Vegas Watch

Once again, I have separated the remaining teams into regions (which is pretty innovative), and started the discussion of each region with a table of their various Final Four odds. The first numerical column is the odds Pomeroy's log5 analysis implies each team has of reaching San Antonio. The second column shows their odds at Pinnacle and Sportsbook (same as yesterday) with the house advantage removed. The final column is the best odds I have found on each team, and where those odds are located.

An interesting arbitrage situation has been presented here. As you can see above, Sportsbook has UNC at -150 to win the East. BetUS has the odds on the Heels not winning the region at +175. By wagering $66 on them winning the region at Sportsbook, and $40 on them not reaching San Antonio at BetUS, one could lock in a $4 (or 3.8%) profit, regardless of the outcome.

I believe the inefficiency here is the BetUS line. Pinnacle has the same prop, but it's +121, much lower than BetUS' +175. The line Pomeroy's numbers would put on this (-192) is unrealistic, since it does not take into account the time Lawson missed, or the location of the games (Charlotte), but I think +175 is off as well.

There is probably some value in Louisville +350 here, especially since they are now favored by by 3 in Thursday's game, but nothing major. Same goes for Wazzu, although that one is losing value, as BetUS opened it at +1000, and the line on their game has been increasing.

Washington St.'s defensive performance against Notre Dame in the second round really was remarkable. The Fighting Irish had not been held under an offensive efficiency of 103 since their January 19th loss to Georgetown. Against the Cougars, that number was 69, the first time they've been held under 85 all season.

Even with only two games remaining, the longshots' odds are quite poor here. If you think either Davidson or Villanova are going to reach the Final Four, you'd be much better served betting on the money line and rolling it over into their Elite 8 game.

Seven of the country's nine best defenses are still alive, while for offenses that number is only four of nine. The potential Kansas-Wisconsin matchup this weekend would pit the Badgers' #1 defense against Kansas' #4 D. The big difference between these teams comes on the other side of the ball, where KU is #1, and Wisky is just 26th.

The numbers indicate- and I tend to agree with this- that Memphis has become undervalued. It is true that they cannot shoot free throws, but don't listen when CBS shoves the gloomy stats regarding this down your throat- as Pomeroy explains, these numbers are a matter of circumstance, rather than cause and effect. The reason not many poor free throw shooting teams have won it all is that there haven't been many teams this incompetent from the line that were this good overall- Memphis is a fairly unique situation, and should be treated as such. People always need something to talk about, and considering the Tigers have lost only once all year, it's not surprising that their weakness has gotten so blown out of proportion.

The rest of the odds in this region are pretty boring. I do find it interesting that Sportsbook clearly had the best Final Four odds prior to the tournament, but that title has now been handed over to BetUS.

The guys from Storming the Floor wrote the following regarding UCLA in today's Deadspin West Regional Preview:

"Nothing short of a Final Four will meet expectations, and a championship is almost necessary for a group that could be remembered for coming up short on the biggest of stages without it."

I completely agree with this, but also find it to be somewhat insane.

UCLA's record in the NCAA tournament over the last three years currently stands at 11-2. That is pretty damn impressive. They've won 85% of the games that have really counted- the ones where a loss ends your season. The fact that they lost to to one of the best teams in recent memory the past two years can't really be held against them- you may have noticed that everybody else lost to the Gators as well. It's very true that these teams will be remembered for falling just short if they don't win the title this year, but I think that's really a shame. Howland has put together a great program, and regardless of what happens over the next two weeks they should be remembered as the best team of the past three years, rather than some sort of failure.

Same as always. I averaged the Vegas lines and the Pomeroy numbers for the first round. For rounds 2-4, I adjusted the Pomeroy numbers slightly. Marquette was downgraded, and I gave Pitt a slight bump.

Gasaway posted all the efficiency margins in one pretty chart this afternoon. The South is obviously handicapped because Memphis is not included, but it does not have a single team in the top 10.

I find it interesting that Memphis is 3:2 in multiple places to win the region. This is the same team that is 26-1, right? It's true that they didn't test themselves on the road, but were 3-0 in New York against Oklahoma, UConn, and USC. They also have double-digit home victories against Georgetown, Arizona, and Gonzaga. They went 16-0 in the 10th best conference in the country. If not for that one game, Memphis' odds would probably be much, much worse.

Looking at the aforementioned efficiency margins, Texas is only 15th in the country. This is partially because they play in the Big 12, which was very strong this year. But that's not the whole story- this didn't seem to bother Kansas, as their efficiency margin is 33% higher than anyone else's. The Longhorns looked good in their final two games- beating Oklahoma by 28, and hanging with the Jayhawks in Kansas City- but in the two weeks before that, they were uninspiring. A 3-1 record is nothing to complain about, but two of those games were at home and closer than they should be (beating Nebraska and Oklahoma St. by 4 and 5, respectively), and they lost @Texas Tech. The fact that their defense is only 32nd in efficiency also does not bode well. They don't have a bad draw- they should cruise to the second weekend- but I'm still not sold. Augustin is fun to watch though, I will give them that much.

Pitt sure looked good in New York. But the thing is, Pitt always looks good at the Garden. This was the fifth time they've reached the BE tournament final in the last six years. Let's look at how each year turned out.

Seems to me like their MSG performances aren't particularly indicative of how they'll do in the big tournament.

Marquette-Stanford would be an interesting second round game. Both teams rely on defense, but for Marquette it's their guards (3rd in 3-point FG% allowed, 5th in steal %), and for Stanford it's the tall brothers (6th in 2-point FG% allowed). I don't really see how Marquette is going to score against the Trees- their three guards are terrible outside shooters, and I can't see Hayward and Barro getting too much going against the Lopez brothers. The Vegas lines show a 64% chance of those two teams winning their first round games, so we'll probably find out.

I am picking Memphis- and they're very good- but it's essentially by default. I do not like Texas for the reasons listed above. Stanford has a bad draw. I'm not sold on Pitt. Michigan St. is 4-6 on the road, including losses at Iowa and Penn St. It's just not a very good region.

Pick: Memphis
Upset: Oral Roberts
Scary Team: Marquette

Related: First Round Schedule [Rush the Court]

Since a couple people have asked, I'm going to post my full bracket later tonight. There is no way I am going to class tomorrow afternoon, so there may be a live-blog.

Same disclaimers as yesterday: For the first round percentages, I averaged the Vegas lines and the Pomeroy numbers. For rounds 2-4, I adjusted the Pomeroy numbers slightly.


UCLA is favored by 32 in the first round. This is a lot, even for a 1-16 matchup. Is this is sign that the oddsmakers like UCLA? No. It is a sign that Mississippi Valley St. is really, really bad- Pomeroy has them 318th out of 341 D1 teams. From his preview: "Mississippi Valley State's chance of a title is one in 600 trillion." Nice.

Everyone is jumping on the Xavier bandwagon in the lower half of this region, since Duke has lost two of their last three games. Look, I love the Musketeers, but this is kind of silly. Duke has lost a couple games- @UNC, and against Clemson on a neutral court. Meanwhile, Xavier has lost two of their last five, both to Saint Joseph's. If you flip their schedule, Duke is probably 4-1 over Xavier's stretch, and Xavier is likely 1-2 over Duke's. Just something to keep in mind.

It was discussed in the East preview that the Sportsbook lines are unusually good because of UNC being so overvalued. Sadly, this does not hold true in the West, as UCLA's odds are more reasonable. There is still one that sticks out, however- the Aggies' Sportsbook odds are twice their true odds. As with Indiana, this is even after knocking down the Pomeroy odds, as I question whether Texas A&M is the 16th best team in the nation (although, looking at the teams below them, they're probably pretty close). Even with this conservative assumption, 60-1 looks great.

The potential match-up with UCLA in the second round will obviously be tough. But it's important to remember that if they get past the Bruins, the region really opens up. This is true for all the 8/9 teams, and probably contributes to the favorable odds. Breaking it down round-by-round, Pomeroy gives the Aggies only a 26% chance of winning in the second round (should they get there), but a 58.4% chance of winning their potential third game. This may be a little high, but I'm not too scared of UConn or Pitt, especially if aTm has already beaten UCLA, thus living up to their lofty Pomeroy rank.

I have not discussed the National Championship odds much. This is primarily because they're almost all terrible. It should be noted that Pomeroy does love Kansas at +525 (The Greek)- his 36.8% puts their true odds at an incredible +171. I honestly do not know what would get you better value in this situation- betting on the Jayhawks in each round, or taking the 5-1 odds. My guess would be the 5-1, but I am not sure.

I had a larger point here- right. Aside from the Jayhawks, almost all the NC odds are worthless. Let's take Indiana as an example. Sportsbook has their Final Four odds at 40-1; the best NC odds for them that I have seen are 125-1. This would imply that they have a 1 in 3 chance of winning the whole thing if they reach San Antonio. Considering that they would almost definitely be underdogs in both games, this is pretty unreasonable. Similar to longshots in conference tournaments, it's another inefficiency in the market- for all but the top teams, there is more value in the F4 odds than the traditional "Hoosiers to win it all" futures.

Somehow, I have barely mentioned #1 seed UCLA to this point. I have heard repeatedly that the Bruins got a great draw. To an extent, this is true- you certainly can't compare this region to the stacked East. But I think this claim is greatly exaggerated. Their first round draw is awesome, but that has very little effect. Texas A&M in the second round is more difficult than usual- in Pomeroy's words, the Aggies "will make UCLA's life interesting". Following this is a likely Sweet 16 game against UConn. I am not the Huskies' biggest fan, but a 4 seed seems to match their skill level. So in the first three games, it's actually more difficult than average.

The main reason people think this is a great draw is the region's "weak" two seed, Duke. But is this really true? Granted, the Blue Devils are a notch below UCLA- I actually think that the four one seeds are also the four best teams in the nation. But Duke isn't a 1, they're a 2. And I think they compare reasonably with the other 2s. Duke may not have won their conference tournament, but neither did Tennessee, and the ACC is miles ahead of the SEC this season. I will talk about this more in the South preview, but I think the perception of Texas would be very different if they played @Kansas during the regular season, rather than hosting the Jayhawks. I can't really argue for the Blue Devils being better than Georgetown- the Hoyas have been pretty impressive over the last month- but really don't think that having Duke as the 2 in their bracket makes UCLA's draw particularly special.

For the same reasons that I advised against picking the USC-Kansas St. winner to beat Wisconsin, I wouldn't be so quick to put the West Virginia-Arizona winner in the Sweet 16. Each could pull the upset, and I think both teams are underseeded as far as talent goes. But that's exactly the problem- they're both good, and they have to play each other in the first round. Meanwhile, Duke is -3600 in their round 1 game against Belmont. There is a reason that Pomeroy- whose ratings agree that the Wildcats and Mountaineers are underseeded- has Duke at 67% to get to the second weekend, while Arizona and West Virginia are each around 16%.

Pick: Duke
Upset (+6 or worse): San Diego
Scary team (four seed or worse): Texas A&M (there's no shortage of these- I also strongly considered WVU and U of A)

Related:
Midwest Region Round 1 Leans [The Money Line Journal]
South Region Round 1 Leans [The Money Line Journal]

SITE NEWS: The Nationals' poll is the last one. Finally. I have to figure out the details of this contest, but hopefully it'll be up and running in the next few days.

Also, I have added even more pools to the list.

Okay, on to the East preview. The table below is a hybrid. For the first round percentages, I averaged the Vegas lines and the Pomeroy numbers. For rounds 2-4, I adjusted the Pomeroy numbers slightly. For example, I downgraded Indiana, because of the obvious external factors. I gave UNC a boost, because Pomeroy's numbers obviously don't know that Lawson was hurt.


There are reasonable arguments for each of the following statements:

• North Carolina is the best team in the country
• Tennessee should've been a 1 seed
• Louisville has the talent of a 2 seed
• Indiana should've been a 6, rather than an 8
• Butler should've been a 5, rather than a 7
  

It is pretty amazing that all five of these things converged into one region. The result is that the East is absolutely loaded.

The Sportsbook lines for this region are great. They have UNC at 5-7; the Tar Heels would have to have a 58% chance of reaching the Final Four for you to break even on that. They don't. This absurdity causes the rest of the lines to be better than usual- Sportsbook's odds only added up to 127% to begin with, and if you knock UNC down from 58% to 33%, there's barely any juice.

The Louisville line is a little better than break even, which is nice, but boring. The one that really surprised me was Indiana. I know they've been playing poorly lately, but 40:1? Even after I knocked down Pomeroy's numbers for the Hoosiers significantly, those are good odds.

Another intriguing one is Washington St. There are two reasons this line is so high- they didn't make it past the second round last year as a 3 seed, and they lost three straight home games in the middle of the Pac-10 season. Since then, they've played pretty well. I don't think it's unreasonable to say they've got a 1 in 10 chance, which makes their odds profitable.

I'm not saying it's a good bet (it's not), but considering what happened a couple years ago, I'd think Sportsbook is taking a good deal of action on George Mason at 300:1.

Yesterday, for the Midwest, six teams had at least a 1% chance of winning the regional, and only four were above 2%. For the East, those numbers are eight and seven, respectively. I think everybody thinks of the top three teams as serious Final Four contenders, and Washington St. is probably in the next tier down. It is possible that all of the following matchups occur: UNC-Indiana, Notre Dame-WSU, Butler-Tennessee, UNC-WSU, Louisville-Tennessee, and UNC-Louisville. I know upsets are part of what make the tournament what it is, but who could argue with that slate? I read somebody compare this region to the South last year- that works for me.

Pick: Louisville
Upset (has to be at least a 6 point underdog): George Mason
Scary team (four seed or lower): Indiana

Related: Bracket Breakdown: East and Midwest [Basketball Prospectus]

First off- Luke Winn incorporated the home/road splits into a post for his Tourney Blog. His take on it is definitely worth a read. I swear, I have nothing against Vanderbilt- it just so happens that Siena was great on the road, and quite poor at home.

On to the Midwest preview. In the table below, the second column is the chance I think each team has of winning the region. This was done partially by taking Pomeroy's numbers into account, but mostly by my own judgments. The next column is what the odds should be. The third column is the best odds I've found, followed by their location.

Portland St. is 51:1 just to beat Kansas. Why anyone would bet on them to win the entire region is entirely beyond me.

The odds of everyone outside of the top four are really, really bad. USC is a good team. But to get to the Final Four, their four opponents could potentially be Kansas St., Wisconsin, Georgetown, and Kansas. The idea that they have a 1 in 13 chance of beating those four teams is absurd.

I'm a Wisconsin believer. They're 29-4, and have won 23 of their last 25 (both losses coming to Purdue). They are fourth in Pomeroy's ratings. That's probably a little excessive, but I still think 10:1 is quite good. The Sportsbook line is also an outlier- they're no better than 6:1 anywhere else.

I'm higher on Kansas than most. I think they are the best team in the nation- some others agree, but most do not. I would not bet on them at even money to win the region, since I think you could probably get better odds betting on each individual game. But that's not a bad line.

I have it as 90% that Kansas, Georgetown, or Wisconsin emerge from the Midwest. I think that's fair. This is partially because they're really good, but also a product of seeding. They just have it easier than the other than the other teams- that's a privilege they've earned, but a significant advantage nonetheless.

There's no doubt that USC-Kansas St. is a compelling first round matchup. But I would advise against picking either team to beat Wisconsin. First, the Badgers may not have the pro prospects, but they're better than either of those teams. But the main reason is each team's first round matchup. Who's going to win the USC-KSU game? I have no idea. It's about a toss up (USC is favored by 2.5). I'm much more confident that Wisconsin (-11) will take care of CS Fullerton. That's an important thing to keep in mind when filling out your bracket- not just the chance that USC beats Wisconsin, but the relative chances either team has of getting that far.

If Kansas, Clemson, Wisconsin, and Georgetown do end up reaching Detroit, the second weekend will be quite something.

Pick: Kansas
Upset (has to be at least a 6 point underdog): Siena, obviously
Scary team (four seed or lower): Clemson

Related: Bracket Winners and Losers [Basketball Prospectus]

Here are the Pomeroy percentages for each team advancing to each round of the SEC tournament, which begins on Thursday.

Tennessee, Mississippi St., Kentucky, and Vanderbilt are in. Parrish has them as 1, 7, 10, and 5 seeds, respectively.

Arkansas vs. Vandy in the second round would be interesting; a battle of atrocious road teams. Strangely the Razorbacks, a bubble team, have a bye, while Vandy does not.

Florida and Ole Miss are also on the bubble. Both would likely have to reach the semis (which would require winning two games) to have a realistic chance. I don't really know how Lunardi has UF included in "Last four out". 8-8 in the weak SEC, and absolutely nothing out of conference- how do they even receive consideration? They also have a RPI of 65, and are 2-8 vs. the RPI top 50. This is not a tournament team.

I have not made any changes to the Pomeroy percentages because a) it is quite late, and b) they look good enough to me.

Once again, the top few teams have good to decent odds, and after that everything is terrible. As much as people have an affinity for favorites when betting on single games, it seems that they much prefer longshots in this situation. That is the only explanation for this pattern.

Anyway, nothing here is really worth it. Tennessee and Mississippi St. are not bad, but not great either.

BetUS has now copied The Greek; they have the exact same odds for bot the MVC and CAA tournaments.

Pomeroy ran the numbers himself this time. This tourney starts Friday at noon ET.

I do not follow the CAA closely at all, but if VCU does not have any injuries or external issues, they have to be a good wager here.

NC Wilmington is extremely overrated. They finished conference play 12-6, tied for with George Mason for second (VCU was 15-3). But Pomeroy has them as just the 172nd best team in the country, far behind VCU (72nd) and George Mason (89th), and also trailing Old Dominion (114th) and Northeastern (164th). They ranked 37th in the country in "Luck", meaning they won the close ones, but lost some blowouts.

Once again, the longshots are very poor bets. There is just nowhere near a 1 in 16 chance that Hofstra beats Towson, then VCU, then Old Dominion, then the team that emerges from the other half of the bracket. If you for some reason want to bet on any team that does not get a bye in any of these tournaments, you're going to be better off doing it game by game.


Edit: VCU is down to +150 at BetUS now. Still +175 at The Greek.

Both Lunardi and Parrish updated their brackets today.

After sweeping the Arizona schools on the road, UCLA moves up to the top line in both brackets. Amazingly, they are still getting completely screwed over in both cases.

In Lunardi's bracket, Kansas is the two seed. Anecdotally, I think these are the two best teams in the country, and the numbers agree with this. I understand Tennessee, Memphis and UNC have pretty RPIs, but raise your hand if you think Tennessee is better than Kansas. This probably won't last, since the Bruins and Jayhawks will both be favorites to win their conference tourneys. But it really would be a shame if these two teams met in the Elite 8 for the second year in a row. (And what would be even more annoying is if UCLA won, and people got to continue the "Bill Self just isn't a good enough coach to get his team past the E8" nonsense.)

Parrish has Duke as the 2 seed in the West, and Wisconsin the 3. This is actually a pretty good draw for UCLA; I would love to see Paulus try to guard Collison, that'd be amusing. But the 2/3 seeds wouldn't matter if UCLA fell short of the Elite 8, and that's entirely possible in the proposed bracket, since Louisville is the four seed.

What does this team have to do to get some respect? They were not impressive in non-conference play, but they had a good excuse- they were missing their best player. In Padgett's first game back, they lost to Cincinnati by 1. In 17 games since, they are 15-2 and have outscored their opponents by 11.5 ppg. They are the best team in the Big East. The books have certainly caught on; they were favored by 7.5 against Notre Dame (this did not end well), and 11 against Villanova. I almost hope they lose @Georgetown on Saturday, so they continue to be overlooked. This is a really good team.

Xavier is now a 2 seed in both brackets. They have a big game @St. Joseph's on Thursday; if they lose that one, I would imagine they'll fall down to a 3.

Parrish has Butler as a 4. The same seed as Louisville. If these two teams met on a neutral court tomorrow, how many points would the Cardinals be favored by? Nine? This whole process really amazes me sometimes.

After splitting their two games this weekend, Washington St. moves up to a 6 seed in both projections. I still think they will end up higher than this. They host Washington on Saturday, and then will likely be the 3rd seed in the Pac-10 tourney. The Cougars should end up being at least a 5.

Parrish has Miami (FL) as a 7 seed. I will be picking against them in the first round; I don't even think it matters who their opponent is. Their non-conference is weak (Pomeroy has their non-con schedule as the 263rd most challenging). They are 7-7 in the ACC, but five of those seven wins have come by three points or less. Four of their seven losses have come by double digits. Some will look at this and say they know how to win close games. I will choose to conclude that they are not very good.

Photo by: me. (We had pretty good seats yesterday.)

I am going to Tucson for the weekend. Hopefully they can hang with UCLA on Sunday. Probably not. At least it'll be warm.

Tiger at +1015 to win the Grand Slam? Not so fast.

Pomeroy with a fascinating look at shot selection.

A fan asked Steve Phillips to sign his jersey, "Steve Phililps, Met Killer". That is awesome.

60 Minutes is going to run a feature on Bill James.

Comparing this year's Rays team to the '69 Mets.

Jon Heyman makes up a new derogatory term for the sabermetric crowd: VORPies.

Yahoo:

A leaner, more muscular Victor Martinez stepped into the batter’s box Friday morning on one of the back fields at Chain of Lakes Park.

You know it. The Indians also won their ST opener.

In mainstream sports reporting, the term "consistent" is entirely meaningless. When Joe Morgan says, "He's the most consistent hitter on the ballclub", he is telling us absolutely nothing (I think he really means *best*, but that's a discussion for another day). In coverage of college basketball over the next month, we will be bombarded with discussion of how team X has to be more "consistent" to make a deep run. It's all BS.

"Consistency" does have an actual, significant application however, and can be interesting when discussed intelligently. First off, it's important to note that being consistent is not necessarily a good thing. If you're a 12 seed playing in the first round, the last thing you want is to consistently play to the level of a 12 seed. If you do this, you will lose almost every time. It would be in your best interest to play like a 6 seed half the time, and like one that belongs in the NIT the other half. If you have inferior talent, it is to your advantage to be inconsistent.

The opposite is true when the situation is reversed. Kansas, the team that currently sits atop the Pomeroy ratings, would greatly benefit by being more consistent. On some nights they absolutely destroy teams (KU 84, Nebraska 49), but on others they play far below their talent level (Oklahoma St. 61, KU 60). The Jayhawks would benefit greatly from being more consistent and playing to their true level of talent every night- they'd almost never lose.

With that being said, the following is my attempt to quantify how consistent the 73 BCS teams have been this year. Simply put, all I've done is calculated the standard deviation of a team's performance against the spread.

It is important to note that this is very different from how each team has performed against the spread (or against expectations). That can be measured with the average of their performance against the spread- for example, UCLA has beaten the spread of their games by an average of 2.3 ppg. That is interesting in itself, and I'll have a post about it later this week, but is irrelevant when discussing consistency.

What I'm measuring here is how consistent each team has been in its performance against the spread (ATS). For example, if team X plays six games and beats the spread by 5 points in each, their average ATS is 5, and the standard deviation is 0. If team Y plays five games, covers by 9 three times, and covers by 1 the other three, their average ATS is still 5, but the standard deviation is 4.4. Clearly, team X has been more consistent than team Y, and this shows in the standard deviation.

Using this method, here are the 12 most consistent teams thus far in conference play (a lower number means a higher consistency):


When you think about this year's Indiana team, I doubt "consistent" is the first word that comes to mind. But on the court, they've been exactly that. They've played right to expectations (6-7-1 ATS), and done so reliably- all but one of Indiana's Big Ten games have been within nine points of the spread. With all the drama surrounding this team, it's anybody's guess how this will translate into March, but their talent level (a 4 seed) is pretty clear.

A second solid Big Ten team also makes the list, that being Purdue. They've gotten here in a very different fashion than the Hoosiers, going 11-3 ATS, and outperforming the spread by an average of 5.3 ppg. The Boilermakers have consistently exceeded expectations, beating the spread by between 3 and 8 points in 7 of their 14 conference games.

The third consistent tournament lock is Stanford. They've beaten the spread by an average of 2.1 ppg, and have been within 10 of that number in all but one of their Pac-10 games. This indicates that the projected #3 seed will have no trouble in the first couple rounds, but the odds are stacked against the Cardinal pulling off two upsets on the second weekend to reach the Final Four.

Now, the most inconsistent teams:

Two teams that are surprisingly high in the Pomeroy ratings- Marquette (10) and Kansas St. (11), appear here. The Wildcats' standing is pretty clear- they are world beaters at home (+15.6 average ATS, even after last night), but weak on the road (-3.3 average ATS). Even so, it's hard to know which team will show up in the tournament. When I think of a team that's extremely inconsistent- capable of beating just about anybody, or losing to Texas Tech, Kansas St. is the first team that comes to mind.

Marquette is another interesting case. After starting off Big East play 3-7 ATS, they have covered in their last six games. They lost their first three conference road games by an average of 17 points, but are 4-1 away from the Bradley Center since. Either they are very inconsistent, or they have improved as the season has progressed. Regardless, this is a team capable of making a run in March, and is likely underseeded as a 5.

The consistency numbers for the 49 teams that did not make these lists can be found here.

Photo: Yankees Chick.

I am using Lunardi again this week, since Parrish hasn't updated his bracket in five days. If Parrish updates his in Wednesday, I will probably discuss that as well.

This week I have included the best preseason futures odds for each team, and the site at which they could be found.

Texas- #1 seed, Pomeroy #8 overall, 75:1 preseason odds (Sportsbook)
With wins over Tennessee (neutral), UCLA (away) and Kansas (home), a 10-2 conference record, and a 23-4 overall mark, the Longhorns have certainly built quite a resume. Similar to Tennessee win on Saturday, I think tonight's game against Kansas St. will essentially determine whether Texas ends up this high. The Wildcats have been dominant at home, 6-0 in the B12 with an average margin of victory of 21 points. A win would put them at 11-2 in the conference, with four huge victories on their resume, and no particularly bad losses. With three winnable games left (@TTU, vs. Nebraska and Ok. St.), they would be in great position to stay on the top line. A loss would drop them back down to a 2, and short of winning out through the B12 tournament, they would be unlikely to get back here.

Xavier- #2 seed, Pomeroy #15, 150:1 preseason odds (VIP)
Hey everybody- an A-10 team is currently in line to get a #2 seed. Is there a reason more people aren't talking about this? The last time a non-BCS school (excluding powerhouses Gonzaga and Memphis) was seeded this high was 2004, when St. Joe's was a top seed, eventually losing to Oklahoma St. in the regional final. Xavier certainly deserves their lofty seeding- they've gone 12-1 in the #8 conference in the country, with an average margin of victory of nine points.

Could they end up as a 1 seed? It's possible, but unlikely. Tennessee's win over Memphis put them in great position to enter the tournament as a top seed, and things are looking good for the one-loss Tigers as well. It seems likely that either Texas or Kansas well end up on the top line, assuming one of them wins the B12 tournament. UNC, UCLA and Duke all have their eyes on a top seed as well. It seems like Xavier's best shot would be for UNC and Duke to split their regular season finale and tournament matchups, and for UCLA to lose in the Pac-10 tournament. In that case, if Xavier wins out, I think they have a chance at a #1 seed.

Washington St.- #7 seed, Pomeroy #12, 40:1 preseason odds (Sportsbook)
This seems a little harsh, doesn't it? They're third in the Pac-10 at 9-6, but their weak non-conference SOS (RPI #234) really kills them. What's strange is they notched impressive road victories against Baylor and Gonzaga as part of that. Problem is, they also played Eastern Washington, Idaho, Montana, Mississippi Valley St., The Citadel, Idaho St., and North Carolina A&T. Still, they did go 12-0 before Pac-10 play. They play at the northern California teams this weekend- if they can split those two, I think they'll end up higher than this.

Butler- #6 seed, Pomeroy #44, 200:1 preseason odds (Sportsbook)
Let's see- the other current #6 seeds are Clemson, Kansas St., and Gonzaga. If you're a 3 seed in the second round, would your rather play one of those teams, or Butler, whose best win is either Ohio St. at home or @SIU. Right. The Bulldogs lost on national TV on Saturday, but in reality they've been struggling all month. It's true that they were 6-0 in February, but four of those Horizon league wins were by five points or less, and a fifth was in OT. With two home games and then their conference tournament, Butler will likely win out, but that won't make them one of the 24 best teams in the nation.

I'll let the Atlanta poll run until 11ET, but the Baltimore poll is now up as well. Their total of 65 is the lowest number this year, by the way.

If you've watched ESPN for more than 30 seconds this week, you're aware that the Memphis Tigers and Tennessee Volunteers are playing each other at 9pm ET on Saturday night, in a battle of '#1 vs. #2'*.

Pinnacle, which is always on top of this type of thing, has released the line already- Memphis is favored by 6.

This may seem a little high, but do remember the game is being played at Memphis, so that explains about four points of it. As discussed here the other day, Tennessee has struggled on the road- they've been winning, but not by much, and not against very tough competition.

Ken Pomeroy also brought up an interesting point today. The Volunteers' defense depends on their opponents turning the ball over; they struggle, especially defending the three, when their opponents are able to take care of the ball. This hasn't been too much of a problem so far, but may become an issue against stiffer competition.

Regardless, Saturday night promises to be an intriguing, fast-paced games between two of the country's most exciting teams.

*Yeah, okay. Kansas and UCLA apologize for playing in real conferences.

Update: Not surprisingly, Tennessee is a very public dog, getting almost 70% of the action so far at Wagerline.

Thursday update: The line has moved down to 5.5. Although the juice (-112 for Tennessee, +102 for Memphis) indicates that it's right on the border between 5.5 and 6.

One of the great things about college hoops is that the polls don't actually matter, as there's that little tournament at the end of the season. In light of this, I thought I'd do another overrated/underrated type post, but use the latest Bracketology rather than the polls.

The teams in green are those that I think should/will get better seeds, and the teams in red are currently too high. I've included their projected Bracketology seed, their Pomeroy ranking, and their National Championship odds at Sportsbook.

UCLA- #2 seed, Pomeroy #3 overall, 9:2 at Sportsbook
Are we really going to go through this again? Last year UCLA got screwed out of a one seed, although they did get to stay in California through the first four rounds and ended up reaching the Final Four. UCLA has had some injury problems- Collison missed the first six games, Mbah a Moute has missed four Pac-10 games, Mata-Real has missed a couple games. Despite this, they are 10-2 in what might be the top conference in the country. Even with the three losses, I think they're at least in the "top team in the country" conversation, and really don't see how they can be behind...

Tennessee- #1 seed, Pomeroy #15 overall, 12:1 at Sportsbook
If the Volunteers beat Memphis, sure, put them up on the top line. But right now, I'm just not seeing it. It's true that they're 10-1 in the SEC, but the SEC isn't very good. Tennessee has also been fortunate to have just one loss, as they've won their last four SEC road games by an average of only 4 points, against powerhouses such as LSU and UGA. The good news is that this will probably take care of itself- if Tennessee beats Memphis, they'll deserve their 1 seed, and a loss would likely drop them down to the second line.

Louisville- #4 seed, Pomeroy #8 overall, 18:1 at Sportsbook
Perception is slowly starting to catch up to reality with Louisville- they are finally ranked (23rd) in the ESPN poll this week. It's possible that they doesn't deserve higher than this based on their current resume, but you'd be hard pressed to find 12 more talented squads. Their Pomeroy rating is actually held down a bit, since they struggled without Padgett and Palacios early in the year, starting the season 5-3. With road games against Pitt and Georgetown, the rest of their schedule is challenging, but I expect them to be at least a 2 or 3 seed when the actual brackets are unveiled.

Purdue- #3 seed, Pomeroy #22 overall, 75:1 at Sportsbook
When a projected 3 seed is still 75:1 to win it all, something is off. These aren't old odds either- Sportsbook updated these futures on Monday. Even I am starting to become a believer in the "Baby Boilers", who have now won 11 straight B10 games. Still, this is probably their peak, as they visit Bloomington on Tuesday night. It's certainly possible that they continue to prove everyone wrong, but I think the end up being a 4 or 5 seed on Selection Sunday.

Kansas St.- #4 seed, Pomeroy #6 overall, 30:1 at Sportsbook
Beating Missouri by 37 sure helps your Pomeroy rank. Everybody knows that Beasley scored 40 points, but did you realize he did that in 27 minutes? Projected out to a full 40 minutes, that's 59 points. He might get paid to play basketball some day. This is a scary team, but they're yet to prove themselves on the road. Interestingly, freshman guard Jacob Pullen has a 3:1 assist-to-turnover ratio in B12 home games, but has just seven assists and eight turnovers in conference road games. They have winnable games at Nebraska and Baylor this week, before hosting UT on Big Monday. I don't know what seed they end up getting, but I certainly wouldn't want them as a 4 in my region.

The Tampa over ended up getting 49 of 66 votes (74%). If we do one of these each weekday, and one each weekend, we can finish all 30 before the season starts. Mariners poll is up now.

Mr. I: "If there was ever a Douchebag Smurf, this is what he would've looked like."

Guesses on the lines for tomorrow's college basketball games.

More projected standings, this time using CHONE. 89 wins for the Rays?

Pomeroy:

Louisville probably won't win the Big East regular season title, but don't let that fool you. They're the best team in the conference.

A very flattering picture of Josh Beckett.

YouTube was forced to delete all the Berman videos. Deadspin wasn't.

NL Spring Training previews from Sheehan: East, Central, West. On the Giants:

Winter grade: F
They took a 71-91 team and replaced its best position player with a guy coming off a career year who’s had two above-average seasons in his life. For $60 million. Good luck with that.
One move to make: Release half the roster. And the general manager.

Indeed.

Same as always- these rankings are strictly based on the lines for each game thus far in conference play.The predicted line for the KU-UT game tonight was 6.3 (14.1-3.9-3.9 for home court). The actual line was a5.5. Not bad.

The Big 12 has six teams in in the latest Bracketology- Kansas (1), Texas (2), Kansas St. (4), Texas A&M (6), Baylor (7), and Oklahoma (9). That's gotta be their max, and Oklahoma (3-5 in the B12) is pushing it, especially with Longar Longar out indefinitely. Five is probably more likely than six. The over/under was 5.5.

This conference recently passed the Pac-10 in the Pomeroy conference rankings. Here are the top 10:

I think these are very accurate. The top two are clear. The ACC is so strong at the top, and Clemson is really coming on strong of late (well, except for minutes 46-50 against UNC). There's then another drop before the BE & B10. (Is Purdue actually the best team in that conference? We'll get a better idea Tuesday night, as they host Michigan State). Finally there's another dropoff before we reach the SEC, which really has one good team (Tennessee), and about six more that aren't bad but it's hard to get excited about.

The number of teams these conferences get into the tournament isn't going to match up with this order at all. The SEC currently has six teams getting in, but five of them are 7-10 seeds (Tennessee is a 1). The average seed of the six ACC teams is 7.5; that number for the B12, getting the same number of teams in, is 4.8.

Same thing as last week- rankings are based on the lines on conference games so far. Today, we look at the Pac-10, as everybody has played at least seven of the 18 scheduled conference games.

In theory, we should be able to predict future lines with this. For example, if UCLA hosted USC, they would be favored by 13.2 (9.3-0.0 +3.9 for home court). In fact, this matchup occurred last weekend, and the Bruins were favored by 11.5, only to lose by nine.

The top and bottom teams are very clear. Especially the bottom- the Beavers have been outscored 588-447 in eight games thus far. They are also just 2-6 against the spread, which is pretty remarkable since these have been some pretty big spreads (they were getting 16 from UCLA at home on Saturday; they lost by 23).

Oregon St. has a real shot at going 0-18 in conference play. Their best chance at a win will be at home against Washington on February 16, and even then they will be significant underdogs. Pomeroy's percentages give them a 46.8% chance of not winning a conference game.

So Oregon St. is terrible, and UCLA has a good shot at reaching its third consecutive Final Four. Aside from that, the best conference in the nation is pretty wide open.

I think Stanford, Washington St. and Arizona could each make a case for being the second best team in the conference right now. Washington St. won @Baylor and Gonzaga in non-conference, beat USC by 15 on the road, and have only lost @UCLA and @Arizona. I don't know- I just find something about the Cougars unconvincing. They were really never in the UCLA game after falling behind 28-10 (the final score is deceiving, as they hit a ridiculous seven threes in the last 1:37). And then they lose against Arizona. The same type of thing happened last year, when they got swept by both UCLA and Oregon (the top two teams in the conference), but went 13-1 in their other P10 games. Then they lost in the second round in both the P10 and NCAA tourneys. I think I'll remain a little down on them until they beat some of these elite teams, which they'll have plenty of opportunities to do.

On the surface, Arizona's resume isn't nearly as impressive. But when you take into account that they were missing freshman Jerryd Bayless for three of their six losses, it changes things. Bayless has been fantastic, averaging 20ppg with a 58% eFG%. Since he returned they have won @Houston and Cal, and won convincingly on their home floor against the two Washington schools. Their sole loss was @Stanford, when he shot 3/12 from the floor. They'll be tested this week, when they visit the southern California schools- coming out of that with a split would have to be considered a success.

The numbers- both in the table above, and Pomeroy's ratings- love Stanford, but their resume is pretty uninspiring. They played nobody out of conference, and didn't even go undefeated, losing to Siena. Their best road win is @Cal, which is 1-4 at home in the Pac-10. But they are 16-3, and have beaten USC, Arizona, and ASU at home. They'll have an opportunity to prove themselves on Saturday, as they play the Cougars in Pullman.

They're a clear #5 right now, but Southern Cal could join that discussion at some point. Their last three games have been very impressive, beating UCLA, Oregon St. (by 24) and Oregon on the road. After beginning conference play 0-3, they have a chance to move to 6-3 if they can sweep the Arizona schools at home this weekend.

BBTF hands out some Gold Gloves.

Listen, Buster. Listen. He listened!

The Post not making much sense. Carl echoes the same thoughts, except Carl is joking.

Sheehan's '08 breakout candidates.

Duke or UNC?

Shaughnessy at it again.

Jack Morris for the HoF? In that case, how about Rob Nen?

Grant Wahl doesn't include UNC in his "Magic Eight". His reasoning behind this is questionable (see update).

I thought it would be interesting to contrast the latest AP rankings with the current Pomeroy ratings (explained here) to see where the largest discrepancies lie. Today I'll look at teams that haven't gotten as much attention as they deserve; tomorrow, teams that aren't as good as their AP rankings might indicate.

Marquette; AP #13, Pomeroy #3

I was initially surprised to see Marquette this high in Pomeroy's rankings, but now I get it. They don't have any marquee wins, but their resume is impressive in more subtle ways. There are two main characteristics that cause teams to be underrated by the AP poll, and Marquette has both.

1. "Quality" losses

Marquette has lost two games. In November, Duke beat them by four in Hawaii. Then, a week ago, they lost at West Virginia by 15. Neither of these are bad losses; everybody knows about Duke, but West Virginia is very good as well. According to Pomeroy, Marquette has played the 23rd most difficult schedule in the country.

2. Destroying teams

The AP voters mostly look at whether you win or lose, rather than how much you win or lose by. When we're trying to predict a team's future performance, doing this is ignoring some important information. Three of Marquette's victories are good examples of this:

11/20 Oklahoma St. (N), 91-61
1/3 Providence (H), 96-67
1/12 Notre Dame (H), 92-66

Having beaten these three teams, none of which are ranked, isn't particularly impressive. But beating them by an average of 28 points bodes very well for Marquette as they continue Big East play.


Xavier; AP #20, Pomeroy #9

Xavier has lost at Miami (OH) and Arizona St., and at home against Tennessee. The fact that they lost to ASU by 22 is a concern, but the concern is lessened when you look at their final three non-conference games:

12/31 Kansas St. (H), W 103-77
1/3 Virginia (H), W 108-70
1/6 Auburn (A), W 80-57

To me, even more impressive than the average MOV of 29 points was how Vegas dealt with these games. They were favored by 9 against K State, 9.5 against UVA, and 9 @ Auburn. Each of these lines were higher than I would have expected. The books clearly didn't want a lot of money on Xavier in these games, and the results explained why. Dayton has gotten most of the attention, but Xavier is the best team in a very strong A-10.

Drake; AP #26, Pomeroy #15

The Bulldogs lost at St. Mary's in their second game of the season, which is understandable, as St. Mary's is undefeated at home this year. Drake has since run off 13 straight victories, and are getting dangerously close to the Top 25. Their two most impressive non-conference wins came in beating a very good Duquesne team by four, and beating Iowa St. by 35. But it's been their MVC games that have allowed them to rise in Pomeroy's rankings, as they've started off 5-0, winning each game by an average of 11.4 points.


Wisconsin; AP #17, Pomeroy #6

The main reason that Wisconsin is only #17 is they were 40th in the preseason poll. It would be difficult to move up higher than 23 spots while losing twice over the first couple months of the season. But what's important is that those were quality losses; @Duke, and against Marquette at home. Their win @Texas is very impressive; it's also their only win that has come by less than 10 points. They haven't had much trouble in their first three Big Ten games, easily beating Michigan, Iowa and Illinois.

The following is the ESPN "Game Flow" from last night's Saint Louis-George Washington game. The top line tracks GW's scoring throughout the game, lower line SLU's.

As Rush the Court alertly pointed out last week, "straight line = bad."

With 8:39 to go in the first half, SLU's Barry Eberhardt made a layup, bringing the Billikens to within six (13-7).

They would have to wait 18 minutes for their next field goal. Luke Meyer scored with 10:39 left in the second half, bringing the score to 36-10.

Think about this for a second. Saint Louis scored one point (an Eberhardt FT) in 18 minutes. If they had timed this better, they would have had only a single point on the board with two minutes left in the first half.

During their drought, SLU was 0/24 from the field, including 0/11 from three.

The final score was 49-20. This was a historic performance; SLU scored the fewest points since the shot clock was introduced in '85-'86. The ended up shooting 14.6% from the field, including 5.3% from three.

This is not exactly typical for them; their previous low this year was 52 points. The pace of the game also likely effected the low output; Pomeroy had them ranked 329th of 341 D1 teams in adjusted tempo coming into Thursday night. Even so, his ratings predicted a 58-56 SLU win.

Everybody's votes are here (Google Doc); the final ballot is as follows:

Please excuse me for not getting too excited about UNC. They beat a Clemson team that is not that good by two in OT. They would have lost if Clemson managed better than 14/27 from the line. If the Tigers make a couple more FTs, UNC loses and they're down to 6th in the poll.

Meanwhile, all UCLA did this week was beat both Stanford and Cal rather easily on the road. I moved them up from 5 to 4 because of this.

After beating Pepperdine by 37, I have Memphis' chances of going 31-0 up to 32%.

The biggest discrepancy between my ballot and the compilation is with Ole Miss. I have them 20th, while they're 13th here. They play @Tennessee at 8pm; if they win, I'll certainly move them way up. And if they make a game of it, I won't drop them too far, as that would be the most impressive part of their resume to this point.

I also stubbornly have Texas higher than any of the 13 other voters. They destroyed St. Mary's, and those Tennessee and UCLA wins are looking more impressive by the day. If Texas played Ole Miss on a neutral court tomorrow, I'm pretty confident that the Longhorns would emerge victorious.

I understand why Xavier is 22nd; they have three losses (including getting blown out by 22 @Arizona St.), and the only name team they've beaten is Indiana. But after their performance in their last four games, I think you'd be hard-pressed to find 20 better teams in the country. (Pomeroy's rankings, which I should do a rundown of sometime soon, agree with this, as Xavier is 5th.)