Aike’s Model - 2/21/25 Update

[Aike]

Florida and Missouri both looking scary. Gonzaga is going to be painfully underseeded. Cats hanging tough through adversity. Pitino primed and ready. Auburn is still Auburn.

1. Auburn 4.29
2. Duke 3.41
3. Tennessee 3.24
4. Houston 2.94
5. Florida 2.83
6. Gonzaga 2.82
7. Arizona 2.73
8. Iowa St 2.63
9. Texas Tech 2.48
10. Missouri 2.31
11. Purdue 2.19
12. Alabama 2.17
13. Mississippi St 2.16
14. Maryland 2.14
15. Connecticut 2.13
16. Michigan 2.12
17. St John’s 2.04
18. Kentucky 2.00
19. Clemson 1.97
20. Kansas 1.96
21. Mississippi 1.91
22. Michigan St 1.86
23. Marquette 1.85
24. BYU 1.84
25. UCLA 1.80
27. Arkansas 1.66
28. Louisville 1.59
30. Vanderbilt 1.52
32. Georgia 1.48
34. Texas A&M 1.40
37. Ohio St 1.38
43. Texas 1.26
47. Oklahoma 1.15
48. N Carolina 1.14
60. Indiana 0.83
71. LSU 0.67
89. S Carolina 0.44

 

[Doc_53]

Wisconsin?

 

[Aike]

Wisconsin?

Closed it down but I think they were 26.

 

[Montana81]

I am not a believer in Gonzaga. They did not look great in the non con and their metrics have once again began to sky rocket as their competition weakened.

In years when they’ve been a real threat they looked great in the non conference too.

That’s the hill i’m dying on. We’ll just have to wait and see.

 

[Montana81]

Also any way you slice it this is the best the sec has ever been. Brutal year for a new coach with a complete roster reset to try and right the ship.

 

[Aike]

I am not a believer in Gonzaga. They did not look great in the non con and their metrics have once again began to sky rocket as their competition weakened.

In years when they’ve been a real threat they looked great in the non conference too.

That’s the hill i’m dying on. We’ll just have to wait and see.

I’ll say what I’ve said about Gonzaga before. They have 4 losses by a combined 17 points, and 3 more losses in OT.

If playing them, I would expect a win in a game that went down to the wire, or a loss. I sure wouldn’t want to have to face them in the second round as a 1 seed.

 

[Digger-Cat]

5 wins over the top 6, gotta like that, especially since some of those wins came with a key player out.

 

[Aike]

5 wins over the top 6, gotta like that, especially since some of those wins came with a key player out.

We do tend to rise to the occasion.

 

[Digger-Cat]

We do tend to rise to the occasion.

This game tomorrow night is another one of those where weird things happen when CMP is coaching. I'm not expecting it, but if he pulls off another win, that could move us into 2 seed consideration.

 

[entropy13]

I’ll say what I’ve said about Gonzaga before. They have 4 losses by a combined 17 points, and 3 more losses in OT.

If playing them, I would expect a win in a game that went down to the wire, or a loss. I sure wouldn’t want to have to face them in the second round as a 1 seed.

Gonzaga won't be an 8 or 9 seed, and thus wouldn't play a 1 seed in the second round. Assume you mean they might be a 4-5 seed and thus possibly face the 1 seed in the Sweet 16?

Also, your model predicts estimated NCAA tournament wins, correct? If so, I think that forecast looks accurate for Kentucky, that is, we make it to the Sweet 16. Get our main dudes back from injury and playing well, and it can only go up!

 

[The_Answer1313]

I am not a believer in Gonzaga. They did not look great in the non con and their metrics have once again began to sky rocket as their competition weakened.

In years when they’ve been a real threat they looked great in the non conference too.

That’s the hill i’m dying on. We’ll just have to wait and see.

I predict Gonzaga is going to be a 8/9 seed and give the 1 seed in that region absolute fits. Probably not win the game as they will still be underdog in that one but a lot closer than what most 8/9 vs 1 games would be.

I think an argument can be made maybe they shouldn't be say a 6th in Aike's model or say 10th like they are in Kenpom and whatnot.

But what a massive underseed they are going to get if Bracket Matrix is correct.

I would really be interested to take two groups of teams. One group where the metrics say they are better than their seed but their resume has brought them down and another group where the resumes are really good but the computer metrics are so so.

I'd venture to guess group 1 overperforms their seed line moreso than group 2 overperforms theirs.

 

[KY Long Rifle]

Aike,

Thanks for tracking this and continually posting updates. I enjoy keeping up with them.

 

[Aike]

Gonzaga won't be an 8 or 9 seed, and thus wouldn't play a 1 seed in the second round. Assume you mean they might be a 4-5 seed and thus possibly face the 1 seed in the Sweet 16?

Also, your model predicts estimated NCAA tournament wins, correct? If so, I think that forecast looks accurate for Kentucky, that is, we make it to the Sweet 16. Get our main dudes back from injury and playing well, and it can only go up!

Gonzaga is projected on that 8/9 line currently. Maybe they’ll move up a little if they win their conference.

And yes, the model predicts “unadjusted” number of tourney wins. Number will change a little based on the bracket, since there are only 63 wins available.

I agree that we have the look and feel of a Sweet 16 level team if we are reasonably healthy.

 

[runt#69]

Auburn has definitely the feel of a great team for all time this year, relative to the competition. And it's been as hard a path for them as anyone. Simply astounding how well they have performed. It would be ashame to see them fall flat and not ball out in March Madness.

But my money ?

Florida

Great job and thanks, Aike. Looks solid.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Gonzaga won't be an 8 or 9 seed, and thus wouldn't play a 1 seed in the second round. Assume you mean they might be a 4-5 seed and thus possibly face the 1 seed in the Sweet 16?

Currently that's exactly where they are

The Bracket Project's Bracket Matrix - 2025

And given their schedule very little room to move up I figure.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

So Maryland has (2) top 25 wins
UK has (7) top 15 wins
And they are
1,2,3,4 spots above us
Seems like some serious flaws

 

[The_Answer1313]

So Maryland has (2) top 25 wins
UK has (7) top 15 wins
And they are
1,2,3,4 spots above us
Seems like some serious flaws

How many opportunities does Maryland have for top 25 wins?

How many opportunities do we have for those type of wins?

 

[Aike]

Auburn has definitely the feel of a great team for all time this year, relative to the competition. And it's been as hard a path for them as anyone. Simply astounding how well they have performed. It would be ashame to see them fall flat and not ball out in March Madness.

But my money ?

Florida

Great job and thanks, Aike. Looks solid.

Have a feeling that hothead will hurt Auburn in the tournament again. CBN.

Florida is as good a pick as anyone. Especially getting that big man back.

 

[UKBB4Ever]

Take those numbers to Vegas and bet.

Just be sure to save bus money home. 😈

 

[Aike]

Take those numbers to Vegas and bet.

Just be sure to save bus money home. 😈

Not a gambler but they hold up incredibly well where point spreads are concerned. Hard for anyone to beat Vegas consistently, since they get to keep the juice. Pays for a lot of shiny buildings.

 

[Blueheart32]

Not a gambler but they hold up incredibly well where point spreads are concerned. Hard for anyone to beat Vegas consistently, since they get to keep the juice. Pays for a lot of shiny buildings.

Amazes me when people think they know more than the books.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

How many opportunities does Maryland have for top 25 wins?

How many opportunities do we have for those type of wins?

Duke has (1) top 15 win
Houston has (2)
Yet they stand at #2 and #4 respectively in this list
The tournament will bite these teams
Pretty obvious to me

 

[The_Answer1313]

Duke has (1) top 15 win
Houston has (2)
Yet they stand at #2 and #4 respectively in this list
The tournament will bite these teams
Pretty obvious to me

It probably doesn't matter.

I've seen UK not have great resumes in 2011 and 2014 and turn that into final fours.

Year in and year out we've heard how the Big 12 and Big Ten were dominant conferences and how those tough schedules were going to mean they were "battle tested" come March only for those teams to not live up to the seeding they got.

None of this matters. If you are a good team, your a good team. Duke and Houston will be fine IMO.

 

[Montana81]

I predict Gonzaga is going to be a 8/9 seed and give the 1 seed in that region absolute fits. Probably not win the game as they will still be underdog in that one but a lot closer than what most 8/9 vs 1 games would be.

I think an argument can be made maybe they shouldn't be say a 6th in Aike's model or say 10th like they are in Kenpom and whatnot.

But what a massive underseed they are going to get if Bracket Matrix is correct.

I would really be interested to take two groups of teams. One group where the metrics say they are better than their seed but their resume has brought them down and another group where the resumes are really good but the computer metrics are so so.

I'd venture to guess group 1 overperforms their seed line moreso than group 2 overperforms theirs.

I do the same in regards to that last sentence. I mostly trust the metrics. And aike has a good point about gonzaga ooc losses all being close. I might be being a tad hard on them.

But, and we’ve had this conversation before, a lot of games against the bottom feeders of division one…those are games where stronger teams can name their score. And Arkansas versus Maryland Eastern shore for example. They’re getting a bigger bump in performance for that game than we are for beating Tennessee, Duke or Florida.

And I understand the concept and the math and all and why that is. It’s all about net efficiency. Points per possession scored versus given up vs expected performance. But those are scenarios when it just doesn’t work imo for lots of reasons.

 

[yabbadabbadoo]

It probably doesn't matter.

I've seen UK not have great resumes in 2011 and 2014 and turn that into final fours.

Year in and year out we've heard how the Big 12 and Big Ten were dominant conferences and how those tough schedules were going to mean they were "battle tested" come March only for those teams to not live up to the seeding they got.

None of this matters. If you are a good team, your a good team. Duke and Houston will be fine IMO.

Exactly
That’s why all the Kenpom numbers, BPI, and many others mean basically nothing.

 

[bradyjames]

Aike, has UT beaten a single team in the top 15-20 that hasn’t beaten them worse(UF). Just don’t see them anywhere close to what your model shows them at.

 

[Aike]

Aike, has UT beaten a single team in the top 15-20 that hasn’t beaten them worse(UF). Just don’t see them anywhere close to what your model shows them at.

Baylor was at 13 when they played. UT won by 15.

Arkansas was at 23 when UT beat them by 24.

Georgia was at 23 when UT won by 18.

Mississippi St was at 14 when UT won by 12.

Missouri was at 15 when UT won by 4.

Beat number 5 Florida by 20, which as you pointed out was a revenge game, but they were still good enough to beat Florida by 20.

Lost to Auburn by 2.

They have a pretty strong resume. Definitely susceptible to a great offensive performance, but if you don’t come ready to play, they will cut your water off.

Now do I think they’ll make the Final Four? Seriously doubt it. But depending on matchups, a return to the Elite Eight or at least the Sweet Sixteen shouldn’t be surprising at all.

 

[Aike]

Exactly
That’s why all the Kenpom numbers, BPI, and many others mean basically nothing.

Time and again, advanced metrics do a better job of predicting results than the “eye test.”

The simplest explanation for this is that no one can watch every game, and humans tend to be more biased than the best models (although models have their own biases).

Analytics are tools to enhance your understanding of the game. Nate Oats uses math heavily, and rode it all the way to the Final Four. Mark Pope is deeper into analytics than any coach we’ve ever had. If these are all meaningless, someone should probably let those guys know.

 

[Aike]

I do the same in regards to that last sentence. I mostly trust the metrics. And aike has a good point about gonzaga ooc losses all being close. I might be being a tad hard on them.

But, and we’ve had this conversation before, a lot of games against the bottom feeders of division one…those are games where stronger teams can name their score. And Arkansas versus Maryland Eastern shore for example. They’re getting a bigger bump in performance for that game than we are for beating Tennessee, Duke or Florida.

And I understand the concept and the math and all and why that is. It’s all about net efficiency. Points per possession scored versus given up vs expected performance. But those are scenarios when it just doesn’t work imo for lots of reasons.

I don’t disagree that it’s hard to correctly capture adjustments for SOS. I have some ideas about how to make it better, but they require a bit more work and time then I currently have available.

That being said, these numbers still hold up awfully well.

One example I’ll give is Gonzaga in 2019. They were first going into the tournament with around a 3.8 score. Even though they were the favorite, that score still meant that they were most likely to fall just short of the Final Four.

Ultimately, they lost to Texas Tech in the Elite Eight. Did they lose because the model was wrong and they weren’t used to playing a team as tough as TT? Maybe.

But digging into the numbers (as I recall), TT’s foul rate was abnormally low that game (Rooferee was on the whistle).

Did TT foul less because Gonzaga was soft and bad at drawing fouls? Did Gonzaga get a bad whistle from a Big 12 friendly ref?

End of the day, the predicted margin in most of these games after the first round will be 3-4 points or less. So it doesn’t take much to flip one game the other direction.

In aggregate, the metrics hold up very well. But any one game can and will go sideways. Crazy tournament and only one team is left standing. The expected wins for the best teams are typically 2-3, but a few teams will win 4, 5, or 6 by default.

 

[bradyjames]

Baylor was at 13 when they played. UT won by 15.

Arkansas was at 23 when UT beat them by 24.

Georgia was at 23 when UT won by 18.

Mississippi St was at 14 when UT won by 12.

Missouri was at 15 when UT won by 4.

Beat number 5 Florida by 20, which as you pointed out was a revenge game, but they were still good enough to beat Florida by 20.

Lost to Auburn by 2.

They have a pretty strong resume. Definitely susceptible to a great offensive performance, but if you don’t come ready to play, they will cut your water off.

Now do I think they’ll make the Final Four? Seriously doubt it. But depending on matchups, a return to the Elite Eight or at least the Sweet Sixteen shouldn’t be surprising at all.

There is a lot of WAS. They seem to really be overrated in the polls and your model from what I have seen. Just a thought. I really enjoy your stuff.

 

[Aike]

There is a lot of WAS. They seem to really be overrated in the polls and your model from what I have seen. Just a thought. I really enjoy your stuff.

This model and most of the ones you’re talking about take the whole season into account. I do usually run another model for just the last month of the season to see how teams are trending.