URI:
   DIR Return Create A Forum - Home
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       March Madness 2016
  HTML https://marchmadness2016.createaforum.com
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       *****************************************************
   DIR Return to: General Discussion
       *****************************************************
       #Post#: 23--------------------------------------------------
       Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: zdc3133
       Date: March 14, 2016, 9:43 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       I was just made aware of this site check it out!
  HTML http://projectperfectbracket.blogspot.com/
       #Post#: 41--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: will
       Date: March 15, 2016, 10:03 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Some quick upset stats while I have time based on the four most
       similar tournaments...
       -On average, the '05/'10/'12/'14 tournaments produced 1.25
       upsets from the 14 and 15 seeds. Look out! (But still don't pick
       these, too much risk)
       -If I remember correctly, they produced about 4.25 upsets from
       the 11-13 seeds and the most similar tournaments at the 11, 12,
       and 13 lines produced (on average) 2, 1, and 1 each.
       -As for the second round, every tournament but 2012 (which
       appears to be an outlier at 1 second-round upset) had at least
       three second-round seed upsets, and two had exactly four.
       -Even 2014 had at least one 1 seed in its Final Four. Only 2005
       had more than one 1 seed; all had at least one team seeded 4 or
       higher.
       -The collected average of total upsets in the four closest
       tournaments is 10.75, though 2014 drags this up with its 15
       upsets. Leaving out 2014, the average would be 9.33.
       This kind of confirms what some basic Top 20 research did a
       month or so ago - I don't think this one will be extremely crazy
       but not extremely sane either. Maybe above-average for upsets.
       #Post#: 60--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: squire12
       Date: March 15, 2016, 8:21 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       will,
       How are you basing the tournaments of 05, 10, 12 and 14 as being
       more similar to this upcoming one??
       Is it Kenpom efficiency data?
       Just wondering where/how you are drawing from those tourney's vs
       others.
       Thanks
       #Post#: 64--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: will
       Date: March 15, 2016, 9:37 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       --- Quote from: squire12 link ---
       >
       > will,
       >
       > How are you basing the tournaments of 05, 10, 12 and 14 as
       being more similar to this upcoming one??
       >
       > Is it Kenpom efficiency data?
       >
       > Just wondering where/how you are drawing from those tourney's
       vs others.
       >
       > Thanks
       >
       --- End Quote ---
       I'm using the author of the blog's assertion that the '05, '10,
       '12, and '14 tournaments are most similar to this one.
       #Post#: 69--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: squire12
       Date: March 15, 2016, 10:36 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       Thanks will!!!
       Good stuff.  I recall tabulating a lot of the same seed total
       (aggregate) information a few years ago and posting it to
       Bracket Science.  Really interesting to look at it with the seed
       curve and combining it with the upsets/seed total aggregate.
       #Post#: 71--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: squire12
       Date: March 15, 2016, 10:44 pm
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       From what I calculated, here are the efficiency averages for
       each seed level.
       1.  .9378
       2.  .9236
       3.  .8919
       4.  .8909
       5.  .8866
       6.  .8554
       7.  .8179
       8.  .7997
       9.  .8302
       10  .7856
       11.  .8162
       12.  .7469
       13.  .7303
       14.  .6722
       15.  .6184
       16.  .3546
       Weak 8-seeds and 10-seeds relative to the 9 and 11 seeds
       respectively.
       #Post#: 75--------------------------------------------------
       Re: Project perfect bracket 
   DIR By: kdkalita
       Date: March 16, 2016, 7:54 am
       ---------------------------------------------------------
       This should help. I made a chart of the KenPom Ratings vs. Seed
       for 2016 teams as well as the ten year average (2006 was first
       year of the one and done rule).
       Blue Series = 2016
       Red Series = Ten Year Average
       This chart helped me tremendously last year for predicting that
       the tournament would be pretty chalky, and for the most part it
       really was.
       Hope this helps!
       *****************************************************
       Page 1 of 1