Way Too Much Made of "Avoiding the 8/9 Line"

[markfromj]

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

 

[cg8284]

Originally posted by markfromj:

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

Well that seems about right unless you consider this:

Sweet 16 appearances

8 seed - 11
9 seed - 5
10 seed - 22

 

[wyohawk]

Originally posted by markfromj:

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

In this year's case, it is pretty simply in every team's interest to avoid playing Kentucky or Duke as long as possible.

 

[EddieHaskell]

This team isn't making the Sweet 16 regardless of seed.

 

[wicker]

I doubt you will fall three lines. Unless being a 6 was a stretch to begin with

 

[jscott78]

rpi is not good, Not many of those teams iowa beat in the six game streak were worth a darn. Maybe one was. the committee is less emotional about this than fans.

 

[TJHawkeye]

If you can't beat lowly Penn State, chances of beating a tourney team are not good. We should have been using this tournament to stay sharp for the NCAA.

 

[jhawkinaz]

Originally posted by cg8284:

Originally posted by markfromj:

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

Well that seems about right unless you consider this:

Sweet 16 appearances

8 seed - 11
9 seed - 5
10 seed - 22

Ha! those pesky facts getting in the way of something so simple.

 

[skydog0784]

IA is very capable of making the Sweet 16, today's game notwithstanding, but to say that avoiding the 8/9 line to do so is immaterial is totally inaccurate.

 

[GPRHAWK]

Originally posted by cg8284:

Originally posted by markfromj:
You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.
Well that seems about right unless you consider this:

Sweet 16 appearances

8 seed - 11
9 seed - 5
10 seed - 22
________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________
That may be the best factual response I've ever seen on here. Pretty hard to argue that and yes we will likely fall to an 8 or 9, but probably not a 10.

 

[SoonerBeAHawk]

Originally posted by markfromj:

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

It's numeric perfection to the extent that the degree of separation between each team and the team immediately above and below is constant throughout the bracket. But when there are teams that have far and away separated themselves from the next team below it ... then not so much.

Not sure people are necessarily trying to sound sophisticated either. If they are Hawk fans, maybe they have just soured on the experience. Count me in this camp.

 

[fivecardstud14]

7-10 are all interchangeable.
Posted from Rivals Mobile

 

[Hawk-A-Doodle-Doo]

Originally posted by cg8284:

Originally posted by markfromj:

You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

Well that seems about right unless you consider this:

Sweet 16 appearances

8 seed - 11
9 seed - 5
10 seed - 22

Add in the fact that a #1 seed has NEVER lost to a 16 seed in the history of the tournament since it expanded to 64 teams, and that means that you have a 100% guarantee of meeting a 1 if you win the 8/9 game.

Meanwhile, in the 7/10 game, not only do the 10 seeds much more routinely win, but they also have a much better chance of NOT playing the 2 seed than they do the 1 seed coming out of the 8/9 match-up.

In fact, in a 1 v 8 matchup, the 1 has a historical winning percentage of .814 and against the 9 its .867. Meanwhile, in a 10 vs. 2 matchup, the winning percentage for the 2 seed is only .581. 7 times the 15 has beaten the 2. The 15 has gone on to win against the 7 seed 1 out of 3....but is 0-4 against the 10 seed.

So not only does the 10 fare EXPONENTIALLY better against the 2 than the 8/9 does against the 1, but the 10 actually has a better record against the 2 than the 7 does. And the 10 is undefeated in those instances when they get to face the 15.

The 8 seed actually has a losing record against the 9 seed at 58-61. The 10 seed has a losing record against the 7, but has won 47 vs. 73 losses and if you can get past that game, you have a significantly better chance of advancing through the next round than you do coming out of the 8/9 game.

It's so simple. It's numeric perfection.

 

[TampaHawkfan]

Originally posted by wicker:
I doubt you will fall three lines. Unless being a 6 was a stretch to begin with

Being a 6 did seem a little high.. 7 seemed more realistic to me. Besides, Iowa would only have to fall 2 spots from the 6 to be on the 8/9 line. An 8 or a 9.. It really doesn't matter. You're playing the 1 seed in the next game either way.

If Iowa was more like a 7 seed, yesterday's game almost assuredly dropped them to an 8.

I'd also argue that there's a considerable difference between playing a 2 seed, and one of the top 1 seeds, like UK or Duke. Not that a 2 seed would be anything less than a difficult game, but I'd at least give Iowa a CHANCE. Against UK.. Forget about it.

As for the "Iowa wasn't going to make a run anyway" baloney.. You see double digit seeds make the Sweet 16 pretty regularly. Upsets happen. But not usually at the expense of a 1 seed.

 

[IACentralHawk73]

8/9 is a very real possibility but 7 is still a possible spot. I'd love to see us still be a 7 and have a shot at playing Zaga, KU or Zona. I think we're extremely capable of competing with those teams, but at the same time we could very well absolutely crap away the 1st round game.

 

[hawk44ever]

Why avoid 8/9? To avoid UK as long as possible- as simple as that.

 

[markfromj]

Wow, some excellent and stat-based comebacks to my claim. Thanks.

What amazes me, then, is that this shows that the committees over the years have an long-term standing flaw in seeding. Not just in a year, but over the long term. For example, that, over many years, 9s have an actual winning record against 8s. Absolutely bizarre. And that 10s fare better against 2s than 7s do.

It makes no sense to be that there would be this level of entrenched error in committee seeding but there it is.

 

[BeepBeepInMyJeep]

I love how the imminent possibility of having our best season in 15 years is a sign of failure.

 

[HoustonREDHawk]

Players need to get pissed about their performance yesterday (Fran sure didn't seem happy), and take that energy into the next game. The tourney is all about match ups, but I sure was hoping for a 6 seed and now it will probably be an 8.

 

[BGHAWK]

Originally posted by markfromj:


You hear folks trying to sound sophisticated by saying things like "I'd rather be a 10 than an 8". Well, yes, if you are an 8, and win, you have to play the 1, but if you are a 10, you only have to play a 2 if you win. But, to do so, you have to beat a 7 first, presumably harder than beating the 9.

It is really, really simple: The better the seed, the easier the path. It is numeric perfection.

That better seed didn't work out too well yesterday. And yes, give me a 10 over an 8/9 seed.

 

[83Hawk]

Originally posted by HoustonREDHawk:

Players need to get pissed about their performance yesterday (Fran sure didn't seem happy), and take that energy into the next game. The tourney is all about match ups, but I sure was hoping for a 6 seed and now it will probably be an 8.

All games are about match ups.

 

[cg8284]

Originally posted by markfromj:
Wow, some excellent and stat-based comebacks to my claim. Thanks.

What amazes me, then, is that this shows that the committees over the years have an long-term standing flaw in seeding. Not just in a year, but over the long term. For example, that, over many years, 9s have an actual winning record against 8s. Absolutely bizarre. And that 10s fare better against 2s than 7s do.

It makes no sense to be that there would be this level of entrenched error in committee seeding but there it is.

I don't know if it's as much a flaw in seeding as it is the teams who are usually 7-10 seeds are a total crapshoot and highly inconsistent. Those teams are usually quite talented but lose a lot of games to teams with less talent. Then they finally put a couple games together and makes a run. You can usually pick out 4-5 teams like this every year in the tournament. You don't know if they'll lose first round or make the elite 8 because they have the talent to do so.