College basketball Power Rankings, Feb. 9: ‘Selection Saturday’ primer edition

Selection Saturday is almost upon us.

That’s what we’re calling this, right?

Whatever we think of the exercise, whether we consider it an exercise or ill-fated gimmick, and whatever our level of excitement, the NCAA tournament selection committee has convened this week, will adjourn Thursday, and will reveal what amounts to an incomplete mock bracket Saturday at 12:30 p.m. ET on CBS.

One month and one day prior to Selection Sunday, in a one-time event, the committee will announce its top 16 teams as they stand now. It’s a bracket taste-test, an effort to increase transparency and a plea for TV ratings all in one, and it’s all we’ll be talking about heading into a busy Saturday of college basketball.

There’s one thing, though, that we must hope it’s not: A gateway drug. In other words, we must hope the first-ever in-season bracket reveal is not an uncontroversial ploy to make further, grander, more frequent in-season reveals less controversial, more palatable, and perhaps even more desirable.

[Tourney Pick’em is open! Sign up now | Bracket Big Board]

In theory, there is nothing preventing the NCAA from commissioning a full, 68-team mock bracket every week, and revealing it every Saturday morning through February up until the big reveal on the second Sunday of March. It’d be a logistical nightmare for many reasons — piecing together a bracket is a remarkably tedious and convoluted task, and it’s dependent on automatic qualifiers that don’t secure spots in the field until March — but it’s technically feasible. And TV ratings — also known as money — make a lot of seemingly unfeasible things feasible anyway.

It would also be terrible. It would create actual controversy — unnecessary and unwanted controversy — on Selection Sunday. It might even affect the way the committee does its job, the one job that matters: picking, ordering and bracketing the teams on that Sunday. Criticism of pre-releases, even irrational criticism, could cloud judgment. And, most certainly of all, it would undermine the enthralling mystery of the wait for the final bracket.

This Saturday’s reveal, on its own, is a good thing for college basketball. It will increase discussion and banter. It won’t at all harm the anticipation and excitement leading into the real selection show four weeks from now. It won’t compromise the committee’s ability to make rational judgments based on a full season of data on March 12.

It likely will turn into much ado about nothing. Are we really going to get worked up over a 2-seed vs. 3-seed argument in early February? The committee’s job only really gets tough as résumés get more and more flawed, which is why much of the interest and controversy of Selection Sunday revolves around the bubble. Saturday won’t tell us anything about how the committee views Wichita State’s volume of wins up against Georgia Tech’s quality. This is where the committee has been maddeningly inconsistent in the past; this in-season reveal won’t hold them to any increased standard of consistency.

But this is fine. Let’s not let our thirst for more info overwhelm our knowledge that more info could harm the validity of that info in the long run.

Let’s just enjoy Saturday. Let’s argue about the 16 teams and their seeds. Arguing about sports is good. It can be infuriating, sure. But that’s why it’s fun.

So to prepare you for the fun, this week’s Power Rankings have been hijacked and turned into a bracket reveal primer. IMPORTANT: That does not mean the criteria for ordering the teams has changed. It’s the same as it’s always been, based on how good I believe a team to be. But the analysis this week concerns résumés, not predictive measures. You can and should read Ken Pomeroy’s piece on the distinction between, and uses for, the two.

After you do, you can and should read on below…

1. Kansas | 21-3 | KenPom: 9 | Last week: 1 | Brad Evans’ Big Board: 3

With strong overall numbers and wins over Duke (neutral), Kentucky (road) and Baylor (home), Kansas is a near consensus 1-seed at this point in time. And unless the Jayhawks are knocked off their perch atop the Big 12, it’ll be hard to knock them off the top line.

2. Villanova | 23-2 | KP: 5 | LW: 2 | Big Board: 2

The Wildcats have the second-best win-loss record in college basketball, and have compiled it against a tough, though not murderous, schedule. The win over Virginia two weeks ago solidified them as a 1-seed.

3. Gonzaga | 24-0 | KP: 1 | LW: 3 | Big Board: 2

Gonzaga’s schedule, which ranks somewhere near the Division I average, will inevitably be brought up as a point of contention. But don’t dismiss the quality of the Zags’ wins off hand. They’ve beaten Florida, Iowa State, Arizona and Tennessee on neutral floors. A road win over St. Mary’s on Saturday might even give Gonzaga some room for error over the season’s final month.

4. Virginia | 18-5 | KP: 2 | LW: 4 | Big Board: 9

The Cavaliers often play a challenging non-conference schedule, but this year’s non-league résumé was done in by losses to the two truly powerful teams on the slate, Villanova and West Virginia, and by disappointing seasons from the likes of Ohio State, Iowa and Cal. Virginia has plenty of opportunity over the season’s final month to ascend toward the top line, but as of now, it likely sits as a comfortable 3-seed.

5. Louisville | 19-5 | KP: 3 | LW: 10 | Big Board: 7

Louisville’s three banner wins — vs. Purdue, vs. Kentucky, vs. Duke — don’t look as impressive as they once did. They also all came at home. But the Cardinals’ computer numbers are strong, and could have them on the second seed-line Saturday.

The reason for the jump in these rankings, by the way, is the expected return of Quentin Snider from injury and the reinstatement of Deng Adel and Mangok Mathiang after one-game suspensions.

6. North Carolina | 21-4 | KP: 11 | LW: 7 | Big Board: 5

The Tar Heels could be in the conversation for the fourth 1-seed — that is, provided they beat Duke Thursday night. But even if they don’t — they’re underdogs in Durham, after all — they shouldn’t fall outside the top eight.

7. Baylor | 21-3 | KP: 8 | LW: 5 | Big Board: 4

The other contender for the fourth 1-seed is the Bears, who are No. 1 in the RPI despite losing twice last week. Their Nov. 25 win over Louisville in the Bahamas is one they’ll ride all the way to Selection Sunday. That November win over Oregon isn’t too shabby either, even if they didn’t have to contend with Dillon Brooks that afternoon.

8. Florida State | 21-4 | KP: 13 | LW: 14 | Big Board: 8

The Seminoles are a robust 9-1 against the RPI top 50, a record that should have them in the top eight on Saturday. They could fall to a 3-seed, though. Whether or not they do will tell us a bit about how the committee values the importance of good wins vs. bad losses — though Florida State’s two most recent losses, at Georgia Tech and at Syracuse, don’t look all that bad now, do they?

9. Oregon | 21-3 | KP: 19 | LW: 12 | Big Board: 6

Oregon may very well be the most interesting case study on Saturday, for two reasons. One is the Dillon Brooks injury. The Ducks opened the season 2-2 with losses to Baylor and Georgetown, but did so without a 100 percent Brooks. They’ve only lost once since. The other intriguing question pokes around at the committee’s view of the Pac-12. Which matters more: That Oregon is leading a major conference? Or that half of its conference wins have come against sub-100 foes, and that the conference is far and away the weakest of the power six?

Of course, Oregon’s seeding will also depend in part on the result of Thursday night’s showdown with UCLA.

10. West Virginia | 19-5 | KP: 4 | LW: 9 | Big Board: 14

No team has a better collection of three wins than the Mountaineers’ trio of vs. Kansas, vs. Baylor and at Virginia. Somehow, though, West Virginia is ranked 32nd in the RPI, behind the likes of Illinois State and Dayton. (Related: RPI is dumb.) It’ll be interesting to see how much the computer numbers knock the Mountaineers down the board. They should be secure in the top 16, though.

11. Duke | 18-5 | KP: 15 | LW: 15 | Big Board: 18

There’s a chance we don’t even hear Duke’s name on Saturday, especially if the Blue Devils lose at home to Carolina Thursday night. Their résumé is frail outside of a Dec. 6 win over Florida that looks better by the week.

12. Wisconsin | 20-3 | KP: 10 | LW: 13 | Big Board: 12

How does the committee perceive the Big Ten, the jumbled mess of a conference that the Badgers lead by two games? Its seeding of Wisconsin — whose best win is … um … at Marquette? — will tell us a bit about how its views that big Midwestern mass of mediocrity.

13. Kentucky | 19-5 | KP: 7 | LW: 8 | Big Board: 10

The Wildcats are 1-4 against teams that have a chance to hear their names called Saturday. It’s easier to see Kentucky falling to a 4-seed than jumping to a 2.

14. Arizona | 22-3 | KP: 22 | LW: 6 | Big Board: 11

Arizona is confusing, not only because Allonzo Trier missed the first half of the season with a suspension, but because it hasn’t been that great since Trier returned. This résumé has quantity, but not necessarily top-end quality.

15. UCLA | 21-3 | KP: 18 | LW: 11 | Big Board: 16

If UCLA had lost to Kentucky, and if its uniforms didn’t have those four letters across the front, it’d be a 6-seed right now.

16. Florida | 19-5 | KP: 6 | LW: 20 | Big Board: 13

The Gators have, for the most part, avoided bad losses, and now have that headliner win over Kentucky. Their metrics are strong. They should be in the top 16, if not the top 12.

17. Cincinnati | 22-2 | KP: 20 | LW: 16 | Big Board: 15

The committee’s seeding, or lack thereof, of Cincinnati will be telling for SMU as well. The two have been running rampant through the AAC. The AAC likes to think of itself as a major conference. Most beg to differ. Opportunities for quality wins are scarce.

18. Butler | 19-5 | KP: 23 | LW: 18 | Big Board: 17

Don’t be surprised if the Bulldogs are one of the 4-seeds on Saturday. They’re in the RPI top 10 and have wins over Villanova and Arizona. They also have a very nice computer profile.

19. Purdue | 19-5 | KP: 12 | LW: NR | Big Board: 19

It’s tough to see how the Boilermakers could crack the top 16. If they do, we’ll know the committee is looking at the words “BIG TEN” and not at the actual teams in the conference.

20. Notre Dame | 17-6 | KP: 25 | LW: 17 | Big Board: 24

The Irish were as high as a 3-seed until four straight losses. Now they’re unlikely to hear their name called Saturday.

Five more to keep an eye (or two) on: South Carolina, Oklahoma State, St. Mary’s, Kansas State, Syracuse

Best of the mids: Wichita State, Illinois State, Middle Tennessee State, VCU, Dayton

Previous rankings: Jan. 5 | Jan. 12 | Jan. 19 | Jan. 26 | Feb. 2