debateable. Yes, it's not fair that they get more chances.....but....they do. So...

23dpg
03-05-2018, 10:12 AM
I mean....it is what it is. You can only beat who is on your schedule and unfortunately for the Zags they dropped 3 tight games they all had chances to win and got blown out by Nova. If you want to compare resumes between Kansas, Duke, Michigan State we can. The P5 teams get more a lot more chances than a team like the Zags, you know that. It's not a double standard. Duke gets more games at home against potential tournament teams than the Zags will play all season. We as Gonzaga fans, playing in the WCC should know by now that if we want a top seed, they need A) Good OOC wins B) To dominate the WCC schedule and C)Hope the rest of the OOC doesn't suck.

Using advanced metrics and past seeding, Gonzaga's resume this year stacks up best with past 4-6 seeds. It is what it is.

First part, no. Second part, yes.

gueastcoast
03-05-2018, 10:12 AM
He did not give us a seven seed, I was being sarcastic because we moved up in the polls but are not seeing a similar rise in the seedings. Which is also another reason we should join MWC.

WCC isn't the biggest issue, OOC is. Which is why we didn't see as much of a ranking/seeding disconnect in prior years when the WCC bottom half was similarly mediocre at best.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 10:17 AM
WCC isn't the biggest issue, OOC is. Which is why we didn't see as much of a ranking/seeding in prior years when the WCC bottom half was similarly mediocre at best.

Sparty's ooc was worse than ours, I believe, yet their conference gave them the rpi boost they needed for a great seed. Oh, and they're a blue blood.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 10:18 AM
North Carolina also has wins over Michigan, Tennessee, Ohio St, Clemson and Duke. All teams projected to be seeded 5 seeds or high in the tournament. Resumes are about who you beat just as much as you lost to. It is what it is. UNC's resume is better than Gonzaga's this year. I don't even think it's debateable. Yes, it's not fair that they get more chances.....but....they do. So...

You've bought into their narrative hook, line and sinker. To repeat, they lost two in a row, dropped in the polls, are 6th in their own conference, but Joey Brackets kept them at a 2 seed! Loses literally no longer matter. You've been hoodwinked

gueastcoast
03-05-2018, 10:21 AM
Sparty's ooc was worse than ours, I believe, yet their conference gave them the rpi boost they needed for a great seed. Oh, and they're a blue blood.

I think we're agreed there are two ways to solve RPI (which is supposed to go away/get downgraded by the committee, but who knows) - in conference or out of conference. People can disagree as to how best to do so, either (theoretically) works for me.

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 10:28 AM
You've bought into their narrative hook, line and sinker. To repeat, they lost two in a row, dropped in the polls, are 6th in their own conference, but Joey Brackets kept them at a 2 seed! Loses literally no longer matter. You've been hoodwinked

Who's narrative? The committees? It's been like that for years. It's not a hoodwink, it's reality. They value wins over big time programs more than value losses. It is what it is. If the Zags hadn't blown games against SDSU and St. Mary's, they would be in line for a top seed. If you can't have a schedule like UNC, you have to win nearly all your games. That's reality.

CDC84
03-05-2018, 10:30 AM
Lunardi said last week that when the dust settles, he feels Gonzaga will be a 4 seed. However, that is as high as they can go, and they must win out.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 10:35 AM
Who's narrative? The committees? It's been like that for years. It's not a hoodwink, it's reality. They value wins over big time programs more than value losses. It is what it is. If the Zags hadn't blown games against SDSU and St. Mary's, they would be in line for a top seed. If you can't have a schedule like UNC, you have to win nearly all your games. That's reality.
It's not a matter of "valuing losses" at this point they're literally ignoring them, like they never took place.For the 3rd a final time, UNC has lost 2 in a row, is tied for 6th in the conference, yet remains a 2 seed. Losses are now irrelevant and that's why it is a joke.

Zagceo
03-05-2018, 10:38 AM
And Joey Brackets locked us up as a 7 seed.

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings

when ya gonna stop conflating a beauty contest with a business decision?

NCAA is the power 5 conferences..never forget this

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 10:43 AM
It's not a matter of "valuing losses" at this point they're literally ignoring them, like they never took place.For the 3rd a final time, UNC has lost 2 in a row, is tied for 6th in the conference, yet remains a 2 seed. Losses are now irrelevant and that's why it is a joke.

Losing 2 in a row doesn't matter in a season of 30 games. Seeding isn't about who's hot and who's not, it's about the body of work. Should losing @Duke really drop a team a seed line? The ACC could possibly be an 11 bid league. The WCC is a at most 2 bid league. Just curious....what seed would you have the Zags right now?

Hoopaholic
03-05-2018, 10:52 AM
Losing 2 in a row doesn't matter in a season of 30 games. Seeding isn't about who's hot and who's not, it's about the body of work. Should losing @Duke really drop a team a seed line? The ACC could possibly be an 11 bid league. The WCC is a at most 2 bid league. Just curious....what seed would you have the Zags right now?

Neither does losing 9 out of 30 games matter anymore either. Almost 30% of their games
They have list 2 and 3 in row many to untrained teams

Zags deserve the 4 seed in west

Zagceo
03-05-2018, 10:59 AM
Losing 2 in a row doesn't matter in a season of 30 games. Seeding isn't about who's hot and who's not, it's about the body of work. Should losing @Duke really drop a team a seed line? The ACC could possibly be an 11 bid league. The WCC is a at most 2 bid league. Just curious....what seed would you have the Zags right now?

mostly agree with ya....but body of works not always true..sometimes I hear a decision is made during selection Sunday that the committee took into account a star player being out during a portion of the season and they added value to that school over another because the injured player was back playing. My guess Mr CBS is sitting in the corner with ratings book giving his approval of the choice of Notre Dame over St Bonny because Colson is back ...8-10 conference record not a true stat of the ability of Irish since Bonzie's back

I'm fine with 5 seed but gotta be in the West.

Hoopaholic
03-05-2018, 11:00 AM
mostly agree with ya....but body of works not always true..sometimes I hear a decision is made during selection Sunday that the committee took into account a star player being out during a portion of the season and they added value to that school over another because the injured player was back playing. My guess Mr CBS is sitting in the corner with ratings book giving his approval of the choice of Notre Dame over St Bonny because Colson is back ...8-10 conference record not a true stat of the ability of Irish since Bonzie's back
If accurate then they should discard two of our losses as we were without a starter..if going be consistent and fair

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 11:04 AM
Neither does losing 9 out of 30 games matter anymore either. Almost 30% of their games
They have list 2 and 3 in row many to untrained teams

Zags deserve the 4 seed in west

Why do people keep using this "anymore" like it hasn't been like this forever?

2012- 8 loss Ohio State, 2 seed.
2013 - 8 loss Ohio State, 2 seed.
2014 - 10 loss Kansas, 9 loss Michigan, 8 loss Virginia, 2 seeds.
2015 - 9 loss Kansas, 2 seed.
2016 - 8 loss Oklahoma, 2 seed.
2017 - 9 loss Louisville, 9 loss Duke, 2 seeds.

Gonzaga fans have to face the facts that P5 teams play a lot harder schedule than we do overall. According to Kenpom (whom metrics I think most of us are a fan of) UNC has played the hardest schedule overall in the nation. I just don't know what else to tell ya.

On another note, I agree I think GU deserves the 4 seed in the West.

Zagceo
03-05-2018, 11:06 AM
If accurate then they should discard two of our losses as we were without a starter..if going be consistent and fair

I'm with ya....but the Power 5 conference response (ncaa) would be yeah Nooo your starter Mr Gonzaga is no longer a starter therefore the losses will stand...go sit in the corner for even trying that comparison..

Shanachie
03-05-2018, 11:07 AM
I really don't get all of this whining about seeding. Gonzaga has been a top 2 seed in 3 out of the last 5 years. In two of those years, they lost their last regular season game at home to an unranked team, yet still managed to secure the 2 and the 1 in those years. This year's resume just doesn't measure up to those teams. A 4 or 5 seed is about right.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 11:23 AM
Why do people keep using this "anymore" like it hasn't been like this forever?

2012- 8 loss Ohio State, 2 seed.
2013 - 8 loss Ohio State, 2 seed.
2014 - 10 loss Kansas, 9 loss Michigan, 8 loss Virginia, 2 seeds.
2015 - 9 loss Kansas, 2 seed.
2016 - 8 loss Oklahoma, 2 seed.
2017 - 9 loss Louisville, 9 loss Duke, 2 seeds.

Gonzaga fans have to face the facts that P5 teams play a lot harder schedule than we do overall. According to Kenpom (whom metrics I think most of us are a fan of) UNC has played the hardest schedule overall in the nation. I just don't know what else to tell ya.

On another note, I agree I think GU deserves the 4 seed in the West.

So, "playing the games" is all that matters, the outcome is irrelevant. That's literally what you're arguing for because you have repeatedly defended the 6th place ACC team being a 2 seed.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 11:25 AM
I really don't get all of this whining about seeding. Gonzaga has been a top 2 seed in 3 out of the last 5 years. In two of those years, they lost their last regular season game at home to an unranked team, yet still managed to secure the 2 and the 1 in those years. This year's resume just doesn't measure up to those teams. A 4 or 5 seed is about right.

Because the criteria isn't the same for all teams. If you're a blue blood, the outcome of the game, i.e. w's and l's is literally irrelevant as I have pointed out numerous times in this thread with the UNC example. It's not a level playing field. If you call that "whining", so be it. I call it pointing out the double standard.

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 11:34 AM
So, "playing the games" is all that matters, the outcome is irrelevant. That's literally what you're arguing for because you have repeatedly defended the 6th place ACC team being a 2 seed.

I have defended them because I am using their wins AND losses to quantify their ranking, while you on the other hand are just yelling about their losses. You have to take both into consideration. You are the committee. What seed does UNC get? How about the Zags?

Shanachie
03-05-2018, 11:45 AM
Because the criteria isn't the same for all teams. If you're a blue blood, the outcome of the game, i.e. w's and l's is literally irrelevant as I have pointed out numerous times in this thread with the UNC example. It's not a level playing field. If you call that "whining", so be it. I call it pointing out the double standard.

It's not a double standard. It's just that playing in a conference like the ACC or Big 10 gives you more margin for error. And it's not that wins and losses are "literally irrelevant" as you claim, it's that more losses are expected when you play a tougher schedule. But even in the WCC, sometimes you can lose and not move down. Last year, Gonzaga would have been a 1 seed if they hadn't lost to BYU in the last game of the regular season. In fact, they did lose that game, and they still got a 1 seed. Does that mean the loss was "literally irrelevant," or does that not apply, since we are not a blue blood?

Hoopaholic
03-05-2018, 11:47 AM
It's not a double standard. It's just that playing in a conference like the ACC or Big 10 gives you more margin for error. And it's not that wins and losses are "literally irrelevant" as you claim, it's that more losses are expected when you play a tougher schedule. But even in the WCC, sometimes you can lose and not move down. Last year, Gonzaga would have been a 1 seed if they hadn't lost to BYU in the last game of the regular season. In fact, they did lose that game, and they still got a 1 seed. Does that mean the loss was "literally irrelevant," or does that not apply, since we are not a blue blood?
A single loss being used to justify 9 losses is humorous

Hoopaholic
03-05-2018, 11:48 AM
I have defended them because I am using their wins AND losses to quantify their ranking, while you on the other hand are just yelling about their losses. You have to take both into consideration. You are the committee. What seed does UNC get? How about the Zags?

Unc 4 maybe 5 seed. 6 in league with 9 losses
Zags a 3 seed if win out.

TheGonzagaFactor
03-05-2018, 11:49 AM
WCC isn't the biggest issue, OOC is. Which is why we didn't see as much of a ranking/seeding disconnect in prior years when the WCC bottom half was similarly mediocre at best.

I think the WCC is a pretty big issue. Rhode Island lost to two unranked conference foes this week (one by 30 pts) and stayed in the AP Poll. The A10 isn't great, but that would never happen in the WCC.

Martin Centre Mad Man
03-05-2018, 11:59 AM
WCC isn't the biggest issue, OOC is. Which is why we didn't see as much of a ranking/seeding disconnect in prior years when the WCC bottom half was similarly mediocre at best.

:agreed:

Our nonconference strength of schedule was above 100. Our RPI improved dramatically over the course of the WCC season.

https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/teams/rpi/GONZAG/gonzaga-bulldogs

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 12:02 PM
Unc 4 maybe 5 seed. 6 in league with 9 losses
Zags a 3 seed if win out.

I just don't see how you can look at amount of losses and placement in their conference and choose their seed. They also play in the ACC who does not have a balanced schedule. If you are putting UNC as a 5 seed, who in the world are the 20-23 teams above them? I really hate standing up for P5 teams, but man....haven't we learned over the past 15 years what it takes for GU to get a top seed? I think they deserve a 4, possibly a 3 if they win out, but the schedule and results just weren't there for any more than that.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 12:09 PM
I have defended them because I am using their wins AND losses to quantify their ranking, while you on the other hand are just yelling about their losses. You have to take both into consideration. You are the committee. What seed does UNC get? How about the Zags?

No you're not, you like the committee are seeing the name on the front of their jersey, in this case North Carolina and are assuming a top seed, simply because of their name brand and conference and literally ignoring their actual record. They are the 6th place team in the ACC for crying out loud. There is zero justification for them being a 2 seed, zero. Well, except that they're a blue blood, which the committee, Joey Brackets, and you have deemed the most important criteria.

zagzilla
03-05-2018, 12:10 PM
:agreed:

Our nonconference strength of schedule was above 100. Our RPI improved dramatically over the course of the WCC season.

https://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/teams/rpi/GONZAG/gonzaga-bulldogs

Reason our RPI improved at the end was because most of our games vs SMC, BYU and USD were at the back end of conference slate and we won them.

ZZ

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 12:10 PM
It's not a double standard. It's just that playing in a conference like the ACC or Big 10 gives you more margin for error. And it's not that wins and losses are "literally irrelevant" as you claim, it's that more losses are expected when you play a tougher schedule. But even in the WCC, sometimes you can lose and not move down. Last year, Gonzaga would have been a 1 seed if they hadn't lost to BYU in the last game of the regular season. In fact, they did lose that game, and they still got a 1 seed. Does that mean the loss was "literally irrelevant," or does that not apply, since we are not a blue blood?

Carolina has 9 losses and is tied for 6th in their own conference, 6th! How is the 6th place team in any conference a 2 seed?

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 12:12 PM
I just don't see how you can look at amount of losses and placement in their conference and choose their seed. They also play in the ACC who does not have a balanced schedule. If you are putting UNC as a 5 seed, who in the world are the 20-23 teams above them? I really hate standing up for P5 teams, but man....haven't we learned over the past 15 years what it takes for GU to get a top seed? I think they deserve a 4, possibly a 3 if they win out, but the schedule and results just weren't there for any more than that.

And yet you're doing just that by defending the cartels placement of us as a 5 seed. So, I'll throw it back to you, "who in the world are the 20-23 teams above Gonzaga"?

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 12:17 PM
No you're not, you like the committee are seeing the name on the front of their jersey, in this case North Carolina and are assuming a top seed, simply because of their name brand and conference and literally ignoring their actual record. They are the 6th place team in the ACC for crying out loud. There is zero justification for them being a 2 seed, zero. Well, except that they're a blue blood, which the committee, Joey Brackets, and you have deemed the most important criteria.

I couldn't care less if it said North Carolina or Pepperdine across the front of their jerseys. You keep ignoring their wins. You ignore they played the toughest schedule in the country this season. All you want to mention is A) they have 9 losses and B) they are the 6th seed in the ACC tournament. There is more to seeding than those two things.

They are ranked #7 in Kenpom, #5 in RPI, #7 in BPI, #1 in SOS, #7 in SOR, have an average seed of #2.3 in bracketmatrix....so either everyone who does brackets and rankings are being "hoodwinked" or....I don't know what to tell ya.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 12:20 PM
I couldn't care less if it said North Carolina or Pepperdine across the front of their jerseys. You keep ignoring their wins. You ignore they played the toughest schedule in the country this season. All you want to mention is A) they have 9 losses and B) they are the 6th seed in the ACC tournament. There is more to seeding than those two things.

They are ranked #7 in Kenpom, #5 in RPI, #7 in BPI, #1 in SOS, #7 in SOR, have an average seed of #2.3 in bracketmatrix....so either everyone who does brackets and rankings are being "hoodwinked" or....I don't know what to tell ya.

They are creating the narrative. Carolina is a blue blood and a name brand. Again, there's no logical way to defend a team that is tied for 6th in their own conference as being a 2 seed, none. Unless, you literally ignore losses, and hype up the brand, which they have and you've bought into.

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 12:21 PM
And yet you're doing just that by defending the cartels placement of us as a 5 seed. So, I'll throw it back to you, "who in the world are the 20-23 teams above Gonzaga"?

Personally I think Gonzaga should get a 4....but have an outside chance at a 3.

Virginia, Villanova, Xavier, Kansas, Duke, Cincy, Michigan State, Purdue, Texas Tech, Michigan, UNC, Auburn. There's 12. That puts GU at a 4 seed.

Hoopaholic
03-05-2018, 12:22 PM
So if there is no power 5 bias please explain

Top 100 rpi winning percent
Zags 64%. Yet 5 seed. 7-4
Auburn 63% yet 2 seed 12-7
Arizona 65% yet 4 seed 11-6
Mich state 56% yet a 3 seed!5-4
Tennessee 63% yet 3 seed. 12-7

Michigan 64% yet 3 seed. 10-6


So we have better winning percentage against top 100 rpi yet not even in discussion for a 3 or 4 seed

Michigan state 2-4 against top 25 and 5-4 against top 100 and solidly in 3 seed with discussion of 2 seed

Hmmmmmmm

JPtheBeasta
03-05-2018, 12:32 PM
It cuts both ways. The higher seed that gets stuck playing the Zags isn't going to be happy with our seeding, either. When I look at the RPI, there are so many teams ahead of the Zags that simply just aren't as good as the Zags, in my opinion. But the Zags blew a few opportunities to show the rest of the country that, and they weren't that great of team early in the year due to their inconsistency. To make matters worse, many of the teams they did beat underachieved this year. I like this team now, but they looked like a first-weekend exit to me earlier in the year. I thinking their seeding now is suffering because of the up and down OOC season.

A 4 seed is fine. I'd take it in heart beat over a higher seed and a bad match up in their bracket against a team like West Virginia, or a Davidson-like team in their back yard.

Zagceo
03-05-2018, 12:34 PM
They are creating the narrative. Carolina is a blue blood and a name brand. Again, there's no logical way to defend a team that is tied for 6th in their own conference as being a 2 seed, none. Unless, you literally ignore losses, and hype up the brand, which they have and you've bought into.

spy you believed the false narrative as others lost we would climb in the polls and therefore our seed would get better...a unique narrative of your own creation that is being proven false. Polls mean ZERO in seeding

Bouldin4Prez
03-05-2018, 12:45 PM
They are creating the narrative. Carolina is a blue blood and a name brand. Again, there's no logical way to defend a team that is tied for 6th in their own conference as being a 2 seed, none. Unless, you literally ignore losses, and hype up the brand, which they have and you've bought into.

You realize that if every metric backs up their seeding, it's not a narrative. I'm not sure why you are choosing to die on the hill that UNC is the example of incorrect seeding when there are many other cases that would actually have a point. UNC appears to be fairly seeeded, maybe they should drop a line to the 3, but I think that the Zags are being criminally underrated. KenPom, Sagarin and the BPI all have the Zags in the top 10 which should warrant a ~3 seed for us.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 01:06 PM
spy you believed the false narrative as others lost we would climb in the polls and therefore our seed would get better...a unique narrative of your own creation that is being proven false. Polls mean ZERO in seeding

Yes, you appear to be correct. I was wrong in that assumption but the two schools of thought are not mutually exclusive; I can be wrong about that and the other poster can be wrong about justifying the sixth place team in a conference as a two seed solely based on their brand identity

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 01:13 PM
You realize that if every metric backs up their seeding, it's not a narrative. I'm not sure why you are choosing to die on the hill that UNC is the example of incorrect seeding when there are many other cases that would actually have a point. UNC appears to be fairly seeeded, maybe they should drop a line to the 3, but I think that the Zags are being criminally underrated. KenPom, Sagarin and the BPI all have the Zags in the top 10 which should warrant a ~3 seed for us.

lol @ "dying on a hill". I'm just an anonymous, irrelevant dork on a basketball message board. This is just a game, mere entertainment, no dying here. But if you think the 6th place team in any conference is worthy of a 2 seed, then you must concede that losses have been deemed irrelevant; I'd argue in the place of name brand recognition, they'll use code words such as "quadrants".

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 01:14 PM
Yes, you appear to be correct. I was wrong in that assumption but the two schools of thought are not mutually exclusive; I can be wrong about that and the other poster can be wrong about justifying the sixth place team in a conference as a two seed solely based on their brand identity

I am fairly certain this is aimed at me, but absolutely no one is this thread thinks that UNC should be a 2 seed because of their brand or the name on their jersey. I wish you would give up and quit this narrative you are trying to push.

23dpg
03-05-2018, 01:26 PM
http://collegepolltracker.com/basketball/team/gonzaga-bulldogs/2017

Over 60 basketball writers with different perspectives and agendas. I would guess most are very involved in the sport and follow it diligently. And the lowest ranking is 12, which would still equate with a 3 seed. Most have them have the Zags as an 8 or higher. The most votes were for 4 or 5 with 13 votes each. Yet the committee of college presidents who don’t have this as a priority (I hope) use an outdated system to keep them in the 4-5 range which would equate to being the 13th to 20th best team in the nation. This is what I hope changes. Teams should be placed where they belong according to who you think is better, preferably using metrics or hundreds of hours watching games.

Of course it won’t happen.

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 01:39 PM
I am fairly certain this is aimed at me, but absolutely no one is this thread thinks that UNC should be a 2 seed because of their brand or the name on their jersey. I wish you would give up and quit this narrative you are trying to push.

Please let me clarify, I don't think you believe that's why you believe it, I think you have just subconsciously bought into the narrative. Because there's no other way to justify the 6th place team in any conference being a 2 seed. They have to create clever memes such as "quadrant" and hope that people buy in; gotta protect, hype and sell the blue bloods.

gonstu
03-05-2018, 01:43 PM
Spy, who are your top8 seeds, outta curiosity?

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 01:47 PM
Spy, who are your top8 seeds, outta curiosity?

In no particular order; Nova, Virginia, Puke, us, Sparty, Xavier, Cinci, Purdon't

SwainZag
03-05-2018, 01:54 PM
Please let me clarify, I don't think you believe that's why you believe it, I think you have just subconsciously bought into the narrative. Because there's no other way to justify the 6th place team in any conference being a 2 seed. They have to create clever memes such as "quadrant" and hope that people buy in; gotta protect, hype and sell the blue bloods.

You sound like you belong on a conspiracy forum rather than a college hoops forum. The quadrants are just different groupings of the RPI which gives more credit to neutral and road wins than it does to home wins. In all reality it's better than the "Top 50 or Top 100 RPI wins." but it still uses the RPI numbers. This being said, I am not a fan of the RPI, I believe there are better metrics and ways of ranking teams. But I am not being brainwashed and subconsciously buying into anything. You keep posting "6th in the ACC, 9 losses" over and over and over and over and over again. And I keep saying.....look at their schedule, look at their wins! You HAVE to take into consideration the teams they beat just as much if not more than who they lost to! A team from a power conference can get away with losing more games than a team like the Zags, it's just that simple. The Zags played 21 of their 32 games against teams with a KP ranking of 100+ or higher, some much higher. Carolina played 8 of 31 of those teams that are ranked 100+. They played an overall much harder schedule. They can lose more games. I just don't know what to tell you. I'll ask again.....what seed should a UNC get?

thespywhozaggedme
03-05-2018, 02:12 PM
You sound like you belong on a conspiracy forum rather than a college hoops forum. The quadrants are just different groupings of the RPI which gives more credit to neutral and road wins than it does to home wins. In all reality it's better than the "Top 50 or Top 100 RPI wins." but it still uses the RPI numbers. This being said, I am not a fan of the RPI, I believe there are better metrics and ways of ranking teams. But I am not being brainwashed and subconsciously buying into anything. You keep posting "6th in the ACC, 9 losses" over and over and over and over and over again. And I keep saying.....look at their schedule, look at their wins! You HAVE to take into consideration the teams they beat just as much if not more than who they lost to! A team from a power conference can get away with losing more games than a team like the Zags, it's just that simple. The Zags played 21 of their 32 games against teams with a KP ranking of 100+ or higher, some much higher. Carolina played 8 of 31 of those teams that are ranked 100+. They played an overall much harder schedule. They can lose more games. I just don't know what to tell you. I'll ask again.....what seed should a UNC get?

UNC should get a 4 seed, they have 9 losses and are 6th in their own conference.

doctorzag
03-05-2018, 04:06 PM
Losing 2 in a row doesn't matter in a season of 30 games. Seeding isn't about who's hot and who's not, it's about the body of work. Should losing @Duke really drop a team a seed line? The ACC could possibly be an 11 bid league. The WCC is a at most 2 bid league. Just curious....what seed would you have the Zags right now?

All the coaches and all the writers have us as the sixth best team in the country. Should we not be a two seed?? Its all rigged for the power 5 conferences. Spy is right, losses do matter at all. Unless your not in a power conference in which case a loss will sink you. Watch what happens if we lose in the Wcc tourney. Yes it has always been that way, but that does not make it right. Mediocre power 5 teams will always be in the tourney. RPI is a joke of a measurement but they still use it because it favors them.

Coach Crazy
03-05-2018, 04:07 PM
Regardless of what the committee uses, I look to KenPom, Sagarin, and BPI.

If you use RPI and KPI, you're working on less intelligence. If you use quadrants, you're working on less intelligence. The seeding should be done using those three metrics and major players of the aggregate.

DixieZag
03-05-2018, 05:02 PM
Regardless of what the committee uses, I look to KenPom, Sagarin, and BPI.

If you use RPI and KPI, you're working on less intelligence. If you use quadrants, you're working on less intelligence. The seeding should be done using those three metrics and major players of the aggregate.

I don't know why the committee would limit itself to anything. They should be able to come out and say "we use anything and everything generally accepted."

btzag
03-05-2018, 06:55 PM
I don't know why the committee would limit itself to anything. They should be able to come out and say "we use anything and everything generally accepted."

That’s kinda the problem though....by not narrowing in on better statistical measures they allow the committee to use a poor measure like RPI. I think the assumption some people have is that the committee has a high level of intelligence and will therefore do what’s best for cbb and that is just not true. Vegas is the perfect test of this...they are truly intelligent and have millions on the line and accordingly do not rank in line with the committee.

btzag
03-05-2018, 06:56 PM
Regardless of what the committee uses, I look to KenPom, Sagarin, and BPI.

If you use RPI and KPI, you're working on less intelligence. If you use quadrants, you're working on less intelligence. The seeding should be done using those three metrics and major players of the aggregate.

+1 exactly