NCAA Selection Discussion - Containment Thread

[wgdsr]

The big news is that we are down to just 5 leagues with an at-large worthy team and we have our 4th lock for the field: Johns Hopkins.


ncaa_projections_NCAAD1Men_20230416.jpg

Interesting that the Ivies seem to have a better than average chance of at least one at-large bid.

EDIT: Also, with the win over UNC, Syracuse is guaranteed at least an 8-7 record, with games remaining with Duke and Virginia. I would think that they would be in the work-to-column, and winning one of their last two games might put them in? Or is there RPI just too low to make it up at this point, no matter how they finish?

Is that St Bonny's game going to bite Syracuse in the ass like it did Cornell a few years ago?

cuse: one win gets them maybe mid-teens rpi. their sos will now not only firmly be inside the top 5, but maybe top 2 (it was ~27+ 2 weeks ago and is now 5).
and vermont, p'ton (and unc) are inside the top 20 for now. no bad losses.

might depend on those 3 mostly staying inside that cutline.

Yeah...I was referring more to the fact that 'Cuse doesn't even appear in the Work to Do column, suggesting they don't have a path into the tourney. I find that hard to believe at this point.

EDIT: I'd have to think if they win both of their remaining games and finish 10-5, they'd have to be in, no?

i'd say very probable. anything outside the top 4-5 at large candidates (maybe 6+ if 2 aqs in that group) don't have to be in. depends on how things shake out.

[laxreference]

The big news is that we are down to just 5 leagues with an at-large worthy team and we have our 4th lock for the field: Johns Hopkins.


ncaa_projections_NCAAD1Men_20230416.jpg

Sorry but if JHU is a lock, then so is Maryland. I'm not saying JHU is not a lock or that Maryland is a lock (confusing phrase to write), just that if JHU's resume ensures a berth, then Maryland's better resume also does.

In the simulations, Johns Hopkins made the field in every single one. That's why they get moved to the lock category. Terps made it in 99.7%, but you don't get to be a lock if there are plausible scenarios where you are left out.

And it's for smarter people than me to determine who has the better resume, but I wouldn't say that Maryland's resume is obviously better.

JHNvsMD.JPG (85.97 KiB) Viewed 531 times

[DocBarrister]

Rutgers is better positioned for an at large than Villanova.

DocBarrister

What is your basis or reasoning for the argument that Rutgers is in a better position for an at large bid?

Higher RPI (Rutgers 12, Villanova 17) and a bad loss for Villanova (Brown 28 RPI).

Villanova has more quality wins, but fewer opportunities for quality wins ahead than Rutgers.

It’s close, but Rutgers with its higher RPI and tougher schedule ahead has more control over its fate than Villanova.

Doesn’t mean Rutgers will get an at large over Villanova, just better positioned to get one because of their higher current RPI and the fact that every B1G opponent is now a quality RPI win. Just playing Marquette next week is not helpful to Villanova (no disrespect to Marquette).

DoxBarrister

[jrn19]

Rutgers also has a bad loss in Army (RPI: 22)

Army has a much, much better chance to climb out of it than Brown does, I don't think Army finishes outside of the Top 20, but their resume is similar to Nova's. However they also have far more opportunities being in the B1G than Nova does in the Big East that's correct

[DocBarrister]

Rutgers is better positioned for an at large than Villanova.

DocBarrister

What is your basis or reasoning for the argument that Rutgers is in a better position for an at large bid?

They play in the BIG and Nova doesn't. Like my Ivy bias, he has an extreme BIG bias. That simple.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

You are actually kinda on the mark. Rutgers has the current higher RPI (5 positions ahead of Villanova) and more opportunities for high quality wins (including more opportunities for top ten RPI wins) because Rutgers is in the B1G and Villanova is in the Big East.

This weekend is an example: Villanova beat Providence. Today, Rutgers has the opportunity to beat Maryland.

So Rutgers, right now, is in better position for an at large bid. Now, that better current position means nothing if Rutgers fails to actually win games.

I would rather be in Rutger’s position with all those opportunities ahead than Villanova’s.

DocBarrister

[DocBarrister]

Rutgers also has a bad loss in Army (RPI: 22)

Army has a much, much better chance to climb out of it than Brown does, I don't think Army finishes outside of the Top 20, but their resume is similar to Nova's. However they also have far more opportunities being in the B1G than Nova does in the Big East that's correct

Yeah, but the NCAA committee will probably give Rutgers a pass on that one.

Again, look at the opportunities for each team this weekend:

Villanova beat Providence (42 RPI) and next week plays 40 RPI Marquette.

Rutgers plays Maryland today (5 RPI) and Penn State (6 RPI) next week.

At this moment, who would you rather be, Rutgers or Villanova?

I know what my choice would be.

Again, doesn’t mean a thing if Rutgers doesn’t cash in on their opportunities.

DocBarrister

[DocBarrister]

The big news is that we are down to just 5 leagues with an at-large worthy team and we have our 4th lock for the field: Johns Hopkins.


ncaa_projections_NCAAD1Men_20230416.jpg

Sorry but if JHU is a lock, then so is Maryland. I'm not saying JHU is not a lock or that Maryland is a lock (confusing phrase to write), just that if JHU's resume ensures a berth, then Maryland's better resume also does.

In the simulations, Johns Hopkins made the field in every single one. That's why they get moved to the lock category. Terps made it in 99.7%, but you don't get to be a lock if there are plausible scenarios where you are left out.

And it's for smarter people than me to determine who has the better resume, but I wouldn't say that Maryland's resume is obviously better.



JHNvsMD.JPG

Not sure Hopkins is a lock right now.

I would say Hopkins is bubble (likely in) but still needs a little help.

With just one more B1G win, I’d say Hopkins is a lock because they would definitely be among the top three B1G teams, and the B1G is pretty certain to get two at large.

DocBarrister

[jrn19]

Rutgers also has a bad loss in Army (RPI: 22)

Army has a much, much better chance to climb out of it than Brown does, I don't think Army finishes outside of the Top 20, but their resume is similar to Nova's. However they also have far more opportunities being in the B1G than Nova does in the Big East that's correct

Yeah, but the NCAA committee will probably give Rutgers a pass on that one.

Again, look at the opportunities for each team this weekend:

Villanova beat Providence (42 RPI) and next week plays 40 RPI Marquette.

Rutgers plays Maryland today (5 RPI) and Penn State (6 RPI) next week.

At this moment, who would you rather be, Rutgers or Villanova?

I know what my choice would be.

Again, doesn’t mean a thing if Rutgers doesn’t cash in on their opportunities.

DocBarrister

There's no such thing as "a pass"

A bad loss is a bad loss. If you lose to a team with an RPI of 21+, it's a bad loss. Army's RPI is 21+, same with Brown. I don't think Army's will stay there, whereas Brown's will. But for now, it is.

I agree I'd rather be Rutgers. But there's no nuance here.

[DocBarrister]

Rutgers also has a bad loss in Army (RPI: 22)

Army has a much, much better chance to climb out of it than Brown does, I don't think Army finishes outside of the Top 20, but their resume is similar to Nova's. However they also have far more opportunities being in the B1G than Nova does in the Big East that's correct

Yeah, but the NCAA committee will probably give Rutgers a pass on that one.

Again, look at the opportunities for each team this weekend:

Villanova beat Providence (42 RPI) and next week plays 40 RPI Marquette.

Rutgers plays Maryland today (5 RPI) and Penn State (6 RPI) next week.

At this moment, who would you rather be, Rutgers or Villanova?

I know what my choice would be.

Again, doesn’t mean a thing if Rutgers doesn’t cash in on their opportunities.

DocBarrister

There's no such thing as "a pass"

A bad loss is a bad loss. If you lose to a team with an RPI of 21+, it's a bad loss. Army's RPI is 21+, same with Brown. I don't think Army's will stay there, whereas Brown's will. But for now, it is.

I agree I'd rather be Rutgers. But there's no nuance here.

Sure there is a “pass.” NCAA selection committee has a lot more discretion than they care to admit.

DocBarrister

[joewillie78]

Not to disparage his computations, I'm sure they are accurate but to say the word, LOCK, right now would scare the heck out of me if my team was deemed a LOCK today.
As I have said before, a LOCK is winning your conference championship or seeing your name in the bracket on Selection Sunday.
The last time I thought my team was a LOCK, I was sadly mistaken.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

[DocBarrister]

Not to disparage his computations, I'm sure they are accurate but to say the word, LOCK, right now would scare the heck out of me if my team was deemed a LOCK today.
As I have said before, a LOCK is winning your conference championship or seeing your name in the bracket on Selection Sunday.
The last time I thought my team was a LOCK, I was sadly mistaken.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

Yeah, but your team is subject to special Rule 13 of the NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Selection Committee Handbook.

It be what it be.

DocBarrister

[joewillie78]

Rutgers is better positioned for an at large than Villanova.

DocBarrister

What is your basis or reasoning for the argument that Rutgers is in a better position for an at large bid?

They play in the BIG and Nova doesn't. Like my Ivy bias, he has an extreme BIG bias. That simple.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

You are actually kinda on the mark. Rutgers has the current higher RPI (5 positions ahead of Villanova) and more opportunities for high quality wins (including more opportunities for top ten RPI wins) because Rutgers is in the B1G and Villanova is in the Big East.

This weekend is an example: Villanova beat Providence. Today, Rutgers has the opportunity to beat Maryland.

So Rutgers, right now, is in better position for an at large bid. Now, that better current position means nothing if Rutgers fails to actually win games.

I would rather be in Rutger’s position with all those opportunities ahead than Villanova’s.

DocBarrister

I agree completely that Rutgers has it all right in front of them to position themselves for a bid.

And I also have no problem with a person having biases. We are all human and that is human nature. I seem to have alot of that human nature but that's just me.

Gobigred
Joewillie78

[joewillie78]

Not to disparage his computations, I'm sure they are accurate but to say the word, LOCK, right now would scare the heck out of me if my team was deemed a LOCK today.
As I have said before, a LOCK is winning your conference championship or seeing your name in the bracket on Selection Sunday.
The last time I thought my team was a LOCK, I was sadly mistaken.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

Yeah, but your team is subject to special Rule 13 of the NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Selection Committee Handbook.

It be what it be.

DocBarrister

Ahh yes, rule 13:
"Cornell and only Cornell , when deemed that other more lacrosse worthy programs might be excluded, can be eliminated from the NCAA tournament, by 1 SINGLE committee member voting hence forth to do so."
Gobigred
Joewillie78

[DocBarrister]

Not to disparage his computations, I'm sure they are accurate but to say the word, LOCK, right now would scare the heck out of me if my team was deemed a LOCK today.
As I have said before, a LOCK is winning your conference championship or seeing your name in the bracket on Selection Sunday.
The last time I thought my team was a LOCK, I was sadly mistaken.
Gobigred
Joewillie78

Yeah, but your team is subject to special Rule 13 of the NCAA Men’s Lacrosse Selection Committee Handbook.

It be what it be.

DocBarrister

Ahh yes, rule 13:
"Cornell and only Cornell , when deemed that other more lacrosse worthy programs might be excluded, can be eliminated from the NCAA tournament, by 1 SINGLE committee member voting hence forth to do so."
Gobigred
Joewillie78

Actually, it’s simpler than that:

Rule 13: Cornell must be screwed.

Dates all the way back to the 1978 rule amendments.

DocBarrister

[CU77]

As someone who's followed this for a LONG time, my opinion is that, ever since the 2009 criteria change, Cornell has been treated fairly by the committee.

As indeed have all other schools.

Which is not to say that the committee's decisions are consistent from year to year: they are definitely not.

If you want consistency, the only way to get it is to do what hockey does: use a definite mathematical formula with no discretion for the committee.

But prior to 2009, there were many debacles, of which 2007 was the worst. Happily, that one led directly to the 2009 criteria change.

[Farfromgeneva]

As someone who's followed this for a LONG time, my opinion is that, ever since the 2009 criteria change, Cornell has been treated fairly by the committee.

As indeed have all other schools.

Which is not to say that the committee's decisions are consistent from year to year: they are definitely not.

If you want consistency, the only way to get it is to do what hockey does: use a definite mathematical formula with no discretion for the committee.

But prior to 2009, there were many debacles, of which 2007 was the worst. Happily, that one led directly to the 2009 criteria change.

Isn’t that more of a seeding than at large selection issue?

[CU77]

2007 was a seeding issue, but the same set of bad criteria also led to bad selections in other years; 1996 was particularly egregious:

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/12/spor ... -snub.html

[Farfromgeneva]

2007 was a seeding issue, but the same set of bad criteria also led to bad selections in other years; 1996 was particularly egregious:

https://www.nytimes.com/1996/05/12/spor ... -snub.html

Ahh the fatty bucknell reference used like Hop fans citing titles from 1914 against the YWCA.

But yeah Albany and Cornell were boned on seeding in 2007/

[jrn19]

Assuming that the “lock” we’re talking about is Cornell in 2019, they were 12th in RPI that year, every team they were in discussion with on the bubble was ahead of them and they had 2 Top 10 wins with the rest of their wins being over teams outside of the Top 20 in RPI. Maryland had 5 Top 20 wins and a Top 5 win. Hopkins had 3 Top 20 wins. Notre Dame had 3 Top 20 wins, a Top 10 win, and a Top 5 win.

if you wanted to make an argument for Cornell that year, that was one thing, and they were a really good team, but by no means were they at any point anywhere close to a lock and they were behind the teams they were in contention with in many, if not all, of the key criteria

Hopkins this year by comparison is Top 5 in RPI, has a Top 10 RPI win at the moment, half a dozen Top 20 wins, and the potential to rack up more. If anyone thinks they’re not a lock they should have to present the scenario where Hopkins doesn’t get in.

[CU77]

laxreference's definition of a "lock" is a team that gets in under all 10,000 of his simulations, no exceptions. Of course, he's simulating both the rest of the regular season and the conference tournaments, and the committee's selection process, in which I do not have 100% confidence . In other words, the uncertainty in the result is dominated by systematic error that cannot be reliably estimated, not by statistical error, so the "all of 10,000" is less impressive than it sounds.