I'll just have to disagree. Yes, the way teams have been selected is being "changed." However, we still aren't sure exactly how the selection committee is going to combine all these metrics. They are certainly making an effort to go away from RPI as one of the main selection criteria, and that's good, because it is a very flawed metric. I'm not sure I buy much changing in one year, though. Certainly not a team with the lowest RPI ever making the field in year 1, but we'll see.

An ESPN analytics guy named Seth Walder wrote a good article a couple of days ago, outlining how the selection committee reveal on Sunday would give us some hints as to how the committee is using these metrics. I can't link, because I'm on mobile, but you should give it a read. It's titled "committee has right numbers, but will it use them correctly?"

Basically, he said if a team like Gonzaga is named in the top 16, it would show us that the committee is really considering all metrics and valuing more than just strength of record and RPI. If a team like Clemson is in the top 16, it would tell us the opposite.

You guessed it - Clemson was in the top 16, projected as a 3 seed and the 9th ranked team overall. Gonzaga was no where to be found.

But yes, a win at Alabama would go a long way in terms of our tournament chances.

This post was edited on 2/12/18 at 11:54 am

1 ...

Report Post

Posted by Alt26

Member since Mar 2010

28528 posts

Posted on 2/12/18 at 1:22 pm to BayouBengals03

quote:
I'll just have to disagree. Yes, the way teams have been selected is being "changed." However, we still aren't sure exactly how the selection committee is going to combine all these metrics. They are certainly making an effort to go away from RPI as one of the main selection criteria, and that's good, because it is a very flawed metric. I'm not sure I buy much changing in one year, though. Certainly not a team with the lowest RPI ever making the field in year 1, but we'll see.

An ESPN analytics guy named Seth Walder wrote a good article a couple of days ago, outlining how the selection committee reveal on Sunday would give us some hints as to how the committee is using these metrics. I can't link, because I'm on mobile, but you should give it a read. It's titled "committee has right numbers, but will it use them correctly?"

Basically, he said if a team like Gonzaga is named in the top 16, it would show us that the committee is really considering all metrics and valuing more than just strength of record and RPI. If a team like Clemson is in the top 16, it would tell us the opposite.

You guessed it - Clemson was in the top 16, projected as a 3 seed and the 9th ranked team overall. Gonzaga was no where to be found.

But yes, a win at Alabama would go a long way in terms of our tournament chances.

I agree with that. It looks like they MAY be placing the most emphasis on number of "Tier 1" wins and SOS

Gonzaga has 5 Tier 1 wins. But their SOS is 126
Clemson has 4 Tier 1 wins. But their SOS is 20

IF that is what the committee thinks are the two most important elements, then LSU COULD have an argument (depending, obviously, on what happens this week and the rest of the season).

LSU (currently) has 5 Tier 1 wins with a SOS of 43.

Let's compare that with current bubble teams (tier 1 wins/SOS)

NC State 4/56
Texas 5/11
USC 2/40
Kansas St. 4/80
Boise St. 0/112
Miss. St. 1/90
LSU 5/43

Of that group, Texas is the only team with clearly better numbers. RPI-wise NC State is "in" with a 72 RPI. K-State is "in" with a 66 RPI. Some of the other teams (Boise, Miss. St.) have much better RPI rankings but virtually no big wins.

This week is HUGE for LSU. The SOS should improve into the high 30's just by virtue of playing two top 50 teams. LSU MUST get at least one win this week. Two would be enormous.

1 ...

Report Post

Tiger Rant - Replies to Post

Return To Board

Page 1

Return To Board