Here’s what’s coming…

In an attempt to limit the number of emails I get tomorrow night, I figured I’d let you know what to expect after the brackets tomorrow:

  1. I will furiously fill out the rest of the monster Excel sheet that everyone clamors for. It will get posted to the “Tips+” section, which is only accessible to Insiders. I usually post an early version, then a complete version. A few stats (RPI, SOS and USBWA All-American picks off the top of my head) are slow to update Sunday, and come in Monday. No sense waiting for them to deliver you the goods.
  2. Then I go into bracket model crunching. This year, you’ll be getting seven models. I was only going to do five because of my commitments to CBSSports.com this year—that’s why the price is 10 bucks this year. But it creeped up to seven. You won’t get my gut, upset/toss-up, combined PASE, seed matchups, contrarian of keeper brackets. I eliminated these either because they were hunches (gut, contrarian and keeper), didn’t perform all that well (combined PASE), or took too much time to generate (upset/toss and seed matchup). Here’s what you will get:
    - Model 1: KenPom Efficiency
    - Model 2: Final Four/Champ Rules
    - Model 3: Outcome Matching
    - Model 4: Efficiency and Coaching
    - Model 5: Pulse Check Stats
    - Model 6: Factor PASE
    - Model 7: Higher-seed Baseline

    I hope to crank at least four of these out by 2am EST Monday morning. The rest will be furnished on Monday. Depending on how the next few days go, I may deliver a final Keeper bracket on Tuesday or Wednesday. But I don’t want to commit to it, because…

  3. After spinning out the models, I will be occupied with providing deliverables to CBS—team write-ups, bracket strategies (I just pick three from above…but they want them in article form). Then I’ve got radio interviews, podcasts with CampusInsiders (check ‘em out: www.campusinsiders.com) and a big “Bracket Lab” video program with the CBS crew—Parrish, Goodman and Palm. That takes me up to 4pm, Monday night.
  4. I’ll have a backlog of blogs to write after that. First, I’ll complete any of the outstanding models. Then I’ll probably check out the Quality Curve to see how it looks with the actual seeding baked in. That will give us a good sense of the type of tourney we’ll be looking at. (My guess: normal one seed dominance…with batsh*t craziness everywhere else.) Then I’ll do a series on how this dance compares to history.
  5. Super Insider Ryan (you listening, Tress?) had a great idea. The old site would get these huge forum threads. I figured what I’d do is throw out a topic in the blog—maybe by region (I’ll divide into eight)—and get some good conversation going.
  6. If anyone is in the Ann Arbor area on Tuesday, come join the WTKA group, John Bacon and me for our Bracket Science Night. You don’t need to be a bracketbrain to drink good beer.
  7. Collapse. (Not from the beer, though. That would be wrong.)
This entry was posted in General News. Bookmark the permalink.

49 Responses to Here’s what’s coming…

  1. Ryan Tressler says:

    Awesome stuff Pete, can’t wait to check out all the new stuff on CBS and CampusInsiders. Also, I’m sure the seed matchup will be the first model I do myself (since I find it the most interesting to do myself every year), so I can always maybe post those results in the comment section or something going by your old rules for the model (only picking the upset if it calculates to a better than 50% winning percentage and such . . . ) . . . just a thought, more for the other readers than anything (I’m sure lots of the subscribers are just like me and will probably do it themselves anyway, haha)

    • ptiernan says:

      Ryan – I wondered if anyone would take me up on filling out the old models. Of course, I’d love to see the results. I decided against that one for a couple reasons: 1) not quickly resolvable, and 2) not in the top 5 of results.

      • Ryan Tressler says:

        Haha, I will gladly run through those other models . . . and I totally understand picking the seed matchup model in order to save time (among the other reasons) . . . it does take a little while to go through, haha, but, for some reason, I love going through that one.

        • ptiernan says:

          Thanks Ryan. Let me know how it fills out.

          • Nick says:

            Hey guys – when you say “seed match-up” is that bracket filled out be going through Pete’s seed guide. I would think that has solid results, yeah?

          • ptiernan says:

            Average 56th percentile of ESPN Tourney Challenge in last seven years. Not as good as others. Range of better ones, off the top of my head, is 61 to 99 (99 is one year of “outcome matching”).

          • Ryan Tressler says:

            yea, the seed match-up has not done particular well in recent years, haha . . . I just find it extremely interesting and it is a nice tool to identify potential killers and victims to research more, probably wouldn’t go with it as a bracket too many times unless you REALLY like what it spits out, haha.

    • paul says:

      anyone working on the final four/champs teams. i was wanting to compare work with someone. i just ran numbers for 1 seeds. looks like we are missing SOS and All American info so i’m ignoring. i also didn’t know how to do the 5th criteria. regardless. i had gonzaga failing #4 (snake bit coach) and 6 (rebound plus turnover margin) and louisville failing #6 (rebound plus turnover margin)

  2. Ryan Tressler says:

    One quick question that I forget every year dealing with the seed by seed model . . . scoring margin percentage is the scoring margin divided by points allowed, correct (so the calculation is the same as if you would be finding gross profit margin percentage)?

  3. Bamilus says:

    Thanks for your all hard work, Pete. Looking forward to that stat sheet tomorrow so I can get cranking!

  4. paul says:

    do we have a final champs list?

  5. JDubb says:

    I assume you have to be an insider in order to get access to the 7 models that will be posted over the next 24-48 hrs?

  6. Ryan Tressler says:

    Only 2:08 left until the bracket comes out!!!

  7. Ryan Tressler says:

    Is Minnesota the favorite as an 11 seed against UCLA?

  8. Ryan Tressler says:

    Virginia and Iowa are the biggest snubs, they are both top 30 teams in the KenPom ratings

  9. Nick says:

    Ryan… I hope you’re going to post the whole thing and not just the results for the models you’re doing!? :) And thanks for taking this task on.

    Pete… Is anything from the old site archived anywhere?! :)

    • ptiernan says:

      Not accessible right now. Looking for something particular?

    • Ryan Tressler says:

      I will try to post the whole bracket, plus I will try to include a write up on teams that fit the requirements within seeds for an upset (or loss), but do not meet Pete’s requirements for advancement (such as a 13 seed whom fits the profile for a upset, but does not meet Pete’s requirement of over .500 likelihood) . . . might have to send Pete the bracket through email to have him post it, cause I can’t link files in the comments section, but we will figure it out, haha . . . I’ve already started on things that are easy to figure out, I will let everyone know, haha

  10. Ryan Tressler says:

    Finished my own by the gut bracket . . . have 7 upsets and I have Louisville beating Indiana in the Championship

    • Ryan Zimmerman says:

      I got Louisville and Indiana as well. 10 upsets for me. Minnesota, South Dakota st and Montana as my big upsets…. I hated to see my team Brooklyn draw the play-in game.

      • ptiernan says:

        Ryan – South Dakota State downing Michigan? Say it ain’t so. (I am officially scared.)

      • Ryan Tressler says:

        Nice Ryan, my upsets from my gut were:
        Round 1:
        -St. Mary’s over Memphis
        -Minnesota over UCLA (not an upset to me)
        -Bucknell over Butler
        Round 2:
        -Pittsburgh over Gonzaga
        -Bucknell over Marquette
        -Creighton over Duke
        Sweet 16
        -VCU over Kansas

  11. Jared says:

    When does the giant excel sheet come out… What time tonight?

    • ptiernan says:

      First version coming within the half hour. Has everything but RPI, SOS and All-American data. NCAA/CBS doesn’t crank out RPI/SOS until morning. And US Basketball Writers Association announces their All-Americans tomorrow. I’ll update the sheet in the morning.

  12. Jared says:

    Pittsburg fits some of the categories for the 1v8 model… Does the team have to fit all of the categories for it to make sense for them to pull the upset because I really like pitt over gonzaga.

  13. Bamilus says:

    Got it. Thanks Pete!

  14. scott says:

    With so many sites to place “legal” bets on head to head bracket picks, which ones do you feel are the safest and most respected….in terms of legit payouts if you win?

  15. Mike L. says:

    Hi Pete (and everyone else),

    Since the 1-3 seed pretender/contenders blog entry was posted, I have been working on a spreadsheet for that. I’m still waiting on a lot of the final data (pts allowed, rebounds all, margins, etc) for Sunday’s games to come in (it affects Mia, Ohst, & Fla). Would it be okay to post the results in the comments section? I wasn’t sure if that was included in the Insiders package and didn’t want to give out free information to non-Insiders. I can also send you (Pete) the spreadsheet if anyone wants to check my work behind me, but I do strive for precision-accuracy.

    Also, I’m looking for possession data since some of the TO & Reb Margin data requires per possession calculations. If anyone knows where I can find it without having to do the calculations, I’d appreciate it very much.

    Mike

  16. paul says:

    anyone working on the final four/champs teams. i was wanting to compare work with someone. i just ran numbers for 1 seeds. looks like we are missing SOS and All American info so i’m ignoring. i also didn’t know how to do the 5th criteria. regardless. i had gonzaga failing #4 (snake bit coach) and 6 (rebound plus turnover margin) and louisville failing #6 (rebound plus turnover margin)

    • ptiernan says:

      Paul – Right on Gonzaga. Wrong on Louisville. TO margin is a negative…so you have to subtract it. I come up with Louisville, Kansas, Indiana and Ohio State as the only team fulfilling F4 rules.

      • paul says:

        pete, don’t mean to major in minors, but the math on louisville, reb margin + to margin equals
        3.6 + (-6.0) = -2.4
        which would put us under the 5 right?
        what am i doing wrong?

        • paul says:

          and btw, i didn’t even finish the 2 seeds they were so ugly. this must have been what you were talking about the 1′s being pretty rock solid and the 2,3,4′s being relative weak this year

          • paul says:

            the way the final four champ rules played out in the gonzaga bracket is nice with ohio st in the same bracket and ohio st meeting the criteria and zags not

          • ptiernan says:

            Agreed. I’m liking that model. Just finished. A couple surprises in the S16.

        • ptiernan says:

          -6 means they’re six bound better than opponent. so they’re total is 9.6.

          • Scott says:

            Pete- I’m confused as to how I fill in the bracket after picking the Final 4. Specifically “eliminating key underachieving outliers before their seed-expected win totals”. How do I figure that out? Do I do that for each matchup?

          • ptiernan says:

            Scott – I’ll make it easy for you. I did all the heavy-lifting already and posted the Final Four/Champ model in the Tips+ section. Look for a link called “2013 Models.” I believe the one you want is #2.

        • Frank says:

          Paul,
          Did you ever get a response on this? I got the same results as you and disqualified Louisville.

      • Mike L. says:

        Wow. Those four were my go-with-your-gut Final 4 teams. Then I slapped myself in the face with reality questioning whether or not 3 teams from the previous Final 4 could return. And I say this shedding a sarcastic tear for those cry-baby one-n-doners at UK.

        One question on Kansas. They fail one of the 1-seed pretender rules having a Pythag > 5. There’s is 8 currently.

    • Mike L. says:

      http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/polls?poll=5

      I use this. It will be up-to-date tomorrow morning. Not sure if today’s 4 games would have that big of a move. Keep an eye on Gonzaga SOS. Right now it is 77. Any lower and we could be looking at another disqualifier. Statsheet.com also has some RPI polls, especially historical RPI rankings. Hope this helps.

      Mike

      • ptiernan says:

        Thanks Mike. I’ve been consistent in using CBS data. Don’t know if it’s different. Like statsheet though.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

* Copy This Password *

* Type Or Paste Password Here *

You may use these HTML tags and attributes: <a href="" title=""> <abbr title=""> <acronym title=""> <b> <blockquote cite=""> <cite> <code> <del datetime=""> <em> <i> <q cite=""> <strike> <strong>