It's Blind Resume Comparison Time
by Ben Broman on Jan 18, 2010 6:20 PM EST
in Basketball
Email
Print
Ready for a quick resume comparison? I know I am. You probably know which teams these are, but I'll keep it secret to the end.
| Team A | Team B | |
|---|---|---|
| W-L | 12-6 | 10-5 |
| Road W-L | 0-3 | 3-1 |
| Top 50 | 2-5 | 0-5 |
| Top 100 | 5-6 | 1-5 |
| SOS | 20 | 28 |
| Conference W-L | 1-2 | 2-1 |
| 100+ Losses | 0 | 0 |
| RPI | 51 | 52 |
| Bracket Matrix Seeding | 5 seed | Unseeded |
Okay, so team A has a slightly better record, though negligibly so. Team B is significantly better on the road. Team A is better against better competition (top 100) but it's worth noting that Team B hasn't lost to a 50-100 team while Team A did.
The strength of schedule is comparable. One team is better in conference. Neither have any losses in the 100+ category, though it's likely one will by the end of the year.
The RPI is basically identical.
One team, however, is not only in every single bracket, but is a composite 5 seed. Team B? Not seeded compositely. Should Team A enjoy an advantage? Yes, the Top 100 record provided that. But the conference record and road record lessens it, and RPI makes it even less. One should fall or the other should rise; probably both.
Now, bracketology isn't all statistical. There is, as with everything else, a human element. But is the human element a little unfair? Maybe.
If you hadn't figured it out yet: Team A is UNC, Team B is Maryland.
UNC will get in because they're UNC and unless they absolutely bomb they'll be in the top half and return to title contention before long. I'm not saying there's a bias against Maryland - UNC has the name recognition - but it's fairly shocking, no?
Maybe some brackets haven't updated since UNC's two most recent losses. Okay. But you'd still expect them to be lower than 5. SBN's own Dobber put them at 6 (nothing against Dobber, he's awesome). Lunardi has them at 6 as well.
UNC will likely be better by the end of the year, but when you compare the statistical difference and the seeding difference, it really illustrates what we already knew: UNC has the name advantage and Maryland has an uphill battle to climb. But at some point someone has to actually watch these games, right?
Quick disclaimer: this is just a discussion piece. It's still too early for bracketology to mean anything anyway, and yes, we already knew that UNC and a certain other Tobacco Road team get media biases.
8 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
UNC looks a little bit like us from last year.
Bad loss to CoC (our Morgan State), 1-2 in the ACC, great win at Michigan State (our, erm, Michigan State).
The only difference? At this point last season, UMD was consensus OUT. UNC? A consensus 5 seed? Bullshit.
Given the Heels performance against top 100 teams, I suppose they deserve to be in at least. But a 5 seed? HELL NO!
Maryland is 10-5 according to the selection committee
Chaminade does not count. The win is not factored in at all. Maryland is 10-5 for all practical purposes.
by turtle soup on Jan 19, 2010 12:04 AM EST up reply actions
UNC's schedule
I see your point, but I don’t think there is any team in the nation that has had as tough of a OOC schedule as UNC has. They have a lot of losses, but all their losses for the most part have been against the best of the best…
Not entirely sure I agree
I know RPI is FAR from a great, objective statistic, but it’s still important, so I’ll use it.
Look at UNC’s losses: 1, 10, and 6 – I’ll give you those. But Maryland lost to 9 and 5, too. UNC has a far worse than loss than anything Maryland has – Charleston, who’s 92 right now. The Clemson and GT wins can’t exactly be described as good, either; both have lower RPIs than Wake, IIRC. If you were to average out the opponents’ RPI in losses, MD would be right there, if not ahead. Unfortunately, UNC does have a win that Maryland can’t match in MSU.
Top 100 wins/losses
I think this stat line may be a bit more important than you let on. 5-6 is losing, but its a heck of a lot better than 1-5. But I absolutely agree with the main point of UNC getting a major boost to its tourney chances just by virtue of being UNC.
Well, the stats are slightly misleading here
Maryland has three wins sitting within 20 spots of the top 100, which would boost the record to a far more respectable 4-5. UNC is lucky in that two of their opponents – Ohio State, a win, and Charleston, a loss – are sitting just inside 50 and 100, respectively. MD has that with Cincy, but they have a lot of closer negatives than UNC (FSU, for example, sits at 52).
FWIW, MD just passed UNC in RPI. Far from a perfect indicator, but interesting.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Certain photos copyright © 2012 by Associated Press or Getty Images. Any commercial use or distribution without the express written consent of Associated Press and Getty Images is strictly prohibited.