+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: Members (/forum-401.html)
+----- Forum: UAB (/forum-448.html)
+------ Forum: UAB Blazers (/forum-384.html)
+------- Forum: The Gene Bartow Memorial Forum (/forum-388.html)
+------- Thread: KenPom.com Update (/thread-833936.html)
KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 11-17-2017 09:29 PM
Updated Sunday 7 Jan. 2018. Numbers in parentheses are ratings from Dec. 17th.
Conferences of Note:
1. Big 12
2. ACC
3. Big East
4. SEC
7. AAC
13. C-USA (15)
15. Sun Belt (13)
32. SWAC
C-USA Teams
58. WKU (95)
63. MTSU (68)
66. ODU (67)
92. UAB (110)
131. La Tech (107)
161. Marshall (179)
189. UTSA (195)
206. NT (235)
224. USM (255)
230. UTEP (200)
264. Charlotte (270)
267. FAU (248)
273. FIU (292)
305. Rice (295)
C-USA has jumped from the 20th rated conference, from about two months ago, to 13th.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 11-17-2017 09:38 PM
Updated on Sunday 17 Dec. 2017. Numbers in brackets are from a month ago.
OOC Teams
329 Jacksonville (317) -12
230 Chattanooga (246) +16
222 Richmond (187) -35
127 Buffalo
73 Iowa
153 Memphis (136) -17
163 Troy (160) -3
43 Auburn (54) +11
349 Alabama A&M (350) +1
266 New Orleans (276) +10
350 Mississippi Valley State (351) +1
UAB’s OOC schedule ranks 265 out of 351. A month ago, it was ranked 323rd.
RE: KenPom.com Update - UABfan1 - 11-17-2017 09:49 PM
(11-17-2017 09:29 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote: With UTSA losing to Sun Belt member Coastal Carolina today, 83-69, I thought I would update C-USA’s Pomeroy rankings. The conference is still ranked 20th, and we did have one win today: ODU beat Indiana State. Rice is leading Northwestern State.
Elon beat FIU, and South Carolina beat UTEP.
Conferences of Note:
1. Big 12
2. SEC
3. Big East
7. AAC
14. Sun Belt
16. Southern
20. C-USA
32. SWAC
C-USA Teams
87. ODU
100. MT
110. La Tech
117. UAB
175. UTEP
197. Marshall
203. Charlotte
225. WKU
274. FAU
280. UTSA
285. Rice
286. USM
299. NT
323. FIU
C-USA has six teams rated lower than 250. The Sun Belt has two.
I really appreciate your kenpom updates. I don't think UTEP or WKU are as bad as their numbers suggest. And I think UAB should be around 85. But, it has to be earned. Not given. Not going to earn it playing teams like our first 4. (Although we didn't know Chatt & Richmond would be so bad)
CUSA can & should take action to have the top 6-7 teams play each other 4 times a year (regular season). And ditto for the bottom 4-6 teams.
That would cause a lot of whining by the lesser and middling teams. All the more reason to avoid being a lesser team.
And the tournament seeding would have to be adjusted too. Perhaps by taking RPI into account. It CAN be done but they have to take action to reward teams that win and play harder schedules. They could even use non public coaches polls to help pick the top teams.
And penalize any coach suspected or trying to game the polls.
RE: KenPom.com Update - iam4uab - 11-17-2017 09:58 PM
I don't understand why our league doesn't do something to try and move the conference up.
I mean, a CUSA vs. Sun Belt week right now would guarantee that we would have some better RPI games than we're currently getting. It's going to take a collective effort from all the schools to develop our reputation.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 12:15 PM
Original post has been updated and changes from a month ago are also noted.
RE: KenPom.com Update - WesternBlazer - 12-17-2017 12:21 PM
What were we before the Alabama A&M game. I suspect that game cost us...
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 12:28 PM
(12-17-2017 12:21 PM)WesternBlazer Wrote: What were we before the Alabama A&M game. I suspect that game cost us...
UAB improved from 116 to 110 in KenPom due to the large margin of victory.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 12:31 PM
Second post, dealing with OOC teams, was also updated.
RE: KenPom.com Update - Memphis Blazer - 12-17-2017 12:35 PM
Why is there such a discrepancy betweenness amenpom and the RPI which has us sub 200. In the past they have been fairly consistent.
RE: KenPom.com Update - BirminghamJoseph2770 - 12-17-2017 01:17 PM
Regarding the A&M game, Hope the Blazers play them every year in all sports. especially golf and Baseball, It does A&M great and the Blazers, a win is a win and the Blazers needed a win. And A&M needs to play the Blazers. A&M is a proud traditional University, would like to see more out of Them. Heck they are out of the City of Huntsville which is a very progressive city in Alabama. Hope they do well in their Conference. Wells it a Green City. Not to many across the region. Moving on, Its always better to win then lose unless your playing Indiana at Legacy a close loss would of been better then this win.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 03:54 PM
(12-17-2017 12:35 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: Why is there such a discrepancy betweenness amenpom and the RPI which has us sub 200. In the past they have been fairly consistent.
From a 2013 article -
Quote:The tool favored by the NCAA tournament selection committee is the RPI, which rates teams' accomplishments to date based on winning percentage and strength of schedule, giving extra weight to road or neutral-court wins but ignoring margin of victory. The tool favored by proponents of advanced stats is Ken Pomeroy's ratings, a predictive system which utilizes efficiency stats to provide a snapshot of every Division I team's current level of play.
https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/colorado-indiana-among-teams-kenpom-rpi-rate-most-182536501--ncaab.html
KenPom considers margin of victory, which is why UAB’s ranking actually improved after beating one of the worst teams in the country yesterday.
RE: KenPom.com Update - uabbean - 12-17-2017 07:40 PM
(12-17-2017 03:54 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:Yes RPI is based on W/L but 75 % of the score is based on the W/L of the teams you play. So Strength of the teams we play primarily - which sucks(12-17-2017 12:35 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: Why is there such a discrepancy betweenness amenpom and the RPI which has us sub 200. In the past they have been fairly consistent.
From a 2013 article -
Quote:The tool favored by the NCAA tournament selection committee is the RPI, which rates teams' accomplishments to date based on winning percentage and strength of schedule, giving extra weight to road or neutral-court wins but ignoring margin of victory. The tool favored by proponents of advanced stats is Ken Pomeroy's ratings, a predictive system which utilizes efficiency stats to provide a snapshot of every Division I team's current level of play.
https://sports.yahoo.com/blogs/ncaab-the-dagger/colorado-indiana-among-teams-kenpom-rpi-rate-most-182536501--ncaab.html
KenPom considers margin of victory, which is why UAB’s ranking actually improved after beating one of the worst teams in the country yesterday.
Ken Pom is based on all kind of metrics offense and defense. Our offense metrics are top 60 which averages to the low 100s.
RE: KenPom.com Update - Memphis Blazer - 12-17-2017 07:47 PM
So basically, we could be #1 in Ken Pom, and wouldn't impress the committeee at all.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 08:30 PM
(12-17-2017 07:47 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: So basically, we could be #1 in Ken Pom, and wouldn't impress the committeee at all.
I don’t believe that to be the case. In March 2015, Colorado State was 27-6 with an RPI of 29. They were not selected for the Big Dance. Their KenPom was 68. KenPom and other non-RPI rankings likely played a factor is the committee’s decision not to select Colorado State.
Colorado State played South Dakota State in the NIT (I believe) and lost by 10. Their final KenPom ranking was 72.
That’s just one example of when the committee considered more than just the RPI. I suspect that is increasingly the case as coaches make the case that the RPI is too primitive, and with the availability of more robust ranking systems.
RE: KenPom.com Update - Memphis Blazer - 12-17-2017 08:35 PM
(12-17-2017 08:30 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:(12-17-2017 07:47 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: So basically, we could be #1 in Ken Pom, and wouldn't impress the committeee at all.
I don’t believe that to be the case. In March 2015, Colorado State was 27-6 with an RPI of 29. They were not selected for the Big Dance. Their KenPom was 68. KenPom and other non-RPI rankings likely played a factor is the committee’s decision not to select Colorado State.
Colorado State played South Dakota State in the NIT (I believe) and lost by 10. Their final KenPom ranking was 72.
That’s just one example of when the committee considered more than just the RPI. I suspect that is increasingly the case as coaches make the case that the RPI is too primitive, and with the availability of more robust ranking systems.
Yeah because it was Colorado State. Well known fact that the committee goes back and forth betwweeen RPI and other factors to justify leaving non power conference schools out. There needs to be one set of criteria instead of multiple lists, so the committee can be held accountable.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-17-2017 08:44 PM
(12-17-2017 08:35 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:(12-17-2017 08:30 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:(12-17-2017 07:47 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: So basically, we could be #1 in Ken Pom, and wouldn't impress the committeee at all.
I don’t believe that to be the case. In March 2015, Colorado State was 27-6 with an RPI of 29. They were not selected for the Big Dance. Their KenPom was 68. KenPom and other non-RPI rankings likely played a factor is the committee’s decision not to select Colorado State.
Colorado State played South Dakota State in the NIT (I believe) and lost by 10. Their final KenPom ranking was 72.
That’s just one example of when the committee considered more than just the RPI. I suspect that is increasingly the case as coaches make the case that the RPI is too primitive, and with the availability of more robust ranking systems.
Yeah because it was Colorado State. Well known fact that the committee goes back and forth betwweeen RPI and other factors to justify leaving non power conference schools out. There needs to be one set of criteria instead of multiple lists, so the committee can be held accountable.
If there was one system, we wouldn’t need a committee.
I do wonder if they look at the Massey Composite.
https://www.mratings.com/cb/compare.htm
A week ago UAB’s ranking varied from 77 to 226.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-19-2017 01:22 PM
Right now KenPom has switched C-USA with the MAC.
13. Sun Belt
14. C-USA
15. MAC
RE: KenPom.com Update - hooverblazer - 12-19-2017 01:37 PM
(12-19-2017 01:22 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote: Right now KenPom has switched C-USA with the MAC.
13. Sun Belt
14. C-USA
15. MAC
#14 has to be the best conference ranking in a long time.
RE: KenPom.com Update - blazers9911 - 12-19-2017 01:45 PM
(12-17-2017 08:35 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote:(12-17-2017 08:30 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote:(12-17-2017 07:47 PM)Memphis Blazer Wrote: So basically, we could be #1 in Ken Pom, and wouldn't impress the committeee at all.
I don’t believe that to be the case. In March 2015, Colorado State was 27-6 with an RPI of 29. They were not selected for the Big Dance. Their KenPom was 68. KenPom and other non-RPI rankings likely played a factor is the committee’s decision not to select Colorado State.
Colorado State played South Dakota State in the NIT (I believe) and lost by 10. Their final KenPom ranking was 72.
That’s just one example of when the committee considered more than just the RPI. I suspect that is increasingly the case as coaches make the case that the RPI is too primitive, and with the availability of more robust ranking systems.
Yeah because it was Colorado State. Well known fact that the committee goes back and forth betwweeen RPI and other factors to justify leaving non power conference schools out. There needs to be one set of criteria instead of multiple lists, so the committee can be held accountable.
I agree. I don't care what the rules we are playing by are, I just want to know what they are so we can try our best to logically figure things out.
RE: KenPom.com Update - KevMo4UAB - 12-19-2017 02:38 PM
(12-19-2017 01:37 PM)hooverblazer Wrote:(12-19-2017 01:22 PM)KevMo4UAB Wrote: Right now KenPom has switched C-USA with the MAC.
13. Sun Belt
14. C-USA
15. MAC
#14 has to be the best conference ranking in a long time.
For previous years, I only know how the conference finished at the end of the season, according to KenPom.
2016-2017 21
2015-2016 20
2014-2015 17
2013-2014 16
2012-2013 11 The Conference still had Memphis.