• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

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

buckets said:
wow - must have been really awkward this last decade filling in a team that wasn't even in the NIT!
Click to expand...
Just didn't do a bracket. I'm not interested in benefiting from Wake not winning a national championship. I'm not one of those guys who is on the Wake beat and picks against them in predictions to try to be right. Deacs by a MILLION.
 
Yeah. It’s weird but UF being ahead of us is fine for seeding.
 
bym051d said:
I have just because there have been too many opportunities where we aren't in the bracket.

But I’ve never filled one out that had UNC or Duke winning.
Click to expand...
Picked UNLV in 1991, Michigan in 1992, and Gonzaga in 2017. Sometimes I feel as if the karma gods enjoy tormenting me.
 
DeacsATS said:
Not necessarily. I'd argue it's better for us if Clemson wins and kills any hope of Pitt climbing back into the conversation... Keeps the Clemson game a certain Q1 opportunity for us and removes Pitt from competing for an ACC bye.
Click to expand...
This was my thought. I just want Pitt out of the picture.

A Clemson win keeps them closer to Q1 if its a decent margin, and we can just pass them in standings in H2H at the end of the season if we tie with a home win if we are both 13-7.

Our tiebreakers against Pitt if they go 13-7 are not as good if they go on a hot streak. We would lose tiebreaker if the common opponent is Virginia or N.C. State. Clemson would depend on our final result against them and tonight's Pitt/Clemson match up.

This is all moot if we go 14-6.
 
lazydeac said:
Hard to take this seriously when it wants us to root for Missouri to beat Florida tomorrow and that’s like the 3rd most leveraged game on this whole list. Obviously it doesn’t understand quads


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...
The idea is Florida is in a similar position to us. The orange border denotes conflicting interests.
 
spritethr said:
The idea is Florida is in a similar position to us. The orange border denotes conflicting interests.
Click to expand...
I also think that Torvik denotes quads based on his own rankings, not the NET. Florida is at 20 in his rankings, so I guess no real danger of dropping to Q2 in this hypothetical.

But in the quads that matter, we absolutely do not want Florida to lose to an awful Missouri team.
 
Torvik's site is super robust. That game is in a box because it has conflicting interests, if you hover over it the rationale is given. In this case, it states we would want Missouri to win because "Win by this team hurts T-Ranketology score, but likely hurts a rival more or eliminates a bid thief."
 
IAppreciateIt said:
Torvik's site is super robust. That game is in a box because it has conflicting interests, if you hover over it the rationale is given. In this case, it states we would want Missouri to win because "Win by this team hurts T-Ranketology score, but likely hurts a rival more or eliminates a bid thief."
Click to expand...
But Florida isn't a bid thief. They are firmly in the tournament.

And I don't think the value of jumping them in line for an 8/9 seed is as valuable as the T-Ranketology score (and of course the Q1 win)
 
WF would be benefitted if Florida won out. The committee doesn't treat all Q wins as the same. So, beating the #30 team is not as good as beating the #16 team (as it should be).
 
deacon14 said:
But Florida isn't a bid thief. They are firmly in the tournament.

And I don't think the value of jumping them in line for an 8/9 seed is as valuable as the T-Ranketology score (and of course the Q1 win)
Click to expand...

The methodology is obviously not perfect, but seems pretty sound.

That specific one does seem counter-intuitive. My hypothesis would be given where we are (high chance of making the tourney whether or not Florida is a Q1), Florida being a Q1 is more impactful for the SEC bubble teams (S.Carolina, Ole Miss, TAMU), who may play them twice, plus UVA (who beat them at a neutral site) than it is for us.

Playing around more, a loss to Mizzou would also mean Florida has a real path to bubble territory since they would then be underdogs in their next two games (@S.Carolina and Bama), before finishing on the road vs. Vandy.
 
Last edited:
deacon14 said:
I also think that Torvik denotes quads based on his own rankings, not the NET. Florida is at 20 in his rankings, so I guess no real danger of dropping to Q2 in this hypothetical.

But in the quads that matter, we absolutely do not want Florida to lose to an awful Missouri team.
Click to expand...
He uses actual NET rankings rather than his rankings. But, if you're looking at the Projections page and don't flip over to the 'if the season ended today' page, it factors in where he thinks teams will end up in NET versus just where they sit today.
 
Interesting discussion, I think Torvik has some super interesting tools and stuff, but I wish how some of it worked was a little more transparent.

Hopefully Florida wins by 30 as a 13 point favorite tonight at Missouri.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top