I Never, You Always

[Wrestleknownothing]

When my kids were little and they would complain about something it usually took the form of "I never get to ____, you always get to ____" and was usually directed at a sibling. Oh, and it was always wrong. So, I would respond with "I don't want to hear 'I never, you always' ".

Some of the debates on here can take that form. It is especially the case with NCAA performance. People say some form of "my team always out performs their seed, but your team always under performs". Is that true?

At the risk of ending the debate (ha, ha, ha) I present some data on how teams perform at NCAA's based on 2010 - 2022 results. This gets a bit tricky when you span 12 seed, 16 seed, and 33 seed tournaments.

To deal with that:

• An unseeded wrestler can only perform at their seed or better than their seed in my world.
• Meanwhile, a seeded wrestler has all three options available to them.

Not a perfect choice, but here we are, none the less. Also, I use the midpoint of the range for non-All Americans. So, a wrestler knocked out in the blood round gets credit for finishing 10.5 ( (12+9)/2 ), if they were not seeded 9 through 12. If they were seeded 9 through 12, they get credit for “At Seed”.

• How Often? The first set of three columns shows the % of times a team falls into each category (Better Than Seed, At Seed, or Worse Than Seed)
• By How Much? The second set of three columns shows the average of the degree of performance. So when Minnesota outperforms their seed they do it by an average of 3.9 spots.
• Yeah, But Where Did They Start? The the third set of three columns shows what the average seed was by category.

The obvious conclusion is that Little Rock is the most under rated tournament team of all time. Do not open your gate for these Trojan horses.

With no further ado, the top 20 by "Better" %:

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

Typo noticed after the 15 minute shot clock expired.

 So when Minnesota outperforms their seed they do it by an average of 3.9  4.4 spots

[jchapman]

Thanks for your work.  Can you run the numbers specifically for Alex Marinelli?  J/K!

[BerniePragle]

@Wrestleknownothing

Well, I never...

I'm sure I'm setting myself up for a PTF (palm to forehead) moment, but WTF is FS?  Is that that fashion school Mrs You-Know Who attended?

[jchapman]

6 minutes ago, BerniePragle said:

@Wrestleknownothing

Well, I never...

I'm sure I'm setting myself up for a PTF (palm to forehead) moment, but WTF is FS?  Is that that fashion school Mrs You-Know Who attended?

I assume Fresno State (RIP).

[Dark Energy]

Nice.  Where is Mizzou?

[mspart]

PSU at seed 40% seems low but that's because they have been winning so often.  But if a #1 wins, he did not exceed his seed so there's that.  They have had a lot of #1 seeds.

Okie State does not surprise me, they constantly underperform which is something I have been saying for years.  

MINN is a surprise.   I think they usually underperform but they are one of the higher performers.  

Very interesting chart.   Thanks for taking the time. 

mspart

 

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, BerniePragle said:

@Wrestleknownothing

Well, I never...

I'm sure I'm setting myself up for a PTF (palm to forehead) moment, but WTF is FS?  Is that that fashion school Mrs You-Know Who attended?

@jchapman is right on both accounts. Fresno State. And RIP. Though if you are a glass half full kinda guy, take solace in the fact that they will never get worse.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, jchapman said:

Thanks for your work.  Can you run the numbers specifically for Alex Marinelli?  J/K!

You are playing a dangerous game, my friend. Let us not speak of Alex Marinelli, lest we have to mention Christopher Weller.

[Wrestleknownothing]

1 hour ago, Dark Energy said:

Nice.  Where is Mizzou?

#22 based on Better %

[Dark Energy]

Mizzou is a team that many say has benefited from their conference and schedule.  Has gotten higher seeds than deserved.  Your numbers would suggest this is somewhat correct.  Thank you.

[ionel]

14 minutes ago, Dark Energy said:

Mizzou is a team that many say has benefited from their conference and schedule.  Has gotten higher seeds than deserved.  Your numbers would suggest this is somewhat correct.  Thank you.

SEC

[Crotalus]

Mizzou is a team that many say has benefited from their conference and schedule.  Has gotten higher seeds than deserved.  Your numbers would suggest this is somewhat correct.  Thank you.

I knew someone would bring them up. They no doubt have often had guys over seeded when they were in the MAC (which they never wanted to be in), but that happens in every conference but the Big 10 and, to a lesser degree, the Big 12. That said, they got the seeds they deserved based on their results, and they always scheduled tough tournaments and non-conference duals. Big 10 fan boys just get butt hurt about seeds because they beat each other up all season (or at least they used to prior to the increase in the duck population), and it hurts their seeds. Mizzou is a perennial top 10 team. Anyone who thinks they actually regularly underperform realistic expectations (vs. inflated seeds) is an idiot.

[MizzouFan01]

12 minutes ago, Crotalus said:

1 hour ago, Dark Energy said:

Mizzou is a team that many say has benefited from their conference and schedule.  Has gotten higher seeds than deserved.  Your numbers would suggest this is somewhat correct.  Thank you.

I knew someone would bring them up. They no doubt have often had guys over seeded when they were in the MAC (which they never wanted to be in), but that happens in every conference but the Big 10 and, to a lesser degree, the Big 12. That said, they got the seeds they deserved based on their results, and they always scheduled tough tournaments and non-conference duals. Big 10 fan boys just get butt hurt about seeds because they beat each other up all season (or at least they used to prior to the increase in the duck population), and it hurts their seeds. Mizzou is a perennial top 10 team. Anyone who thinks they actually regularly underperform realistic expectations (vs. inflated seeds) is an idiot.

Although I agree with most of your post, there are proven examples of Mizzou under performing badly compared to seed at NCAAS. Joey Lavalle as a SR comes to mind. There are others. Recently, in the last 4/5 years without looking it up, I don’t think it’s near as bad. 

[Crotalus]

15 minutes ago, MizzouFan01 said:

Although I agree with most of your post, there are proven examples of Mizzou under performing badly compared to seed at NCAAS. Joey Lavalle as a SR comes to mind. There are others. Recently, in the last 4/5 years without looking it up, I don’t think it’s near as bad. 

You can find examples of guys flopping at the tournament from any team. The previous year Lavallee was the 3 seed and made the finals. As a returning finalist the next year with 1 or so losses, he deserved a high seed. But guys in the MAC, or ACC, or even Pac 10, are generally going to have fewer losses than guys at a similar level in the Big 10. And that will result in inflated seeds. So yes, Mizzou, especially while in the MAC, often underperformed seeds. But I don't think they underperform realistic expectations. As a fan, I would argue they are frustratingly consistent. Always in that 5-10 range and never finding their way onto the podium. 

[Show_Me]

6 hours ago, Crotalus said:

Always in that 5-10 range and never finding their way onto the podium. 

Missouri finished 3rd in 2007 (Auburn Hills MI) despite #1 Seed Max Askren going 2 & bbq.  I remember Ben Askren & Matt Pell scoring a bunch of Bonus points and recall how terrible the venue/location was.  Hoping to see the Tigers make a push for another trophy this year ... 16 years is too long.