[Yontsey]

Went 5-0 gambling today. Nice.

[torifile]

And the Big East is overrated, as usual. Georgetown down by 22 to VCU? Are you kidding me? 'Cuse on the ropes? Already lost nova and Penn State.

[PKIDelirium]

Damnit Xavier.

[kieran]

Originally Posted by torifile And the Big East is overrated, as usual. Georgetown down by 22 to VCU? Are you kidding me? 'Cuse on the ropes? Already lost nova and Penn State.

Penn State is in the Big Ten, not the Big East.

However, your point still stands.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by kieran Penn State is in the Big Ten, not the Big East. However, your point still stands.

My bad. All those "Big" leagues confuse me.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile And the Big East is overrated, as usual. Georgetown down by 22 to VCU? Are you kidding me? 'Cuse on the ropes? Already lost nova and Penn State.

7-4? That's not too bad

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude 7-4? That's not too bad

In 3 of 4 of those games, they were the higher seed and in 2 of them, they got trounced.

On another note, I completely missed how close that Arizona/Memphis game was. This close >< to making the right call against my long time nemesis, Arizona (this beef I've got with them goes way back to when they were the second 2 seed to lose to a 15 - they royally screwed up my bracket back then and subsequent years when I had them going far).

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile In 3 of 4 of those games, they were the higher seed and in 2 of them, they got trounced.

Yeah, still not buying that logic. Overrated is a conference going 0-4 or 1-4, something like that. The Big East was a few points away from going 9-2.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude Yeah, still not buying that logic. Overrated is a conference going 0-4 or 1-4, something like that. The Big East was a few points away from going 9-2.

And just as many as going 6-5 or 5-6. If they're the best conference in the country, they need to do slightly better than 60% in the first round of the tourney.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile And just as many as going 6-5 or 5-6. If they're the best conference in the country, they need to do slightly better than 60% in the first round of the tourney.

64% is slightly better, no? The more teams you put in the tourney, the more chance of having teams upset. You'd have to do a pretty thorough statistical analysis to conclude that their being "overrated" (according to your standard) is anything other than due to chance.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude 64% is slightly better, no? The more teams you put in the tourney, the more chance of having teams upset. You'd have to do a pretty thorough statistical analysis to conclude that their being "overrated" (according to your standard) is anything other than due to chance.

Yeah, I suppose you're right. It's luck to win games. Nevermind.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile Yeah, I suppose you're right. It's luck to win games. Nevermind.

Nice strawman. Of course there's some luck (randomness). You think Morehead St. beats Louisville 10/10 times or vice-versa? When Albert Pujols goes 0/4, is he the worst player in baseball on that day? To ignore the role of chance in winning and losing is foolish these days, with all that we know about statistics in sports.

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude Nice strawman. Of course there's some luck (randomness). You think Morehead St. beats Louisville 10/10 times or vice-versa? When Albert Pujols goes 0/4, is he the worst player in baseball on that day? To ignore the role of chance in winning and losing is foolish these days, with all that we know about statistics in sports.

You said

anything other than due to chance

And then you say "some" randomness? Which is it? Not due to "anything other than" or "some" chance/luck?

Regardless, random is 1 of 4 higher seeded teams losing. Random is not 3 of 4. That's what I call overrated.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile You said And then you say "some" randomness? Which is it? Not due to "anything other than" or "some" chance/luck? Regardless, random is 1 of 4 higher seeded teams losing. Random is not 3 of 4. That's what I call overrated.

In terms of statistics, if you want to call the Big East "overrated", you have to show that their actual wins were lower than the confidence interval of their expected wins based on seeding. I'm making a statistical argument. Do you understand that?

[torifile]

Originally Posted by ezkcdude In terms of statistics, if you want to call the Big East "overrated", you have to show that their actual wins were lower than the confidence interval of their expected wins based on seeding. I'm making a statistical argument. Do you understand that?

First, don't patronize me.

Second, it's just a tournament. I'm not sure why you take every fucking thread so seriously.

They lost games they "should" have won. As you said, they were mere points away from being 9-2. But they were 7-4 instead. Not a good record, any way you slice it. I'm done discussing this with you - you are a killjoy.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile First, don't patronize me.

I'm not.

Second, it's just a tournament. I'm not sure why you take every fucking thread so seriously.

Do I? Any statistical evidence or is that another thing you just feel?

They lost games they "should" have won. As you said, they were mere points away from being 9-2. But they were 7-4 instead. Not a good record, any way you slice it. I'm done discussing this with you - you are a killjoy.

The Big East lost games that they "should have" won, and won some games that they "should have" lost. When you put 11 teams in a tourney, things like that happen. It's the nature of probabilities. Sorry that you don't feel like acknowledging that. Not my problem.

Next time Pujols goes 0 for 4, I'll be sure to tell him he's the worst player in baseball.


(Also, you might want to cut down on the F*bombs. Keep this place civilized, ok?)

[Elysium]

1) Louisville overachieved all season and were going to fall anyways.

2) St. John's lost their best player and rebounder in the Big East Tournament.

3) Villanova crashed and burned down the stretch (losing 10 of their last 15), there was no way they were going anywhere in the tournament.

4) Georgetown was awful after losing Wright to injury during the season, and a banged up return was not enough to put them over the top.


Playing conference champions and runner-ups are in no way locks for wins in the tournament.

[SKMDC]

All I know is I'm watching some shitty basketball for the most part.

[zsummers]

Originally Posted by SKMDC All I know is I'm watching some shitty basketball for the most part.

Indeed. If you missed that two hour or so streak during the first round of games (with the Moorehead upset, Butler/ODU, Temple/Penn State, and Kentucky/Princeton... at least I think those were the games), there hasn't been much. The Richmond/Vandy and Memphis/Arizona games seemed good, what I saw of Texas/Oakland was spirited, and UCLA/Mich. St. got interesting. But the only really standout game was Villanova/George Mason. It hasn't been bad if you caught that good run of the really early games... but outside of that, I've been flipping for something good most of the time. I have high hopes for FL/UCLA, OH St./George Mason, Wisconsin/K. State, and Illinois/Kansas though.

[SKMDC]

I like watching BYU.
JIMMER!

[Yontsey]

Wow. Just wow. That Butler/Pitt ending was incredible. Never seen anything like that.

[torifile]

Big East: overrated.

[Elysium]

Pitt chokes every year. Yawn, nothing to see here.

[Yontsey]

Originally Posted by torifile Big East: overrated.

Agreed. Been saying this all year. It's always overrated.

[ezkcdude]

Originally Posted by torifile Big East: overrated.

lol

now the data is starting to support that hypothesis

[torifile]

You can be reasonable.

[JohnnyTheA]

Originally Posted by SKMDC I like watching BYU. JIMMER!

I got em going all the way to the final game and losing to Duke. With Pitt out, it looks like they might make it to the final four. They should be able to get past Florida who did "okay" beating a bad UCLA. And then either Wisconsin or Butler.... Jimmer is freeking on fire. I know most folks on this board are too old to remember, but he plays a little like old Pistol Pete Marovich (sp?). He can just about do it all with class! The problem BYU has though, is that everything is riding on this one guy. The other players are just pretty good... Find a way of stopping him, and you have BYU beat cold...

Go Mormons go!!!!

[Kickaha]

My two Alma maters: UW and UNC. Game of a lifetime starts in less than hour.

And I'm boarding a plane to DC in five minutes. *waaaaaaaah*

[torifile]

Found some "stats" to back up my claim that the Big East is overrated. They have the second worst winning percentage of all the major conferences. They will have at most 3 teams left in the Sweet 16 since 'Cuse and Marquette play one another.

[FFL]

Originally Posted by torifile Found some "stats" to back up my claim that the Big East is overrated. They have the second worst winning percentage of all the major conferences. They will have at most 3 teams left in the Sweet 16 since 'Cuse and Marquette play one another.

Yeah, the Big East record for NCAA upsets is not all that great the past few years. That doesn't really overcome the conference RPI rankings evidence that it's the toughest conference in CBB, though.

Maybe if their top two teams were served up with all their first-weekend games in their home states year after year, things would be a little bit different? Of course, the top two teams are different every year since they're not ridiculously top-heavy like the SEC and the ACC.