So, one of my normal complaints is about the media bracketologists – which leads me every year to do my insane bracketology where I do what they have been doing all year in two weeks. But as much as I complain about it, it doesn’t change the fact that I love reading it. I love anything written about college basketball – but seeing people write about their chances of making the dance is right up the Lunatic’s alley.
I particularly liked a series that ESPN did called Bubble Watch. Instead of what Joe Lunardi does, where he would write one paragraph about one or two teams and then list out their 68 teams, they really started to dig in to the teams who were fighting each game for a chance to make the tournament. Like I always say in my bracketology page, everyone knows Auburn and Duke are going to be #1 seeds – the drama is whether or not teams like Georgia are going to get that one last upset they need to convince the committee they deserve to keep playing.
So, they would break the teams up into Locks, Should Be In, and Work to Do. And then they would give a paragraph about how they did in their last game and what is next for the teams that still need to do more. They would sometimes give their opinion on where they stood – but normally it was more of a story of what they were doing. Such as talking about how this star player is going to need to keep up their play to help them upset the ranked team they are about to play.
Well, the paragraphs still are mostly that, but ESPN ruined it. Because they have put their teams in the groups based on probabilities from the ESPN Analytics model that forecasts the season 10,000 times to determine where they think the season will end up.
This has ruined it for me for three reasons. The first one is that now it is part of the ESPN+ package, so you only can read it if you pay for it. The Lunatic is lucky enough that he has it through his bundle to get Disney+ and Hulu, but it stinks that this kind of article would be considered premium content. Their opening line on Georgia this weekend was “Up against the best team in the country on Saturday, Georgia literally never led Auburn en route to its fourth loss in a row (and ninth in 11 games).” Not that thought-provoking – they needed a win, they played the #1 team in the country, and as happened with 23 of 25 other games, they also couldn’t knock off the Tigers. I enjoy reading it because it is a nice way of finding out who is still left on the bubble team’s schedules – but it is not like I can’t just look up the TV schedule.
The second one is that they include the probability that the team wins the conference tournament. It isn’t BUBBLE watch if they guarantee their dance ticket by winning their conference’s automatic bid. We want to understand their chances if they need an at-large bid. They have George Mason in the Work to Do category because they have a 27% chance to make the tournament. George Mason is 20-6 in the Atlantic 10 conference with a NET of 66 and a 0-3 record against Quad 1 opponents with no more chances before the conference tournament to get a top victory. Any of you who have read my bracketology know that teams who have not beaten a Quad 1 team do not get an at-large bid. (To be fair to the committee, that makes sense – if you have never beaten anyone of the quality that is going to be in the tournament, what makes you believe that they will win 6 in March).
While they mention in their paragraph that the odds are basically based on them winning the conference tournament, an article talking about the bubble should be giving realistic chances about the bubble. What is worse is that they seem to mention a couple times what they think the probability is if they need an at-large bid (for example, they gave North Texas a 27% chance to make it – but only a 6% chance if they don’t get the American conference automatic bid). If they have created those probabilities, maybe we should be looking at those since the topic of the Bubble Watch is their chances on the bubble.
But the most offensive part for me is their predicted probabilities are awful and make no sense. And it is obvious their probabilities are poor right off the bat as they first talk about the SEC, the best conference currently in basketball (at least according to the analytics). I think that it is the best this season based on watching teams like Auburn, Alabama, Florida, Tennessee and Texas A&M, but it is always amazing to me how that doesn’t always lead to success in March. But I digress – lets look at how they rank the SEC bubble teams.
- Vanderbilt (59% – 10th in SEC at 6-8, 18-9, NET 43)
- Oklahoma (55% – tied 13th in SEC at 4-10, 17-10, NET 51)
- Texas (52% – tied 11th in SEC at 5-9, 16-11, NET 38)
- Arkansas (43% – tied 11th in SEC at 5-9, 16-11, NET 39)
- Georgia (21% – tied 13th in SEC at 4-10, 16-11, NET 40)
So, this screams at me to start – because remember that the NET ranking is one of the main rankings that the committee uses – after all, it is the NCAA’s ranking system. So, even though Oklahoma is ranked last in the NET ranking of these 5 teams, and last in the SEC standings of these 5 teams, the Sooners still have a 55% chance of making the tournament.
Lets remember that the Sooners have to win 5 games in the SEC tournament to get the automatic bid – even if we say that they have a 50% chance in each of those games, that still gives them only a 3.1% chance of claiming the auto-bid. So this means their analytics think that Oklahoma really has about a 50% chance of getting an at-large bid.
Then, I thought, maybe Oklahoma has a winnable schedule over their last 4 games. Then I look as they play #17 Kentucky, at Ole Miss, #14 Missouri and at Texas. Their BPI model actually forecasts that their expected win total is only 1.4 more victories (where they will likely not be favored to win any of the 4 games since all 4 of those teams are above them in the BPI standings).
Meanwhile, Texas according to their model has a chance of winning 2.3 of their last 4 games (including being favored at home against the Sooners). So, lets think about this for a minute.
- Currently, Texas is one win ahead of Oklahoma in the conference standings.
- Texas is currently 13 teams ahead of Oklahoma in the NCAA’s ranking system.
- ESPN’s analytic model actually believes that Texas will win more games in the remainder of the season than Oklahoma – so the Longhorns will expand the gap between the teams.
- And yet, Oklahoma has a 3% better chance of making the tournament over Texas.
Right now, the NCAA rankings have all 4 SEC teams ranked higher than the Sooners. 3 of the 4 teams are ranked higher than the Sooners in the conference standings. And their own predictive model ranks 3 of the 4 teams as stronger teams than the Sooners (and ironically, the team that ranks lower is Vanderbilt – the only one that their model says has a better chance of making the tournament at 59%).
Basically, their own predictive model says that most likely, Oklahoma will finish 5-13 in the SEC. While I don’t have exact numbers on it, I don’t remember any teams that had that bad of a conference record and still got an at-large bid. And yet, ESPN wants us to believe this type of team has over a 50% chance to make the tournament.
Sure, Oklahoma’s resume is strange – they have 5 Quad 1 victories. They went 13-0 in the non-conference season before the SEC tore them apart. They might get the upset they need in the last 4 games to convince the committee to give them a chance. But it is ridiculous to say that they have a 50/50 chance – and a better chance than Texas, Arkansas and Georgia – which their own model thinks are better teams….
By the way, as I ranted about this, Georgia had a roller-coaster game. The Bulldogs jumped out at home on #3 Florida to a 39-13 lead, watched the Gators come all the way back to take a 2 point lead with a minute left, and then outscored the #3 team in the country 10-3 in the final minute to pull off a major upset.
Things were so much better in the ESPN Bubble Watch when it simply said things like this (who knows what ESPN will write tomorrow, but this is what the Lunatic wants to see):
Work to Do: Georgia
In an emotional game on Tuesday night, the Bulldogs jumped out to a 26 point lead on the #3 team in the country just to watch Florida take the lead in the final minute. And then Georgia’s sophomore guard, Blue Cain, hit a clutch three-pointer from the wing that might have saved the Bulldogs season. Georgia would this time hold onto the lead for the final 47 seconds and the fans stormed the court to celebrate after following the public address announcers instructions to wait 90 seconds so the teams could safely leave. The Bulldogs will hope to ride the momentum of beating a top 3 team when they travel this weekend to Austin to play the Texas Longhorns.
No probability off what honestly is a broken model. No statement that claims the committee must select a team based on these metrics. Just a simple paragraph stating the excitement that was generated from an awesome game.