2023-24 Wake Forest Basketball Season - 21-14 (11-9) - KP#29 / NET#43

[KennyRogersRoast]

I believe that the "last 4 in" go to Dayton regardless. So if we're on the bubble and barely sneak in (on the back of metrics boosting us) we'd still go to Dayton. Otherwise though I agree

That sucks. So they know the last 4 in before they seed? Obviously I have forgotten some of the step by step details as it was not really of interest last season.

If you offered a guarantee of Dayton right now I would say no. I would say it politely though in case I needed to crawl back to you Saturday evening.

 

[Deacfreak07]

This is all setting up for Wake to make the tournament, be everybody's favorite pick for an upset (based on seeds), and then lose in the first round and have everyone hate Wake

It's refreshing when things are put back where they belong. Long road to get back to first round bracket buster.

 

[DeacDaddy]

I have Wake safely in my brackets. Currently an 8 seed. I don't know what some of these amateurs are doing.

Which #1 seed do you have us taking out in the round of 32? I’m guessing Purdue.

 

[daaberry]

DraftKings has "Wake Forest to Make the 2024 NCAA Tournament" line set at:

Yes -200
No +155

This is right at 66.67% or so for Yes to hit. Not bad at all

That is nice to see. Would be a much better bet to just take Wake to win tomorrow as that will be around even money. Those odds to dance will shift tremendously based off tomorrow's result.

 

[daaberry]

That sucks. So they know the last 4 in before they seed? Obviously I have forgotten some of the step by step details as it was not really of interest last season.

If you offered a guarantee of Dayton right now I would say no. I would say it politely though in case I needed to crawl back to you Saturday evening.

They reveal the "S-Curve" which lists the teams in order. That is how they are able to say which team was the last one in, etc.

 

[thatguy2016]

<quietly>

up to #20 in KP today

 

[IAppreciateIt]

Yeah I mean it's almost certain that would be the case barring a 6 seed being in a similar metrics v. resume standpoint. To state the obvious: Wake would be favored on a neutral court against everybody in the country today except the top 19-20 teams or so.

Which is why this is all so stupid.

you are damn right PAWWWWWL, them mountain teams ain't played nobody. we all know the dawgs woulda rolled michigan or them washington hippies in the football playoff if they hadn't got screwed out of the chance by the woke committee, they better not make the same mistake again in hoopsball !

 

[Wakeforest22890]

That is nice to see. Would be a much better bet to just take Wake to win tomorrow as that will be around even money. Those odds to dance will shift tremendously based off tomorrow's result.

Yeah I was thinking about this angle as well.

 

[IAppreciateIt]

Agreed. Don't they take this into consideration with seeding if a player is injured or ineligible? We definitely beat lsu and uga and probably Utah with him and that probably puts us at a 6 or 7 seed or better and safely in.

Sent from my SM-G998U using Tapatalk

they are supposed to, but i think the issue is if you just look at W-L, our resume doesn't look that much better with reid as it did without him, which is why i theorize that one marquee win could make a huge difference for our perception.

if we finish strong, then i think the reid narrative becomes more legit and i really think we have a legit chance of ending up with a pretty high seed (5-7)

 

[Deaconblue]

they are supposed to, but i think the issue is if you just look at W-L, our resume doesn't look that much better with reid as it did without him, which is why i theorize that one marquee win could make a huge difference for our perception.

if we finish strong, then i think the reid narrative becomes more legit and i really think we have a legit chance of ending up with a pretty high seed (5-7)

If Wake hits that 5-7 range, I could see a first game against a play-in winning 11 seed.

 

[macktheknife]

I just don't see how we wouldn't be a compelling story for March Madness that the TV powers would love. Former Tobacco Road great, with basketball alumni royalty like Timmy D, CP3, Muggsy, Chill, back from the dead after a decade+ in the wilderness. Steve Forbes, the quirky bald portal king who himself keeps bringing players back from the dead. Small school that plays with the big boys. etc etc etc

Come on people the scripts write themselves let us into the Dance

Yet again. Our commissioner should preach it. Good post.

Sent from my SM-S911U using Tapatalk

 

[KennyRogersRoast]

They reveal the "S-Curve" which lists the teams in order. That is how they are able to say which team was the last one in, etc.

Without the rule numbers mentioned though the last 4 teams to make the field would not necessarily be the lowest 4 at large seeds/Dayton teams.

@Wakeforest22890 I am not sure that rule is still the same. The principles and procedures from a few years ago says the “last four at-large teams selected to the field” will be seeded 65-68. The principles and procedures published last year says the “last four at-large teams on the overall seed list” will be seeded 65-68.

I read that as meaning the last 4 teams to make the field do not have to be in Dayton.

 

[DCDeac]

they are supposed to, but i think the issue is if you just look at W-L, our resume doesn't look that much better with reid as it did without him, which is why i theorize that one marquee win could make a huge difference for our perception

I mean, in the Wake/Pitt game the announcers again said that the NET caps the winning margin at 10 points which was a big reason why Wake couldn't move up, even by throttling Pitt.

A lot of "perception" out there is from lazy faux-pundits who just say wrong shit all the time. Plenty of folks will say we're in if we beat Duke which isn't necessarily true, or they'll say we're out if we lose which also isn't necessarily true. Just like the LaRavia/Alondes team was "a lock" until they weren't.

 

[Wakeforest22890]

Without the rule numbers mentioned though the last 4 teams to make the field would not necessarily be the lowest 4 at large seeds/Dayton teams.

@Wakeforest22890 I am not sure that rule is still the same. The principles and procedures from a few years ago says the “last four at-large teams selected to the field” will be seeded 65-68. The principles and procedures published last year says the “last four at-large teams on the overall seed list” will be seeded 65-68.

I read that as meaning the last 4 teams to make the field do not have to be in Dayton.

Hmm that makes sense. But it also undermines the "seeding is done differently than selection" line of logic

 

[Deaconrob1]

My issue with quads is the hypocrisy. All these Big 12, Big 10 and SEC schools rack up Q1's at home because of the sheer volume of them. No wonder they all have 4-5 Q1's, half of them are at freaking home. Yet somehow its only a problem when ACC schools get big wins at their place.

 

[deacon14]

Torvik currently has Wake at 86.7% odds of getting a bid if they win tomorrow, and 57.2% if they lose.

Which feels right to me, with a win tomorrow I think Wake is squarely in the field, and with a loss they are squarely on the bubble and in the hands of the committee.

 

[deacon14]

In other ACC bubble projections:

VT vs Pitt is basically an elimination game, the loser will drop below 10% bid odds on Torvik.
UVA vs UNC puts UVA in basically the same position that Wake is in. A win and they are 83% bid odds, a loss has them at 54%.
Clemson vs FSU doesn't matter all that much. Clemson is 95% bid odds regardless and FSU is out of it

It's pretty cool that 6 of the 7 ACC teams reasonably fighting for a bid are playing each other this weekend.

 

[KidA23]

My issue with the quads is it seems like the emphasis on Q1 wins is resulting in some double-counting. I’m a lawyer so math ain’t my strong suit, but it seems if our overall NET is so high, it shouldn’t be a sub-component of the NET calculation (Q1 wins) that then gets held against us. It’s your effing formula and it shows we’re good.

 

[Deaconrob1]

My issue with the quads is it seems like the emphasis on Q1 wins is resulting in some double-counting. I’m a lawyer so math ain’t my strong suit, but it seems if our overall NET is so high, it shouldn’t be a sub-component of the NET calculation (Q1 wins) that then gets held against us. It’s your effing formula and it shows we’re good.

Yeah if we're a Q1 win for almost everyone we play, why is that not held in higher regard. Makes no sense.

 

[deaconfan152]

Selling 4 tickets and 1 Allegacy parking pass for Duke tomorrow. Tickets are lower level mid court if anyone here is interested. Will deliver the tickets and pass in person. Send me your best offer at cwmdeacon@yahoo.com or 919 (six-three-zero) 8103