| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
 Posted: 02/20/17 4:53 pm ::: |
Reply  |
|
| linkster wrote: |
I read the same sorts of posts now about Maryland. I have no attachment to the team but I've watched them play several times and would pick them in an even bet on a neutral court over practically every one seed candidate in the country. And if Miss St were to play the same teams I would bet against them every time. |
That's the bottom line. You think your "expert" guessing is more valuable than actual games won against good opponents.
You should publish your own rankings. The Linkster "Because I Say So" Rankings.
Thankfully the committee relies on actual results instead of on total bullshit.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
|
patsweetpat
Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2313
Location: Culver City, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 7:14 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| cthskzfn wrote: |
| patsweetpat wrote: |
| Yeah, Maryland has just one single Top 25 (RPI) win on its resume. One. Over #13, Louisville. I just don't know how the committee can justify giving that team a 1-seed. |
They did beat ASU. |
ASU is 6th in the Pac-12. There are 7 other teams in the nation who also have beaten ASU at least once. |
I should also point out that ASU has only a .500 record in the Pac-12 conference. So anyone pointing to a victory over the Devils as a marquee win befitting a 1-seed resume is paying the rest of the Pac-12 one heck of a compliment. So... thanks, I guess?
Last edited by patsweetpat on 02/20/17 7:37 pm; edited 1 time in total |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 7:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ArtBest23 wrote: |
| linkster wrote: |
I read the same sorts of posts now about Maryland. I have no attachment to the team but I've watched them play several times and would pick them in an even bet on a neutral court over practically every one seed candidate in the country. And if Miss St were to play the same teams I would bet against them every time. |
That's the bottom line. You think your "expert" guessing is more valuable than actual games won against good opponents.
You should publish your own rankings. The Linkster "Because I Say So" Rankings.
Thankfully the committee relies on actual results instead of on total bullshit. |
There is no need to sink to ridicule.
I thought I made it clear that my opinion is based on my eyeball opinion and that in part my dislike of RPI stems from my UConn fandom. But I'm hardly out on a limb by myself. My opinion is shared by a couple of respected ratings services.
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63807
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63807
Back to top |
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 8:21 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
Attention: I know ASU sucks.
When I read here that Maryland has beaten only 1 T25 RPI team, I checked their schedule and saw that they beat ASU. Maybe ASU wasn't a T25 (RPI) team back on Nov 25th, but they weren't far off.
But all that is beside the point, which is that while Maryland hasn't played anyone it doesn't diminish how good they are.
Even if they lose tonight at Oh St they still make my list of 9 legit FF teams.
_________________
Silly, stupid white people might be waking up.
|
|
cthskzfn
Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 12851
Location: In a world where a PSYCHOpath like Trump isn't potus.
Back to top |
|
dinkytown
Joined: 18 Sep 2011
Posts: 2591
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 9:16 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I thought I heard them say during the Maryland/OSU game that Stanford won't be able to host if they get a Top 16 seed. Did anyone else catch that?
|
|
mikeyc22
Joined: 20 Apr 2006
Posts: 2396
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 9:19 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| dinkytown wrote: |
| I thought I heard them say during the Maryland/OSU game that Stanford won't be able to host if they get a Top 16 seed. Did anyone else catch that? |
Yes the PAC 12 gymnastics tournament is there
|
|
Durantula
Joined: 30 Mar 2013
Posts: 5223
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 9:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| mikeyc22 wrote: |
| dinkytown wrote: |
| I thought I heard them say during the Maryland/OSU game that Stanford won't be able to host if they get a Top 16 seed. Did anyone else catch that? |
Yes the PAC 12 gymnastics tournament is there |
I hate hearing stuff like this, it happened to Michigan State last year. If Stanford gets a top 4 seed why can't they use Cal's gym since its nearby and they can still get their fans there for a homecourt advantage?
|
|
CompSci87
Joined: 15 Mar 2009
Posts: 812
Location: Palo Alto, CA
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 10:31 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Durantula wrote: |
| mikeyc22 wrote: |
| dinkytown wrote: |
| I thought I heard them say during the Maryland/OSU game that Stanford won't be able to host if they get a Top 16 seed. Did anyone else catch that? |
Yes the PAC 12 gymnastics tournament is there |
I hate hearing stuff like this, it happened to Michigan State last year. If Stanford gets a top 4 seed why can't they use Cal's gym since its nearby and they can still get their fans there for a homecourt advantage? |
I heard that Stanford inquired about a couple of other nearby possibilities (closer than Cal), but they were booked too.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/20/17 11:09 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Nm
|
|
Stonington_QB
Joined: 05 Jul 2013
Posts: 756
Location: Siege Perilous
Back to top |
|
Shades
Joined: 10 Jul 2006
Posts: 63807
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 11:08 am ::: |
Reply |
|
| Stonington_QB wrote: |
ESPN is now citing the selection committee instead of always going to Joe Lunardi, the most useless person on their staff. |
Do you mean Charlie Creme? They still manage to refer to him.
_________________
Nnekalonians 1:14 - Thou shalt not accept that which is not earned
|
|
ClayK
Joined: 11 Oct 2005
Posts: 11158
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 11:27 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Margin of victory is an interesting statistic, and it does reveal something about a team ... the question is how much, and how it should be evaluated.
So here's this: The high school team I'm assisting on this year has won or shared the league title for five straight seasons and its average margin of victory in league is 30+ points.
That's significant, I think ...
And here's this: A single game has a two-point differential with two minutes left. The losing team begins to foul, and bad things happen, so the final result is a 10-point victory.
In this case, MOV doesn't really tell us much about the competitiveness of the game.
But I do think, over a full season, that MOV delivers some valuable information. Though some close games become routs, some routs become close -- and statistical studies indicate that MOV in the NBA is very predictive of postseason success.
The issues, though, arise if MOV is an acknowledged metric. Now coaches have to run up the score (because you never know); now the starters play more minutes; now scheduling weak teams becomes even more important.
In the MaxPreps high school computer rankings (full disclosure: I do the national high school rankings for MaxPreps), MOV is part of the formula, which is in my experience as a coach very accurate if all scores are entered. Without the MOV aspect, it would reward wins way too much and not reflect the reality on the floor.
On balance, I'd rather have it in than out ... maybe they can use it and just not tell anyone?
_________________
Oṃ Tāre Tuttāre Ture Svāhā
|
|
ArtBest23
Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14550
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 12:20 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
statistical studies indicate that MOV in the NBA is very predictive of postseason success.
|
Irrelevant to the usefulness of MOV for college ball.
In the NBA you do not have the wide variation in pace in the NBA that you have in college where on the men's side you have Kentucky and Auburn at 78 possessions per game, and UVA and St. Mary's with 62. That's a 26% range (and that's only counting the major schools. The full range is over 40%). In the NBA the range from highest to lowest is only 10%. (I don't have any women's pace stats.)
In the NBA you do not have remotely the same team-to-team differences in substitution patterns and questions of clearing the bench, playing the subs or keeping in the starters to the bitter end. The shorter 24 second clock largely precludes sitting on the ball and burning clock with a lead (and also eliminates much of the difference in pace from team to team).
In the NBA you play 81 games among only 30 teams, and play the same teams multiple times. And you don't have the total lack of overlap in schedule that you find in college.
The statistical home court impact on MOV is far narrower in the NBA than in college.
The range of avg scoring margins in the NBA is actually very narrow. Only Golden State averages in double figures, and they're only 12.8. All last season, only San Antonio was in double figures at 10.5. In WCBB, Baylor is averaging 35, and there are 51 teams with double digit MOV averages.
So it's not surprising that there is some statistical validity to the use of MOV in the NBA, because styles are far far more similar than in college, but the foundation for that use is completely absent at the college level.
You aren't rewarding superior teams. You're rewarding teams that play at a high pace, play their stars to the end, and don't sit on the ball with a lead. If those are things that define "better" to you, then I guess using MOV would produce a list of "better" teams.
By the way, I think it would be great if we had someone doing ratings for WCBB based on pace and efficiency metrics like Pomeroy, but we don't.
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 1:52 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| ClayK wrote: |
Margin of victory is an interesting statistic, and it does reveal something about a team ... the question is how much, and how it should be evaluated.
So here's this: The high school team I'm assisting on this year has won or shared the league title for five straight seasons and its average margin of victory in league is 30+ points.
That's significant, I think ...
And here's this: A single game has a two-point differential with two minutes left. The losing team begins to foul, and bad things happen, so the final result is a 10-point victory.
In this case, MOV doesn't really tell us much about the competitiveness of the game.
But I do think, over a full season, that MOV delivers some valuable information. Though some close games become routs, some routs become close -- and statistical studies indicate that MOV in the NBA is very predictive of postseason success.
The issues, though, arise if MOV is an acknowledged metric. Now coaches have to run up the score (because you never know); now the starters play more minutes; now scheduling weak teams becomes even more important.
In the MaxPreps high school computer rankings (full disclosure: I do the national high school rankings for MaxPreps), MOV is part of the formula, which is in my experience as a coach very accurate if all scores are entered. Without the MOV aspect, it would reward wins way too much and not reflect the reality on the floor.
On balance, I'd rather have it in than out ... maybe they can use it and just not tell anyone? |
In the last week I read an article about the NCAA exploring the use of advanced metrics instead of RPI. One point made was that it's possible to track the scores of games from start to finish, avoiding the end game situations that can distort how competitively a game was played. Another solution to running up scores could be diminishing the value of MOV's above some level, so that a 15 point win would be much better than a 2 point win but that a 30 point win would not be much better if at all from a 15 pint win.
|
|
myrtle
Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32336
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 2:39 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| I think MOV against top 30 teams, or somewhere around there, could be a useful statistic to fall back on, but not to use as a primary factor. And perhaps included in the metric would be score with 2 minutes left in game to minimize end of game distortions. MOV against sub 100 teams is totally meaningless IMO. My guess is that they actually do use it in some cases when it's hard to make other distinctions.
_________________
For there is always light,
if only we’re brave enough to see it.
If only we’re brave enough to be it.
- Amanda Gorman
|
|
Ex-Ref
Joined: 04 Oct 2009
Posts: 8956
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 4:03 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
IF this is the bracket that the committee comes out with next month and IF the tourney plays out this way, here are the regional match-ups:
Uconn vs OK and OrSU vs FSU
MSST vs KY and MD vs Stanford
BU vs L'ville and TX vs Duke
ND vs. UCLA and SC vs WA
|
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5423
Back to top |
| Posted: 02/21/17 5:42 pm ::: |
Reply |
|
| Ex-Ref wrote: |
IF this is the bracket that the committee comes out with next month and IF the tourney plays out this way, here are the regional match-ups:
Uconn vs OK and OrSU vs FSU
MSST vs KY and MD vs Stanford
BU vs L'ville and TX vs Duke
ND vs. UCLA and SC vs WA |
These are, I believe, strict S curve seedings. It was 2 years ago that the NCAA decided that top 16 teams from the same conference would be keep in separate regions if possible. If the above teams are the top 16 then it is possible.
ACC - 4
P12 - 4
SEC - 3
B12 - 3
B1G - 1
AAC - 1
Using a combination of Geography and keeping conference members separated I came up with this:
Bridgeport- UConn, Or. St, Fl St, Okl
Lexington- N Dame, Mary., Stanford, Kentucky
Okl City - Baylor, S Car, Duke, UCLA
Stockton - Miss St, Texas, Wash., Louis.
I initially had MSSt in Lexington and ND in Stockton using geography, but it meant having 2 SEC teams in Lexington and 2 ACC teams in Stckton. Swapping ND and MSSt solved that. Another solution would be to make Kentucky a 5 seed.
|
|
|
|
where we used to have to play a lot of our games in the good ol days. It could probably hold 50 fans...though their feet would be on the court.