KenPom 2023-2024 KenPom Rankings Thread

[hhcmatt]

1 hour ago, Norm Peterson said:

We shot up to #54 after that win last night. If memory serves me, I think Kenpom projected us winning 82-58. We won 81-54, so we did slightly better MOV-wise than expected. I don't know if that's why we jumped a spot, but I'm guessing it didn't hurt, so ...

 

We did enough to edge past Pitt 

There actually is an archive function to go back day by day

https://kenpom.com/archive.php?d=2023-11-09

 

 

This part of the season is so fluid though that we could move up or down 5 spots before our next game on Monday

[Norm Peterson]

18 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

We did enough to edge past Pitt 

There actually is an archive function to go back day by day

https://kenpom.com/archive.php?d=2023-11-09

 

 

This part of the season is so fluid though that we could move up or down 5 spots before our next game on Monday

 

But we made it past the Thursday threshold, so we  can officially say this is the best Kenpom ranking of the Hoiberg era.

[basketballjones]

On 11/7/2023 at 11:10 AM, busticket said:

Arthur Kaluma was pretty bad for K State.  I really hope we beat those guys.  

And iso ball the is the absolute worst thing to do against the structure of our defense. 

[49r]

27 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

We did enough to edge past Pitt 

There actually is an archive function to go back day by day

https://kenpom.com/archive.php?d=2023-11-09

 

 

This part of the season is so fluid though that we could move up or down 5 spots before our next game on Monday

 

Put your money on down.  Our recent years' history will be the anchor that will always be a drag in cases like this.  It's also how Wisconsin for example always seems to float up even with mediocre results.

[Chuck Taylor]

This bracketology site has us as a 5 seed:

https://www.allmysportsteamssuck.com/ncaa-college-basketball-live-machine-learning-bracketology/

 

We're 20 in their computer rankings:

https://www.allmysportsteamssuck.com/ncaa-college-basketball-live-computer-rankings/

 

Maybe we should replace KenPom in this thread with this site? 

[hhcmatt]

59 minutes ago, 49r said:

 

Put your money on down.  Our recent years' history will be the anchor that will always be a drag in cases like this.  It's also how Wisconsin for example always seems to float up even with mediocre results.

 

If Pittsburgh beats Binghamton by 40 instead of 18, they'll likely move past us because they've exceeded the amount Kenpom thought they'd beat Binghamton by. That has nothing to do with our previous history. 

 

Otherwise, it's the previous year, not years, that are included for part of the season because it simply gives better results overall than not including them. https://kenpom.com/blog/preseason-ratings-why-weight/

[hskr4life]

1 hour ago, Chuck Taylor said:

This bracketology site has us as a 5 seed:

https://www.allmysportsteamssuck.com/ncaa-college-basketball-live-machine-learning-bracketology/

 

We're 20 in their computer rankings:

https://www.allmysportsteamssuck.com/ncaa-college-basketball-live-computer-rankings/

 

Maybe we should replace KenPom in this thread with this site? 

Then would play a power house 4 seed (Portland State) in the 2nd round… lol

[49r]

23 minutes ago, hhcmatt said:

 

If Pittsburgh beats Binghamton by 40 instead of 18, they'll likely move past us because they've exceeded the amount Kenpom thought they'd beat Binghamton by. That has nothing to do with our previous history. 

 

Otherwise, it's the previous year, not years, that are included for part of the season because it simply gives better results overall than not including them. https://kenpom.com/blog/preseason-ratings-why-weight/

 

Still, last season we peaked in the 80's and finished high 90's and triple digits, so that's gonna drag us down.  Movement occurs even without playing any games so in the next few days if Pitt beats Binghampton by the predicted MOV or if Mizzou wins by the predicted margin, they will be more likely float up past us due to having better recent rankings.

 

Obviously if one of the teams around us has a blowout win or loss that will have a bigger effect on movement.  But I'm not taking that into account.

 

Eventually we'll settle in to where we are likely to stay for the rest of the season barring unexpected winning/losing streaks, but my point is, all things considered equal here we are going to be at a little disadvantage to the teams around us due in part at least to where we're coming from.

[Chuck Taylor]

Too much teeth gnashing over ratings, MOV et al. because what matters is winning games. The NET is only for sorting teams. The fact that teams with NET under 40 usually get in reflects that they have beaten quality opponents. Gaming the ratings by running up the score does nothing to get you in the tournament. 

 

Quote

The data that matters

In short, the committee is looking for teams that have performed well, especially away from home since the tournament is not played on home floors.

Most important

• Games by quadrant, listing results and upcoming games
• Records by quadrant, away and neutral
• Non-Conference Strength of Schedule (SOS)
• Overall SOS
• Overall road and neutral records
• Non-Division I losses

Some value

• Average NET win and loss
• Overall record
• Non-Conference record, road record

Not nothing, but not very important

• NET and other computer rankings

 

You'll note that conference standing also doesn't matter. FInishing 4th in the Big Ten doesn't matter if you haven't beaten good teams. 

[The Polish Rifle]

1 hour ago, Chuck Taylor said:

The NET is only for sorting teams. The fact that teams with NET under 40 usually get in reflects that they have beaten quality opponents. Gaming the ratings by running up the score does nothing to get you in the tournament. 

I disagree. I remember Vandy being NET poor and Mississippi St being a NET darling last year. MSU got the nod despite being 3 games behind Vandy in the SEC, losing to Vandy in the last game of the regular season, not going as far as Vandy the SEC tournament and having less Q1 and Q2 wins than Vandy. The seeding thing is lip service, they weigh it heavily. 

[Chuck Taylor]

1 hour ago, The Polish Rifle said:

I disagree. I remember Vandy being NET poor and Mississippi St being a NET darling last year. MSU got the nod despite being 3 games behind Vandy in the SEC, losing to Vandy in the last game of the regular season, not going as far as Vandy the SEC tournament and having less Q1 and Q2 wins than Vandy. The seeding thing is lip service, they weigh it heavily. 

What I posted was the actual explanation of how the tournament committee works, but you can think what you want.

[royalfan]

Margin of victory matters a lot.  Chuck is simply incorrect suggesting that it does not make any difference.  

[hskr4life]

Rough night for the B1G 10… while we were probable expected to lose two of these, top half of the league losing hurts that perception of the league.

 

Maryland loses to Davidson

OSU lost to A&M

Wisco about to lose to Tennessee.

[Handy Johnson]

If Nebraska WINS the B1G Conference, (possible not probable) they’d have to take us, right? I’ve never clung to this notion of winning A game in the Tournament. What if we’re the Best Team in a So/So B1G & come out of the weeds ala ‘91 & really make a run at this thing? I can’t wait to see what happens…

[royalfan]

Big 10 has to get their shit together right now.  After you get into league play, the results are what the results are and the league is as good as the early seaoson results are.  The computers don't understand that we have the best conference of coaches in the land and teams get better throughout the season.  They assume all teams get better at the same rate.  These early season struggles are REALLY bad for us who need this to be an 8 bid type of league. 

[royalfan]

3 hours ago, hskr4life said:

Rough night for the B1G 10… while we were probable expected to lose two of these, top half of the league losing hurts that perception of the league.

 

Maryland loses to Davidson

OSU lost to A&M

Wisco about to lose to Tennessee.

The perception doesn't matter as much as the data that goes into it IMO.  

[tcp]

this was always the argument against automated rating systems---rate of change over the course of season is intrinsically subjective. it's still accounted for by the committee ostensibly, but we all know the limitations on how many games an  active coach can actually watch during the course of a season. 

 

 

[Chuck Taylor]

15 hours ago, royalfan said:

Margin of victory matters a lot.  Chuck is simply incorrect suggesting that it does not make any difference.  

But I didn't say that it didn't make a difference, did I?

Margin of victory matters to the computer rankings. The computer rankings determine how the selection committee views your opponents. The committee makes its selection based on how you did against your opponents. But the committee doesn't select teams strictly based on the rankings. So some teams with good NETs get left out because they have bad resumes.

As it said above,

Not nothing, but not very important

• NET and other computer rankings

I didn't make that up. That's the committee's explanation. 

[royalfan]

23 minutes ago, Chuck Taylor said:

But I didn't say that it didn't make a difference, did I?

Margin of victory matters to the computer rankings. The computer rankings determine how the selection committee views your opponents. The committee makes its selection based on how you did against your opponents. But the committee doesn't select teams strictly based on the rankings. So some teams with good NETs get left out because they have bad resumes.

As it said above,

Not nothing, but not very important

• NET and other computer rankings

I didn't make that up. That's the committee's explanation. 

This is a far more accurate post than your prior one.  At the very least, that list significantly downplayed the importance of margin of victory.  running up score at the end to win by 16 instead of 4 matters a lot. 

[Norm Peterson]

All 14 Big Ten teams in the Kenpom top 100. Purdue is #1. Michigan is next at #23.

 

We're 10th in the league at #55 but within striking distance of 6th and #39 Iowa.

 

But we've got a lot of stuff we've got to get right before we play anyone good.

[49r]

Big jumps for Michigan and Minnesota and big drops for Maryland and Indiana. Nebraska settles back to #55 (was up to #53 yesterday) but nudges up a spot in the Big Ten due to Indiana's precipitous drop.

 

Duquesne makes a significant jump as well, they will present a very stiff challenge for us.  Ken still has us projected at 18-13 (9-11).

 

---

 

 

KenPom rankings as of 11-14-23

=======================

 

B1G (0-0):
1. Purdue
23. Michigan
25. Wisconsin
27. Illinois
30. Michigan State
39. Iowa
45. Maryland
46. Northwestern
51. Ohio State
55. Nebraska
61. Indiana
72. Rutgers
83. Penn State
97. Minnesota

 

 

Non-Conference (3-0):
354. Lindenwood - W

347. Florida A&M - W

---Cornhusker Classic---
236. Rider - W
293. Stony Brook

---Sanford Pentagon---
191. Oregon State

 

---Cornhusker Classic---

77. Duquesne

 

189. Cal State Fullerton

8. Creighton
38. @Kansas State
250. North Dakota

339. South Carolina State

[hhcmatt]

Very much conference rooting for today's Gavitt Games

[hskr4life]

Iowa vs Creighton is toughhh to choose.  Can I root for the B1G without rooting for Iowa?  Lol

 

Better day for the conference yesterday.  Michigan and Purdue got the Gavit series kicked off on the right foot.

[The Jazz Huddle]

3 hours ago, hskr4life said:

Iowa vs Creighton is toughhh to choose.  Can I root for the B1G without rooting for Iowa?  Lol

 

Better day for the conference yesterday.  Michigan and Purdue got the Gavit series kicked off on the right foot.

I would rather Creighton win so they come into Pinnacle undefeated.

[HB]

5 hours ago, hskr4life said:

Iowa vs Creighton is toughhh to choose.  Can I root for the B1G without rooting for Iowa?  Lol

 

Better day for the conference yesterday.  Michigan and Purdue got the Gavit series kicked off on the right foot.

 

Definitely bonga bonga or death.