+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: Lounge (/forum-564.html)
+---- Forum: College Sports and Conference Realignment (/forum-637.html)
+---- Thread: NCAA selections (/thread-839734.html)
NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-10-2018 11:23 AM
I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
RE: NCAA selections - leofrog - 01-10-2018 12:46 PM
Warrennolan.com now breaks out the new "Tiers." I think it makes sense that you play the #50 team home and home, they should not count the same.
RPI Group 1: Home (1-30) Neutral (1-50) Away (1-75)
RPI Group 2: Home (31-75) Neutral (51-100) Away (76-135)
RPI Group 3: Home (76-160) Neutral (101-200) Away (136-240)
RPI Group 4: Home (161-351) Neutral (201-351) Away (241-351)
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-10-2018 12:49 PM
it's going to be negative for conferences that have teams in the 31-50 range- but positive for those in the 51-75 range. Negative for those that have teams in the 76-100 range, but positive for 101-135 range.
RE: NCAA selections - The Cutter of Bish - 01-10-2018 04:42 PM
I think it's just another way for the committee to flick off non-majors.
Even those just on the outside, like the A10, could really get stung. Rhode Island's RPI has them at 19. But, that's 2-3 versus the first two tiers. With the A10 so down this year, those numbers won't get considerably better for them. Their 2-3 put up against against, say, Georgia, at 40 but 5-2, or, heck...Minnesota currently at 2-3. We know Minnesota's going to have some better numbers against the top two tiers after it's all said and done.
In the other thread, we talk about Wisconsin being nearly dead. I don't like Gonzaga's chances this year with this new system, either. If they aren't winning the AQ, what's their real RPI ceiling at this point, and the best they can do against the top tiers?
I know it's early...but if it was possible to keep out high RPI non-majors like Missouri State and St. Bonaventure in the past...I think there's a chance we're going to see similar snubs soon, and done more frequently.
RE: NCAA selections - Wolfman - 01-10-2018 04:46 PM
(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponets were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
RE: NCAA selections - The Cutter of Bish - 01-10-2018 04:53 PM
(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponets were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Because #73 road is a Group 1 metric, and #32 home is Group 2. It's a way of weighting road wins, emphasizing the importance of play off the home court, which is what tournament teams will see.
It's controversial, to be sure. If you beat a good team, you beat them. But, now there's this added layer of context. KenPom measures how you win, and now RPI cares about where. Still think the SOS skews it all, though, for RPI.
RE: NCAA selections - leofrog - 01-10-2018 06:29 PM
(01-10-2018 04:42 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: I think it's just another way for the committee to flick off non-majors.
Even those just on the outside, like the A10, could really get stung. Rhode Island's RPI has them at 19. But, that's 2-3 versus the first two tiers. With the A10 so down this year, those numbers won't get considerably better for them. Their 2-3 put up against against, say, Georgia, at 40 but 5-2, or, heck...Minnesota currently at 2-3. We know Minnesota's going to have some better numbers against the top two tiers after it's all said and done.
In the other thread, we talk about Wisconsin being nearly dead. I don't like Gonzaga's chances this year with this new system, either. If they aren't winning the AQ, what's their real RPI ceiling at this point, and the best they can do against the top tiers?
I know it's early...but if it was possible to keep out high RPI non-majors like Missouri State and St. Bonaventure in the past...I think there's a chance we're going to see similar snubs soon, and done more frequently.
But, it could also work in their favor, especially for OOC games. Teams like Rhode Island usually can't get top teams to go to their place. But now, they can schedule somewhat easier opponents on the road, and get a bigger benefit out of that. I can see this actually helping teams like that if they schedule accordingly.
This is basically how the RPI is set up on college baseball. Instead of Tiers, they just weigh a home win as .7 of a win, and a road win as 1.3 of a win. Because of that, teams are schedule to take advantage of that.
RE: NCAA selections - leofrog - 01-10-2018 06:30 PM
(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponets were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
RE: NCAA selections - Wolfman - 01-10-2018 10:33 PM
(01-10-2018 06:30 PM)leofrog Wrote:(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponents were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
That list doesn't explain the tiers at all. Nor does the website warrennolan.com
You can add all the Ross Perot charts and multipliers you want, I still say beating a team with at home with a 32 RPI is a much better win than beating a team on the road with a 40 point lower RPI. I guess that's why I am not on the selection committee.
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-10-2018 11:27 PM
(01-10-2018 10:33 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 06:30 PM)leofrog Wrote:(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponents were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
That list doesn't explain the tiers at all. Nor does the website warrennolan.com
You can add all the Ross Perot charts and multipliers you want, I still say beating a team with at home with a 32 RPI is a much better win than beating a team on the road with a 40 point lower RPI. I guess that's why I am not on the selection committee.
They're making much more of a focus on what you do away from home. Which makes sense to large degree because you can't play at home in the tournament.
RE: NCAA selections - dbackjon - 01-11-2018 12:48 PM
(01-10-2018 11:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:(01-10-2018 10:33 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 06:30 PM)leofrog Wrote:(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:23 AM)stever20 Wrote: I think 1 thing that folks need to stop thinking about in basketball is just blindly looking at records vs RPI top 50. That's no longer the case any longer. It's this year going to be better to beat #73 on the road than it is to beat #32 at home. I see people asking Lunardi questions on Twitter using RPI top 50 records.
How so? I could see if the opponents were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
That list doesn't explain the tiers at all. Nor does the website warrennolan.com
You can add all the Ross Perot charts and multipliers you want, I still say beating a team with at home with a 32 RPI is a much better win than beating a team on the road with a 40 point lower RPI. I guess that's why I am not on the selection committee.
They're making much more of a focus on what you do away from home. Which makes sense to large degree because you can't play at home in the tournament.
It is a good thing, IMHO - too many P6 teams only play home OOC (with a neutral site sprinkled in) and won't play true road games. Anything to get more OOC road games is better for the sport
RE: NCAA selections - The Cutter of Bish - 01-11-2018 12:49 PM
(01-10-2018 06:29 PM)leofrog Wrote: But, it could also work in their favor, especially for OOC games. Teams like Rhode Island usually can't get top teams to go to their place. But now, they can schedule somewhat easier opponents on the road, and get a bigger benefit out of that. I can see this actually helping teams like that if they schedule accordingly.
This is basically how the RPI is set up on college baseball. Instead of Tiers, they just weigh a home win as .7 of a win, and a road win as 1.3 of a win. Because of that, teams are schedule to take advantage of that.
Assuming this year is just an anomaly in the A10, I don't worry for them...it's everyone else behind them where I do. Especially Gonzaga, or SMC, who can't always get games on their own, rely on tournaments (where, as stever points out, a loss and the ensuing consolation games can really smack your SOS around), and then have to play in really bad conferences. And that doesn't even consider when a team thinks it challenges itself with a schedule, just to see it play garbage (like SMC). A metric like KP will take how you play against everyone, but RPI will just rip you up for playing...crap.
I just get the impression a bunch of major conference reps really started complaining about the metrics considered by the selection committee, especially when the Missouri Valley and CAA populated the RPI's top, usually "safely in" tier. And, talking heads started going to things like quality opponents, SOS (which is factored into RPI), records against certain teams, and wins regardless of where they happened. Over time, isn't this what the RPI is starting to look more like? A way to validate major conference teams with questionable RPI over better non-majors because of volume consideration of games played against top teams? Majors who don't have to move off their home court or even challenge in the non-conference then propped up in conference play? It's not exactly fair, to me at least, to now break it down further.
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-11-2018 12:56 PM
(01-11-2018 12:48 PM)dbackjon Wrote:I think it's going to really hinge end of the year on how a conference looks......(01-10-2018 11:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:(01-10-2018 10:33 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 06:30 PM)leofrog Wrote:(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote: How so? I could see if the opponents were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
That list doesn't explain the tiers at all. Nor does the website warrennolan.com
You can add all the Ross Perot charts and multipliers you want, I still say beating a team with at home with a 32 RPI is a much better win than beating a team on the road with a 40 point lower RPI. I guess that's why I am not on the selection committee.
They're making much more of a focus on what you do away from home. Which makes sense to large degree because you can't play at home in the tournament.
It is a good thing, IMHO - too many P6 teams only play home OOC (with a neutral site sprinkled in) and won't play true road games. Anything to get more OOC road games is better for the sport
If it's like the current Big East, with teams at RPI 29,30 and then another team at 51,67- that's going to be a plus.
if it's like the current SEC, with 4 teams at the 31-50 range- it's going to hurt conferences like that.....
could also help Pac 12, with 3 teams in the 51-75 range- as now those road games with them would be tier 1 games.
It's going to really be a team by team thing quite frankly as well.
RE: NCAA selections - Wedge - 01-11-2018 12:59 PM
(01-11-2018 12:48 PM)dbackjon Wrote:(01-10-2018 11:27 PM)stever20 Wrote:(01-10-2018 10:33 PM)Wolfman Wrote:(01-10-2018 06:30 PM)leofrog Wrote:(01-10-2018 04:46 PM)Wolfman Wrote: How so? I could see if the opponents were within 5 or 10 points but beating a team that is 40 points higher should earn more credit.
Look at my previous email where the Tiers are explained.
That list doesn't explain the tiers at all. Nor does the website warrennolan.com
You can add all the Ross Perot charts and multipliers you want, I still say beating a team with at home with a 32 RPI is a much better win than beating a team on the road with a 40 point lower RPI. I guess that's why I am not on the selection committee.
They're making much more of a focus on what you do away from home. Which makes sense to large degree because you can't play at home in the tournament.
It is a good thing, IMHO - too many P6 teams only play home OOC (with a neutral site sprinkled in) and won't play true road games. Anything to get more OOC road games is better for the sport
I wouldn't be too optimistic about it. If this home/neutral/road metric turns out to be influential in tournament seeding and in choosing bubble teams, someone will figure out how to game this metric. One possibility is more neutral-site games that aren't genuinely neutral, e.g., Kansas playing in Kansas City, Maryland playing in DC, Arizona playing in Phoenix.
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-11-2018 01:03 PM
(01-11-2018 12:49 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:For the A10, it feels like this is just the continuation of a trend.(01-10-2018 06:29 PM)leofrog Wrote: But, it could also work in their favor, especially for OOC games. Teams like Rhode Island usually can't get top teams to go to their place. But now, they can schedule somewhat easier opponents on the road, and get a bigger benefit out of that. I can see this actually helping teams like that if they schedule accordingly.
This is basically how the RPI is set up on college baseball. Instead of Tiers, they just weigh a home win as .7 of a win, and a road win as 1.3 of a win. Because of that, teams are schedule to take advantage of that.
Assuming this year is just an anomaly in the A10, I don't worry for them...it's everyone else behind them where I do. Especially Gonzaga, or SMC, who can't always get games on their own, rely on tournaments (where, as stever points out, a loss and the ensuing consolation games can really smack your SOS around), and then have to play in really bad conferences. And that doesn't even consider when a team thinks it challenges itself with a schedule, just to see it play garbage (like SMC). A metric like KP will take how you play against everyone, but RPI will just rip you up for playing...crap.
I just get the impression a bunch of major conference reps really started complaining about the metrics considered by the selection committee, especially when the Missouri Valley and CAA populated the RPI's top, usually "safely in" tier. And, talking heads started going to things like quality opponents, SOS (which is factored into RPI), records against certain teams, and wins regardless of where they happened. Over time, isn't this what the RPI is starting to look more like? A way to validate major conference teams with questionable RPI over better non-majors because of volume consideration of games played against top teams? Majors who don't have to move off their home court or even challenge in the non-conference then propped up in conference play? It's not exactly fair, to me at least, to now break it down further.
look at last 5 years....
2014- 9.29 KP rating, #8 conference, 5/5/6/9/10/11 seeds
2015- 5.61 KP rating, #7 conference, 7/10/11 seeds
2016- 5.48 KP rating, #8 conference, 7/8/10 seeds
2017- 3.95 KP rating, #8 conference, 7/10/11 seeds
2018- 1.84 KP rating, #10 conference
The question for me is this the low point of the A10, or could they slip more? Why I don't think you can write it off as an anomoly is the fact that the league wasn't exactly great last year.
RE: NCAA selections - Wedge - 01-11-2018 01:16 PM
(01-11-2018 12:49 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: A way to validate major conference teams with questionable RPI
"Questionable RPI" is a redundant phrase, because RPI is an extremely questionable metric to begin with. It should have been retired at least 10 years ago after several conferences had a consultant show them how to rig their RPI ratings by scheduling the best teams from terrible conferences (because RPI rewards you for playing a 20-win team even if 19 of those wins were over teams that should probably be in D-III or NAIA).
RE: NCAA selections - The Cutter of Bish - 01-11-2018 01:23 PM
Yeah, I could see seeding getting really dicey with this new component. Again, especially with the mid-majors at high RPI's. Not to pick on Rhodie, but, assuming they don't lose another game, their RPI could still scrape the top 10-15. With the conference so bad and record versus the top tier, and second tier, being far more slim than those around them...what's the reality they actually see a 3-5 seed? Their numbers put them in the 7-10 stew at best.
Again, looking at Gonzaga, and I'm not seeing how winning out at this point gets them anything better than where the line divides the at-large's with the single-bid AQ's (which is looking terrible this year...this might be a good year for 5-seeds), maybe the 11-line? This is last year's runner-up, and still a good team...totally ****ed by its schedule. And we wonder why this rumor of going to the Big East doesn't die? This is a real issue for them.
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-11-2018 01:32 PM
(01-11-2018 01:23 PM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote: Yeah, I could see seeding getting really dicey with this new component. Again, especially with the mid-majors at high RPI's. Not to pick on Rhodie, but, assuming they don't lose another game, their RPI could still scrape the top 10-15. With the conference so bad and record versus the top tier, and second tier, being far more slim than those around them...what's the reality they actually see a 3-5 seed? Their numbers put them in the 7-10 stew at best.
yeah, not only are they 1-3 vs tier 1 teams, only 2-3 vs tier 1/2 teams. They have only 1 tier 1 game left- @ St Bonaventure. Only 3 tier 2 games left. I think a 5 might be their absolute best case scenario.
RE: NCAA selections - stever20 - 01-11-2018 01:36 PM
at least Gonzaga is 4-3 vs tier 1 opponents. With 2 more games left. That's where they're different than Rhode Island. If both won out, I think Gonzaga would easily get the higher seed than Rhode Island. Right now on ESPN, Gonzaga projected as a 6, Rhode Island as a 8. That seems about right to me.
RE: NCAA selections - The Cutter of Bish - 01-11-2018 02:06 PM
(01-11-2018 01:36 PM)stever20 Wrote: at least Gonzaga is 4-3 vs tier 1 opponents. With 2 more games left. That's where they're different than Rhode Island. If both won out, I think Gonzaga would easily get the higher seed than Rhode Island. Right now on ESPN, Gonzaga projected as a 6, Rhode Island as a 8. That seems about right to me.
Yeah, if you're 8 and the AQ, I'm not sure what happens if you slip up and don't win the auto bid. Bonaventure's just on the outside. I don't see how SMC keeps a spot if they aren't grabbing at least one against Gonzaga.
Lipscomb is interesting. 38th in RPI, 1-5 versus tiers 1 and 2...14 seed, and just because they are the AQ.