🏀 Bama and Bracketology - the latest projections

[#80]

Still at a 10 seed in Lundardi's bracket, out Palm's. Bama's in 88 of 100 on the bracket matrix site.

Surprising. RPI is down to 60. We have a strange resume. I think we have 4-5 top 25 wins but only two true road wins. The committee values how you end the season and our collapse is epic. I've follow Bama basketball very closely all my life and can't remember a team losing the last 5 games.

 

[alagator]

It has to be the players for no way could it be the coaches.

18 for 60 against Florida and 21 of 56 against A&M from the floor. What part of coaching applies when the team can't buy a basket?

 

[TUSKtimes]

18 for 60 against Florida and 21 of 56 against A&M from the floor. What part of coaching applies when the team can't buy a basket?

It is possible if they would quit stepping on their own shoelaces and play fundamental basketball their quality of shots might improve. This whole thing is like looking at a 9 car pileup and trying to figure out who's mostly at fault. Plenty of blame for all in this epic collapse.

 

[TerryP]

Surprising. RPI is down to 60. We have a strange resume. I think we have 4-5 top 25 wins but only two true road wins. The committee values how you end the season and our collapse is epic. I've follow Bama basketball very closely all my life and can't remember a team losing the last 5 games.

I saw mention of a Bama team losing several in a row to close out the season a day or two ago. I can't recall the season. IF I recall what I read correctly it's been 50 or so years.

One thing I've been pointing to this entire season is how up and down teams across the board have been. We're roughly a month removed from seeing the top 10 lose nine games in a week's span. There's a lot of teams out there this season with strange resumes.

We'll have to see how much weight the committee is going to put on how Bama's season ended. In Palm's write-up about how the committee would view teams and what criteria is on their "team sheets" he specifically mentions the record in the last few games no longer is considered. If you recall, that used to be how a team did over its last dozen games and then it was changed to last 10 games. However, that component has been removed from these sheets. (BTW, remember conference records don't apply any longer either. They look at how teams do in conference only under the light of their strength of schedule.)

(The article is linked here, somewhere. It may be on the first few pages of this thread. I do know Palm has the article and tweet referencing the criteria pinned on his Twitter timeline.)

 

[alagator]

Plenty of blame for all in this epic collapse.

There's plenty of reasons as well. Out of these last five losses let's not forget they were to teams that are currently projected as a 3 seed, 5 seed, 8 seed, 6 seed, and a 7 seed. (I think I've got those right.) What's pesky is we're still looking at some wins over some of those seeded teams as well.

 

[alagator]

No kidding. I think the SEC is going down like the Titanic in the tourney.

We could go back one year and we'd see the same thing posted about the SEC in March Madness. We saw how those prognostications went as well with three SEC working their way into the Elite 8.

 

[TerryP]

Still at a 10 seed in Lundardi's bracket, out Palm's. Bama's in 88 of 100 on the bracket matrix site.

Surprising. RPI is down to 60. We have a strange resume. I think we have 4-5 top 25 wins but only two true road wins. The committee values how you end the season and our collapse is epic. I've follow Bama basketball very closely all my life and can't remember a team losing the last 5 games.

BTW, from my view, Palm's "bracketology" is one of the harder ones to wrap my mind around. Just today when he was asked why Bama isn't in the first four in/out he said he doesn't consider team that are four games or less under .500. Bama is four games over leaving his explanation wanting.

He's still beating this drum as well: "Conf performance not criteria. Record vs ranked teams, not criteria."

 

[18Champs]

There's plenty of reasons as well. Out of these last five losses let's not forget they were to teams that are currently projected as a 3 seed, 5 seed, 8 seed, 6 seed, and a 7 seed. (I think I've got those right.) What's pesky is we're still looking at some wins over some of those seeded teams as well.

If this team was shooting well from the charity stripe Bama would be a shoe-in.

 

[TerryP]

If this team was shooting well from the charity stripe Bama would be a shoe-in.

Here's another thing we've seen a lot this season and it's still simplistic.

If you take the top 10 games of this season in terms of free throws made the Tide is .500 losing three of the top five. On the other hand, if you look at the worst games they've had from the line Bama has won all five--seven of ten.

Yes, there have been games that could have been won with better shooting from the line. They aren't as numerous as people would have you believe.

 

[Max]

 

[EasyTider]

Lies, damn lies and statistical lies. This team has looked like a tournament team at times, but anyone defending us over the last 3 weeks is either a crimson colored glasses wearer and/or Avery Johnson.

 

[TerryP]

This team has looked like a tournament team at times, but anyone defending us over the last 3 weeks is either a crimson colored glasses wearer and/or Avery Johnson.

There are two sides anywhere you find fans talking about the team. What catches my eye here is "anyone defending us over the last three weeks..."

I'd offer anyone basing what this team is, or is capable of, over the last three weeks of play isn't looking at the overall picture. That is especially true when we've been told by those on the committee the selections are not based on the last few games a team plays--it's the entire season at play here.

Personally, I see reasons the team has struggled. Often, I see people mentioning these same reasons and they're being described as excuses. While my math skills are limited it still doesn't add up even in the most elementary way(s.)

 

[TUSKtimes]

At this point, I would be surprised if we are in. 17-14 with 5 straight losses is not a good look for the committee. The only way in from my perspective is to be the team that beat Florida and then dismantled Tennessee in the conference tourney. I think we need to make the finals.

 

[EasyTider]

IMO-lose Thursday = OUT

Beat TAMU lose competitive game to Barn = Butt clinching selection show

Win 2 or more = Dancing

 

[#80]

JL updated his brackets this morning and we are the last team in. Play in game against UCLA. RPI is 59.

Bracketology with Joe Lunardi

 

[alagator]

At this point, I would be surprised if we are in. 17-14 with 5 straight losses is not a good look for the committee.

Why are the five losses continuing to be used as points when the committee hasn't used that as part of their formula in a decade?

 

[TUSKtimes]

Why are the five losses continuing to be used as points when the committee hasn't used that as part of their formula in a decade?

Because it's a bad look. And that's what human's do, they look. If you were a committee member and numbers are getting tight and maybe we've had a few more upsets than anticipated, which is often the case during these conference tourneys, how does 17-14 look to you? That Florida loss was on ESPN, and the announcers were not that complimentary of our execution or effort. If committee members actually watch these games as they claim, it's not hard to see how much momentum this team has.

I think the only thing we have going for us now is the conference tourney. And I think we had better start impressing the hell out of these folks.

 

[TerryP]

And that's what human's do, they look. If you were a committee member and numbers are getting tight and maybe we've had a few more upsets than anticipated, which is often the case during these conference tourneys, how does 17-14 look to you?

Speaking for myself here ...

It's 18-14 and it looks a hell of a lot better than the 19-15 record from last season. 18 wins versus the #6 ranked toughest schedule compared to 19 wins at a schedule ranked between 65-70 from last season. (And people say we've not seen improvement because they see the same numbers but ignore who Bama has played.)

More importantly is this is a new system they're using. It's a season long look based on quadrant wins as much as anything. But, even more important here is circled...

There's not a school in this list with a better resume simply due to playing two teams in Group 4 versus as many as 17 from NC State.

 

[alagator]

I think the only thing we have going for us now is the conference tourney. And I think we had better start impressing the hell out of these folks.

The bracketologist who are thinking along the same lines you are have been notoriously wrong.

Just this past week Jerry Palm was called out on how he was explaining how Bama was left out of his latest guess. (And, BTW, Palm is ranked in the bottom fifteen or so for accuracy.)

Read this exchange from Palm and tell me how you're left feeling about what he's putting out there.

Palm admits he uses a criteria clearly not used by Committee. Here is an
amazing exchange on CBSSports.com between Palm and someone named Client Samuels (a fan I assume) after Palm's new bracket came out.

Samuels: So no Bama in the bracket or even in First 4 Out? You're the only one excluding Bama from even First 4 out?

Palm: I don't consider teams that are not at least 4 games over .500

Samuels: What? So you lecture us all the time on what is and what is not a criteria and you are guilty of applying your own criteria?
No response.

12 minutes later:


Samuels: Several teams have received at large bids with records that were not at least 4 games over .500. So you just admitted that you apply your own criteria for which there is proof is not used by the committee.

No response


About 1 hour later:
Samuels: So that everyone knows, I tweeted Palm about this and he immediately blocked me. Guess he doesn't want people to know he uses his own criteria. Or that he ranks 86 out of 100 over the last 5 years on bracketology matrix.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Speaking for myself here ...

It's 18-14 and it looks a hell of a lot better than the 19-15 record from last season. 18 wins versus the #6 ranked toughest schedule compared to 19 wins at a schedule ranked between 65-70 from last season. (And people say we've not seen improvement because they see the same numbers but ignore who Bama has played.)

More importantly is this is a new system they're using. It's a season long look based on quadrant wins as much as anything. But, even more important here is circled...

There's not a school in this list with a better resume simply due to playing two teams in Group 4 versus as many as 17 from NC State.

If we get in I can't think of a Bama fan that would be upset with that. If this new math is supposed to present a little optimism, well, it's about all we have to be optimistic about these days. But you're basically saying that if we win a few big games the rest of the schedule can look like a natural disaster and we're still good to go with the committee. If we lose the next game, I'll take that bet. And there is a really good chance that happens. As one beat writer put it:

"In recent weeks, Alabama has resembled a disjointed mess. Its offense has imploded, its defense has been spotty, its ball-handling has been dodgy and its rebounding has been underwhelming."

I'm glad you're optimistic, kinda like that 18th game you have on our resume, but I fear we need a serious winning streak this week.