Started By
Message
The Potential 1-Seeds Record vs the Projected Field.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 12:42 pm
Posted on 5/19/25 at 12:42 pm
Using today’s D1 baseball NCAA Tournament Projections ( LINK)
Here is how each team stacks up against the current projected field, sorted first by wins and then by overall games played…
Record vs Projected 1-Seeds:
9-4 Arkansas
8-7 Auburn
8-4 Texas
7-7 Alabama
7-6 Ole Miss
6-8 Georgia
5-5 Vanderbilt
4-8 Tennessee
3-6 LSU
Record vs Project 1+2 Seeds:
14-10 Vanderbilt
14-9 Arkansas
13-11 Auburn
12-10 Tennessee
11-9 Ole Miss
10-11 Alabama
10-7 Texas
10-10 Georgia
9-8 LSU
Record vs Projected 1+2+3 Seeds:
18-14 Vanderbilt
18-13 Auburn
16-14 Ole Miss
16-8 Texas
15-14 Alabama
15-12 Georgia
15-8 LSU
14-9 Arkansas
14-13 Tennessee
Record vs the Projected Field of 64:
21-13 Auburn
19-14 Ole Miss
18-14 Vanderbilt
18-12 Georgia
17-8 Texas
16-9 Arkansas
15-14 Alabama
15-8 LSU
14-13 Tennessee
My initial thoughts…
*Vandy has quietly put together a hell of a resume.
*Ole Miss should be getting more credit, and their resume looks like a solid regional host IMO.
*Texas lacks the number of quality opponents played but their win% against the strong teams they have played is undeniably strong… specifically looking at that 16-8 record vs 1-3 projected seeds.
Here is how each team stacks up against the current projected field, sorted first by wins and then by overall games played…
Record vs Projected 1-Seeds:
9-4 Arkansas
8-7 Auburn
8-4 Texas
7-7 Alabama
7-6 Ole Miss
6-8 Georgia
5-5 Vanderbilt
4-8 Tennessee
3-6 LSU
Record vs Project 1+2 Seeds:
14-10 Vanderbilt
14-9 Arkansas
13-11 Auburn
12-10 Tennessee
11-9 Ole Miss
10-11 Alabama
10-7 Texas
10-10 Georgia
9-8 LSU
Record vs Projected 1+2+3 Seeds:
18-14 Vanderbilt
18-13 Auburn
16-14 Ole Miss
16-8 Texas
15-14 Alabama
15-12 Georgia
15-8 LSU
14-9 Arkansas
14-13 Tennessee
Record vs the Projected Field of 64:
21-13 Auburn
19-14 Ole Miss
18-14 Vanderbilt
18-12 Georgia
17-8 Texas
16-9 Arkansas
15-14 Alabama
15-8 LSU
14-13 Tennessee
My initial thoughts…
*Vandy has quietly put together a hell of a resume.
*Ole Miss should be getting more credit, and their resume looks like a solid regional host IMO.
*Texas lacks the number of quality opponents played but their win% against the strong teams they have played is undeniably strong… specifically looking at that 16-8 record vs 1-3 projected seeds.
This post was edited on 5/19/25 at 12:58 pm
7
Posted on 5/19/25 at 12:53 pm to AUTiger789
Alabama has
- 7 wins vs #1 seeds
- 10 vs #1-2 seeds
- 15 vs #1-3 seeds
2 vs #1 Georgia
1 vs #1 LSU
1 vs #1 Auburn
1 vs #1 Vanderbilt
1 vs #1 Coastal Carolina
1 vs #1 Southern Miss
1 vs #2 Tennessee
1 vs #2 Florida
1 vs #2 NC State
1 vs #3 Mississippi State
2 vs #3 Oklahoma
2 vs #3 Troy
- 7 wins vs #1 seeds
- 10 vs #1-2 seeds
- 15 vs #1-3 seeds
2 vs #1 Georgia
1 vs #1 LSU
1 vs #1 Auburn
1 vs #1 Vanderbilt
1 vs #1 Coastal Carolina
1 vs #1 Southern Miss
1 vs #2 Tennessee
1 vs #2 Florida
1 vs #2 NC State
1 vs #3 Mississippi State
2 vs #3 Oklahoma
2 vs #3 Troy
This post was edited on 5/19/25 at 12:56 pm
Posted on 5/19/25 at 12:58 pm to SummerOfGeorge
Fixed. Sorry about that. I missed your game against Southern Miss.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 12:59 pm to AUTiger789
Why in the world are you sorting by # of wins instead of win %?
Posted on 5/19/25 at 1:02 pm to BigBro
quote:
Why in the world are you sorting by # of wins instead of win %?
Some people value playing a difficult schedule.
Are you fine with Oregon being the overall number 1 seed in the Tournament?… because they are 9-1 (90%) against Quad 1 opponents compared to Texas at 17-10 (63%).
Posted on 5/19/25 at 1:12 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Some people value playing a difficult schedule.
Are you fine with Oregon being the overall number 1 seed in the Tournament?… because they are 9-1 (90%) against Quad 1 opponents compared to Texas at 17-10 (63%).
P
Are you new to baseball? Just curious..
Posted on 5/19/25 at 1:31 pm to BigBro
This post was edited on 5/19/25 at 1:35 pm
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:09 pm to BigBro
Nope. Are you? (And you didn’t answer my question in regards to Oregon vs Texas win% against Q1 opponents).
This post was edited on 5/19/25 at 2:11 pm
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:09 pm to AUTiger789
You're melting all over the board.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:12 pm to 1BIGTigerFan
quote:
You're melting all over the board.
How so?
Sorry literal statistics have you triggered.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:13 pm to AUTiger789
I knew we were up there in quad 1 games played, but that was shocking to see how OM did against the projected field.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:15 pm to AUTiger789
So Arkansas is 14-9 against the 1 and 2 seeds but only 2-0 versus the rest of the field? That’s wild, if true.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:17 pm to Insurancerebel
Ole Miss is legit. Will be extremely disappointing to see the committee bump them down to a 2-seed just to fill regional hosts with teams from other leagues.
Ole Miss, Bama, and Tennessee all deserve to host IMO.
Ole Miss, Bama, and Tennessee all deserve to host IMO.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:18 pm to TheCheshireHog
quote:
So Arkansas is 14-9 against the 1 and 2 seeds but only 2-0 versus the rest of the field? That’s wild, if true.
Yeah I had to do a double check when I saw that. Somehow Arkansas missed all the projected 3 seeds from the SEC this year (MSU, OU, and UK).
Those two other wins came against Oral Roberts.
This post was edited on 5/19/25 at 2:46 pm
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:42 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Ole Miss, Bama, and Tennessee all deserve to host IMO.
TN needs to be traveling, as much shite as they talk, to not win more is funny as hell
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:47 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
Nope. Are you? (And you didn’t answer my question in regards to Oregon vs Texas win% against Q1 opponents).
Yes, I'm 100% okay with Oregon or any other team taking the #1 seed.
Why are you ignoring their 12 Non-Q1 losses?
Also, in your first grouping, you have..
Arkansas 9-4
Auburn 8-7
Texas 8-4
Not sure why they would be sorted that way..
Imo you are trying to use stats to push a narrative.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 2:56 pm to BigBro
quote:
Not sure why they would be sorted that way..
You can kindly f off or start your own thread and sort it any damn way you want.
Quality wins in total are far more important than win% against said group of teams. For example, if one team is 7-4 against a top tier group of opponents and another team is 2-1 against that same group, which is more impressive?
Obviously a team going 7-4 against a group of quality opponents is a better accomplishment than a team going 2-1, but simple win% would say the opposite.
Your small mind is welcome to do the research and start your own thread and sort it any which way you like. No one is stopping you.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 3:12 pm to AUTiger789
quote:
You can kindly f off or start your own thread and sort it any damn way you want.
okay, I'll stay out of your threads going forward.. you clearly don't like opinions different than your own.. have a nice life
Posted on 5/19/25 at 3:29 pm to AUTiger789
Honestly, Big Bros's "statistical thread is way better and has been doing it all season.
Posted on 5/19/25 at 3:48 pm to BigBro
quote:
you clearly don't like opinions different than your own
You didn’t state an opinion. You accused me of manipulating statistics to fit a narrative all because you didn’t like the way it was sorted.
Again, feel free to re-sort the data any which way you like… but don’t accuse me of manipulating statistics only because you think they should be manipulated in a way that suits your opinion.
Page 1 of 2
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News