Importance of NCAA Seeds

H

Hawk1960

Well-Known Member
There will certainly be a lot of talk in the next few weeks regarding "seeding" for the big dance. Attached is a good article looking at the first round winning percentages and a recap below. The data is from 1997 - 2011 ...

Seed 1st Round Winning %
#1 100%
#2 97%
#3 90%
#4 78%
#5 63%
#6 67% (yes, higher than a 5 seed)
#7 53%
#8 52%

BostonSportsHub.com - Men's NCAA Basketball Tournament
 
I love studies like this that point out the obvious. So higher seeds win their first round games more often than do lower seeds. Good stuff.

I'll bet you also didn't know that Iowa is UNDEFEATED this year when scoring 100 points or more. Or that it's cooler in the shade than it is in the sun.
 
Last edited:
1977Hawkeye said:
I love studies like this that point out the obvious. So higher seeds win their first round games more often than do lower seeds. Good stuff.

I'll bet you also didn't know that Iowa is UNDEFEATED this year when scoring 100 points or more.
Click to expand...

True but the anomaly between 5 and 6 is interesting

I assume it is because 11 seeds are usually mid levell BCS teams, where 12 seeds are usually high level, low tier conference teams that have something to prove.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
I love studies like this that point out the obvious. So higher seeds win their first round games more often than do lower seeds. Good stuff.

I'll bet you also didn't know that Iowa is UNDEFEATED this year when scoring 100 points or more. Or that it's cooler in the shade than it is in the sun.
Click to expand...

To me real facts are always more interesting than b.s. on message boards.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
I love studies like this that point out the obvious. So higher seeds win their first round games more often than do lower seeds. Good stuff.

I'll bet you also didn't know that Iowa is UNDEFEATED this year when scoring 100 points or more. Or that it's cooler in the shade than it is in the sun.
Click to expand...

Studies show that roads become wet after rain falls. The things that stood out to me from those numbers are how much better it is to be a 4 than a 5 (15%) and how much better it is to be a 6 than a 7 (14%).

edit: they stand out because the margins between other seeds seem tighter and less substantial.
 
I agree that those numbers do matter. A few people on these boards say things like "I don't care what seed we are or who we play, have to beat the best teams at some point anyway." I disagree with this, seeds do matter, because higher seeds have more favorable match-ups and are more likely to advance to the next round. I would rather be a 4 seed and make the Sweet 16 than be a 7 seed and lose in round one. Higher seeds make going further more likely.
 
SnapBack said:
I agree that those numbers do matter. A few people on these boards say things like "I don't care what seed we are or who we play, have to beat the best teams at some point anyway." I disagree with this, seeds do matter, because higher seeds have more favorable match-ups and are more likely to advance to the next round. I would rather be a 4 seed and make the Sweet 16 than be a 7 seed and lose in round one. Higher seeds make going further more likely.
Click to expand...

I would rather be a 6 seed than a 4 seed, though. You still get a favorable round 1 matchup, then get a 3 seed (usually not that big of a difference in terms of quality) in the second round and the 2 seed in the Sweet 16 instead of the 1 seed. That said, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 3 seed.
 
tm3308 said:
I would rather be a 6 seed than a 4 seed, though. You still get a favorable round 1 matchup, then get a 3 seed (usually not that big of a difference in terms of quality) in the second round and the 2 seed in the Sweet 16 instead of the 1 seed. That said, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 3 seed.
Click to expand...

I think a 3-seed significantly improves Iowa's (or anyone's) chance to advance. The stats show 3-seeds fair quite a bit better against 14 seeds, then 4 seeds do against 12 seeds (which could be major conference team). Plus there is the obvious advantage of avoiding the 1 seed in the sweet 16. It is much easier for Iowa to beat Duke than Syracuse.
 
If the Hawks do what they are capable of doing they will get no worse than a 4 seed. They could get a 3 seed.
 
1977Hawkeye said:
I love studies like this that point out the obvious. So higher seeds win their first round games more often than do lower seeds. Good stuff.

I'll bet you also didn't know that Iowa is UNDEFEATED this year when scoring 100 points or more. Or that it's cooler in the shade than it is in the sun.
Click to expand...

The fact that conventional thinking is not always accurate means that all conventional thinking needs to be tested if we're going to find truth. It's seems obvious but it's worth looking at because you never know what the truth says about seeding. Now we do.
 
tm3308 said:
I would rather be a 6 seed than a 4 seed, though. You still get a favorable round 1 matchup, then get a 3 seed (usually not that big of a difference in terms of quality) in the second round and the 2 seed in the Sweet 16 instead of the 1 seed. That said, I'm keeping my fingers crossed for a 3 seed.
Click to expand...

You may be getting a bit ahead of yourself but I understand what you're saying. End of the day....seeds matter.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Latest posts

Share this page

Top