2018-2019 B1G Basketball Thread

[ELA]

I would put Purdue on Tier 3 for now, maybe Indiana too.  The Hoosiers play like an AAU team.  They are going to continue to be less than the sum of their parts all season.

[medinabuckeye1]

I would put Purdue on Tier 3 for now, maybe Indiana too.  The Hoosiers play like an AAU team.  They are going to continue to be less than the sum of their parts all season.

I wasn't sure where to draw the cut-line between tier-2 and tier-3.  I kept IU and PU above the line because I felt like PU looked good in their win over Iowa and that IU looked good in their competitive loss in Ann Arbor.  
I'll defer to the group if their is group consensus.  Other thoughts?  

[Entropy]

Nebraska will be tier 4 soon

[HailHailMSP]

MN feels "under-tiered"

Their computer ratings fall much more in line with Tier's 2 & 3. No outside the conference marquee wins, but the Wisconsin win plus their computer status may elevate them. The Maryland game tomorrow will be a good data point. 

[HailHailMSP]

Nice to see Michigan win comfortably with some adversity. Livers out, plus foul trouble for a handful. Johns should take most of the Davis minutes. Davis's time should be shrunk to 3-6 minutes a game in situations where there isn't an athletic big he is lined up across from, and to spell Teske and Johns a bit. Brandon Johns time last night was very valuable for development. 8 pts, 8 rebounds in 12 or so minutes against a strong opponent is a big win. 

[medinabuckeye1]

MN feels "under-tiered"

Their computer ratings fall much more in line with Tier's 2 & 3. No outside the conference marquee wins, but the Wisconsin win plus their computer status may elevate them. The Maryland game tomorrow will be a good data point.

I think you might be right, but I don't think we should make that move just yet.  
When @ELA posted the composite computer rankings last week there was a substantial gap between the bottom of tier-3 (Iowa at #38) and the top of tier-4 (MN at #52).  Obviously Minnesota's win in Madison will improve their ranking but, at least for now, I'd like to treat that as an upset and take a wait-and-see approach.  
I agree with you that the Maryland game tomorrow will be a good data point.  Minnesota is hosting Maryland and we would project the Gophers to win regardless of whether they are in tier-3 or tier-4 because Maryland is in tier-3.  Obviously, if Minnesota loses it simply cancels out their upset win.  As a tier-4 team they should basically barely win.  If they run Maryland out of the gym . . .
After that the Gophers host Rutgers which should be a pretty easy win either way.  Then they travel to Illinois.  This will be a key data point because a tier-3 team should win in Champaign while a tier-4 team should lose in Champaign.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

Nebraska will be tier 4 soon

KenPom (16) and Sagarin (11) don't agree that Nebraska should be tier-4 BTW. It's important to see their record in context... 11-4, but with the 31st strongest SoS in the country per KenPom. That SoS helps to buoy Wisconsin (15th in KenPom w/ 4 losses, 17th hardest SoS), and Purdue (17th in KenPom w/ 5 losses, 10th-hardest SoS). 
Per Iowa/Minnesota, it is clear from the computer rankings that their gap has lessened. KenPom has Iowa 43, Minnesota 48, Northwestern 51. Sagarin has Iowa 50, Minnesota 49, Northwestern 52. Quantitatively, it seems to me that it would justify moving Iowa down, not moving Minnesota up. Penn State is around 60 in both computer rankings as well. 

KenPom and Sagarin diverge on both Indiana and Wisconsin. KenPom has Indiana at 27, Sagarin 16. KenPom has Wisconsin at 15, Sagarin 26.
I do think tier 2 looks a little cluttered. I personally am not sure a lot of those teams in tier 2 would be favored to beat Michigan or MSU at home, which suggests a few of them are overweighted. However, I think it's too early in the season to truly understand which teams should be dropped into tier 3 with Maryland. 

[bayareabadger]

Wisconsin’s road bounce back was good to see. Put a good offensive day on a very good defense, even with Happ missing a lot of 2-footers.

I went into that game hoping, “Just don’t put me in a bad mood,” and it did not. 

[medinabuckeye1]

KenPom (16) and Sagarin (11) don't agree that Nebraska should be tier-4 BTW. It's important to see their record in context... 11-4, but with the 31st strongest SoS in the country per KenPom. That SoS helps to buoy Wisconsin (15th in KenPom w/ 4 losses, 17th hardest SoS), and Purdue (17th in KenPom w/ 5 losses, 10th-hardest SoS). 

In my proposed tiers I had Nebraska in tier-2 not tier-4.  

Per Iowa/Minnesota, it is clear from the computer rankings that their gap has lessened. KenPom has Iowa 43, Minnesota 48, Northwestern 51. Sagarin has Iowa 50, Minnesota 49, Northwestern 52. Quantitatively, it seems to me that it would justify moving Iowa down, not moving Minnesota up. Penn State is around 60 in both computer rankings as well.

I get that, but like I said in response to @HailHailMSP , I would prefer to take a wait-and-see approach unless there is broad consensus that we should move Minnesota up (or alternatively Iowa down) now. 

I do think tier 2 looks a little cluttered. I personally am not sure a lot of those teams in tier 2 would be favored to beat Michigan or MSU at home, which suggests a few of them are overweighted. However, I think it's too early in the season to truly understand which teams should be dropped into tier 3 with Maryland.

I also thought that tier-2 looked a little cluttered as soon as I wrote up my proposal but I'm not sure what to do about it just yet.  
One thought I had was that after Ohio State lost at home to MSU and Wisconsin lost at home to Minnesota, maybe we should have a blank tier-2 in between the Michigan Schools (at tier-1) and the current tier-2 teams (at new tier-3).  The gap might be that big.  Much like the Minnesota discussion, I think we should take a wait-and-see approach on this.  Of the proposed (by me) tier-2 teams, their home games against the tier-1 schools:

• Ohio State lost at home to MSU and does not host M so they will finish the season 0-1.  
• Nebraska does not host Michigan and hasn't hosted MSU yet (1/17).  
• Wisconsin hosts both but hasn't hosted either yet (M 1/19 and MSU 2/12).  
• Indiana hosts both but hasn't hosted either yet (M 1/25, MSU 3/2).  
• Purdue does not host Michigan and hasn't hosted MSU yet (1/27).  

So far the tier-1 teams are 1-0 on the road against tier-2 teams (MSU>tOSU).  The remaining games of that type chronologically are:

• MSU at UNL, 1/17
• M at UW, 1/19
• M at IU, 1/25
• MSU at PU, 1/27
• MSU at UW, 2/12
• MSU at IU, 3/2

For now we need to be cognizant of the possibility that Ohio State's home loss to MSU could be either:

• Just one of those things that happens, or
• A problem with Ohio State specifically rather than tier-2 generally.  

However, over the course of January we may discover that Nebraska, Wisconsin, Indiana, and Purdue aren't capable of winning home games against tier-1 teams either.  In that case, we need a blank tier to separate them.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

FYI I had replied to @Entropy who suggested that Nebraska was going to be tier-4. Suspect it was similar to my own statements earlier that Purdue was playing like a tier-3 team; i.e. as fans we are more negative about our own faults than our opponents'. 

Beyond that, I agree with everything else you posted, @medinabuckeye1 -- I think it's too early to make a call on Iowa or Minnesota, and too early to truly determine the tier 1 and tier 2 areas. Not enough sample size just yet. 

We should know more in about 2 weeks IMHO. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Ok, I have now updated.  For the time being we are using these tiers:

• Michigan, Michigan State
• Indiana, Wisconsin, Nebraska, Purdue, Ohio State
• Maryland, Iowa
• Minnesota, Northwestern, Penn State
• Illinois, Rutgers

Based on those tiers we have had four upsets so far:

• UW over Iowa in Iowa City on 11/30
• MN over UNL in Minneapolis on 12/5
• MN over UW in Madison on 1/3
• MSU over tOSU in Columbus on 1/5

Wisconsin has one upset each way so they effectively cancel out.  MSU has one up while IA, UNL, and tOSU each have one down.  The one that may need adjusted is Minnesota which now has two positive upsets.  Their win over Wisconsin would be an upset almost no matter what but their home win over Nebraska would not be an upset if we either moved them up or Nebraska down.  

New projected final standings/seeds in the BTT in Chicago, IL:

• 17-3 Michigan
• 15-5 Indiana (wins tiebreaker over MSU based on record against Wisconsin)
• 15-5 Michigan State
• 14-6 Wisconsin
• 13-7 Purdue (wins tiebreaker over Nebraska based on record against IU/MSU)
• 13-7 Nebraska
• 12-8 Ohio State
• 10-10 Maryland
• 8-12 Iowa
• 7-13 Minnesota
• 5-15 Northwestern
• 4-16 Penn State (wins tiebreaker over Illinois based on record against Maryland)
• 4-16 Illinois
• 3-17 Rutgers

Thus, the match-ups at the BTT in the United Center in Chicago Illinois would be:
Wednesday, March 13:

• #11 Northwestern vs #14 Rutgers, 9pm, BTN
• #12 Penn State vs #13 Illinois, 6:30pm, BTN

Thursday, March 14:

• #5 Purdue vs NU/RU, 3pm, BTN
• #6 Nebraska vs PSU/IL, 9:30pm, BTN
• #7 Ohio State vs #10 Minnesota, 7pm, BTN
• #8 Maryland vs #9 Iowa, 12:30pm, BTN

Friday, March 15:

• #1 Michigan vs UMD/IA, 12:30pm, BTN
• #2 Indiana vs tOSU/MN, 7pm, BTN
• #3 Michigan State vs UNL/PSU/IL, 9:30pm, BTN
• #4 Wisconsin vs PU/NU/RU, 3pm, BTN

Saturday, March 16:

• M/UMD/IA vs UW/PU/NU/RU, 1pm, CBS
• IU/tOSU/MN vs MSU/UNL/PSU/IL, 3:30pm, CBS

Sunday, March 17 B1G Championship Game:

• M/UMD/IA/UW/PU/NU/RU vs IU/tOSU/MN/MSU/UNL/PSU/IL, 3:30pm, CBS

[ELA]

Lol, how easy is Michigan's schedule that on the same tier, and already +1, while UM is even, that UM is still projected 2 games better?

[medinabuckeye1]

Explanation of tiebreakers:

First we project both Michigan State and Indiana to finish 15-5.  

• The first tiebreaker is H2H.  The teams play twice (H&H) so we project each team to win one.  
• The second tiebreaker is record against the best team or teams in the league.  That is 17-3 Michigan but both teams are projected to go 1-1 against the Wolverines.  
• The next tiebreaker is record against the next best team or teams in the league.  That is 14-6 Wisconsin.  Each team plays Wisconsin only once but Indiana gets the Badgers in Bloomington while the Spartans have to travel to Madison.  Thus, we project that MSU will go 0-1 while IU will go 1-0 and consequently IU wins the tiebreaker and gets the #2 seed.  

We project that both Nebraska and Purdue will go 13-7.  

• The first tiebreaker is H2H.  The teams play twice (H&H) so we project each team to win one.  
• The second tiebreaker is record against the best team or teams in the league.  That is 17-3 Michigan.  Purdue already lost in Ann Arbor and does not host the Wolverines this year.  Nebraska also does not host the Wolverines this year so we project both teams to finish 0-1.  
• The next tiebreaker is record against the next best team or teams in the league.  that is 15-5 MSU and IU.  Purdue plays them twice each and is projected to go 2-2.  Nebraska plays MSU twice but does not host Michigan so we project them to go 1-2 and consequently the tiebreaker goes to PU and they get the #5 seed.  

We project that both Penn State and Illinois will go 4-16.  

• The first tiebreaker is H2H.  The teams play twice (H&H) so we project each team to win one.  
• Next is record against Michigan but we project both to finish 0-season.  
• Next is record against MSU/IU but we project both to finish 0-season.  
• Next is record against Wisconsin but we project both to finish 0-season.  
• Next is record against UNL/PU but we project both to finish 0-season.  
• Next is record against tOSU but we project both to finish 0-season.  
• Next is record against Maryland.  We project PSU to go 1-1 against the Terps while the Illini go 0-1 so the Nittany Lions win the tiebreaker and get the #12 seed.  

Either I can't find it, or the conference pulled the BB Tiebreaker from their website.  The best I can find is this link to a post from 2015 on the BTN website.  Unless someone can point me to something more current or more authoritative, I will assume for now that this is still controlling.  The tiebreakers are:

• H2H
• Record against the best team or teams in the conference, then the next, then the next, etc.  
• Record against all D1 opponents
• Coin toss

[medinabuckeye1]

Lol, how easy is Michigan's schedule that on the same tier, and already +1, while UM is even, that UM is still projected 2 games better?

I've commented on this before.  It is flat out shocking how easy Michigan's schedule appears to be.  The home games are somewhat irrelevant because both M and MSU (along with all five tier-2 teams are projected to win all of their home games anyway.  
In road games, MSU misses Maryland, Minnesota, and Northwestern.  We would project them to win all three anyway so they get no help whatsoever from the missed games.  Michigan misses Nebraska, Ohio State, and Purdue which are ALL in tier-2 and consequently they get a HUMONGOUS boost in their projected final record from 20-6 or .769 on a double-round-robin to 17-3 or .850 on the existing 20-game schedule.  

Ranking the schedules from most helpful to most detrimental:

• +.081 Michigan
• +.058 Indiana
• +.046 Illinois
• +.019 Minnesota
• +.019 Northwestern
• +.008 Wisconsin
• +.008 Nebraska
• EVEN Maryland
• -.004 Rutgers
• -.031 Penn State
• -.042 Purdue
• -.042 Ohio State
• -.050 Iowa
• -.069 Michigan State

The figures listed are the difference between the team's projected winning percentage on a 26-game double-round-robin schedule and their projected winning percentage on the existing 20-game schedule (before accounting for upsets).  Examples:

• Michigan projects at .769 on a double-round-robin but .850 on the existing schedule, difference .081
• Maryland projects at .500 on a double-round-robin and also .500 on the existing schedule, no difference
• Michigan State projects at .769 on a double-round-robin (same as M) but .700 on the existing schedule, -.069

It really sucks for MSU because note that their projected seed is behind the two teams with the most favorable schedules (M, and IU).