... how is this team a 3-seed?  Yeah, our record is good.  But we lost to the only top-25 team we played.  I only had 2 other games against the top 50 and 4 others against the top 100 (all wins).  That seems like the kind of team that usually gets underseeded with respect to its RPI due to the lack of quality or signature wins.  I was expecting something in the 5-7 range.  Is this one a flukey seeding?  Sure feels like it to me, even after I did win the CT.

Please put Oscar Thompson on -2 3 pt freq, I beg you!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!! 

I've had guys with 50 perimeter shoot 36-38% on -1 even with dramatically less speed and BH.  I'm not changing my gameplan because the guy is underperforming from beyond the arc.

Pretty obviously because you're 28-1.  Wins are always overvalued by WIS's seeding formula.

As for Thompson, the question isn't really whether he is underperforming, it's whether, even given a best-case of 38% on 3s, he can be more efficient shooting twos.  Can he?  I don't know, but I would guess with FTs added in that he probably could.

I don't think 38% is a best case at all.  I'm going to be facing some -2 defenses in the tournament.  I would definitely sag against my team.  I don't think further emphasizing my interior offense is going to be the best way to respond.

You know your team better than I do, but I think you're probably wrong if you think that a 48 per could hit above 38% long term, even against a -2, at least with a decent amount of attempts.

I think this seeding is fine, I mean you only lost 1 game... And it's D3.

I got a 2 seed in the same world, and look what I got rewarded with.



http://whatifsports.com/hd/TeamMatchup/Default.aspx?sid=7026562

My first-round matchup is no cakewalk, but wow.  That is rough.  Really rough.  I'm pretty sure I won't make the Sweet 16 yet again...  Both of the teams I could get in the 2nd round are better than mine.  I won 27 games because I didn't play anybody.

Well, I got beat.   I took a hard schedule so I could win and get a better seed... and for the second year in a row I get a higher rated team with a better win loss in the first round as a 2 seed.

This sucks monkey balls, especially in comparison with other 15 and 14 seeds.     

Posted by isack24 on 5/2/2011 3:14:00 PM (view original):
Pretty obviously because you're 28-1.  Wins are always overvalued by WIS's seeding formula.

As for Thompson, the question isn't really whether he is underperforming, it's whether, even given a best-case of 38% on 3s, he can be more efficient shooting twos.  Can he?  I don't know, but I would guess with FTs added in that he probably could.

Wins are OVERvalued?  Ummmm...that's the whole point to playing.  Give me a "bad" win over a "good" loss any day.  Teams lose to good teams all the time.  It's actually quite common.  So what does it prove to play, and lose, to a top 10 team?  But not everyone can beat bad teams.  Wins are wins.

following up on this, the 15 seed made it to the final four.

he was way underseeded.     

Posted by udm_mike on 5/3/2011 10:54:00 AM (view original):

Posted by isack24 on 5/2/2011 3:14:00 PM (view original):
Pretty obviously because you're 28-1.  Wins are always overvalued by WIS's seeding formula.

As for Thompson, the question isn't really whether he is underperforming, it's whether, even given a best-case of 38% on 3s, he can be more efficient shooting twos.  Can he?  I don't know, but I would guess with FTs added in that he probably could.

Wins are OVERvalued?  Ummmm...that's the whole point to playing.  Give me a "bad" win over a "good" loss any day.  Teams lose to good teams all the time.  It's actually quite common.  So what does it prove to play, and lose, to a top 10 team?  But not everyone can beat bad teams.  Wins are wins.

Let's use the entire season.  Is 26-0 against a schedule of sims is better than 20-6 against a schedule of top-fifty teams? 

It's the reason that low-majors have to win their conference tourney to get in the NCAA tourney in real life.  You might rather have a "bad" win than a "good" loss, but you're just looking at it in a bubble with no context.  As a player, I'd rather win.  As a member of a selection committee, I'd give more credit to a team who loses to the best team in the country by 1 in OT than a team who beats an 0-25 team by 1 in OT.