MBB: Little East

[7express]

Thursday prediction:

USM 62 @ Wentowrth 73.
Wentworth is going to end up 2nd or 3rd in the CCC, while USM lost in double overtime to Plymouth which eliminated them from LEC tournament consideration.  I still for the life of me can't figure out why their playing this game now, but I like Wentworth.

Massey ratings:
Wentworth 61-59 (56%)

[warrior]

I had a very enlightening conversation with a member of a regional committee.  What we forget is the fact that the goal of each regional committee is to get as many teams from that region into the NCAAs as possible.  The problem is, they line up all the # 1s and all the #2s, .... from each region and compare them.  If your region's number 1 is not taken initially, they 'block' the rest of the group, who can't move until that teams in their region above them  are taken.  As a  result, league standing and head to head games are pretty meaningless.  The key is, how does a team match up statistically/mathematically to their counterparts in the OTHER regions!  That's why Keene started out so low.  Yes they were #1 in our conference, and beat head-to-head some of the team in OUR region that were ahead of them, BUT their weak SOS and the fact that a bunch of their games this year were out of region and therefor don't 'count' make them a poor match-up vs. other regions.  If they were ranked higher, they would block the rest of the teams in the region.  Anyway- the conversation was very enlightening and made me understand that first regional ranking, that, at first glance, didn't seem to make sense.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I had a very enlightening conversation with a member of a regional committee.  What we forget is the fact that the goal of each regional committee is to get as many teams from that region into the NCAAs as possible.  The problem is, they line up all the # 1s and all the #2s, .... from each region and compare them.  If your region's number 1 is not taken initially, they 'block' the rest of the group, who can't move until that teams in their region above them  are taken.  As a  result, league standing and head to head games are pretty meaningless.  The key is, how does a team match up statistically/mathematically to their counterparts in the OTHER regions!  That's why Keene started out so low.  Yes they were #1 in our conference, and beat head-to-head some of the team in OUR region that were ahead of them, BUT their weak SOS and the fact that a bunch of their games this year were out of region and therefor don't 'count' make them a poor match-up vs. other regions.  If they were ranked higher, they would block the rest of the teams in the region.  Anyway- the conversation was very enlightening and made me understand that first regional ranking, that, at first glance, didn't seem to make sense.

It's interesting that someone would even admit this.  They're supposed to rank teams in region by a specific criteria (and ability to be selected nationally isn't one of them).  You've basically got a committee member saying they don't follow the rules for regional rankings.  Heavy stuff - but that might explain the big disparity between this year and previous years.

[Eye in the Sky]

I had a very enlightening conversation with a member of a regional committee.  What we forget is the fact that the goal of each regional committee is to get as many teams from that region into the NCAAs as possible.  The problem is, they line up all the # 1s and all the #2s, .... from each region and compare them.  If your region's number 1 is not taken initially, they 'block' the rest of the group, who can't move until that teams in their region above them  are taken.  As a  result, league standing and head to head games are pretty meaningless.  The key is, how does a team match up statistically/mathematically to their counterparts in the OTHER regions!  That's why Keene started out so low.  Yes they were #1 in our conference, and beat head-to-head some of the team in OUR region that were ahead of them, BUT their weak SOS and the fact that a bunch of their games this year were out of region and therefor don't 'count' make them a poor match-up vs. other regions.  If they were ranked higher, they would block the rest of the teams in the region.  Anyway- the conversation was very enlightening and made me understand that first regional ranking, that, at first glance, didn't seem to make sense.

It's interesting that someone would even admit this.  They're supposed to rank teams in region by a specific criteria (and ability to be selected nationally isn't one of them).  You've basically got a committee member saying they don't follow the rules for regional rankings.  Heavy stuff - but that might explain the big disparity between this year and previous years.

Hoopsfan is right. Basically they were hurting one team because they wanted to get more teams in. So they are basically saying, despite the fact that the one team (Keene I guess in the example) seemed to have a very good resume, one that seemed better (at the time) than some others voted higher, but because they were "blocking" other teams from getting in, they got voted lower. This is interesting. Fortunately that first poll hasn't decided anything, and we still have a couple more coming. I have faith they will get the right teams in come tournament time....I HOPE.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I had a very enlightening conversation with a member of a regional committee.  What we forget is the fact that the goal of each regional committee is to get as many teams from that region into the NCAAs as possible.  The problem is, they line up all the # 1s and all the #2s, .... from each region and compare them.  If your region's number 1 is not taken initially, they 'block' the rest of the group, who can't move until that teams in their region above them  are taken.  As a  result, league standing and head to head games are pretty meaningless.  The key is, how does a team match up statistically/mathematically to their counterparts in the OTHER regions!  That's why Keene started out so low.  Yes they were #1 in our conference, and beat head-to-head some of the team in OUR region that were ahead of them, BUT their weak SOS and the fact that a bunch of their games this year were out of region and therefor don't 'count' make them a poor match-up vs. other regions.  If they were ranked higher, they would block the rest of the teams in the region.  Anyway- the conversation was very enlightening and made me understand that first regional ranking, that, at first glance, didn't seem to make sense.

It's interesting that someone would even admit this.  They're supposed to rank teams in region by a specific criteria (and ability to be selected nationally isn't one of them).  You've basically got a committee member saying they don't follow the rules for regional rankings.  Heavy stuff - but that might explain the big disparity between this year and previous years.

Hoopsfan is right. Basically they were hurting one team because they wanted to get more teams in. So they are basically saying, despite the fact that the one team (Keene I guess in the example) seemed to have a very good resume, one that seemed better (at the time) than some others voted higher, but because they were "blocking" other teams from getting in, they got voted lower. This is interesting. Fortunately that first poll hasn't decided anything, and we still have a couple more coming. I have faith they will get the right teams in come tournament time....I HOPE.

Really what they're saying is that they don't believe the national committee follows the criteria.  The national committee has basically the same criteria when they choose teams.  If fact, given the make-up of d3, the NE region actually benefits from the criteria when compared across regions (which is why you see a lot of Pool C bids going to the NE region).

What this really says is that the regional committee expects the national committee to choose with bias, so they're going to choose with bias.

Not a lot of trust or integrity there.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Something to remember... if that is indeed what the NE regional committee is doing... they can be eventually trumped by the National Committee... that committee can go back to the NE committee at the end and tell them that based on the criteria, they don't agree with the rankings and would like them to reassess... or even change the order of teams. It used to happen on a weekly basis, but this year the national committee is allowing their regional committees to work on their rankings with just advice and suggestions and guidance from the national committee... however, if they think something is not right, they will have them change it in the final rankings.

Also... if they have the wrong team ahead of a "blocker"... you could create a bigger blocking type scenario... it usually all works out in the end and honestly in recent years there are usually only one or two teams that become a topic of debate about getting in or not... not like the past when there were far more.

[warrior]

Hoopsfan - I believe you missed my point.  For starters, no one said I spoke to someone in our Region.  Secondly, the point my friend was making was that people don't understand that the committee members have very little room for subjectivity.  Everything has to do with their objective criteria.  The reference to Keene was my own.  Based on what I had learned, I now understand how they could have been ranked below the other LEC team - namely because  their weak SOS and their coach's choice to play multiple games out of region hurt them, while their head-to-head LEC wins and first place in the league are things that are not given great weight in the rankings.  Regarding blocking,  I mentioned it NOT as a criteria considered by committee members, but rather a point of consideration for us FANS- namely, that we fans don't WANT a team in our region to have a high ranking, if their numbers can't compete nationally.  Bottom line - I got the impression that the committees do a better job than we give them credit for.  Simply put, I like many others, didn't understand how a league's top team could be ranked lower than a team in 2nd or 3rd place.  Now I do.  Oh, and one more point - I also learned that the National Committee has to approve all regional rankings, so in the end,  the regional committee is only making suggestions.  It is therefor inappropriate to blame any region for voting with bias, because, the national committee would overrule any ranking that didn't follow their objective criteria.   

[7express]

Note, I'll post Thursdays result tomorrow with Saturday, got a busy day ahead of me today, and can barely fit in my predictions:

Eastern 73 @ Boston 59.
Eastern win clinches at least a share of the title and #1 seed.  Couldn't really ask for a better opponent, but that's why they play the game.

Keene 78 @ RIC 82.
Keene's free fall continues.  If they lose this game AND Western wins, Keene will finish in the #4 spot....7 days ago they were leading with 90 seconds to go with a chance to clinch the conference outright and a week later they could drop all the way to #4, yikes!

Plymouth 65 @ Western 89.
Plymouth is in the tournament already, and locked in at #6, so really no incentive for them here.  Western lost the first meeting, but I doubt they lose this one.  Hopefully we still have something left in the tank after the last emotionally games which were decided by a combined 5 points, 2 in overtime.

USM 56 @ Dartmouth 62.
USM is eliminated, Dartmouth is locked at #5.  Game is meaningless for both sides.

[warrior]

7express - I agree with your 4 predictions and, needless to say, am hoping they work out that way.  I wonder if we are the last team in the league to have never finished as top seed.  We here in Warriorland are very excited about the chance at making history.  I feel especially excited for the seniors and of course Coach Geitner.  It will KILL me not being there, but my daughter made the State Opens in track and I'll be in New Haven.  Thank goodness we should be home just in time to watch on LECTV!   

[7express]

Eastern, USM and Plymouth declare for ECAC.  Luckily for Eastern fans they'll probably be in the NCAA's (even if they lose in the LEC tournament), but unlucky for Plymouth and USM I think you have to have a record .500 or better to play which eliminates both of those teams (USM would finish 13-14 if they won out and lost in the LEC finals).  I believe this was the final day to declare, so this should be the final list:
http://static.psbin.com/0/4/czb3meix5j3ihs/Declared_Teams_W_Basketball.pdf

[warrior]

7express - I just clicked on your link and it showed only Keene and Southern Maine (no sign of Plymouth or ECSU).  That's strange because I was under the impression that ECSU did indeed sign up.  Where did you see Plymouth and ECSU on the list?

[warrior]

I just went on the ECAC website and found the up to date list.  7express - you were right - ECSU, Plymouth and S.Maine signed up.  Here, I believe, it the correct link:

http://static.psbin.com/d/3/l4irpd22czas6b/Declared_Teams_M_Basketball.pdf

[7express]

Eastern, USM and Plymouth declare for ECAC.  Luckily for Eastern fans they'll probably be in the NCAA's (even if they lose in the LEC tournament), but unlucky for Plymouth and USM I think you have to have a record .500 or better to play which eliminates both of those teams (USM would finish 13-14 if they won out and lost in the LEC finals).  I believe this was the final day to declare, so this should be the final list:
http://static.psbin.com/0/4/czb3meix5j3ihs/Declared_Teams_W_Basketball.pdf

Blah, I copied the womens link by mistake.  Here's the men's list: http://static.psbin.com/d/3/l4irpd22czas6b/Declared_Teams_M_Basketball.pdf

[ECSUalum]

Congrats to Coach Geitner and the ECSU Warriors on their LEC regular season championship.  Good Luck in the LEC Tournament!!!!

[pjunito]

The semi-finals should be very fun.... I don't see how RIC or Keene loses in their opening round games.  Keene vs East Conn and RIC vs West Conn; I will sign up for those games!