Basketball Selection Show

[ugarte]

Even though a 96 field team would likely mean another IVY League team would get an invite,

Would it, though?  While the chances would certainly increase in a strong year, "likely" seems to be pushing it. I don't know the historical RPI's for the non-champions, however.

I think you just need to look to see how many NIT bids Ivies have gotten. (65+32 = 97, so pretty much the same but scrapping the play-in game) Back in the 90's when the conference was better, we got considerably more teams into the NIT. Of recent, not so much. So perhaps not "likely" but plausible or realistic.

I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

[kingpin248]

I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

Sucks will be in the CollegeInsider.com Tournament; they open against Appalachian State.

[ugarte]

I was surprised that the NIT passed on Princeton this year. Princeton will be playing Duquesne in the CBI; Harvard will be focusing on their studies.

Sucks will be in the CollegeInsider.com Tournament; they open against Appalachian State.

Ha! I forgot that they had added yet another not-the-NCAA tournament.

[Josh '99]

min's chart, with scores:

Code Select Expand


                  [b]Cornell             Temple[/b]
St. Joseph's      W 78-66             W 73-46, W @75-67(OT)
La Salle          W @78-75            W 64-52, W @64-53
Pennsylvania      L @64-79, W 68-48   W @60-45
Kansas            L @66-71            L 52-84
Massachusetts     W 74-61             W 76-64
Seton Hall        L 79-89             W @71-65
St. John's        W @71-66            L 48-55


I think the St. John's game is officially a neutral site game but playing St. John's at MSG is effectively a road game.

The highlights for Cornell of this comparison are St. John's and Kansas. It doesn't look as close as I thought it might. Temple played decidedly better vs. St. Joe's, LaSalle, Penn and Seton Hall. UMass was a wash. I still feel good about this draw.

I had the exact opposite impression. It's difficult going off of final scores, but I thought the comparisons look a lot better than one would have thought for a #5 and a #12. It's not as if they consistently steamrolled teams that we struggled with, or vice versa.  There's a pretty good mix of everything in there.

I have to agree with you here.  In fact, if it weren't for that loss to Penn, you'd probably have a hard time picking out which is the 5 seed and which is the 12 seed.

[scoop85]

Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

[Trotsky]

Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

What could he have done to deserve that sort of punishment?

[scoop85]

Donahue currently on with Mike Francesa on WFAN.com

What could he have done to deserve that sort of punishment?

Francesa's an arrogant bully, but he does get the ratings.

[RichH]

Guess who tops the list of most overrated tournament teams on one of them "blog" thingies?

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Don-t-fall-for-em-The-five-most-overrated-team?urn=ncaab,228073

[jkahn]

See this analysis by Matt Carberry based upon Bradley-Terry (KRACH) ratings:
http://mattcarberry.com/ZRatings/Zbracket10.html
Temple is #9, Cornell # 39.

[kingpin248]

See this analysis by Matt Carberry based upon Bradley-Terry (KRACH) ratings:
http://mattcarberry.com/ZRatings/Zbracket10.html
Temple is #9, Cornell # 39.

And as a result, the ratings would have given Temple a #3 seed (I placed them in the Midwest region, 1st/2nd rounds in Providence) and Cornell a #10 (I put them in the East, 1st/2nd rounds in Jacksonville, opening against Xavier). The final B-T matched 32 of 34 at-large teams, and no team was more than three lines from what the committee handed out.

The probabilities from the KRACH give Cornell an 11.35% chance of making the Sweet Sixteen, and 1.75% of proving Bilas right and making the Elite Eight.

This is always a fun little diversion, but I understand its relative importance:

[Josh '99]

Guess who tops the list of most overrated tournament teams on one of them "blog" thingies?

http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Don-t-fall-for-em-The-five-most-overrated-team?urn=ncaab,228073

I don't think I'd necessarily take issue with the idea that we might be (to borrow terms that the author uses to describe Maryland) "overrated-in-conversation", as oposed to "overrated-in-seeding".  Temple is a very good team who probably should be seeded higher than they are (see Matt Carberry's posting that Jeff Kahn originally linked to here, for instance), and I think the author is just overreacting to the initial hype in our favor.  (I mean, with all due respect to Coach Donahue's team, picking us to make it to the Elite Eight is putting the cart so far ahead of the horse that the horse can't even see the cart anymore because of the curvature of the Earth).

All that being said, I have us in the Sweet Sixteen in my bracket because where's the fun in filling them out if you can't be a homer?  :-D

[Jim Hyla]

Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh.  Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4.  So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for.  If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said.  I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

But Al, nobody has ever accused ugarte of being subtle. He also doesn't seem to read the modifiers such as "relative" or "in some ways". Maybe I shouldn't say this, but I actually understood Bill on this one.

[Al DeFlorio]

Announcers felt Temple deserved a 4-seed which if correct makes us in some ways a 13-seed.

You don't mean this, do you? Because if you do, it is the silliest thing you've said on the board in a long, long time.

I think this really overly harsh.  Several commentators, including Lunardi, thought Cornell worthy of an 11 seed, and several thought Temple would be a 4.  So to call Bill's posting "the silliest" is simply uncalled for.  If you think Temple and Cornell were seeded correctly, that's all that had to be said.  I don't recall anyone, here or elsewhere, anointing you as the final arbiter of college basketball knowledge.

But Al, nobody has ever accused ugarte of being subtle. He also doesn't seem to read the modifiers such as "relative" or "in some ways". Maybe I shouldn't say this, but I actually understood Bill on this one.

As did I.  Many informed college basketball pundits have essentially said the same thing Bill did.

[YankeeLobo]

Cornell takes it.

[Jordan 04]

Cornell takes it.

Obama agrees:

http://a.espncdn.com/media/pdf/100317/obama_bracket.pdf