MBB: Michigan Intercollegiate Athletic Association

[Flying Dutch Fan]

Both teams have games remaining that would factor into any tie-breaking scenarios.  Long way to go, even after Saturday.

Obviously if Alma wins, they would have effectively a 3 game lead on Hope for hosting the semi-finals because they would own the head-to-head tiebreaker.

I realize there is a lot of season left and there are many many things that would make this moot. I'm simply wondering what the tie breakers are if head to head is a tie... Same could be asked about the 4th place teams...

Tiebreakers for seeding have historically been:

1. Head-to-head
2. Results vs. the #1 seed.
3. Results vs. the #2 seed.
... etc.
10. Coin Flip

Tiebreaker for the 4th seed (i.e. getting into the tournament) is said to be:

1. Head-to-head
2. Play-in game

We've never had a play-in game in MBB since they moved to the 4-team format, but the league had said they don't want secondary tiebreakers to decide who does and doesn't make the field. Record and head-to-head only.

Head-to-head is replaced with results versus tied teams if it's a 3 or 4-way situation.

So, in the Hope/Alma situation, if they both finish 13-1 and split with each other, I think home court will come down to a coin flip.

Heard some discussion after the season last year that non-conf record was going to be included prior to the coin flip.  I cannot find anything on MIAA.org that has what the definition of the tie-breakers to either confirm or deny. 

[HupHolland]

I have received this from an AD regarding tie breakers

"In cases where two or more teams conclude MIAA play with identical league records, the ties would
be broken using the following criteria:
a.Head to Head
b.Combined record vs. the teams ahead of the tied teams in the standings.
c.Record against 1st place team, then 2nd place team, etc....all the way through the standings.
d.Total conference road wins
e.Individual road records against conference schools, starting with the 1st place team, then 2nd place
team, etc...all the way through the standings.
f.Record in second half of conference season (last 7 games).
g.In-Region win total.
h.Coin Flip.
In the case of a tie involving multiple teams, the same tie breaking criteria as above would be used
until one team can be placed in position. The remaining tied teams would then
use the above criteria
to establish the next position until no teams remain tied. In an unbreakable tie, the position will be
determined by a coin flip conducted by the Commissioner. (5/12)
3.Once teams have been put in positions 1-8, seeds will be established"

So it looks like if Hope wins, and both Alma and Hope then win out, Hope would be the 1-seed (see F)

[KnightSlappy]

I cannot find anything on MIAA.org

This is my perpetual state of being.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

I cannot find anything on MIAA.org

This is my perpetual state of being.

Amen to that and +k

[sac]

I have received this from an AD regarding tie breakers

"In cases where two or more teams conclude MIAA play with identical league records, the ties would
be broken using the following criteria:
a.Head to Head
b.Combined record vs. the teams ahead of the tied teams in the standings.
c.Record against 1st place team, then 2nd place team, etc....all the way through the standings.
d.Total conference road wins
e.Individual road records against conference schools, starting with the 1st place team, then 2nd place
team, etc...all the way through the standings.
f.Record in second half of conference season (last 7 games).
g.In-Region win total.
h.Coin Flip.
In the case of a tie involving multiple teams, the same tie breaking criteria as above would be used
until one team can be placed in position. The remaining tied teams would then
use the above criteria
to establish the next position until no teams remain tied. In an unbreakable tie, the position will be
determined by a coin flip conducted by the Commissioner. (5/12)
3.Once teams have been put in positions 1-8, seeds will be established"

So it looks like if Hope wins, and both Alma and Hope then win out, Hope would be the 1-seed (see F)

I believe this is new, and the men have adopted the women's tie-breakers that make a coin flip virtually impossible to reach.

[KnightSlappy]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

[sac]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

It does give positive incentive to schedule not just in-region games but in-region games you can win.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

[oldknight]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

My two cents:

Tend to agree with KS on this. Once you get past tie breaker f, you're getting too far away from a fair comparison that makes a tie breaker between teams meaningful. For teams that finish in a conference tie, looking at in-region win totals is always going to be pretty much looking at apples and oranges. Might as well count the total number of steady girl friends being dated by each team's players. Whether using most or fewest, makes no difference.

[HOPEful]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

It doesn't happen often, but I agree with knighslappy on this one. I think teams should be rewarded for playing tougher competition, not punished. I don't think a team should ever be rewarded for choosing to play a non conference schedule full of D'Youvilles over top NCAC or OAC teams.

[KnightSlappy]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

We used to have the situation where Wheaton was in-region for Hope but not for Calvin. It's possible, under a situation like that, where two teams could play the exact same schedule but be credited differently because of regional definition. It also gives teams an (admittedly very small) incentive to schedule weaker in-region opponents when the league should actually be working to maintain a high level of schedule difficulty.

I would favor in-league point differential, in-league road point differential, in-league total points for, in-league away points for as better tiebreakers.

If we MUST go out of conference to continue to settle this, I'd like to see maybe out-of-conference D3 common opponents, out-of-conference non-D3 opponents, then latest regional ranking position.

Then coin flip.

Then in-region win total.

[Flying Dutch Fan]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

We used to have the situation where Wheaton was in-region for Hope but not for Calvin. It's possible, under a situation like that, where two teams could play the exact same schedule but be credited differently because of regional definition. It also gives teams an (admittedly very small) incentive to schedule weaker in-region opponents when the league should actually be working to maintain a high level of schedule difficulty.

I would favor in-league point differential, in-league road point differential, in-league total points for, in-league away points for as better tiebreakers.

If we MUST go out of conference to continue to settle this, I'd like to see maybe out-of-conference D3 common opponents, out-of-conference non-D3 opponents, then latest regional ranking position.

Then coin flip.

Then in-region win total.

The Wheaton example is an issue - but that has been corrected with the change to in-region definitions.  Seriously - you would favor any point differential metrics?  Those just fly in the face of sportsmanship IMHO - I'd prefer a coin flip to that.

[Mr. Ypsi]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

We used to have the situation where Wheaton was in-region for Hope but not for Calvin. It's possible, under a situation like that, where two teams could play the exact same schedule but be credited differently because of regional definition. It also gives teams an (admittedly very small) incentive to schedule weaker in-region opponents when the league should actually be working to maintain a high level of schedule difficulty.

I would favor in-league point differential, in-league road point differential, in-league total points for, in-league away points for as better tiebreakers.

If we MUST go out of conference to continue to settle this, I'd like to see maybe out-of-conference D3 common opponents, out-of-conference non-D3 opponents, then latest regional ranking position.

Then coin flip.

Then in-region win total.

Seriously - you would favor any point differential metrics?  Those just fly in the face of sportsmanship IMHO - I'd prefer a coin flip to that.

There's a simple solution to the sportsmanship, 'running up the score' issue - cap the differential for any game at, say, 15 points.

[KnightSlappy]

I'm probably in the minority here, but a coin flip is a much better tie breaker than "in-region win total".

Be interested to hear your thinking on that. 

In my book anything that is not related to playing basketball and winning is a bad way to choose.  As sac points out it may favor someone who played a weaker schedule - but everyone plays their games with the exact same goal - win the game.  Heck I'd favor rock-paper-scissors-lizard-Spock to a coin flip because it's at least competition and not pure chance.

We used to have the situation where Wheaton was in-region for Hope but not for Calvin. It's possible, under a situation like that, where two teams could play the exact same schedule but be credited differently because of regional definition. It also gives teams an (admittedly very small) incentive to schedule weaker in-region opponents when the league should actually be working to maintain a high level of schedule difficulty.

I would favor in-league point differential, in-league road point differential, in-league total points for, in-league away points for as better tiebreakers.

If we MUST go out of conference to continue to settle this, I'd like to see maybe out-of-conference D3 common opponents, out-of-conference non-D3 opponents, then latest regional ranking position.

Then coin flip.

Then in-region win total.

Seriously - you would favor any point differential metrics?  Those just fly in the face of sportsmanship IMHO - I'd prefer a coin flip to that.

I mean, I'd actually prefer efficiency differential metrics, but yeah. It has to do with in-league, on-court performance. Teams that win by an average of 13 points are typically better than teams who win by an average of 5 points.

I don't think running up the score is really an issue. An extra 10 points in any one game would only move the needle ~0.7 points in terms of a per-game average. We already have games that can end in 30-40 point victories (though few). I doubt many will suddenly become 60 points with starters playing 38 minutes.

But I'm actually fine with a coach running up the score if he/she chooses. If they want to risk extra injury and fatigue while denying younger players a chance to get some actual varsity experience, that's their own (bad) decision. But I doubt many of the MIAA coaches would start to do that.

[realist]

At the end of the 2012-2013 season the Hope and Calvin women's teams ended up tied.  A coin toss was used to determine the # 1 seed, and Calvin won the coin toss.
Go back to page 251 on the MIAA page for women's basketball. 
Apparently Hope lost seeding to Calvin on a couple of occasions by coin toss, and the tie breaker has been changed.

The following is a quote from Sac on pg 251:  "Women's seeds

1 or 2  Calvin/Hope    .......Calvin win, Hope loss Calvin is #1 seed, Hope #2 seed
                                  .......Hope win, Calvin loss = coin flip to determine seed"

FWIW  Calvin won the coin toss for home court, but lost the game.