- My Forums
- Tiger Rant
- LSU Recruiting
- SEC Rant
- Saints Talk
- Pelicans Talk
- More Sports Board
- Fantasy Sports
- Golf Board
- Soccer Board
- O-T Lounge
- Tech Board
- Home/Garden Board
- Outdoor Board
- Health/Fitness Board
- Movie/TV Board
- Book Board
- Music Board
- Political Talk
- Money Talk
- Fark Board
- Gaming Board
- Travel Board
- Food/Drink Board
- Ticket Exchange
- TD Help Board
Customize My Forums- View All Forums
- Show Left Links
- Topic Sort Options
- Trending Topics
- Recent Topics
- Active Topics
Started By
Message
The 8/9 seed myth (or not)
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:47 pm
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:47 pm
There is a lot of talk on here about how horrible it is to be an 8 or 9 seed and a 10 or 11 seed is so much better. I am not so sure. So I looked up some numbers since 1985 (when the tourney expanded to 64 teams).
historical seed stats
It turns out that 8 seeds have won 75 games since 1985, 9 seeds: 63 games, 10 seeds: 70 games and 11 seeds: 67 games. So mostly a wash; 8/9 seeds have won 1 more game than 10/11 seeds. Moreover an 8 seed has actually won the whole tourney (Villanova) and another made the championship game (Butler?) and several made the final four. A ten seed has never made it to the final 4 and only 3 11 seeds have (never making the NC game).
Statistician Nate silver feels differently:
Nate Silver Analysis
In fact his analysis shows it is much better to be a 10/11 seed and that it might even be better to be a 15 seed!! As I showed earlier, his analysis is NOT backed by historical results. One argument (and a probably good one) might be that the 8/9 seeds are just better teams which is why they win as many or more games but Nate Silver's who argument is based on the assumption that there is very little difference in the strength of teams from 8 to 11.
In short, I don't think it matters that much. You'll have to eventually play good teams no matter what. If your goal is to win 1 game or make the final four an 8/9 seed might be better. A 10/11 seed might be better for the sweet 16.
historical seed stats
It turns out that 8 seeds have won 75 games since 1985, 9 seeds: 63 games, 10 seeds: 70 games and 11 seeds: 67 games. So mostly a wash; 8/9 seeds have won 1 more game than 10/11 seeds. Moreover an 8 seed has actually won the whole tourney (Villanova) and another made the championship game (Butler?) and several made the final four. A ten seed has never made it to the final 4 and only 3 11 seeds have (never making the NC game).
Statistician Nate silver feels differently:
Nate Silver Analysis
In fact his analysis shows it is much better to be a 10/11 seed and that it might even be better to be a 15 seed!! As I showed earlier, his analysis is NOT backed by historical results. One argument (and a probably good one) might be that the 8/9 seeds are just better teams which is why they win as many or more games but Nate Silver's who argument is based on the assumption that there is very little difference in the strength of teams from 8 to 11.
In short, I don't think it matters that much. You'll have to eventually play good teams no matter what. If your goal is to win 1 game or make the final four an 8/9 seed might be better. A 10/11 seed might be better for the sweet 16.
This post was edited on 3/16/15 at 1:49 pm
12
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:48 pm to lsumatt
Assuming LSU gets by NCSU I'd rather play Villanova than Virginia. So it works out fine for me.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:51 pm to lsumatt
quote:
9 seeds: 63 games, 10 seeds: 70 games and 11 seeds: 67 games
Sooooo...it is better to be a 10 or 11.
I will say I think we got the weakest 1 seed...most will say Duke but I just like the fact Villanova ahs no front court really outside of 1 guy.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:53 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Sooooo...it is better to be a 10 or 11.
???
By these numbers 8 seed is best. But really there is no statistical difference between the 4. An 8/9 seed has won 1 more game than a 10/11.
You missed the point
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:56 pm to lsumatt
quote:
since 1985
quote:
how horrible it is to be an 8 or 9 seed and a 10 or 11 seed is so much better
quote:
1985 Southeast 8 seed Villanova
What you're doing..I see it
But in all seriousness it comes down to matchups...yea most people thought UK would beat top seed WSU last yr..they played no one all yr.
And WSU the yr before over weak 1 seed Zaga.
And most ppl I knew had either ODU or Butler over 1 seed Pitt in 2011.
This post was edited on 3/16/15 at 1:57 pm
Posted on 3/16/15 at 1:57 pm to Akit1
quote:
Assuming LSU gets by NCSU I'd rather play Villanova than Virginia. So it works out fine for me.
Virginia's best player is recovering from surgery.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:00 pm to lsumatt
It's not about winning one game, it's about making the Sweet 16. Here's the important charts:
He's making the rather obvious argument that an 8/9 seed has a terrible chance of being able to survive the first weekend, while a 10 or 11 has a better shot due to the obvious fact of not having to play a 1-seed. An 8/9 team has a BETTER chance of winning one game, but a 10/11 team has a better chance of winning TWO. I'd rather throw in my luck to win two, even at the cost of a harder first round.
He's making the rather obvious argument that an 8/9 seed has a terrible chance of being able to survive the first weekend, while a 10 or 11 has a better shot due to the obvious fact of not having to play a 1-seed. An 8/9 team has a BETTER chance of winning one game, but a 10/11 team has a better chance of winning TWO. I'd rather throw in my luck to win two, even at the cost of a harder first round.
This post was edited on 3/16/15 at 2:02 pm
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:00 pm to lsumatt
quote:
In fact his analysis shows it is much better to be a 10/11 seed and that it might even be better to be a 15 seed!!
So he is saying a team that is on a winning streak and red hot going into the Dance fares better than a team that doesnt deserve to be there alot of the time(see Indiana this year)..and/or is on a big losing streak backing into the dance?
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:02 pm to lsumatt
I got called an idiot and stupid in another thread for suggesting the same thing.
I think that getting to the Sweet 16 is harder as an 8/9 seed than it is as a 10/11 seed. Personally, I think that the committee knows this and they place teams at 8/9 that they might not think are as good as 10/11 seeds. That has been my observation over the years.
The committee wants the #1 seeds to make it to the Sweet 16. They also want upsets. That is what drives the ratings. Where do you get your most likely upsets without upsetting the apple cart too much? From 10/11/12/13. Those are all solid teams, for the most part.
It is a theory that comes from a long time of observation. I don't think that the 10-13 seeds are as big a Cinderella as they are made out to be, to be honest.
Basically, I don't think that being a 9 seed means that you are considered the #36-39 team in the country by the committee.
I very well could be wrong, but it is an informed opinion after watching this thing for years now.
I think that getting to the Sweet 16 is harder as an 8/9 seed than it is as a 10/11 seed. Personally, I think that the committee knows this and they place teams at 8/9 that they might not think are as good as 10/11 seeds. That has been my observation over the years.
The committee wants the #1 seeds to make it to the Sweet 16. They also want upsets. That is what drives the ratings. Where do you get your most likely upsets without upsetting the apple cart too much? From 10/11/12/13. Those are all solid teams, for the most part.
It is a theory that comes from a long time of observation. I don't think that the 10-13 seeds are as big a Cinderella as they are made out to be, to be honest.
Basically, I don't think that being a 9 seed means that you are considered the #36-39 team in the country by the committee.
I very well could be wrong, but it is an informed opinion after watching this thing for years now.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:02 pm to Baloo
quote:
, it's about making the Sweet 16. Here's the important chart:
Why is winning the NC or making the final four not a goal? 8 seeds have historically done better than 10/11 seeds
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:03 pm to TN_Tigers
quote:
So he is saying a team that is on a winning streak and red hot going into the Dance fares better than a team that doesnt deserve to be there alot of the time(see Indiana this year)..and/or is on a big losing streak backing into the dance?
Absolutely not. Whether a team is "hot" or not has likely very little to do with whether they advance. Hot teams lose in the first round all the time, and they also go to the Final Four. It's not really a factor of future success.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:04 pm to lsumatt
quote:
??? By these numbers 8 seed is best. But really there is no statistical difference between the 4. An 8/9 seed has won 1 more game than a 10/11. You missed the point
Im comparing a 10 or 11 to exactly what we are - a 9. There IS a difference in that. It's not big, but about what you would expect.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:04 pm to Baloo
quote:
It's not about winning one game, it's about making the Sweet 16.
Unless you want to go past the sweet 16.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:06 pm to thunderbird1100
quote:
Im comparing a 10 or 11 to exactly what we are - a 9. There IS a difference in that. It's not big, but about what you would expect.
There is the biggest difference between an 8 and a 9. Do you really think being an 8 seed is really that much better than an 8? Heck 9 seeds beat 8 seeds 53% of the time? I think they are all statistically similar
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:07 pm to Baloo
WTF is this? When has a 16 seed ever won a game in the dance?
Plus, if you add up the percentage of 1, 8, 9, and 16 seeded teams going to the sweet 16..this should =100%..am I right? This chart is stupid.
This post was edited on 3/16/15 at 2:10 pm
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:11 pm to Baloo
quote:
Whether a team is "hot" or not has likely very little to do with whether they advance. Hot teams lose in the first round all the time, and they also go to the Final Four. It's not really a factor of future success
Which is why I said its better to matched up with a favorable opponent matchup wise than worry about a seed line here or there.
I'd be interested to see win streaks of the 15 seeds that have advanced versus loss streaks with 10/11 seeds.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:12 pm to UserName69
quote:
WTF is this? When has a 16 seed ever won a game in the dance?
Yeah I didn't get that portion of the graph either…15% chance of a 16-seed advancing to the 2nd round? bullshite!
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:12 pm to UserName69
quote:
WTF is this? When has a 16 seed ever won a game in the dance?
His math is based on if an average team got a 16 seed. So a team like NC state or LSU would win as a 16 seed 8% of the time. 16 seeds are usually terrible.
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:13 pm to Baloo
Honestly in LSU's case we didn't get a strong 1 seed.
IMO:
#8 NC State then #1 Nova
is easier than
#7 Michigan St then #2 UVA
IMO:
#8 NC State then #1 Nova
is easier than
#7 Michigan St then #2 UVA
Posted on 3/16/15 at 2:17 pm to lsumatt
quote:
Why is winning the NC or making the final four not a goal? 8 seeds have historically done better than 10/11 seeds
Because 8 seeds are likely better teams. But that's not what he's talking about: he's talking about how tough the draw is. And if the 8/9 can get past the 1-seed hurdle, then yeah... smooth sailing from there (you will then play either the 4/5 or 12/13). But the best way to advance is to have someone else beat the best team in the region. It's an easier draw, the further away from the best team you are. Here's the all-time record by seed:
8: 87-119
9: 69-120
10: 77-120
11: 67-123
In the past ten years, only three 8-seeds have made the Sweet 16. Two of them then made the national title game. Only three 9-seeds have made the Sweet 16, one made the Final Four.
By contrast, 7 10-seeds have made the Sweet 16, none the Final Four. There have also been 7 11-seeds in the Sweet 16, and 1 in the Final Four.
So, if you are Kentucky, feel free to take the 8-seed option. The rest of us would probably take the better chances of making the Sweet 16 at the 10 or 11. That would be a successful year.
ETA: Essentially, what the numbers say that in order for an 8/9 team to advance to the Sweet 16, it must be a Final Four caliber squad. Ask yourself, is LSU that level of quality?
This post was edited on 3/16/15 at 2:21 pm
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow TigerDroppings for LSU Football News