A Brief Note on Strength Of Schedule
by fetch9 on Feb 17, 2012 12:56 PM CST
Email
PrintA group of writers are currently going through a mock NCAA tournament selection process, and earlier today they released their mock seed list. The obvious problem here is that there is still almost a month left in the season, and, for example, Duke and North Carolina and Kansas and Missouri have only played each other once so far, with the second meeting likely dramatically impacting the seeding.
But beyond that, I noticed Missouri as a 1 seed and immediately thought about their strength of schedule. Overall (note: all SOS values are according to KenPom) it's not terrible (72), but their non conference SOS of 313 is historically bad for a team that is talked about as a one seed. How bad? Let's take a look.
| Year | Team | Non-Con SOS | SOS |
|---|---|---|---|
| 2011 | |||
| Ohio State | 178 | 18 | |
| Duke | 64 | 27 | |
| Kansas | 109 | 40 | |
| Pitt | 223 | 37 | |
| Average | 143.5 | 30.5 | |
| 2010 | |||
| Duke | 13 | 3 | |
| Kansas | 83 | 21 | |
| Kentucky | 90 | 50 | |
| Syracuse | 139 | 44 | |
| Average | 81.25 | 29.5 | |
| 2009 | |||
| North Carolina | 27 | 12 | |
| Connecticut | 68 | 18 | |
| Louisville | 50 | 15 | |
| Pitt | 44 | 9 | |
| Average | 47.25 | 13.5 | |
| 2008 | |||
| Kansas | 39 | 10 | |
| Memphis | 11 | 64 | |
| UCLA | 79 | 17 | |
| North Carolina | 34 | 8 | |
| Average | 40.75 | 24.75 | |
| 2007 | |||
| North Carolina | 47 | 6 | |
| Florida | 145 | 45 | |
| Kansas | 94 | 57 | |
| Ohio State | 35 | 8 | |
| Average | 80.25 | 29 | |
| 2006 | |||
| Connecticut | 164 | 34 | |
| Duke | 35 | 6 | |
| Villanova | 46 | 5 | |
| Memphis | 18 | 86 | |
| Average | 65.75 | 32.75 | |
| 2005 | |||
| North Carolina | 18 | 2 | |
| Illinois | 58 | 34 | |
| Duke | 96 | 6 | |
| Washington | 24 | 27 | |
| Average | 49 | 17.25 | |
| 2004 | |||
| Duke | 38 | 5 | |
| St. Joes | 8 | 45 | |
| Kentucky | 85 | 19 | |
| Stanford | 211 | 98 | |
| Average | 85.5 | 41.75 | |
| 2003 | |||
| Kentucky | 21 | 8 | |
| Arizona | 8 | 22 | |
| Oklahoma | 75 | 31 | |
| Texas | 39 | 15 | |
| Average | 35.75 | 19 |
Examining it a bit more closely, Missouri's non-conference SOS of 313 is the worst on this list by nearly 90 spots. Their overall SOS of 72 would currently be the second weakest on this list next to only 2004 Stanford, who went undefeated until the final regular season game. To put it into perspective, their overall SOS is even worse than the 2006 Memphis team, who played in the 16th ranked conference. With (at least) three games against top 40 teams left Missouri's overall SOS will likely rise. They certainly are a good team, ranked 8th in KenPom and having lost only two games, but the fact remains that strength of schedule wise Missouri would have the weakest profile for a #1 seed since 2003.
41 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Ah Fetch kicking off another twitter war. Have I mentioned how glad I am that we share that login now?
Questions, Comments? email me at denverjhawk@hotmail.com
hey what else am i supposed to do when i'm bored in class
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
dang
there are going to be some awful teams on the right side of the bubble it appears
The bubble will tighten up when some mid-majors that are NCAA-worthy don't get their auto bids
But, yes, the 68-team field has made the bubble even weaker.
worse than that though
It’s not just the last few that are weak. K-State, for example, is at #31? With a losing conference record in a league that has 3 inarguably good teams.
I don't know exactly the parameters of the mock bracket
But I know that they’re assuming MU wins the Big 12 tournament for purposes of the selection. If that’s true, it obviously helps their seed and their SOS.
All this will be moot
when we bash thier heads in at the fieldhouse in 8 days.
I always drink the Kool-Aid
Going for #8 in a row!
and so nicely moot a few days earlier as well
Thank you little apple.
I think the NCSOS really speaks to what a surprise MU has been
Teams that expect to be good schedule that way. Teams that expect to be crappy schedule that way. Whoever set up MU’s schedule obviously expected a different performance than the one they’ve gotten. That’s why teams with terrible NCSOS never get high seeds.
If MU wins the conference and the tournament (as I think the mock committee is assuming), they deserve a 1-seed. Let’s make it a moot question in 8 days though.
agreed
and i probably wouldn’t have a problem with that. I would have a problem if they got to be in St. Louis, which is more important than a 1 seed, unless they won out though.
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
Regardless of seeding
Mizzou could face trouble in the second round if paired with a mid-major that has big men down low and their shooting goes cold.
Mizzou played some good teams in the noncon, those teams have just underperformed imo
we played Villanova,Illinoins, Notre Dame, and Cal, but 4 of those 5 haven’t played very well thus far. Granted that’s not on par with you all playing ohio state and duke, I just wouldn’t say the schedule was meant for a crappy team. Also it doesnt help that Binghamton is 0-23…
I AM A METH AGGIE
by pinkelposse on Feb 17, 2012 5:18 PM CST up reply actions 2 recs
well
Cal and Notre Dame are 18 and 39 in KenPom and Illinois is 46. So it’s not like that is killing you. Playing three teams in the 300s and four in the 200s did.
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
Don't forget that . . .
. . . Haith and his staff had to put together a schedule rather late in the process after many of the better teams already had their “quality” games filled. The fact that Haith was willing to take on Villanova at the Garden shows he was not afraid to schedule tough games.
57-54-9 . . . get used to it, jaybirds; and let us know when you want us to make it worse. Go Mizzou!
by countrycal on Feb 17, 2012 8:41 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
True, but
the quality opponents should have been scheduled at least a year in advance already. KU and Ohio State inked the deal in the summer of 2010. I don’t think Missouri was necessarily afraid of scheduling tough teams, but at the same time I don’t think they were knocking down the doors of the marque programs trying to get those games.
Nor should they have been because it wouldn’t do them any good. It’d be tough for them to draw a home and home with the bigger names because the program as a whole isn’t a big enough draw at this point for the upper tier teams to benefit from it.
Kansas can get any game they want because the opposing team knows there will be big TV money involved, plus a guaranteed sell out. Missouri doesn’t have that luxury right now but if Haith can keep things going they can get better opponents in another 2-3 years.
Missouri’s non-con was very weak but I don’t put that all on them. You schedule who you have to in order to make the tournament. If they’d faltered in a few games they’d be in trouble come selection time. But they haven’t slipped up and that’s what matters. The beauty of CBB is that the tournament is the great equalizer.
www.oreadboomkings.fantake.com
I don't think anyone though Villanova was going to be very good this offsesason
People might not have thought they’d be the #86 team, but I don’t think many people had them as a top-40 team.
Playing Villanova in MSG was probably a smart move, but it doesn’t show anything about a willingness to play tough games.
by KSinDC on Feb 17, 2012 10:42 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
I don't think MU's schedule would have been very good in the best-case scenario
The schedule strength is being dragged down by the number of absolutely putrid teams on the schedule. If Illinois were 25 instead of 45, it doesn’t do much to cancel out the five or six teams that are among the 50 worst teams in the country.
That's part of what has always made KU's SOS strong
We always schedule a bunch of tourney teams from non-AQ conferences.
Even for Cousin Norbert
who has (most of) 6 fingers on each hand.
Yes. totally agree.
If they win the conference and the conference tourney, then they would clearly deserve a 1 seed.
I just don’t think that is likely to happen. They are unlikely to win the conference outright, though a tie is a reasonable possibility. And even if they do manage a tie, we would get another chance to hang a loss on them in the conference tourney. So the assumed scenario is pretty unlikely.
Should be an exciting tourney for mizzou.
Too bad as Kansas fans we won’t be in a position to gloat if mizzou loses early.
The way they collapsed and fizzled out last season makes me think they won’t make it to the f4. On the other hand they’re having such a special magical soft focus season, it would be just our luck if the won it all grumble grumble
by sax solo on Feb 17, 2012 10:30 PM CST via mobile reply actions 1 recs
I can't wait to watch Mizzou lose in the second round
And we can all celebrate it and tease them.
See, they have never been good enough to tease. Now when they fall early, they can get a taste of their own medicine. Gonna be awe…wait for it…some (I’m watching How I met your mother right now).
Shit happens when you win championships
do you mean Legen....
dary?
I don’t think they lose in the second round. I think they’re a pretty sound team. Not sure they’re FF worthy but they play well. They move the ball well and seem to always find an open shooter. Their weakness will be against a team with dominant post players. That, and a team that can make a damn free throw when it counts.
www.oreadboomkings.fantake.com
By "we" do you mean KU ???
When have “we” ever been reduced to celebrating someone else’s losses?
RRROOOOCK CHAAAALLLK! JAAAAYYYHAAAAWWWK! KAAAAYYY UUuuuUU!
some of us common folk
don’t like watching our rivals win
Use the forks
by PenHawk on Feb 20, 2012 5:45 AM CST via mobile up reply actions
Am I the only one here who doesn't want KU to have a 1-seed?
This team has shown an ability to play well when it’s not expected to succeed. I’m not sure the pressure of a 1-seed would be such a good thing for them.
That said, if we keep getting the 3-headed monster of T-Rob, Tyshawn, & Withey playing like this, it may not matter much.
And I realize that if we win out (which is certainly possible) in the conference, we’ll likely end up a 1-seed. I just wonder if it might not be better if we’re not. We’re gonna have a good team on the #1/#2 line regardless of where we are.
Criticize FHOFNCHCBS at your own risk...
i hope
we win out the rest of the regular season and then lose the first game of the conference tournament. that’s probably a 2 seed.
or just win the rest of our games period
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
I'm exactly with fetch
Win out in the regular season, lock up the conference title, and then drop a game to Okie State or A&M in the first round of the conference tournament and settle into a #2 seed.
It's absolutely impossible for me to think like that.
I desperately hope they win both.
Supporter of Carlos Austin Boozer, and I don't want to see Dwight Howard in a Bulls uniform. Call me crazy.
by wrigleyrocker12 on Feb 18, 2012 3:01 PM CST via mobile up reply actions
i certainly won't be cheering for them to lose
i think the real trick is whichever seed gets them in St. Louis is what I hope for. Location is more important than seeding.
I write everywhere. You're probably better off following me on twitter
Yep
Shit happens when you win championships
by Andrew Clark on Feb 19, 2012 1:18 PM CST up reply actions
I don't care what seed we are.
However, I hate losing so I want to see us win the rest of the games this year, including the Big 12 tourney. I don’t have faith in anyone else to beat Missouri in the tourney, and I don’t want to see them walk away from the conference with a tourney title.
Quite honestly, I don’t think the seed number really matters. Both times we exited the national tourney in the first round was when we were 3 and 4 seeds (I’m not sure if this is correct, but too lazy to look up). We will have a target on our back regardless because of the name on the front.
What? A girl who likes sports...INCONCEIVABLE!
I don't care what seed we are.
However, I hate losing so I want to see us win the rest of the games this year, including the Big 12 tourney. I don’t have faith in anyone else to beat Missouri in the tourney, and I don’t want to see them walk away from the conference with a tourney title.
Quite honestly, I don’t think the seed number really matters. Both times we exited the national tourney in the first round was when we were 3 and 4 seeds (I’m not sure if this is correct, but too lazy to look up). We will have a target on our back regardless because of the name on the front.
What? A girl who likes sports...INCONCEIVABLE!
by ladyjay78 on Feb 18, 2012 1:04 PM CST up reply actions 1 recs
Yeah, I'm with you.
I’d rather own the target than hide from it, and I’m not convinced that all the superstition surrounding seeding/targets/chips-on-shoulders is justified.
Been saying this for a little bit
I totally agree. I don’t want the “pressure” of a 1 seed. If we do get one, though, at least we will not be the perpetual favorite or #1 overall like some years. I just want to be close to home and a 2 seed so our guys play with a little chip on their shoulder.
The problem with this, is it would require us to lose another game and I don’t want that either.
by I need more Esteban on Feb 18, 2012 3:04 PM CST up reply actions
Which Regional for #2 seeds
is determined by which #1 seed you are paired with, not by how you compare to other #2s. Of the top 8 in the committee ranking, the Regional pairings are 1-8, 2-7, 3-6, 4-5. Those ranked 5 thru 8 are placed in a Regional according to the top seed (1 thru 4) they are paired with, period.
If location to a particular Region is the important thing, you need to be on the top looking down, not hoping you get paired against the top seed assigned where you want to go.
RRROOOOCK CHAAAALLLK! JAAAAYYYHAAAAWWWK! KAAAAYYY UUuuuUU!
Exception –
Teams from the same conference will not be seeded where they could meet any of the first three rounds. At the level of #1,#2 seeds, this means not in the same Regional. There have been years (e.g. 1988) when two teams from one conference met in a Regional Final, but not because they were seeded #1 and #2. One of them had to upset someone.
RRROOOOCK CHAAAALLLK! JAAAAYYYHAAAAWWWK! KAAAAYYY UUuuuUU!
By and large
I’ve thought KU seems to play some of its best basketball when they ‘play up’. Having the 1 seed just paints a big target on you. Unless of course you are in the year 2008, but even then Davidson had a pretty good bead on us.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
