The unofficial online home for fans of the Kent State University Golden Flashes. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

The Flashes and the Zips will get together at the JAR on Friday for a nationally televised game. Akron is 22-4, 12-1 in the MAC and currently riding a 30 game home winning streak. The Zips are probably one loss away from being knocked out of any potential "at large" discussion. I know, I know, its the MAC. But the fact remains, Akron has plenty of motivation for tomorrow night.

The Flashes should be motivated too. Despite the ups and downs of the last month and half KSU still has an opportunity to get to Cleveland as a top 4 and definitely can earn a home game in the opening round if things don't work out. But none of that should be needed to motivate Kent to beat Akron. This team needs a marquee win to get some momentum going. Sure, beating Texas was nice, but that seems like seasons ago.

Kent will need to keep Jimmy Hall out of foul trouble while defending the rim against Akron's bigs. It will also be interesting to see how Adonis De La Rosa stacks up against Johnson.

I don't see Kent State being able to win a shootout against Akron. But if the defense is solid and second chance points are limited, there is no reason that the Flashes can't hang with the Zips. Will Kent find a hot hand outside of Jaylin Walker and Jimmy Hall? Will the Zips go cold for extended stretches or maybe lose their cool a la their visit to Athens?

Should be fun. Go Flashes!

Akron shouldn't be a realistic at large candidate. On Kenpom they're ranked as the luckiest team in the country. 11% luckier than second place. They're 99th ranked overall on the KenPom ranking system which should be no where near an at large bid. Of course the selection committee still stupidly cares about RPI which has Akron at 35th so maybe they are in the picture...

(02-16-2017 12:50 PM)anti-zip Wrote:  Akron shouldn't be a realistic at large candidate. On Kenpom they're ranked as the luckiest team in the country. 11% luckier than second place. They're 99th ranked overall on the KenPom ranking system which should be no where near an at large bid. Of course the selection committee still stupidly cares about RPI which has Akron at 35th so maybe they are in the picture...

They really don't care about RPI. Fans seem to care about it and coaches seem to care about when it serves their purposes, but very few people take it seriously as a true measure of relative strength. It is one of dozen tools that are used, but it had its heyday 8-10 years ago and is regularly (and rightfully) ignored for the most part when it comes to field selection. It might be used to start a discussion of whether a team is in the mix, but the bottom line is the question: who have you beaten and where did you beat them? If you can't answer that with a a few top 50-ish teams on the road, forget it.

Here's a question for you: when in the last 20 years would this Akron team be the best team in the MAC? I think they are benefitting from a very mediocre conference this year. They just happen to be less flawed than everyone else. Now, granted, I'd take it over what we are witnessing here this year.

The Zips aren't, and have never been this season, a realistic at-large candidate. Their out-of-conference resume is horrible, with Marshall (14-11/158 KP) and UC Irvine (15-12/160 KP) being their best wins. Their SOS is horrible. And their gaudy conference record won't help (see Murray State 2015), especially when you look closer and see that they've barely beaten too many average/bad MAC teams.

The RPI won't save them because the selection committee is moving away from that model to the point that this is probably the last year it will be used. (They're eyeing something that's more of a composite, using other statistical models, none of which are likely to be RPI.)

I think it will come down more to who you played, who you beat and where the game was played, all of which don't bode well for the Zips if they find themselves in treading water in the at-large pool.

How the KSU-Akron game plays out will depend on which teams show. Or it could come down to which team trait is stronger: KSU's tendency to blow leads or Akron's horrible free-throw shooting (worst in MAC play).

I know the RPI isn't the only measurement but Akron is 35 in the RPI, 32 in Walter nolans NpI ( which takes margin of victory into account) and 38 in an ELO system which rates teams similar to how chess players are rated. All these ratings take into account who you beat and whether it was on home, road or neutral court. Having said that a MAC team in the thirties is not a lock and strength of schedule will probably get them. Especially since they will have to lose one or two more games for an at large bid to even be a consideration. I'm not familiar with the rating system that has them at 99 but that seems to be the outlier from what I can find.

Just curious anti zip. How would you determine who the luckiest team in the country is. Is that just a measure of how you do in close games?

I mean, I don't like Akron as much as the next guy but I think winning at the jar would almost be as big as winning at Georgia Tech.

(02-16-2017 12:50 PM)anti-zip Wrote:  Akron shouldn't be a realistic at large candidate. On Kenpom they're ranked as the luckiest team in the country. 11% luckier than second place. They're 99th ranked overall on the KenPom ranking system which should be no where near an at large bid. Of course the selection committee still stupidly cares about RPI which has Akron at 35th so maybe they are in the picture...

Hey I was just looking at the site and it is interesting. Do they explain what are behind the ratings anywhere? I'd pay the $20 for the premium site if there are some details as to how they arrive at some of those numbers or at least what they mean.

(02-16-2017 03:30 PM)burden Wrote:  

(02-16-2017 12:50 PM)anti-zip Wrote:  Akron shouldn't be a realistic at large candidate. On Kenpom they're ranked as the luckiest team in the country. 11% luckier than second place. They're 99th ranked overall on the KenPom ranking system which should be no where near an at large bid. Of course the selection committee still stupidly cares about RPI which has Akron at 35th so maybe they are in the picture...

Hey I was just looking at the site and it is interesting. Do they explain what are behind the ratings anywhere? I'd pay the $20 for the premium site if there are some details as to how they arrive at some of those numbers or at least what they mean.

Here's an explanation of his system.

http://kenpom.com/blog/ratings-explanation/

Here's the relevant information on the Luck factor.

Quote:The new ones are Cons (Consistency) and Luck. The easiest one to understand is Luck, which is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest.

(02-16-2017 03:12 PM)burden Wrote:  I know the RPI isn't the only measurement but Akron is 35 in the RPI, 32 in Walter nolans NpI ( which takes margin of victory into account) and 38 in an ELO system which rates teams similar to how chess players are rated. All these ratings take into account who you beat and whether it was on home, road or neutral court. Having said that a MAC team in the thirties is not a lock and strength of schedule will probably get them. Especially since they will have to lose one or two more games for an at large bid to even be a consideration. I'm not familiar with the rating system that has them at 99 but that seems to be the outlier from what I can find.

Just curious anti zip. How would you determine who the luckiest team in the country is. Is that just a measure of how you do in close games?

BPI has Akron at 78. I don't have a strong opinion on BPI (obviously it's better than RPI) but it's ESPN's rating so of course it's crammed down our throats. For the most part it tends to be closer to the Kenpom rankings than most I've seen. Kenpom is definitely the system I prefer. I've heard announcers and coaches mention it several times over the last few years too so I think it's fairly well regarded.

(02-16-2017 05:52 PM)anti-zip Wrote:  

(02-16-2017 03:30 PM)burden Wrote:  

(02-16-2017 12:50 PM)anti-zip Wrote:  Akron shouldn't be a realistic at large candidate. On Kenpom they're ranked as the luckiest team in the country. 11% luckier than second place. They're 99th ranked overall on the KenPom ranking system which should be no where near an at large bid. Of course the selection committee still stupidly cares about RPI which has Akron at 35th so maybe they are in the picture...

Hey I was just looking at the site and it is interesting. Do they explain what are behind the ratings anywhere? I'd pay the $20 for the premium site if there are some details as to how they arrive at some of those numbers or at least what they mean.

Here's an explanation of his system.

http://kenpom.com/blog/ratings-explanation/

Here's the relevant information on the Luck factor.

Quote:The new ones are Cons (Consistency) and Luck. The easiest one to understand is Luck, which is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest.

Thanks. An engineers dream: the correlated Gaussian method. This will keep me busy for awhile.

I don't care if they use tea leaves, Tarot cards and an Ouija board. There is absolutely no way the selection committee puts two MAC teams in the NCAA tournament.

What was our RPI in 2008 when we were the 8th seed? That is the last time I remember a MAC team being a serious contender for an at large bid.

(02-16-2017 10:03 PM)KentKrazy Wrote:  What was our RPI in 2008 when we were the 8th seed? That is the last time I remember a MAC team being a serious contender for an at large bid.

In 2008, we were the #9 seed. We played UNLV in Omaha and got absolutely embarrassed. I couldn't get out of that arena fast enough.

11 points in the first half. And the program hasn't been the same since.

(02-16-2017 10:03 PM)KentKrazy Wrote:  What was our RPI in 2008 when we were the 8th seed? That is the last time I remember a MAC team being a serious contender for an at large bid.

It was 21 with a SOS of 111 (per Jerry Palms old web site). Of course a loss in the MAC championship game would have lowered it a bit. Over the years MAC teams are usually 3 or 4 seeds lower than what their RPI projects. In this case it would have been a six seed so a 9 or 10 would have been possible as an at large. Obviously from the result of the NCAA game we were probably overrated.

Peterson contributes....pippen....eh

Avery? Nice free throws

No kidding. Come on boys

Looks like we are going to do it.

(02-17-2017 09:00 PM)burden Wrote:  Looks like we are going to do it.

Couldn't be happier with a win but foul shooting - ugh