Championship Brackets with Boyd's ISR ratings

[TXR]

Austin, Texas
1. Texas (1) 4
2. Texas St. 23
3. Boston College 57
4. Army 150

we got a pretty fair regional bracket

Fort Worth, Texas
1. TCU 8
2. Texas A&M 16
3. Oregon State 9
4. Wright State 134

we match up with a regional bracket that arguably has three 1-seeds.

Atlanta, Ga.
1. Georgia Tech 13
2. Elon 33
3. Southern Miss 59
4. Georgia State 114
reasonable non-national seed bracket

Gainesville, Fla.
1. Florida (8) 11
2. Miami (Fla.) 36
3. Jacksonville 71
4. Bethune-Cookman 158

reasonable national seed bracket

Tempe, Ariz.
1. Arizona State (5) 2
2. Oral Roberts 44
3. Cal Poly 18
4. Kent State 82

reasonable national seed bracket when considering Cal Poly and ORU are switched.

Clemson, S.C.
1. Clemson 17
2. Alabama 30
3. Oklahoma State 29
4. Tennessee Tech 133
clemson barely qualifies as a non-national 1 -- I think the much bemoaned cowboys could make some noise here.

Greenville, N.C.
1. East Carolina 22
2. South Carolina 25
3. George Mason 65
4. Binghamton 196
easy breezy.

Chapel Hill, N.C.
1. North Carolina (4) 14
2. Coastal Carolina 38
3. Kansas 35
4. Dartmouth 126
...and the national seed easy breezy. again they are trying to give UNC a downhill coast to the CWS.

Fullerton, Calif.
1. CS Fullerton (2) 1
2. Georgia Southern 39
3. Gonzaga 20
4. Utah 78
a little tough for CSF but not unreasonable.

Louisville, Ky.
1. Louisville 32
2. Middle Tennesee 27
3. Vanderbilt 42
4. Indiana 112
the midwest easy - CSF catches a break after the regional.

Tallahassee, Fla.
1. Florida State 21
2. Georgia 28
3. Ohio State 54
4. Marist 207
overrated ACC versus overrated SEC.

Norman, Okla.
1. Oklahoma (7) 6
2. Arkansas 19
3. Washington State 24
4. Wichita State 106
reasonable national seed bracket with a tough 3 seed.

Irvine, Calif.
1. UC Irvine (6) 3
2. Virginia 12
3. San Diego State 50
4. Fresno State 107
Here is the first big ouch. Most commentators feel Virginia was jobbed getting San Diego State's super pitcher and being shipped to Irvine. Irvine doesn't deserve a top 16 in the regional.

Oxford, Miss.
1. Mississippi 15
2. Missouri 34
3. Western Kentucky 49
4. Monmouth 195
reasonable

Houston
1. Rice 7
2. Kansas State 10
3. Xavier 96
4. Sam Houston State 62
ouch.

Baton Rouge, La.
1. LSU (3) 5
2. Minnesota 40
3. Baylor 37
4. Southern 156
meh.
The Link

here's his calculated probabilities for regional/super/cws bracket/cws titleThe Link

 

[hookem2003]

I'm just so happy that we didn't draw SDSU. Facing Strasburg is as close to a guaranteed loss as you can get.

 

[TXR]

It would have been a long shot to see strasburg with their location and rpi. I'm not really excited about having to rematch TCU or A&M in a super. Probably rather face some fresh blood in recent champs OrSU.

 

[Scooter]

Nice work. Looks like my bracket, though I also add RPI, total record and last ten.

The whole seeding thing still mystifies me. Why seed only 8 teams? It's not like Texas, as the best #1 seed, gets the worst #2 seed (which would be the 32nd ranked team). Its's weird. Weird I tell ya. As LHG said in another post, they seed 8 teams and then geographically distribute the other 56.

 

[s102r18]

Here are the 16 #1 seeds sorted by Boyd's probability of winning their regional:[pre]
Pct Team
89.2 Cal State Fullerton
88.6 Arizona State
87.4 Texas
79.0 Louisiana State
76.4 UC Irvine
72.9 Mississippi
72.1 Georgia Tech
68.5 North Carolina
67.3 Florida
65.1 Rice
64.5 Clemson
58.7 Florida State
54.5 East Carolina
54.5 Oklahoma
48.4 Texas Christian
47.3 Louisville[/pre](Apologies but the board software has a bug that causes text inside the pre tag to be double-spaced.)

It would be interesting to see something comparable based on RPI instead of ISR. The ISR ratings should be more accurate, but the RPI-based probabilities would give more insight into how "fair" the committee tried to make each regional, based on their metric of choice.

 

[roofless]

You can't do the same analysis with RPI, since RPI does not directly predict the likelihood of winning, which is what ISR attempts to do.

You might be able to say that a team with a low RPI is more likely to beat a high RPI team, but it's not quantifiable in the same way that Boyd's ISR is.

The College Baseball Ratings Page -- Frequently Asked Questions

 

[goosehorn]

Boyd'sworld is one of the coolest websites on the internet.

 

[LonghornsWin]

Can someone explain to me the love affair with the ACC?

Have they ever done anything in baseball other than FSU before they joined the ACC (I know NC was in the finals against OSU a couple of years ago).

Thanks for your comments.

 

[roofless]

As far as ACC success in Omaha goes, you have to look at UNC (of late), and Miami and FSU, mostly in their pre-ACC days. Georgia Tech and Clemson have both appeared in recent years as well.

It's widely known that RPI favors teams from the southeast. Seeding is almost entirely based on RPI of the team in question and the RPI of that team's opponents. Thus since the RPI is biased, the ACC and SEC tend to get more love from the committee in seeding than they deserve.

This year is exceptional, in that those conferences arguably got less than what they deserved, what with UVA as a No. 2 seed, and FSU and Ole Miss not hosting a super. I'm confident the pendulum will swing back to its normal position (firmly to the east) next season and beyond.