Model of Consistency
-
jmiller2794
- Posts: 418
- Joined: Wed Nov 07, 2018 10:11 am
Model of Consistency
On the Bart Torvik website I found a tool where you can compare the tournament results of teams with similar efficiency profiles as your team. The closest team to this year's squad is the 2012 Bilikins, Majerus' last year coaching. The second closest team is the 2018 final four team. Pretty remarkable.
- Attachments
-
- Efficiency.PNG (41.51 KiB) Viewed 11726 times
-
swellafelon
- Posts: 4147
- Joined: Sat Apr 27, 2013 4:15 am
Re: Model of Consistency
Interesting that teams that are statistically similar have such a wide range in Tournament seedings, from Florida's #1 to Vermont's #13.
Assuming we get in this year, I hope and pray we get a favorable seed. Eight or nine would be the worst, as the winner of the 8 versus 9 opening round game faces the #1 seed in Round 2, barring a Virginia-like miracle upset.
Best realistic seed would be #5, but that is a bit of a stretch. I'd be satisfied with a 6 and would grudgingly accept a 7.
Alternatively, it would also be advantageous if we were grossly underestimated and got an #11 or 12 seed. (Might need a loss in the regular season for this to happen). Winning our first round game as either of those seeds positions ourself well for the following rounds.
I'm sure we'll have a Bracketology thread once it becomes clear we're tourney- bound.
Assuming we get in this year, I hope and pray we get a favorable seed. Eight or nine would be the worst, as the winner of the 8 versus 9 opening round game faces the #1 seed in Round 2, barring a Virginia-like miracle upset.
Best realistic seed would be #5, but that is a bit of a stretch. I'd be satisfied with a 6 and would grudgingly accept a 7.
Alternatively, it would also be advantageous if we were grossly underestimated and got an #11 or 12 seed. (Might need a loss in the regular season for this to happen). Winning our first round game as either of those seeds positions ourself well for the following rounds.
I'm sure we'll have a Bracketology thread once it becomes clear we're tourney- bound.
Re: Model of Consistency
any idea on a sensible over under here? been averaging around 70 recently
https://www.sportsbetting3.com/ncaabb/m ... s-analysis
been looking at this and consistency here seems to be key!
https://www.sportsbetting3.com/ncaabb/m ... s-analysis
been looking at this and consistency here seems to be key!
Re: Model of Consistency
swellafelon wrote:Interesting that teams that are statistically similar have such a wide range in Tournament seedings, from Florida's #1 to Vermont's #13.
Assuming we get in this year, I hope and pray we get a favorable seed. Eight or nine would be the worst, as the winner of the 8 versus 9 opening round game faces the #1 seed in Round 2, barring a Virginia-like miracle upset.
Best realistic seed would be #5, but that is a bit of a stretch. I'd be satisfied with a 6 and would grudgingly accept a 7.
Alternatively, it would also be advantageous if we were grossly underestimated and got an #11 or 12 seed. (Might need a loss in the regular season for this to happen). Winning our first round game as either of those seeds positions ourself well for the following rounds.
I'm sure we'll have a Bracketology thread once it becomes clear we're tourney- bound.
The bracket guy at CBS had us as a #12 this week playing against Oklahoma State as a #5. I think both of those seedings are misguided