Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
jimmykc

Big Ten + Bile

Recommended Posts

You know what I find the most frustrating is that the teams in our conference that we proved to be better than Penn State and Maryland are both ranked higher than us in Kenpom, so his dumb ass Metric can be tossed as well.

 

I love analytics, so I am creating one next year.  It is going to be similar to Bracket Matrix.  The difference is going to be that my metric is going to take all the other metrics that these clowns on the committee pick as favorites and mold them all into one average.  Then it is going to sort by the average of all of them.

 

Then I will do a simple cross out of all the teams listed in the heart of it that have a below .500 conference record at the end of conference season.

 

Then it will also cross out teams that finished sub .500 in their final 10 that are in the argument of getting into the field. 

 

Then that IMO will be the field of the most deserving candidates.

Edited by big red22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
37 minutes ago, big red22 said:

According to the other metrics outside of the RPI

 

# of Top 100 teams per conference

 

Massey Rating System: (9) 6 teams in the Top 50 and 3 more in the Top100 - Nebraska 37

Team Rankings: (N/A) Site information is gone, they had 10 teams from the Big 10 in the Top 100 last I checked - Nebraska 63

Kenpom: (11) 6 teams in the Top 50 and 5 more in the Top 100 - Nebraska 57

BPI: (12) 6 teams in the Top 50 and 6 more in the Top 100 - Nebraska 63

SOR:  (10) 5 teams in the Top 50 and 5 more in the Top 100 - Nebraska 31

 

You know what!  I am sick of proving how shitty the RPI is.  You are a 1000% correct,and it should be tossed out the window next year!

 

 

I 100% agree.  At least average out all of these metrics.  If you average the metrics, I feel like you would get a much better reading on everyone.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 minutes ago, big red22 said:

You know what I find the most frustrating is that the teams in our conference that we proved to be better than Penn State and Maryland are both ranked higher than us in Kenpom, so his dumb ass Metric can be tossed as well.

 

Predictive rankings are used to predict how games might go.  I don't think the tourney tends to use them that much.

Otherwise, throwing out whatever metric that doesn't go our way in a particular year seems pretty self serving.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
16 minutes ago, colhusker said:

I get that this is what is used and it's wrong.  How many of those Big 10 lose those non-conference games later in the year.  No way with lose to UCF and most likely St John's.  Hell I bet we beat that school in Omaha later in the year.  Point is teams get better as the year goes on.  Using nothing but metrics you get OU who was tanking it at the end in the tournament.  System needs fixed.


It's not a one way street though.   Can't assume that the Big 10 is the only league that is going to improve.   I agree....if we play UCF today.   We'd win.   And if Providence and Bama played Minnesota, they would win.   It goes both ways.  Other teams get better too.   Of all he metrics, RPIs, SOSs, etc....wins and losses mean the most to me and the fact is that the Big 10 just fared horribly here.   They had chances and choked.   They have no one to blame but themselves.   The Big Ten didn't need to do something legendary in the non-con.  Just break even.   And it wasn't even close to that.  Mix in some very bad perception losses and it gets even worse.

 

Look at it this way.   The top 3 big ten teams (seed wise) that were left out were Nebraska, Penn State and Indiana.   That's the middle part of your conference and where the conference sagged the most.   Those 3 teams combined for 3 total non-con wins over power schools, none of which over an NCAA team.   3 teams and not one win?   They also combined for losses to UCF, Rider and blowout losses to IPFW and Indiana State.  If the roll was reversed and the committee was putting teams in another conference in with that criteria....I'm sure we wouldn't be enamored with the decision making.

 

Won't argue that there needs to be some sort of adjustment.   Winning carries all the weight and losing carries none.   There needs to be some variance/weighting to that.  

 

But no matter what system is being used....what metric...when your league does nothing but eat a dick in the non-con....you are going to be fighting an uphill battle.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 minutes ago, hhcdimes said:

The problem with the Big 10 has 4 teams in the top of the NCAA tournament argument for us is that we only played those teams once. 

 

Yep.   Another example of the freakishly bad luck that we experienced all year with the way the schedule shook out.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, hhcdimes said:

 

Predictive rankings are used to predict how games might go.  I don't think the tourney tends to use them that much.

Otherwise, throwing out whatever metric that doesn't go our way in a particular year seems pretty self serving.

Oh I'd keep RPI and Kenpom in the one I'm going to create.  I am going to use all the metrics the Tournament Gadget listed and then any other I find on Bracket Matrix.


Then take the Average... Let's say the roles are reversed and we were Oklahoma and Oklahoma was us.  We would be crossed off, because of the two things I listed.  I would be fair, unlike the committee this year.

 

My Metric will reward teams that are playing the best when it matters

Edited by big red22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
15 minutes ago, hhcdimes said:

The problem with the Big 10 has 4 teams in the top of the NCAA tournament argument for us is that we only played those teams once. 

I get that, but I don't see a big difference in playing at Wisconsin or at Alabama this year.  They both are very difficult places to win, but one was a Q1 win and the other was worthless.  This is where SOR comes in IMO and makes sure that that Wisconsin was indeed a good win.  That is why we were so high in that metric.  @Alabama and @Wisconsin not much difference as the RPI says, that is the problem. 

 

Hence you need to average out all the Metrics and weed out the lazy performers in conference and The Final 10.

 

Edited by big red22

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
40 minutes ago, big red22 said:

I get that, but I don't see a big difference in playing at Wisconsin or at Alabama this year.  They both are very difficult places to win, but one was a Q1 win and the other was worthless. 

 

Even the eyeball test will tell you tell you that winning at Alabama would be harder than winning at Wisconsin against a team that lost two of its top guards.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

yeah, this season, a road win at Alabama much tougher. They really are a good basketball team. 

 

This is the inverse of the problem we complain about with people not watching B1G games. A lot of our fans aren't watching many of theirs, either. Except Royal. He watches everyone! 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
8 minutes ago, tcp said:

yeah, this season, a road win at Alabama much tougher. They really are a good basketball team. 

 

This is the inverse of the problem we complain about with people not watching B1G games. A lot of our fans aren't watching many of theirs, either. Except Royal. He watches everyone! 

Lol you don't think I've seen Alan Iver... I mean Collin Sexton play.  I watched him school Trae Young.  Here is the problem, I don't see it.  I also watched them play sparingly against Mississippi where they lost by 12.  Did you happen to catch that one?  Wisconsin may not have a Sexton, but Alabama has no Happ.  I'm not blind, and I watch a ton of basketball with my 10 year old son who happens to love it too.  So please don't assume I don't watch basketball outside of Nebraska, because you are wrong

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, big red22 said:

Lol you don't think I've seen Alan Iver... I mean Collin Sexton play.  I watched him school Trae Young.  Here is the problem, I don't see it.  I also watched them play sparingly against Mississippi where they lost by 12.  Did you happen to catch that one?  Wisconsin may not have a Sexton, but Alabama has no Happ.  I'm not blind, and I watch a ton of basketball with my 10 year old son who happens to love it too.  So please don't assume I don't watch basketball outside of Nebraska, because you are wrong

 

""many of our fans" was not a euphemism for "you". So please don't assume I mean other words than the ones that I actually typed. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
45 minutes ago, tcp said:

 

""many of our fans" was not a euphemism for "you". So please don't assume I mean other words than the ones that I actually typed. 

"yeah, this season, a road win at Alabama much tougher. They really are a good basketball team." 

 

So this wasn't in response to me comparing Wisconsin and Alabama even though it was exactly 2 posts down from it?  Alright got it!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

Sign in to follow this  

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.

×