Pool C

[Fifth and Putnam]

Appreciate the work put in on this as always...

[sac]

We usually need about 8 or 9 Pool C's for current A's that lose their conference tournaments, so the real bubble is somewhere in the middle of the current C's

Through Sunday, Jan. 29, based on knightslappy's numbers posted at http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/

43 Pool A berths (current conference leaders)
UW-River Falls (WIAC CE) 16-1, 0.604
Babson (NEWMAC NE) 18-1, 0.581
Whitman (NWC WE) 19-0, 0.553
Washington U. (UAA CE) 15-3, 0.596
Marietta (OAC GL) 15-4, 0.601
Susquehanna (LAND MA) 15-3, 0.560
Christopher Newport (CAC MA) 17-2, 0.529
Tufts (NESCAC NE) 16-3, 0.545
Neumann (CSAC AT) 18-1, 0.501
Claremont-Mudd-Scripps (SCIAC WE) 13-0, 0.479
St. Lawrence (LL EA) 16-3, 0.533
Hope (MIAA GL) 14-3, 0.529
Hardin-Simmons (ASC SO) 14-5, 0.559
Eastern Connecticut (LEC NE) 14-6, 0.572
Lycoming (MACC MA) 15-4, 0.537
Ramapo (NJAC AT) 19-1, 0.474
Hanover (HCAC GL) 13-3, 0.525
St. John Fisher (E8 EA) 13-5, 0.559
St. Thomas (MIAC WE) 14-4, 0.537
Oswego State (SUNYAC EA) 15-4, 0.531
---approximate cut line if teams were in Pool C---
Benedictine (NATHC ce) 15-3, 0.504
Randolph-Macon (ODAC SO) 14-5, 0.538
North Park (CCIW ce) 15-4, 0.516
St. Norbert (MWC ce) 14-3, 0.487
Endicott (CCC ne) 15-4, 0.495
Denison (NCAC GL) 17-2, 0.448
Staten Island (CUNYAC at) 15-5, 0.501
Buena Vista (IIAC we) 12-7, 0.543
Becker (NECC ne) 12-4, 0.494
Eastern (MACF at) 11-8, 0.554
Franklin and Marshall (CC ma) 14-5, 0.492
Schreiner (SCAC so) 10-9, 0.565
St. Vincent (PrAC gl) 14-4, 0.469
La Roche (AMCC gl) 14-5, 0.483
Husson (NAC ne) 12-5, 0.493
Salem State (MASCAC ne) 12-8, 0.528
Farmingdale State (SKY at) 14-5, 0.475
Albertus Magnus (GNAC ne) 14-4, 0.456
Gallaudet (NEAC ea) 15-4, 0.438
Northwestern (Minn.) (UMAC we) 13-5, 0.455
Greensboro (USAC so) 10-6, 0.483
Westminster (Mo.) (SLIAC ce) 11-6, 0.454
Centre (SAA so) 11-7, 0.447

21 Pool C berths (must have WP>=.667 and SOS>=.500)
1) Middlebury (NESCAC NE) 15-3, 0.618
2) Rochester (UAA EA) 17-1, 0.542
3) UW-Whitewater (WIAC CE) 15-3, 0.563
4) Amherst (NESCAC NE) 14-4, 0.571
5) Whitworth (NWC WE) 16-3, 0.546
6) Wesleyan (NESCAC NE) 16-4, 0.555
7) Salisbury (CAC MA) 15-4, 0.558
8) Keene State (LEC NE) 14-5, 0.572
9) John Carroll (OAC GL) 12-6, 0.593
10) Cabrini (CSAC AT) 15-3, 0.529
11) Loras (IIAC WE) 14-5, 0.565
12) Bates (NESCAC NE) 14-6, 0.578
13) UW-Eau Claire (WIAC CE) 13-5, 0.569
-------------------------------------------------------------Bubble line??
14) Emory (UAA SO) 14-4, 0.538
15) Swarthmore (CC MA) 15-4, 0.533
16) Williams (NESCAC NE) 13-6, 0.572
17) Carthage (CCIW CE) 12-6, 0.578
18) Illinois Wesleyan (CCIW CE) 12-6, 0.578
19) LeTourneau (ASC SO) 15-3, 0.514
20) Augustana (CCIW ce) 15-4, 0.528
21) Mount St. Joseph (HCAC GL) 15-3, 0.508

You can also strike one CCIW and at least one NESCAC since I think its very unlikely they get 4 and 6 teams in the tournament.

Wrong side of the bubble
UW-Stout (WIAC CE) 10-6, 0.592
UW-Oshkosh (WIAC CE) 12-7, 0.588
Catholic (LAND MA) 13-6, 0.560
Skidmore (LL EA) 14-5, 0.538
Guilford (ODAC SO) 16-3, 0.498
MIT (NEWMAC NE) 14-5, 0.535
Hamilton (NESCAC NE) 13-5, 0.537
Virginia Wesleyan (ODAC SO) 13-6, 0.548
Wooster (NCAC GL) 13-6, 0.545
DeSales (MACF AT) 13-6, 0.545
WPI (NEWMAC ne) 13-6, 0.545

The definition of Pool C means at least one more loss between now and the end of season (unless you're UAA) so strike current 8 and 9 loss teams.  Seven loss teams are on pretty thin ice as well.

UW-Stevens Point (WIAC ce) 9-9, 0.614
Brockport (SUNYAC EA) 15-5, 0.519
Connecticut College (NESCAC ne) 11-7, 0.570
Mass-Dartmouth (LEC ne) 12-7, 0.562
Ripon (MWC ce) 14-3, 0.488
Concordia (Texas) (ASC SO) 12-5, 0.532
TCNJ (NJAC AT) 15-5, 0.515
Gwynedd Mercy (CSAC AT) 15-4, 0.499
Moravian (LAND MA) 12-5, 0.530
Nebraska Wesleyan (IIAC WE) 13-4, 0.506
Chicago (UAA ce) 11-7, 0.562
Johns Hopkins (CC MA) 13-6, 0.532
Scranton (LAND ma) 14-5, 0.512
Rowan (NJAC AT) 12-8, 0.563
New Jersey City (NJAC AT) 16-4, 0.487
Central (IIAC WE) 11-8, 0.568
St. Olaf (MIAC WE) 8-9, 0.607
Trinity (Conn.) (NESCAC ne) 13-7, 0.539
Ohio Northern (OAC GL) 12-7, 0.545
Pomona-Pitzer (SCIAC we) 9-3, 0.500
Wartburg (IIAC we) 11-7, 0.552
St. Johns (MIAC we) 12-4, 0.498
SUNY Geneseo (SUNYAC EA) 12-8, 0.554
Maryville (Tenn.) (USAC SO) 14-4, 0.485
Buffalo State (SUNYAC EA) 11-6, 0.534
Cortland (SUNYAC ea) 13-6, 0.520
Nazareth (E8 ea) 12-6, 0.524
Alvernia (MACC ma) 12-7, 0.537
Grinnell (MWC ce) 10-6, 0.538
Misericordia (MACF at) 14-5, 0.496
Lasell (GNAC ne) 12-7, 0.533

[fantastic50]

No argument with any of that.

[Greek Tragedy]

I have a feeling we're going to see a few more 7-loss and 8-loss teams than what we are accustomed to and/or teams closer to that .500 SoS than we're used to.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I have a feeling we're going to see a few more 7-loss and 8-loss teams than what we are accustomed to and/or teams closer to that .500 SoS than we're used to.

For multiple reasons, yes. We saw it last year... and with two extra picks and even more parity, we are likely to see it this year.

[fantastic50]

I have a feeling we're going to see a few more 7-loss and 8-loss teams than what we are accustomed to and/or teams closer to that .500 SoS than we're used to.

For multiple reasons, yes. We saw it last year... and with two extra picks and even more parity, we are likely to see it this year.

It's maybe not out of the question that a team that got their 9th loss in the tournament final of a tough conference could get in at 18-9 (.667) or 19-9 with a very high SOS.  This seems possible in the WIAC or CCIW.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I have a feeling we're going to see a few more 7-loss and 8-loss teams than what we are accustomed to and/or teams closer to that .500 SoS than we're used to.

For multiple reasons, yes. We saw it last year... and with two extra picks and even more parity, we are likely to see it this year.

It's maybe not out of the question that a team that got their 9th loss in the tournament final of a tough conference could get in at 18-9 (.667) or 19-9 with a very high SOS.  This seems possible in the WIAC or CCIW.

Keep in mind that Rochester was 17-8 (.680) with one of the higher SOS's in the country last year... and they did NOT get in. If you are on the .667 number or just above it... consider yourself on the wrong side of the bubble. Yes, with two more bids there is a better chance a team like Rochester can get in, but I don't think we will see a .667 team get in.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Someone will have to look back, I feel like one of the WIAC schools got in right at .667 with 8 losses one year.  I know a .667 has gotten in at least twice, but it's usually with some conference tourney wins.  Anything under .700, though, and you're on thin ice.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Someone will have to look back, I feel like one of the WIAC schools got in right at .667 with 8 losses one year.  I know a .667 has gotten in at least twice, but it's usually with some conference tourney wins.  Anything under .700, though, and you're on thin ice.

From what the committee has stated several times to me (and maybe they are incorrect), but no team with a .667 or lower has gotten in as a Pool C team during this SOS era. I think someone mentioned last year that this isn't necessarily accurate, but I don't remember who the team was that was pointed out.

Even if it isn't accurate, I know the committee thinks about that as a "Mendoza Line." I think that is fair. If we really think about it, if a team can't win more than 2/3s of their games, should they be in the national tournament which is trying to select the best teams for at-large selections? Sure, a team might have a really good SOS, but I've always said teams still have to prove they can win. Not sure winning just 2/3s of a schedule is good enough. Maybe that is harsh, but I feel if we are looking for the best, 2/3s isn't that standard.

So, I think it is fair to use that as a mark of beware. Ryan's .700 might be a bit of a harder line, BUT considering what Rochester had for a resume last year, it might be a fair line to use as a "if below, you are in trouble" and the .667 is the "forget it" line.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

You might be right - I feel like it was Oshkosh for some reason and I'm pretty sure they had 8 losses, but even 17-8 is .680.

[sac]

I think you're thinking of Springfield in 2015?

2015 Pool C Selections (best guess at order)
1. (GL) Marietta (.893/.519/4-3)
2. (MA) Johns Hopkins (.852/.539/3-3)
3. (C) UW-Stevens Point (.808/.575/2-4) *national champion*  (tied with WW, not sure who had #1 WIAC seed going into WIAC tournament)
4. (C)  Washington U. (.800/.565/4-2)
5. (GL) Ohio Wesleyan (.815/.537/3-1)
6. (NE) Trinity-Conn. (.792/.535/5-1)
7. (NE) Amherst (.741/.579/6-3)
8. (NE) Bates (.760/.609/4-5)
9. (AT) William Patterson (.741/.565/4-3)
10. (GL) Wooster (.786/.551/3-2)
11. (C) Illinois Wesleyan (.704/.591/5-5)
12. (C) Elmhurst (.731/.551/4-4)
13. (S) Virginia Wesleyan (.815/.554/0-4)
14. (GL) John Carroll (.769/.527/3-3)
15. (W) St. Olaf (.808/.527/1-5)
16. (MA) Catholic (.846/.506/1-3)
17. (NE) Eastern Conn. (.815/.550/0-2)
18. (NE) WPI (.808/.515/2-3)
19. (NE) Springfield (.704/.584/3-5)

Last team in 19-8 record.  No WIAC that made the tournament as a C fits your description.


I think this is what you're thinking of Ryan

Illinois Wesleyan in 2011 also 19-8 but 18-8 in-region  .692/.543/2-2
...from reading post from that year, IWU making the field was a surprise

[sac]

I see people referencing 8 and 9 loss teams having a shot because of the expanded Pool C.  But past history is showing a lot of 5-6-7 loss teams still on the table at the end of the process.  I'm not sure its going to work out quite the way some might think.  I seems fairly rare to have a team under .700 even at the final table., like maybe one or two per year.

I guess I see 8 losses with high SOS as just having a better chance since they'll probably have more rounds available for selection, but its not necessarily an assured thing.  Make sense?

Long way to go and maybe it becomes more obvious later, but not sure right now.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Maybe there was an 8 loss WIAC team that missed, but maybe shouldn't have.  All these years run together now and there are so many numbers.

[KnightSlappy]

Question for the group as we prepare our hearts and minds for the first set of rankings next week:

would you rather I (1) update the data every day or (2) update through Sunday and then hold the data until we see the regional rankings on Wednesday afternoon?

http://detroitjockcity.com/division-iii-mens-basketball-regional-rankings-data/

[fantastic50]

Someone will have to look back, I feel like one of the WIAC schools got in right at .667 with 8 losses one year.  I know a .667 has gotten in at least twice, but it's usually with some conference tourney wins.  Anything under .700, though, and you're on thin ice.

From what the committee has stated several times to me (and maybe they are incorrect), but no team with a .667 or lower has gotten in as a Pool C team during this SOS era. I think someone mentioned last year that this isn't necessarily accurate, but I don't remember who the team was that was pointed out.

Even if it isn't accurate, I know the committee thinks about that as a "Mendoza Line." I think that is fair. If we really think about it, if a team can't win more than 2/3s of their games, should they be in the national tournament which is trying to select the best teams for at-large selections? Sure, a team might have a really good SOS, but I've always said teams still have to prove they can win. Not sure winning just 2/3s of a schedule is good enough. Maybe that is harsh, but I feel if we are looking for the best, 2/3s isn't that standard.

So, I think it is fair to use that as a mark of beware. Ryan's .700 might be a bit of a harder line, BUT considering what Rochester had for a resume last year, it might be a fair line to use as a "if below, you are in trouble" and the .667 is the "forget it" line.

I vaguely recall hearing that Virginia Wesleyan (18-9, .561, 3-3) was on the table and in serious discussion at the end of the process last year, but no one has received a Pool C at .667 or below for at least the last four seasons.

In 2015, the lowest WP for a Pool C selection was .704 for Springfield (19-8, .584, 3-5).  John Carroll (20-6, .527, 3-3) got in, while North Central (16-8, .587, 3-6) did not.

In 2014, Emory (17-8, .602, 4-5) was the lowest Pool C WP at .680.  Bowdoin (19-5, .503, 1-3) and Wittenberg (21-7, .517, 3-6) were selected, while St Mary's (16-8, .565, 1-6) and Messiah (19-6, .534, 2-4) were not.

In 2013, Springfield (19-8, .575, 4-6) was in at .704, as was Randolph (15-6, .520, 4-5).  On the flip side, Buena Vista (18-7, .563, 1-2), Thomas More (22-4, .512, 1-3), Albright (20-6, .546, 3-1), and Brandeis (17-8, .569, 4-7) were out.