MBB: College Conference of Illinois and Wisconsin

[cardinalpride]

There was plenty of reason to be worried, CP. Augustana was not a shoo-in. But as Bob pointed out on Saturday night, there was a lot less havoc wreaked in conference tournament semifinals and championships than usual that day, and that relative absence of bid-thieving left enough room for some teams whose numbers would've been too low in past seasons for serious Pool C consideration.

Following up on this thought, I highly recommend that everybody read Pat Coleman's article on the unprecedented selection of UW-Oshkosh for a Pool C berth, which is posted on d3hoops.com. It includes a very helpful graph concocted by a d3boards.com poster named Drew Pasteur, who is a math prof at Wooster and was one of the people in the Pool C room analyzing the data prior to Selection Monday and estimating probabilities for who would get a bid and who wouldn't. His graph plots out the teams that have had Pool C aspirations from the 2013 thru 2016 seasons, inclusive, on a Cartesian plane along an x axis that measures SOS and a y axis that measures winning %.

The graph includes three lines that cut across the plane -- a solid line, that I will now take to calling the Pasteur Line, along which 50% of all teams with Pool C aspirations in those four seasons received a bid and 50% didn't, and a dotted line above it that represented a 90% chance at a bid and a dotted line below it that represented a 10% chance at a bid. The Pasteur Line thus represents the midpoint of the bubble (not taking into consideration the other criteria that weren't plotted, such as vRRO) for those previous four seasons.

There were nine teams that fell below the Pasteur Line that nevertheless got bids in those four seasons, an average of 2.3 teams per year. This year, six teams that fell below the Pasteur Line received bids: Augustana, Keene State, St. Lawrence, St. Thomas, Skidmore, and UW-Oshkosh. Even leaving UWO and its wretched winning percentage aside, it was a bonanza year for teams with normally subpar credentials nevertheless getting into the field of 64.

Incidentally, the other three CCIW Pool C aspirants -- Illinois Wesleyan, Carthage, and North Park -- all fell below the 10% dotted line. Augustana was right on the 10% line. Keene State and (of course) UWO were below it.

GS, good stuff!

[fantastic50]

There was plenty of reason to be worried, CP. Augustana was not a shoo-in. But as Bob pointed out on Saturday night, there was a lot less havoc wreaked in conference tournament semifinals and championships than usual that day, and that relative absence of bid-thieving left enough room for some teams whose numbers would've been too low in past seasons for serious Pool C consideration.

Following up on this thought, I highly recommend that everybody read Pat Coleman's article on the unprecedented selection of UW-Oshkosh for a Pool C berth, which is posted on d3hoops.com. It includes a very helpful graph concocted by a d3boards.com poster named Drew Pasteur, who is a math prof at Wooster and was one of the people in the Pool C room analyzing the data prior to Selection Monday and estimating probabilities for who would get a bid and who wouldn't. His graph plots out the teams that have had Pool C aspirations from the 2013 thru 2016 seasons, inclusive, on a Cartesian plane along an x axis that measures SOS and a y axis that measures winning %.

The graph includes three lines that cut across the plane -- a solid line, that I will now take to calling the Pasteur Line, along which 50% of all teams with Pool C aspirations in those four seasons received a bid and 50% didn't, and a dotted line above it that represented a 90% chance at a bid and a dotted line below it that represented a 10% chance at a bid. The Pasteur Line thus represents the midpoint of the bubble (not taking into consideration the other criteria that weren't plotted, such as vRRO) for those previous four seasons.

There were nine teams that fell below the Pasteur Line that nevertheless got bids in those four seasons, an average of 2.3 teams per year. This year, six teams that fell below the Pasteur Line received bids: Augustana, Keene State, St. Lawrence, St. Thomas, Skidmore, and UW-Oshkosh. Even leaving UWO and its wretched winning percentage aside, it was a bonanza year for teams with normally subpar credentials nevertheless getting into the field of 64.

Incidentally, the other three CCIW Pool C aspirants -- Illinois Wesleyan, Carthage, and North Park -- all fell below the 10% dotted line. Augustana was right on the 10% line. Keene State and (of course) UWO were below it.

I think that one of the key underlying issues is picking the "best" teams (which I might define as those that are most likely to go deep into the national tournament) versus the most deserving (based on what they have accomplished.)  Ben Alamar and Jeff Sagarin (MIT '70) both get at this issue, in a D1 basketball context, in recent stories. 
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/what-experts-who-met-with-ncaa-say-about-changes-to-tourney-selection-process/
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/18724623/should-committee-favor-best-teams-most-deserving

I would argue that the D3 philosophy is about access, and we should lean strongly toward "most deserving", even though that may knock out a 4th/5th NESCAC team or 3rd from the CCIW, WIAC, UAA, (or occasionally my league, the NCAC).  UW-O is legit, and is a darkhorse for a run to Salem; they are without question one of the best 21 teams that didn't get an AQ (maybe top 10), but not among the 21 most deserving, IMHO.

[Gregory Sager]

There was plenty of reason to be worried, CP. Augustana was not a shoo-in. But as Bob pointed out on Saturday night, there was a lot less havoc wreaked in conference tournament semifinals and championships than usual that day, and that relative absence of bid-thieving left enough room for some teams whose numbers would've been too low in past seasons for serious Pool C consideration.

Following up on this thought, I highly recommend that everybody read Pat Coleman's article on the unprecedented selection of UW-Oshkosh for a Pool C berth, which is posted on d3hoops.com. It includes a very helpful graph concocted by a d3boards.com poster named Drew Pasteur, who is a math prof at Wooster and was one of the people in the Pool C room analyzing the data prior to Selection Monday and estimating probabilities for who would get a bid and who wouldn't. His graph plots out the teams that have had Pool C aspirations from the 2013 thru 2016 seasons, inclusive, on a Cartesian plane along an x axis that measures SOS and a y axis that measures winning %.

The graph includes three lines that cut across the plane -- a solid line, that I will now take to calling the Pasteur Line, along which 50% of all teams with Pool C aspirations in those four seasons received a bid and 50% didn't, and a dotted line above it that represented a 90% chance at a bid and a dotted line below it that represented a 10% chance at a bid. The Pasteur Line thus represents the midpoint of the bubble (not taking into consideration the other criteria that weren't plotted, such as vRRO) for those previous four seasons.

There were nine teams that fell below the Pasteur Line that nevertheless got bids in those four seasons, an average of 2.3 teams per year. This year, six teams that fell below the Pasteur Line received bids: Augustana, Keene State, St. Lawrence, St. Thomas, Skidmore, and UW-Oshkosh. Even leaving UWO and its wretched winning percentage aside, it was a bonanza year for teams with normally subpar credentials nevertheless getting into the field of 64.

Incidentally, the other three CCIW Pool C aspirants -- Illinois Wesleyan, Carthage, and North Park -- all fell below the 10% dotted line. Augustana was right on the 10% line. Keene State and (of course) UWO were below it.

I think that one of the key underlying issues is picking the "best" teams (which I might define as those that are most likely to go deep into the national tournament) versus the most deserving (based on what they have accomplished.)  Ben Alamar and Jeff Sagarin (MIT '70) both get at this issue, in a D1 basketball context, in recent stories. 
http://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/news/what-experts-who-met-with-ncaa-say-about-changes-to-tourney-selection-process/
http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/18724623/should-committee-favor-best-teams-most-deserving

I would argue that the D3 philosophy is about access, and we should lean strongly toward "most deserving", even though that may knock out a 4th/5th NESCAC team or 3rd from the CCIW, WIAC, UAA, (or occasionally my league, the NCAC).  UW-O is legit, and is a darkhorse for a run to Salem; they are without question one of the best 21 teams that didn't get an AQ (maybe top 10), but not among the 21 most deserving, IMHO.

Good point, Drew, and that's a good topic for debate on the Pool C issue. BTW, thanks again for all of your hard work in the Pool C room!

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Remember the entire NCAA is about access. The number of teams in any tournament (outside of D1 basketball) is based on an access ratio. Having all conferences with an automatic qualifier also speaks to access.

People confuse NCAA tournaments as the "64 best" when they have never been designed as such. The WBB access ratio is actually different than the MBB access ratio. All based on access.

[fantastic50]

Thanks, Greg and Dave.  This has been a fun few weeks (albeit a side pursuit on which I have spent too much time!)

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Thanks, Greg and Dave.  This has been a fun few weeks (albeit a side pursuit on which I have spent too much time!)

Ha... side pursuit? Tell me about it! LOL

[AppletonRocks]

May as well put all the names in a hat and pick them at random.

If you want another way to measure where teams are at, have a midseason invitational 2 game weekend regional non-conference tourney just so can get those deserving teams the exposure they seek.  Rotate the hosting. Let the host team keep the gate. And the games count for the year-end tourney, consider double counting for purposes of all the math used to seed the tourney. If you draw a weak team you get 2 wins, but weak SOS.  If you lose to a great team, you get higher SOS but 2 losses. Lose twice to weak teams and its lethal to your chances. Big facilities like Oshkosh and IWU could host 8 teams.

D3 Hoops could cover these tourneys and rate people and cause all kinds of controversy at midseason and at the end of the year, that would be fun. All star broadcasters could be selected to cover these venues. I suspect some towns would roll out the red carpet to get the hotel take.     

Back to real life......no one who gets anywhere near Salem is getting there with luck...they will be good.  And I guess, by virtue of performance, deserving.

[AndOne]

May as well put all the names in a hat and pick them at random.

If you want another way to measure where teams are at, have a midseason invitational 2 game weekend regional non-conference tourney just so can get those deserving teams the exposure they seek.  Rotate the hosting. Let the host team keep the gate. And the games count for the year-end tourney, consider double counting for purposes of all the math used to seed the tourney. If you draw a weak team you get 2 wins, but weak SOS.  If you lose to a great team, you get higher SOS but 2 losses. Lose twice to weak teams and its lethal to your chances. Big facilities like Oshkosh and IWU could host 8 teams.

D3 Hoops could cover these tourneys and rate people and cause all kinds of controversy at midseason and at the end of the year, that would be fun. All star broadcasters could be selected to cover these venues. I suspect some towns would roll out the red carpet to get the hotel take.     

Back to real life......no one who gets anywhere near Salem is getting there with luck...they will be good.  And I guess, by virtue of performance, deserving.

Oh, they'll be deserving all right, even if they did have a little luck in getting there which Final Four teams often do.
We've all heard the theorem that you make your own luck. But however often that is true, there still are times when the opposition provides you with some form of luck that you didn't do anything to create. Thus we have the term "unforced error."

[kiko]

May as well put all the names in a hat and pick them at random.

If you want another way to measure where teams are at, have a midseason invitational 2 game weekend regional non-conference tourney just so can get those deserving teams the exposure they seek.  Rotate the hosting. Let the host team keep the gate. And the games count for the year-end tourney, consider double counting for purposes of all the math used to seed the tourney. If you draw a weak team you get 2 wins, but weak SOS.  If you lose to a great team, you get higher SOS but 2 losses. Lose twice to weak teams and its lethal to your chances. Big facilities like Oshkosh and IWU could host 8 teams.

D3 Hoops could cover these tourneys and rate people and cause all kinds of controversy at midseason and at the end of the year, that would be fun. All star broadcasters could be selected to cover these venues. I suspect some towns would roll out the red carpet to get the hotel take.     

Back to real life......no one who gets anywhere near Salem is getting there with luck...they will be good.  And I guess, by virtue of performance, deserving.

Oh, they'll be deserving all right, even if they did have a little luck in getting there which Final Four teams often do.
We've all heard the theorem that you make your own luck. But however often that is true, there still are times when the opposition provides you with some form of luck that you didn't do anything to create. Thus we have the term "unforced error."

Why are you feeding the trolls?

[Gregory Sager]

Oh, they'll be deserving all right, even if they did have a little luck in getting there which Final Four teams often do.
We've all heard the theorem that you make your own luck. But however often that is true, there still are times when the opposition provides you with some form of luck that you didn't do anything to create. Thus we have the term "unforced error."

[4samuy]

Congrats to Augie on their bid.  I hope AC and NCC make some noise in the tournament, making the CCIW proud. 

Yes!  This will be a great experience for both teams, who both will be losing a key player next year but will also be bringing most of their squads back, along with probably a couple of key guys who were unable to finish the season this year. Good luck to both.

[markerickson]

After North Park lost in its third contest against Augie, I knew my alma mater would not be selected for the tourney.  I posted that only one CCIW team would make the national tourney.  To my surprise, Augie made it.  Do we have a consensus here, excluding Augie fans, that AC did not deserve to advance?

Someone posted that Coach C was part of the selection committee.  Anyone, e.g., Joe Hakes, know if he is barred from advocating on behalf of his employer in those discussions?

North Park had three victories against tourney qualifiers.  I wonder if any other team can make that boast.

[AppletonRocks]

North Park had three victories against tourney qualifiers.  I wonder if any other team can make that boast.

Wisconsin Oshkosh defeated Wisconsin-River Falls once and Wisconsin-Whitewater twice.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

North Park had three victories against tourney qualifiers.  I wonder if any other team can make that boast.

Wisconsin Oshkosh defeated Wisconsin-River Falls once and Wisconsin-Whitewater twice.

Middlebury has a pretty good record against qualifiers...

[Mr. Ypsi]

After North Park lost in its third contest against Augie, I knew my alma mater would not be selected for the tourney.  I posted that only one CCIW team would make the national tourney.  To my surprise, Augie made it.  Do we have a consensus here, excluding Augie fans, that AC did not deserve to advance?

Someone posted that Coach C was part of the selection committee.  Anyone, e.g., Joe Hakes, know if he is barred from advocating on behalf of his employer in those discussions?

North Park had three victories against tourney qualifiers.  I wonder if any other team can make that boast.

I think Augie was a good pick.  I also think IWU got screwed (better criteria than the last Pool C selections).

Coach Giovanine was on the regional committee; he is absented during discussion of Augie (AND other CCIW teams?)

I suspect there are dozens of teams with 3+ wins against tourney teams