Looking for Brackets?

I love college basketball and have ever since elementary school. However, I absolutely hate brackets. I hate reading about them starting in January. I hate the discussions on filling them out. I hate listening to the idiotic ESPN talking heads droning on about how their brackets are doing instead of the actual NCAAT games. I guess it goes along with one of my biggest gripes about sports media in general…they are more interested in predicting who is going to win, than analyzing why someone won. For those of you who hate my “numbersâ€? but love brackets and discussing them…this is just something else that we don’t have in common. 😉

Joe Lunardi at espn.com is the perfect illustration of why I hate “bracketology�. On Tuesday, he writes an article about how scheduling cupcakes will ultimately hurt teams. He specifically mentions NC State and says that State’s cupcakes are “already hurting their seed.� Then on Friday, he releases his new bracket and has actually moved State up to a three-seed. As we will see later, this is an extremely optimistic seeding for State…as things currently sit.

Even though I don’t like brackets, with State being in the top-20 in both polls and in the RPI…and being in the middle of a “slow� stretch of games…this looks like the perfect opportunity to assess State’s season to date and lay out some important things to look for as the season winds down.

SIZING UP THE COMPETITION

Seeding is not done in a vacuum. I see many State fans assigning a certain seed based solely on a second-place regular season finish. This type of logic is hopelessly simplistic since it is impossible to accurately project a seed based solely on anything that State has done or might do down the stretch. What is important is how State has done relative to the top 32 or 36 teams in the country….ie Seeds 1-9.

Any intelligent bracket would have to start with some type of objective ranking. Here is a graph of several different rankings for discussion purposes. For those that understand and use normalized graphs….here is one with the same four computer rankings.

The thing that stands out to me is that after the first five teams, there is a fairly steady decline down through the rankings. What this means to me is that State does not have any particular seed wrapped up. If State falters, then there will be plenty of teams ready to take State’s spot (even with a second-place regular season finish). On the other hand, if State continues to win, we can expect State’s ranking to rise, even if it doesn’t rise as fast as the recent past.

It is also important to remember that if everyone ahead of State wins on a given night…then State may not move up in the rankings at all. Specifically with RPI, the difference between a home win or a road one…or playing a team with a winning vs a losing record, all come into play. Bottom line, don’t despair if State doesn’t move up as far as you would like after a win….the important thing is to win. As the season winds down, there is not much time left to “make up� for laying an egg. Every win will likely be critical.

Are the computer rankings that I graphed a better projection of seeding than some other one? I really have no idea….they were just some that I knew about and included. For those that absolutely love computer rankings, or prefer one that I didn’t include….here is a compilation of 33 different rankings all in one place. For games played through Sunday, Feb 6, here is a summary for State:

		NC State	(2/5/06)
		Composite Rank:  14
		Record	18-4
Self	18	Massey BCS	12	Cheong	19
Greenfield	12	Colley	18	Moore	13
Sagarin	13	Dolphin	14	Pickle	14
Bobcat	22	Whitlock	17	Dunkel	23
Rohde	17	Bihl	16	Lynch	11
Rothman	12	Wolfe	13	Rishi	17
Kirkpatrick	12	Rennie	10	AccuRatings	11
Wobus	11	Pomeroy	16	Simpson	36
Dokter	14	Dance Card	10	Score Card	27
JCI	13	Pigskin	27	USA Today	15
Sagarin-Elo	12	SAP	20	AP	16
		Best	10
		Worst	36
		Mean	16.1
		Median	14
		St.Dev	5.7

Computer Summary
The absolute best seed that can be assigned to State based on these objective rankings is a 3-seed….though a 4 or 5 seed would be more likely. Now let’s look behind the numbers for any subjective evaluations that might be made.

SCHEDULE REVIEW

I think that everyone understands that the final brackets are not determined solely through any computer formula. The Selection Committee makes an effort to go behind the numbers and provide some logic and common sense to both the selection and seeding process. Thus we need to go inside State’s numbers to look for the types of plusses and minuses that are so frequently discussed.

Here are State’s results broken down into several different areas to see how State’s record compares with other teams in the Top-30.

Summary of Sagarin Top-30
Games		Total
Against		Games	Win %
	Min	1	0
	Max	9	1
Top-30	Average	5.13	0.447
	Median	5	0.414
	NC State	5	0.400
Summary of RPI Top-30
Games		Total
Against		Games	Win %
	Min	3	0.125
	Max	11	0.9
Top-50	Average	7.33	0.549
	Median	7	0.571
	NC State	8	0.500
	Min	8	0.417
	Max	14	0.923
Top-100	Average	11.63	0.669
	Median	12	0.667
	NC State	13	.692
	Min	0
	Max	8
201+	Average	4.37
	Median	4
	NC State	8

When looking at the games played against teams in the Top-30, Top-50, and Top-100, State has no reason to be embarrassed at its schedule or its results against that schedule. What this means to me is that it is that State’s seed will not be “reduced� beyond what any objective ranking would calculate. On the other hand, there is nothing here that would give anyone hope for State to be seeded above a team with a higher objective ranking.

The problem for State comes on the low-end of the schedule. Playing eight games against teams ranked 200+ ties for the most among the teams in the RPI Top-30. Thus any formula that includes a Strength of Schedule component will downgrade State’s ranking. How much will obviously depend on each different computer formula.

Since the Selection Committee uses the RPI, it would be interesting to know how much the weak OOC schedule has hurt State. If the three games in the Hispanic College Fund Classic were removed from State’s schedule, then it appears that State would rank in the RPI top-10 (confirmed by Chief93). Thus a stronger OOC schedule (with identical results) would have put State in a position to lock in a 2-3 seed, without even depending on any wins in the ACCT. As it stands today, it looks to me like State needs a really strong finish, with some eye-opening wins, to get to a 3-seed.

ANALYSIS OF REMAINING SCHEDULE

State (and nearly every other team) needs as many wins as possible to improve its seed. So where are those eye-opening wins I mentioned going to come from? Here is a quick summary of State’s remaining games:

Sun Feb 12	(149) Georgia Tech	Away
Wed Feb 15	(75) Florida St.	Home
Sat Feb 18	(113) Virginia Tech	Away
Wed Feb 22	(29) North Carolina	Home
Sat Feb 25	(28) Boston College	Home
Sat Mar 4	(118) Wake Forest	Away
	ACCT – Fri
	ACCT – Sat
	ACCT – Sun

WIN to maintain seeding

WIN to improve seeding

As you can see, State has three regular season games left against teams ranked 100+. Will State’s RPI drop, even if they win?

IIUC, SOS is calculated by averaging all of your opponent’s winning percentages, after removing the games played against your team. Thus when we look at State’s current SOS (0.5510), that means that all of the team’s that State has played had an average winning percentage of 55.1% (after removing either the win or loss when they played State). So any future opponent with a higher winning percentage will increase State’s SOS and a lower one will reduce it. Here are the “adjusted” winning percentages (thru Friday) for State’s remaining opponents:

	Current
Opponent	Win %	Loc’n
Georgia Tech	0.4737	Away
Florida St.	0.6842	Home
Virginia Tech	0.5652	Away
North Carolina	0.6842	Home
Boston College	0.8095	Home
Wake Forest	0.5455	Away

Minor Effect on SOS

Increase SOS/Road Game

Decrease
SOS/Home Game

With the ACC suffering a down year and State needing every win…and every percentage point in computer formulas….it’s hard to imagine a better schedule to end the year on:
– Most of the teams will improve State’s SOS.
– The games against the teams at home will all increase SOS.
– The two hardest games are at home.
– The games against the teams with the three worst records are on the road.

CONCLUSIONS

State currently sits at a 4-seed (five at worst). With a strong finish, State has a good shot at a 3-seed. State’s weak OOC schedule could easily end up costing State one to two seeds.

The only way that I would do this bracket stuff weekly is to automate it somehow. Actually looking at 35 or 40 teams the way that I have looked at State is just simply too time-consuming and painful. But this look has helped me understand where State is actually sitting and given me a better idea of what State needs to do.

If you want a quick guess at what State’s seed might be on any given day….I would recommend looking up the Sagarin, RPI, and the voting polls and just assume that State’s seed will be somewhere in-between what those four well-known rankings have State listed at. I can’t imagine that State will move above or below any range established by those four rankings. If you can get by with an update once per week, then Massey’s compiled rankings will give you a broader range to ponder.

For State, the next three games may not substantially improve its seeding, but a loss will definitely hurt. The home games against BC and UNC represent State’s best chance at impressing someone on the Selection Committee in the regular season (even if State’s RPI doesn’t get a big boost from a home win). How much boost State can get in the ACCT will depend on winning….and who they actually beat. Beating Maryland or Miami in the ACCT on Sat (after they’ve upset someone) will not be nearly as impressive as beating BC or UNC. We’ll just have to look at that when we get there.