Joe Lunardi's Blog: X is Deserving

[xbus]

This is from Joe Lunardi's blog. I especially like the last line....

Xavier deserves its seedingby: Joe Lunardi
posted: Friday, February 29, 2008 | Print Entry

Back to the mailbag (and Happy Leap Day to everyone!):

How can you possibly have Xavier over Stanford? They both have four losses, and Stanford plays in a league that is about 100 times as difficult as the league Xavier plays in. This was made abundantly clear when Xavier was smoked by 20 points against Arizona State. You cannot possibly tell me a mid-major like Xavier would be 11-3 in the Pac-10. This is a joke.

John Oster

I'm normally a fairly agreeable guy, but this kind of big conference arrogance makes me want to scream. In no particular order:

• How is Xavier, with 16 NCAA appearances in 23 seasons since the field expanded to 64/65 teams, a mid-major in any way? Four teams from the vaunted Pac-10 -- Washington State (2), Arizona State (3), Oregon State (4) and Oregon (5) -- have 14 NCAA appearances combined in the same time period.

• This is why the Selection Committee evaluates teams, not conferences. In seeding one team over another, it's the overall "body or work" that matters. Interestingly, Xavier is 6-1 vs. InsideRPI Top 50 teams and Stanford is 4-1. At the other end of the spectrum, both teams are perfect against sub-150 competition. But the Musketeers (8-0) have played three fewer "dogs" than the Cardinal (11-0).

• Did I miss something, or didn't Stanford also lose at Arizona State? Same thing for Arizona, Oregon and Washington. Let's be consistent here.

• Citing Xavier's blowout loss at ASU is fine, so long as we cite their double-digit wins over NCAA teams such as Kent State, Indiana and Kansas State. Stanford has one such victory (splitting the season series with Arizona State).

• The best single metric we have in Bracketology is ASM (Adjusted Scoring Margin). Stanford, at 13.15 ppg, ranks No. 20 in the country in this category. Xavier (16.41 ppg) is eighth. If these teams met on a neutral court, Xavier would be favored by 3-4 points.

• I really laugh when I hear something like "no way Xavier could go 12-3 in the Pac-10." No one ever asks the opposite question: Could Stanford go 12-1 in the Atlantic 10? Or 12-3 against the No. 12 nonconference schedule? We'll never know, of course, but we do know the Cardinal's nonconference schedule ranks a less-than-robust No. 313.

• To find a nonconference schedule worse than Stanford's among teams currently in the field, we have to go all the way down to a No. 12 seed. And, wouldn't you know, it's Arizona State (No. 321, even with the win over Xavier).

• For obvious reasons, I remember all too well the beating I took in 2004 for having the temerity to suggest undefeated Saint Joseph's 00 another Atlantic 10 "mid-major" -- deserved a No. 1 seed every bit as much, if not more, than undefeated Stanford. The A-10 was rated higher than the Pac-10 that year, produced more NCAA Tournament teams and the Hawks' nonconference schedule (No. 1) was miles ahead of Stanford's. I also remember Stanford losing in the second round of the NCAAs, while two A-10 teams -- Saint Joseph's and, ironically, Xavier -- lost one-possession games in the Elite Eight.

The truth of the matter is that Stanford, with these numbers, is fortunate to be a No. 3 seed. If the Cardinal wins the Pac-10, then it's time to reassess. In the meantime, John, I suggest you be a tad less dismissive of what you apparently know very little about.

[klark]

This is a great piece from Lunardi, pretty much sticking it to the whiners from the PAC-10 acting as if XU does not belong anywhere near a 3 seed. Any chance we can get him on the selection committee?

[xuwburg]

What a great reply by Lunardi, using some great stats to back up his points (NCAA tourney appearances, record v. top 50 RPI and sub 150).

I can't believe Stanford's OOC SOS is 313. Just took a look at that sched and highlights look like TX Tech and an 11-pt win at NW.

Oh, and can we talk about a 12-point loss at Siena?

[XLFan]

Wow, someone at ESPN put a lot of research into this well thought response. Thank you Joe Lunardi.

[somebody]

Could you give the link to Lunardi's comments. He, of the ESPN crowd, is not afraid to tell it like it is.

[confusedbulldog]

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/in ... ncbexperts

Is there any way to change the link text, ie make the url into a word? ("http..."->"link")?

[somebody]

http://insider.espn.go.com/espn/blog/in ... ncbexperts

Is there any way to change the link text, ie make the url into a word? ("http..."->"link")?

Click this: ESPN Home

The usual BBCode format for this is the following:
~substitute [ ] for { }

{url=http://espn.go.com}ESPN Home{/url}

However I did find it rather flaky with longer links.

I seem to recall trying the HTML format when the board first opened and I think it did not work though I think it just may be an administrative setting.

Oh and thanks for the link! I tried to do the BBCode with it but could not do it. Think the admin maybe needs to do some tweaking still.

[MillerTime]

All I have to say is that...was...AWESOME!

[XavierIsGreat]

Xavier vs Stanford
X Record 24-4
Stanford 23-4 (lost at Siena because of no Brooke Lopez)
Common Opponents Both Lost to Arizona State at Arizona State

X RPI: 6
Stanford RPI: 19

They both deserve at least a 3 seed and if both win out a 2. And Xavier wouldn't have that much better or worse in the PAC 10 and vice versa for Stanford. Xavier has clinched the Atlantic 10. Stanford is one game behind UCLA in the PAC with a game at Pauley on Thursday.

Xavier: Final Four (balence, depth, guard play)
Stanford: Sweet 16/Elite 8 (inside play and guards starting to come around)

[D'Artagnan10]

This is so good, I have to print it out and bring it to the game tonight to show my row.