RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

top 16 reveal
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 24403



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 8:09 pm    ::: top 16 reveal Reply Reply with quote

ok did anyone take a screen shot or have who went where and why Charlie was grumbling about it?



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 24403



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 8:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

anybody?

IMO there are six top teams and a big gap to the next bunch so whichever regions has two of those teams is obviously going to be 'tougher' than the other two. Now the two 'easier' regions should have IMO the toughest 3 & 4 seeds.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 58139
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 8:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote




_________________
It's time I had some time alone
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 24403



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 8:31 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Well, Portland is clearly the cupcakiest...

If NC State ends up as a two seed I'll eat my hat.
Maryland is the likely three to replace them but they would of course much prefer to play in Greensboro as a three rather than Portland as a two.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2493



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 9:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I am guessing they did this a lot earlier, if not they look like a bunch of idiots and even Charlie cannot figure them out as it has nothing to do with location Laughing Laughing


Marquette Fan



Joined: 06 Mar 2005
Posts: 2569



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 9:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm happy with this Smile. But my first thought when I saw the 16 teams listed in order is no way does NC State end up a 2 seed. Now I'm not saying that means Marquette will end up as a 2 seed (not sure they deserve that) but think NC State is one of the most likely teams to drop between now and the end of the season.

As long as Marquette has at least a 4 seed, I'm happy Smile. And the Chicago regional would be pretty sweet too.

I was kind of thinking Notre Dame would end up in Chicago also though.


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2493



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 10:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't think it will just be NC st, but hey you never know after looking at this.


CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 722
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 10:18 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Some weird stuff there. Miami is there (#20 AP #20 RPI), yet Syracuse (#16 AP, #9 RPI) isn't?


myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 24403



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 10:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:
Some weird stuff there. Miami is there (#20 AP #20 RPI), yet Syracuse (#16 AP, #9 RPI) isn't?


yeah, I did a double take on that as well. I don't think the 4 seeds are set at all. I think the 1 - 3 seeds are all likely to at least get one of the top 16s...except NC State. It would surprise me if they hang on to a #4 but they could surprise me and win a couple more games than I think they will here in the home stretch.



_________________
“Try to be a rainbow in someone's cloud.”
― Maya Angelou
patsweetpat



Joined: 14 Jul 2010
Posts: 2109
Location: Culver City, CA


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 10:39 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

CBiebel wrote:
Some weird stuff there. Miami is there (#20 AP #20 RPI), yet Syracuse (#16 AP, #9 RPI) isn't?


Pretty sure they don't look at AP ratings. So that's immaterial. But Miami has two wins over Top 10 RPI teams, while Syracuse's very best win is over #20 Texas A&M. Plus Miami beat Syracuse head-to-head.

I think it's a pretty defensible choice.

But I genuinely don't care either way. Whatevs.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11647
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 10:57 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Now, obviously the lines were drawn before UConn's blowout of SC tonight, but the committee isn't stupid...(are they?) Tell me, statisticians, how MS-State got the 1 seed over UConn. I take it they've considered the SOS/RPI/etc in their seedings. My (more irregular) thinking is MS-State and UConn deserve the #1s, and Baylor goes to a #2, all things considered....no?



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 58139
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 11:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
Now, obviously the lines were drawn before UConn's blowout of SC tonight, but the committee isn't stupid...(are they?) Tell me, statisticians, how MS-State got the 1 seed over UConn. I take it they've considered the SOS/RPI/etc in their seedings. My (more irregular) thinking is MS-State and UConn deserve the #1s, and Baylor goes to a #2, all things considered....no?


Coming into tonight, Miss St had more Quadrant One wins and more Quadrant Two wins. Most of UConn's games have been against sub-100 RPI opponents (14 out of 23 before tonight's game) whil most of Miss St's have been against top 100 RPI teams (12 out of 23). Plus UConn has two losses compared to Miss St's one and Miss St was ahead of UConn in RPI.



_________________
It's time I had some time alone
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11647
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 11:22 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Now, obviously the lines were drawn before UConn's blowout of SC tonight, but the committee isn't stupid...(are they?) Tell me, statisticians, how MS-State got the 1 seed over UConn. I take it they've considered the SOS/RPI/etc in their seedings. My (more irregular) thinking is MS-State and UConn deserve the #1s, and Baylor goes to a #2, all things considered....no?


Coming into tonight, Miss St had more Quadrant One wins and more Quadrant Two wins. Most of UConn's games have been against sub-100 RPI opponents (14 out of 23 before tonight's game) whil most of Miss St's have been against top 100 RPI teams (12 out of 23). Plus UConn has two losses compared to Miss St's one and Miss St was ahead of UConn in RPI.


Okay. I get that. But--using the same metric--how do Baylor and UConn then compare?



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 58139
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/11/19 11:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
pilight wrote:
Howee wrote:
Now, obviously the lines were drawn before UConn's blowout of SC tonight, but the committee isn't stupid...(are they?) Tell me, statisticians, how MS-State got the 1 seed over UConn. I take it they've considered the SOS/RPI/etc in their seedings. My (more irregular) thinking is MS-State and UConn deserve the #1s, and Baylor goes to a #2, all things considered....no?


Coming into tonight, Miss St had more Quadrant One wins and more Quadrant Two wins. Most of UConn's games have been against sub-100 RPI opponents (14 out of 23 before tonight's game) whil most of Miss St's have been against top 100 RPI teams (12 out of 23). Plus UConn has two losses compared to Miss St's one and Miss St was ahead of UConn in RPI.


Okay. I get that. But--using the same metric--how do Baylor and UConn then compare?


Baylor has three more quadrant one wins, has most of their games against the top 100, has only one loss, has a better RPI, and won head-to-head.



_________________
It's time I had some time alone
CBiebel



Joined: 23 Dec 2004
Posts: 722
Location: PA


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 12:11 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:
CBiebel wrote:
Some weird stuff there. Miami is there (#20 AP #20 RPI), yet Syracuse (#16 AP, #9 RPI) isn't?
I think the 1 - 3 seeds are all likely to at least get one of the top 16s...except NC State. It would surprise me if they hang on to a #4 but they could surprise me and win a couple more games than I think they will here in the home stretch.


Considering that their remaining schedule consists of:

at #16 Syracuse
#6 ND
at UNC (who beat them 64-51 in Raleigh)
at #2 Louisville
#20 Miami

Oh, and at Wake Forest.

That sounds like they will be lucky to win 3 of the remaining 6 games.


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 11647
Location: Oklahoma (in my heart), whilst on my way to Oregon!


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 12:20 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Thanks, Pilight.



_________________
Oklahoma: Go Sooners! Oregon: Go Ducks!
Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1077



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 10:46 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

myrtle wrote:


If NC State ends up as a two seed I'll eat my hat.


I agree.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1077



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 10:50 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

[quote="patsweetpat"]
CBiebel wrote:
But Miami has two wins over Top 10 RPI teams, while Syracuse's very best win is over #20 Texas A&M.


Charlie said that as well, but I count three. Am I missing something?

I agree with you that it is a very defensible selection.


SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 805



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 11:24 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm a big UConn fan...but for once, just once...especially if the Huskies are a two seed, I'd like to see them go to a region other than Albany. Ship them off and make them win on the road! Whoever gets the #1 seed for that region should earn the right to be a #1 seed and not worry about a possible home crowd for a lower seed. In the early rounds I can see it, but not for regionals!


Nixtreefan



Joined: 14 Nov 2012
Posts: 2493



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 11:51 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Not sure of your point, the regionals were set long before on locations where they thought they would get crowds just as Portland was set on the west coast for west coast teams, thats probably the least of their worries. After that it is the seeding that determines location and if they get it right. Laughing


SDHoops



Joined: 09 Nov 2007
Posts: 805



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 12:30 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Nixtreefan wrote:
Not sure of your point, the regionals were set long before on locations where they thought they would get crowds just as Portland was set on the west coast for west coast teams, thats probably the least of their worries. After that it is the seeding that determines location and if they get it right. Laughing

Well one year UConn did go to...some place in Cali. 2007 maybe?


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1077



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 5:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

SDHoops wrote:
Nixtreefan wrote:
Not sure of your point, the regionals were set long before on locations where they thought they would get crowds just as Portland was set on the west coast for west coast teams, thats probably the least of their worries. After that it is the seeding that determines location and if they get it right. Laughing

Well one year UConn did go to...some place in Cali. 2007 maybe?


Yes, that's the year LSU and Sylvia Fowles blew away UConn in Fresno 73 – 50.


ucbart



Joined: 21 Nov 2004
Posts: 1410
Location: New York


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 5:53 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

If UCONN has a superior team, they win....almost every year.

We lost a regional to Duke in 2006 in Bridgeport. It has little to do with the crowd, IMO. It has way more to deal with who the team personnel is.

These regionals need fans and the UCONN fans buy tickets more than anyone. I may be a UCONN homer, but they should be placed where it's easiest for the fans to get to.


Phil



Joined: 22 Oct 2011
Posts: 1077



Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 7:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

But you don't need to take my word for it.

I created a quick spreadsheet which can be found here:

https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/16DrOq3P9arQPMCSv1Vn9cf_x5F_jxAcjeVldrgQ64yM/edit?usp=sharing

If I did this right, I set the sharing so that anyone with a link can view and edit it.

I listed all the teams in the top 16 reveal (plus those whose RPI or Massey rating is in the top 16).

I have a column (1) which shows the ranking 1 to 16 as ranked by the committee.

Then there is column (2) which shows there ranking according to the NCAA RPI formula.

Then column (3) is the Massey rating.


There are two takeaways:

The Massey top 16 differs from the committee top 16 by only a single team. Arizona State would be in the top 16 based on Massey and Miami is the top 16 based on the committee. in contrast, the RPI list differs from the committee list in three places. Syracuse, UCF and Florida State have RPI ratings in the top 16 but did not get selected by the committee. Maryland, Oregon State and Miami were selected by the committee but are not in the top 16 RPI.

The second take away is that the Massey ranking is much closer to the committee ranking than the RPI.

A standard way of measuring distances is to look at the squared differences. The final two columns in the spreadsheet show committee versus RPI and committee versus Massey. The square differences for the committee list compared to the RPI list is 486, more than four times the size of the squared differences between the committee list and the Massey list at 113.

[Edit] I'm trying not to overcomplicate; Calculating the sum of squares is a simple calculation and very common. Some would prefer to take the square root (standard deviation) because the units are the same. Still others prefer Mean Absolute Error. I add the other two measures, but all three send the same message -- the Massey metric is far closer to the committee decision than is the RPI metric. (I always liked MAE, but the statistical properties aren't quite as nice as the Variance/Standard Deviation/Squared error measures.)

Read more here if you really want to get into the weeds:
https://stats.stackexchange.com/questions/118/why-square-the-difference-instead-of-taking-the-absolute-value-in-standard-devia




Last edited by Phil on 02/12/19 9:10 pm; edited 2 times in total
GlennMacGrady



Joined: 03 Jan 2005
Posts: 5253
Location: Heisenberg


Back to top
PostPosted: 02/12/19 7:45 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Phil wrote:
A standard way of measuring distances is to look at the square differences.


Phil, just curious as to the rationale for using cumulative square differences rather than just cumulative differences. The point made would be the same, except that (Committee-RPI) would look about twice as great as (Committee-Massey) instead of four times as great.

Are square differences a standard method of making comparisons in other statistical areas?
Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6  Next
Page 1 of 6

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin