NCAA Points Projection: The Burpee Edition

[Wrestleknownothing]

That's right. The seeds are in.

I feel like the NCAA should have Burpee Seeds sponsoring all of these bracket reveal shows. Missed opportunity.

Oh well. Now that the seeds are out we can see how they impact potential scoring. And there are some interesting takeaways.

 

• Pretty much all of the front runners are giving up a little bit over the final rankings. The March 12 numbers below are based on the final Intermat rankings, while the March 13 numbers come from the seeds.
• Among the podium favorites only Oklahoma State, Lehigh, and Virginia Tech came out better in the seeds than in the rankings.
• Arizona State is the clear winner in the matrix process. From only 6 ranked wrestlers they have 8 entrants in the tournament. We see you Cael Valenica and Tony Negron. As the #33 and #31 seeds at their respective weights, we are not expecting much. But, hey, chip and a chair....
• Only Ohio State and West Virginia among my top 20 failed to get all of their ranked wrestlers through the gauntlet.
• The race for second tightened up a bit with the OK ST rally, but it is still NC State's to lose. And it sure looks like Iowa will have something to say about that.

 

I am atingle with anticipation.

[Wrestleknownothing]

[Wrestleknownothing]

I just noticed a problem with a join. 

It messed up my Iowa and NC State predictions. Iowa drops and NC State soars. Sorry Hawkeye Nation.

[Wrestleknownothing]

[PortaJohn]

1 minute ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

I just noticed a problem with a join. 

It messed up my Iowa and NC State predictions. Iowa drops and NC State soars. Sorry Hawkeye Nation.

No worries.  Looks fantastic to me.  Reminds me of the picture drawings I saved from my kids when they were 3 

[Wrestleknownothing]

6 minutes ago, PortaJohn said:

No worries.  Looks fantastic to me.  Reminds me of the picture drawings I saved from my kids when they were 3 

Yeah, third through eleventh is anyone's guess. I don't think I have ever seen anything like that.

[Eagle26]

18 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

That's right. The seeds are in.

I feel like the NCAA should have Burpee Seeds sponsoring all of these bracket reveal shows. Missed opportunity.

Oh well. Now that the seeds are out we can see how they impact potential scoring. And there are some interesting takeaways.

 

• Pretty much all of the front runners are giving up a little bit over the final rankings. The March 12 numbers below are based on the final Intermat rankings, while the March 13 numbers come from the seeds.
• Among the podium favorites only Oklahoma State, Lehigh, and Virginia Tech came out better in the seeds than in the rankings.
• Arizona State is the clear winner in the matrix process. From only 6 ranked wrestlers they have 8 entrants in the tournament. We see you Cael Valenica and Tony Negron. As the #33 and #31 seeds at their respective weights, we are not expecting much. But, hey, chip and a chair....
• Only Ohio State and West Virginia among my top 20 failed to get all of their ranked wrestlers through the gauntlet.
• The race for second tightened up a bit with the OK ST rally, but it is still NC State's to lose. And it sure looks like Iowa will have something to say about that.

 

I am atingle with anticipation.

Good stuff. I’ll add one of my takeaways…

Generally speaking, being in the Big Ten hurts your seeding. This is likely because they are weighing fairly heavy on conference placement and a lot of highly ranked guys don’t finish very high at Big Tens because of the depth.

[Wrestleknownothing]

6 hours ago, Eagle26 said:

Good stuff. I’ll add one of my takeaways…

Generally speaking, being in the Big Ten hurts your seeding. This is likely because they are weighing fairly heavy on conference placement and a lot of highly ranked guys don’t finish very high at Big Tens because of the depth.

Yeah, it seems like there may have been some unintended consequences here.

By bumping conference tournament placement up to 15% this year it can be the most important factor in the matrix in a lot of cases.

Head-to-head is often a push when comparing across conferences, so that 25% effectively gets thrown out. Quality wins, if I understand correctly, are often split 15%/5% for a 10% net. That would make a 3rd place finish in a 6 team conference the deciding factor over a 4th place finish in a 14 or 17 team conference.

[SocraTease]

                

                                         Pts            Max          Seed pts.     wresetlers.   pigtails       Rd 1               Rd 2.          Conso.

Team Standings
Team	Points	Maximum Potential Points	If Seeds Hold	# Wrestlers	# Pigtails	# Round 1	# Round 2	# Consi
Air Force	0	90	20.5	3	0	3	0	0
American	0	30	0	1	0	1	0	0
Appalachian State	0	153	3	5	1	4	0	0
Arizona State	0	243	52	8	1	7	0	0
Army	0	180	1.5	6	0	6	0	0
Binghamton	0	120	12.5	4	0	4	0	0
Brown	0	33	1	1	1	0	0	0
Bucknell	0	150	4.5	5	0	5	0	0
Buffalo	0	63	0.5	2	1	1	0	0
Cal Poly	0	150	9.5	5	0	5	0	0
Cal State Bakersfield	0	60	1	2	0	2	0	0
Campbell	0	180	10.5	6	0	6	0	0
Central Michigan	0	90	2	3	0	3	0	0
Chattanooga	0	60	1	2	0	2	0	0
Clarion	0	30	0	1	0	1	0	0
Colorado State	0	60	0.5	2	0	2	0	0
Columbia	0	120	8	4	0	4	0	0
Cornell	0	300	52	10	0	10	0	0
Franklin & Marshall	0	63	1.5	2	1	1	0	0
Gardner Webb	0	63	0	2	1	1	0	0
George Mason	0	90	1	3	0	3	0	0
Harvard	0	90	10	3	0	3	0	0
Hofstra	0	30	0.5	1	0	1	0	0
Illinois	0	90	13.5	3	0	3	0	0
Indiana	0	186	5.5	6	2	4	0	0
Iowa	0	270	49.5	9	0	9	0	0
Iowa State	0	270	53.5	9	0	9	0	0
Lehigh	0	243	58	8	1	7	0	0
Little Rock	0	150	10	5	0	5	0	0
Lock Haven	0	90	4	3	0	3	0	0
Long Island	0	33	1	1	1	0	0	0
Maryland	0	153	6	5	1	4	0	0
Michigan	0	270	45.5	9	0	9	0	0
Michigan State	0	153	1.5	5	1	4	0	0
Minnesota	0	300	21.5	10	0	10	0	0
Missouri	0	300	36	10	0	10	0	0
Navy	0	150	4.5	5	0	5	0	0
Nebraska	0	270	48	9	0	9	0	0
North Carolina	0	150	11.5	5	0	5	0	0
North Carolina State	0	300	82.5	10	0	10	0	0
North Dakota State	0	30	1.5	1	0	1	0	0
Northern Colorado	0	90	3	3	0	3	0	0
Northern Illinois	0	30	0	1	0	1	0	0
Northern Iowa	0	213	37.5	7	1	6	0	0
Northwestern	0	93	0	3	1	2	0	0
Ohio	0	93	8.5	3	1	2	0	0
Ohio State	0	273	36	9	1	8	0	0
Oklahoma	0	150	8	5	0	5	0	0
Oklahoma State	0	300	55	10	0	10	0	0
Oregon State	0	150	14.5	5	0	5	0	0
Penn	0	240	4	8	0	8	0	0
Penn State	0	300	131.5	10	0	10	0	0
Pittsburgh	0	210	3.5	7	0	7	0	0
Princeton	0	90	3.5	3	0	3	0	0
Purdue	0	153	14.5	5	1	4	0	0
Rider	0	150	3	5	0	5	0	0
Rutgers	0	243	20.5	8	1	7	0	0
SIUE	0	30	0.5	1	0	1	0	0
South Dakota State	0	240	34.5	8	0	8	0	0
Stanford	0	150	11.5	5	0	5	0	0
The Citadel	0	33	1	1	1	0	0	0
Utah Valley	0	30	0.5	1	0	1	0	0
VMI	0	33	0	1	1	0	0	0
Virginia	0	120	2.5	4	0	4	0	0
Virginia Tech	0	300	46	10	0	10	0	0
West Virginia	0	150	14.5	5	0	5	0	0
Wisconsin	0	150	13.5	5	0	5	0	0
Wyoming	0	90	11	3	0	3	0	0

[Eagle26]

5 hours ago, Wrestleknownothing said:

Yeah, it seems like there may have been some unintended consequences here.

By bumping conference tournament placement up to 15% this year it can be the most important factor in the matrix in a lot of cases.

Head-to-head is often a push when comparing across conferences, so that 25% effectively gets thrown out. Quality wins, if I understand correctly, are often split 15%/5% for a 10% net. That would make a 3rd place finish in a 6 team conference the deciding factor over a 4th place finish in a 14 or 17 team conference.

Exactly. I get what they were trying to do… you want to make sure you emphasize the qualifying tournament or it will start to lose its significance. But you are right it had some unintended consequences and I think it needs some tweaking. Maybe something like conference placement out of number of automatic qualifiers? For example, 4th place in a weight that takes top 7 should be considered higher placement than 3rd place in a weight that takes top 3 IMO. 

[Tigerfan]

I’m not at all sure these are “unintended” consequences. Seems like they explicitly stated that one of the reasons they made the switch from historical data-driven allocations to the new allocation/seeding model was to spread the limited spots to include more non traditional wrestling conferences, ostensibly to grow the sport on a national level beyond Big10/12 territory.

That necessarily correlates with keeping conference tournaments relevant, but specifically conferences other than the Big10/12. Simply put, they hoped some talent would spread out of the Midwest schools. How successful that design has been is a question better suited to Wrestleknownothing. 

[gimpeltf]

The non-historical formulae used were really initially intended to figure out who gets to go. It does do a very good job at that. I think it's a mistake to ignore historical data entirely when seeding. Neither likely works well anticipating injury situations like Starocci/Suriano/Schlatter (I added Schlatter to keep the All-S team thing going) so might as well do the best you can.

[Elevator]

i have not studied it, but I think there had many years ago been some seeding credit for past NCAA success (prior championships, finals, AA?).  Recent examples seem to suggest that is worthwhile particularly w wrestlers who have low match total based on apparent injury but are highly ranked.