Great Lakes Region

[ziggy]

Here are the win percentages the seven leading 'C' candidates can finish with
1st number is loss in round 1
2nd number is win in round 1, loss in round 2
3rd number is win in rounds 1 & 2, loss in Championship game

Capital  .833, .840, .846
Calvin  .800, .813, .824
John Carroll  .818, .826, .833
Wooster  .783, .792, .800
Carnegie Mellon  .737
Hope  .688, .706, .722
Ohio Wesleyan  .696, .708, .720

........also the earlier the loss occurs, the bigger the hit to OWP and OOWP to take into consideration.

I actually like Calvin's and Wooster win %, it their OWP and OOWP numbers that could be a roadblock to other teams getting on the C table if one of those two gets on the table first.  Nationally, Calvin and Wooster OWP and OOWP don't stack up well.  I believe either would be a late C bid.

I realize there are other considerations, but win%, and OWP/OOWP seem to be the biggies.

CMU has wins against regionally ranked opponents in their favor with early season wins against John Carroll and Wooster.  I think that is the only thing that has kept them afloat over the last two weeks.  They still have a tough road game at Rochester; should be interesting.

[Hugenerd]

There is no way Wooster is ranked ahead of CMU if it comes down to a Pool C if they beat Rochester.  Maybe if CMU loses to Rochester they flip, but just because Wooster has a couple more regional wins isnt going to negate the head-to-head result and the OWP numbers (if Wooster doesnt win their tourney and picks up a 5th region loss).

Who has Wooster beaten of significance recently?  I know they have won 11 of 12 and 14 of 16, but all those wins are against ~0.500 or worse teams (except for Hiram).

Meanwhile, CMU has 6 losses (5 in region)  2 of those to #2 WashU, 2 more to Brandeis (who have a winning percentage of 0.667 but have one of the highest OWPs in the country) and their only out of region loss is to 23-2 Richard Stockton.

CMU has one bad loss against Case, but Wooster has lost to W&J, Wabash, and also lost the head to head to CMU. 

If CMU wins and Wooster doesnt win their tourney, I dont think there is any way a 15-5 CMU team, with the head to head, will be ranked behind a 20-5 Wooster team (especially when you consider the 0.509 and 0.503 OWP and OOWP numbers for Wooster, compared to 0.557 and 0.531 for CMU).

Similarly, Calvin has sub 0.500 OWP and OOWP, meaning they are beating losing teams.  The committee seems intelligent enough not to look purely at winning percentage (Calvin hasnt been ranked ahead of CMU yet). 

If Capital or John Carroll win the OAC tourney, I think CMU will be first or second under consideration for Pool C from the GL (I think they could still be ranked ahead of John Carroll if JCU doesnt win their tourney and CMU beats Rochester, because CMU would have the head to head win and only a one loss difference between the two teams, CMU also has considerably better OWP and OOWP numbers). 

The Rochester game will be huge for CMU to not pick up a 6th loss, but with their quality in-region wins and nearly all of their losses being to quality opponents, I think they are in much better shape than you guys are giving them credit for by just looking at their in-region winning percentage.  If that was all the committee looked at, CMU would have been ranked below Calvin and Wooster for some time now, but they obviously havent.  I also dont think they will be penalized too much for a loss on the road to WashU this week, I guess we will see when the rankings come out on Wednesday.

[sac]

There is no way Wooster is ranked ahead of CMU if it comes down to a Pool C if they beat Rochester.  Maybe if CMU loses to Rochester they flip, but just because Wooster has a couple more regional wins isnt going to negate the head-to-head result and the OWP numbers (if Wooster doesnt win their tourney and picks up a 5th region loss).

Who has Wooster beaten of significance recently?  I know they have won 11 of 12 and 14 of 16, but all those wins are against ~0.500 or worse teams (except for Hiram).

Meanwhile, CMU has 6 losses (5 in region)  2 of those to #2 WashU, 2 more to Brandeis (who have a winning percentage of 0.667 but have one of the highest OWPs in the country) and their only out of region loss is to 23-2 Richard Stockton.

CMU has one bad loss against Case, but Wooster has lost to W&J, Wabash, and also lost the head to head to CMU. 

If CMU wins and Wooster doesnt win their tourney, I dont think there is any way a 15-5 CMU team, with the head to head, will be ranked behind a 20-5 Wooster team (especially when you consider the 0.509 and 0.503 OWP and OOWP numbers for Wooster, compared to 0.557 and 0.531 for CMU).

Similarly, Calvin has sub 0.500 OWP and OOWP, meaning they are beating losing teams.  The committee seems intelligent enough not to look purely at winning percentage (Calvin hasnt been ranked ahead of CMU yet). 

If Capital or John Carroll win the OAC tourney, I think CMU will be first or second under consideration for Pool C from the GL (I think they could still be ranked ahead of John Carroll if JCU doesnt win their tourney and CMU beats Rochester, because CMU would have the head to head win and only a one loss difference between the two teams, CMU also has considerably better OWP and OOWP numbers). 

The Rochester game will be huge for CMU to not pick up a 6th loss, but with their quality in-region wins and nearly all of their losses being to quality opponents, I think they are in much better shape than you guys are giving them credit for by just looking at their in-region winning percentage.  If that was all the committee looked at, CMU would have been ranked below Calvin and Wooster for some time now, but they obviously havent.  I also dont think they will be penalized too much for a loss on the road to WashU this week, I guess we will see when the rankings come out on Wednesday.

A.  I realize there is more than just winning % to consider

B.  I've kept track of winning % all season, just trying to stay consistent

C.  I forgot CMU still had a reg season game with Rochester

D.  I don't believe CMU is in a good position in the Pool C race, nor do I believe Calvin or Wooster are which have been outlined at least once..

[Hugenerd]

Thats fair.

I was just trying to bring another perspective to a conversation dominated by OAC and NCAC supporters.

I still think they have a good chance (>50%) if they beat Rochester and are ranked #1 GL after Pool As are taken off the board (if Capital wins their tourney).  What might hurt them is if they and Brandeis are on the board at the same time, because it would be difficult to give CMU a nod over Brandeis if they were being compared to eachother, so I could see them both being left out.

If you compare CMU to a team like Amherst (that is currently #10 on pabeggs list), you cant really see much of a difference.  Amherst is 17-5, CMU 14-5 (in region, Amherst 20-5 overall and CMU 19-5).   CMU also has a higher OWP .557 to Amherst's 0.531.  If Amherst doesnt win their tourney, I think CMU can jump over a lot of the teams ahead of them that are considered to be in the 7-14 Pool C picks range, because CMU doesnt have to get another loss because they arent in a tourney (they still could, but it isnt a given like other leagues where it is Pool A or another loss).  Here are a list of teams that I think CMU could jump over currently ranked ahead of them by pabegg (if they beat Rochester): Centre (currently 4 region losses), Elmhurst (6 region losses), Bridgewater State (4 region losses, or Salem State 5 region losses), Amherst (5 region losses), St. Josephs (3 region losses), Montclair State (5 region losses), William Patterson (6 region losses), and McDaniel (6 region losses).

CMU's OWP compared to those teams currently ahead of them (all those teams could also pick up one more loss): 0.557 and 0.531

Centre: .555 .502
Elmhurst: .586 .555
Bridgewater: .518 .505
Amherst: .531 .545
St. Joseph's:  .493 .503
Montclair:  .540 .497
William Patterson:  .515 .504
McDaniel: .547 .532

So as you can see, in addition to the region losses, there is no much that differentiates all these teams.  So CMU could easily jump up to around 7 on the Pool C list if they beat Rochester and all those teams's lose their tourney and pick up another loss.

[ScotsFan]

I was just trying to bring another perspective to a conversation dominated by OAC and NCAC supporters.

And where are these OAC and NCAC supporters that are supposedly dominating the conversation on this board?  You have to go back 5 pages just to find a poster from the NCAC.  And outside of a couple of posts from Pat Coleman, the only other posters in this board are MIAA supporters!   

[Hugenerd]

My fault for leaving out the MIAA, maybe I should have said a CMU perspective.

[sac]

Allegheny 78 Ohio Wesleyan 75 OT

OWU's worst nitemare occurs, they finish with an in-region record of 16-7 and a win % of .696.  I don't believe that will good enough to draw a Pool C bid.

The NCAC pulled an OAC this year with 3 lower seeds all winning,

#6 Wabash v #7 Allegheny

#5 Kenyon v #1 Wooster

I'm not sure OWU had much a chance at a C unless they made the NCAC final, even then I think it was slim.  I'm not sure this really helps anyone except Wooster who maybe now has an "easier" road to the A bid.   Maybe Hope who it seems would almost be assured of being ranked ahead of OWU in the invisible final poll and hence would get on the C table before OWU.  Not sure thats accurate either.

But it now brings up the prospect of 3 teams who had no shot at an at-large bid now firmly in the mix.   

.......and we're just getting started.

[Hugenerd]

I, for one, will be pulling for Wooster, both for sentimental reasons and Pool C ramifications.

[sac]

I, for one, will be pulling for Wooster, both for sentimental reasons and Pool C ramifications.

........and I guess if Carnegie beats Rochester, OWU's loss and a Wooster win would certainly bolster CMU's claim for a 'C' bid.  The earlier you're on the table the better.

[Hugenerd]

I, for one, will be pulling for Wooster, both for sentimental reasons and Pool C ramifications.

........and I guess if Carnegie beats Rochester, OWU's loss and a Wooster win would certainly bolster CMU's claim for a 'C' bid.  The earlier you're on the table the better.

Agreed. Also, if JCU gets upset in their tourney and Capital wins the OAC A bid, I think CMU has a chance of leapfrogging JCU as well, because of the head-to-head result (JCU would have 4 losses to CMU's 5).  But most importantly, CMU has to take care of their own business by beating a tough Rochester team on the road.  Rochester looked like they had packed it in for the season, but the win on the road versus WashU has me pretty worried.  In all likelihood, Rochester doesnt have much of a shot at a Pool C with 8 regional losses, but they could really hurt CMU's chances at one this weekend.  Should be a fun week of basketball.

[Hugenerd]

New regional rankings out:

http://www.ncaa.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/ncaa/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/DIIIMBK22509Regional

Top 6 teams look unchanged in the GL, only difference is that JCU takes over the top spot form Capital (#1 and #2 switch).

[sac]

New regional rankings out:

http://www.ncaa.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/ncaa/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/DIIIMBK22509Regional

Top 6 teams look unchanged in the GL, only difference is that JCU takes over the top spot form Capital (#1 and #2 switch).

It seems completely meaningless to rank OWU #6 since they lost last night and probably won't be ranked again.    I know they aren't supposed to look at last night results etc, etc.


By the way, here's an odd twist.  Calvin's Pool C credentials would be 'helped' if Hope won the MIAA Tournament either by Calvin losing to Hope, or earlier.  Hope it would seem would earn the #6 ranking in the region..........one of the criteria is wins vs ranked teams and just like that Calvin picks up 2 key wins vs a ranked team.

Without the wins vs a ranked team, and a low OWP/OOWP the bubble would be thin.  Best to just win the A me thinks.

[SKOT]

New regional rankings out:

http://www.ncaa.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/ncaa/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/DIIIMBK22509Regional

Top 6 teams look unchanged in the GL, only difference is that JCU takes over the top spot form Capital (#1 and #2 switch).

Great Lakes Region
1. John Carroll 20-4 18-3
2. Capital 22-3 20-3
3. Carnegie Mellon 18-6 14-5
5. Wooster 19-6 18-4
4. Calvin 17-7 12-2
6. Ohio Wesleyan 17-7 16-6

My brain has been working hard lately... Who is supposed to be 4 and who is 5?  I R confused!

[Hugenerd]

Yeah, I didnt notice that at first glance.  Let's just hope that Wooster wins the A bid so that it doesnt matter.  I would venture to say that Wooster is probably the 4, but I guess there will be some confusion until they correct that mistake.

[sac]

New regional rankings out:

http://www.ncaa.com/auto_pdf/p_hotos/s_chools/ncaa/sports/m-baskbl/auto_pdf/DIIIMBK22509Regional

Top 6 teams look unchanged in the GL, only difference is that JCU takes over the top spot form Capital (#1 and #2 switch).

Great Lakes Region
1. John Carroll 20-4 18-3
2. Capital 22-3 20-3
3. Carnegie Mellon 18-6 14-5
5. Wooster 19-6 18-4
4. Calvin 17-7 12-2
6. Ohio Wesleyan 17-7 16-6

My brain has been working hard lately... Who is supposed to be 4 and who is 5?  I R confused!

Well I supposes it depends on who you ask.  I have it on good authority that the  Great Lakes Region reps submitted the rankings with Calvin #4, Wooster #5, there was also a tie at #6. 

The National Committee changed the rankings (which they can do)

To me its clear why, and no one should be happy about it.  Fortunately it will all be cleared up with the invisible rankings next week.