+- CSNbbs (https://csnbbs.com)
+-- Forum: Active Boards (/forum-769.html)
+--- Forum: AACbbs (/forum-460.html)
+---- Forum: AAC Conference Talk (/forum-409.html)
+---- Thread: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** (/thread-886257.html)
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95 96 97 98 99 100 101 102 103 104 105 106 107 108 109 110 111 112 113 114 115 116 117 118 119 120 121 122 123 124 125 126 127 128 129 130 131 132 133 134 135 136 137 138 139 140 141 142 143 144 145 146 147 148 149 150 151 152 153 154 155 156 157 158 159 160 161 162 163 164 165 166 167 168 169 170 171 172 173 174 175 176 177 178 179 180 181 182 183 184 185 186 187 188 189 190 191 192 193 194
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - StillJonesing - 04-12-2021 07:25 AM
(04-12-2021 06:26 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: This thread is off the wall. I know it's a minor part of the thread but please stop citing rpi to measure team quality when kenpom numbers are available. Rpi's limited relevance was because it was a statistical relic that the committee used as a grouping mechanism for far too long . It's never been a measure of team quality. We don't need to use it anymore as even the committee has abandoned it.
They didn't abandon it for Kenpom did they and that's really all that matters is what the NCAA uses to rank and help select teams. I specifically said that I would have used NET if it existed past 3 years ago to actually compare Dooley vs Lebo because that is what the NCAA is going with now. RPI was the going thing then and it absolutely has relevance in comparing NCAA rankings that actually matters in the time period stated or how I used it or in the historical context I was using it or to compare ourself vs ourself when it encompassed some of those years and was the system.
The formula didn't change. If you think it's a bad formula great whatever, that's not the point, it's still the same formula that didn't give an advantage to 2017 ECU over 2021 so it's still relevant as a comparison tool vs ourself and it's still better to compare ECU under something that actually mattered to the NCAA in that timeframe unlike KenPom it was actually the primary tool and that's really all that mattered.
I didn't say it was some amazing great system that we should always and forever use going forward. Infact I said I would use NET if it existed to compare at the time. It would actually be helpful if someone would retro rank the last 40 years the RPI was the standard under NET so we have a comparison. What I used it for was to compare ECU vs itself under Dooley/Lebo since NET didn't exist under Lebo and it was THE system under Lebo and literally the only way to compare the two under a system the NCAA actually mattered or was used primarily in anything that mattered in any of those years.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - steves - 04-12-2021 09:32 AM
Ok ... A new terminology will appear on this board starting in the fall of 2022.
!!! Zocko !!!
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Foreverandever - 04-12-2021 09:45 AM
(04-12-2021 07:25 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:(04-12-2021 06:26 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: This thread is off the wall. I know it's a minor part of the thread but please stop citing rpi to measure team quality when kenpom numbers are available. Rpi's limited relevance was because it was a statistical relic that the committee used as a grouping mechanism for far too long . It's never been a measure of team quality. We don't need to use it anymore as even the committee has abandoned it.
They didn't abandon it for Kenpom did they and that's really all that matters is what the NCAA uses to rank and help select teams. I specifically said that I would have used NET if it existed past 3 years ago to actually compare Dooley vs Lebo because that is what the NCAA is going with now. RPI was the going thing then and it absolutely has relevance in comparing NCAA rankings that actually matters in the time period stated or how I used it or in the historical context I was using it or to compare ourself vs ourself when it encompassed some of those years and was the system.
The formula didn't change. If you think it's a bad formula great whatever, that's not the point, it's still the same formula that didn't give an advantage to 2017 ECU over 2021 so it's still relevant as a comparison tool vs ourself and it's still better to compare ECU under something that actually mattered to the NCAA in that timeframe unlike KenPom it was actually the primary tool and that's really all that mattered.
I didn't say it was some amazing great system that we should always and forever use going forward. Infact I said I would use NET if it existed to compare at the time. It would actually be helpful if someone would retro rank the last 40 years the RPI was the standard under NET so we have a comparison. What I used it for was to compare ECU vs itself under Dooley/Lebo since NET didn't exist under Lebo and it was THE system under Lebo and literally the only way to compare the two under a system the NCAA actually mattered or was used primarily in anything that mattered in any of those years.
You want to use for comparison a system no one uses anymore because it was used when the last guy was here. A ranking system built largely on scheduling and not on play.
You don't want to use a system specifically made to do this, is more in depth and an accurate predictor, was used when the last guy was here and when thei new guy is here, oh and it's a metric the NCAA takes into account. A ranking system based on level of play statistics and not schedule.
Yes that seems totally reasonable and not at all like picking a stat you want to fit your narrative.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - StillJonesing - 04-12-2021 11:13 AM
(04-12-2021 09:45 AM)Foreverandever Wrote:(04-12-2021 07:25 AM)StillJonesing Wrote:(04-12-2021 06:26 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: This thread is off the wall. I know it's a minor part of the thread but please stop citing rpi to measure team quality when kenpom numbers are available. Rpi's limited relevance was because it was a statistical relic that the committee used as a grouping mechanism for far too long . It's never been a measure of team quality. We don't need to use it anymore as even the committee has abandoned it.
They didn't abandon it for Kenpom did they and that's really all that matters is what the NCAA uses primarily to rank and help select teams. I specifically said that I would have used NET if it existed past 3 years ago to actually compare Dooley vs Lebo because that is what the NCAA is going with now. RPI was the going thing then and it absolutely has relevance in comparing NCAA rankings that actually matters in the time period stated or how I used it or in the historical context I was using it or to compare ourself vs ourself when it encompassed some of those years and was the system.
The formula didn't change. If you think it's a bad formula great whatever, that's not the point, it's still the same formula that didn't give an advantage to 2017 ECU over 2021 so it's still relevant as a comparison tool vs ourself and it's still better to compare ECU under something that actually mattered to the NCAA in that timeframe unlike KenPom it was actually the primary tool and that's really all that mattered.
I didn't say it was some amazing great system that we should always and forever use going forward. Infact I said I would use NET if it existed to compare at the time. It would actually be helpful if someone would retro rank the last 40 years the RPI was the standard under NET so we have a comparison. What I used it for was to compare ECU vs itself under Dooley/Lebo since NET didn't exist under Lebo and it was THE system under Lebo and literally the only way to compare the two under a system the NCAA actually mattered or was used primarily in anything that mattered in any of those years.
You want to use for comparison a system no one uses anymore because it was used when the last guy was here. A ranking system built largely on scheduling and not on play.
You don't want to use a system specifically made to do this, is more in depth and an accurate predictor, was used when the last guy was here and when thei new guy is here, oh and it's a metric the NCAA takes into account. A ranking system based on level of play statistics and not schedule.
Yes that seems totally reasonable and not at all like picking a stat you want to fit your narrative.
Where have I argued once it's actually better? That's not the point. I'll use whatever the hell the NCAA uses primarily because that's what actually matters. The fact is that was the standard when Lebo was still here and the only one that existed that was the main one at that level that you can still use the formula to judge both under a NCAA system that actually was the standard.
Not once did I picked it and said this is the best, it's only what the NCAA picked and used in that time period that I even care. Again if we had NET for more than 3 years I'd use it to compare and I'm not a fan of it. The 10 point crap last year was pure **** hey but that's the standard now that actually matters like RPI just 3 years ago.
If you want to get your panties in a wad ***** about it ***** at the NCAA and not me for why they didn't go with Kenpom even when they made a change if it's so amazing. Hell what's next are the Sagarin, BPwhatever, elo stanboys going to come out the wood work next to pump whatever fits their narrative.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - pesik - 04-12-2021 12:04 PM
because the NCAA has no control over kenpom... the ncaa cant force kenpom to change its formula, nor can they stop kenpom from changing his formula
the committee says they weighed the NET against kenpom to see how the NET stacked up when originally deciding it viability.. thus showing they valued kenpom.. the committee openly says the net isnt a perfect system yet (they update the formula yearly).. when they were asked why colgate was such a low seed but #9 in the NET
i know we are just arguing with a brick wall...youve decided you want lebo's team to be more touted..lebo teams are ranked higher in the RPI.. so now rpi has more value than kenpom, and no logic or common sense will change your mind.... #SJdiesonhisTakes
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - TripleA - 04-12-2021 03:51 PM
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Memphis Yankee - 04-12-2021 03:55 PM
(04-12-2021 03:51 PM)TripleA Wrote:
Just saw this you know where. I hope we do better than we did in South Dakota.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Tiger1983 - 04-12-2021 05:31 PM
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Chappy - 04-12-2021 05:52 PM
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Tiger1983 - 04-12-2021 10:29 PM
*** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Pony94 - 04-13-2021 07:31 AM
(04-12-2021 10:29 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:
Good evaluation Jank.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Tiger1983 - 04-13-2021 08:19 AM
(04-13-2021 07:31 AM)Pony94 Wrote:(04-12-2021 10:29 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:
Good evaluation Jank.
Given a normal influx of freshman, eligibility extension, and lack of roster expansion; there will be players settling for lesser teams, lesser roles, lower divisions or even (horror of horrors) paying tuition to attend school.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Tiger1983 - 04-13-2021 03:57 PM
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Foreverandever - 04-13-2021 06:13 PM
(04-12-2021 05:31 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:
Not sure it would have ever mattered who ECU's coach was or maybe even the transfer rule change with that. Kid just went to a national title contender and a system where he will be able to shine.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - b0ndsj0ns - 04-14-2021 01:10 PM
(04-13-2021 06:13 PM)Foreverandever Wrote:(04-12-2021 05:31 PM)Tiger1983 Wrote:
Not sure it would have ever mattered who ECU's coach was or maybe even the transfer rule change with that. Kid just went to a national title contender and a system where he will be able to shine.
Best of luck to him, and I’m sure ECUs NIT roster will start rounding into form any second now!
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - TripleA - 04-14-2021 06:33 PM
Big news for Memphis.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - maccoog - 04-14-2021 07:09 PM
(04-14-2021 06:33 PM)TripleA Wrote: Big news for Memphis.
Good for you. You were a different team when he started playing.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Stickboy46 - 04-14-2021 07:10 PM
(04-14-2021 06:33 PM)TripleA Wrote: Big news for Memphis.That's really surprising ... But yes really good news.
Sent from my SM-F916U1 using Tapatalk
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - TripleA - 04-14-2021 07:31 PM
(04-14-2021 07:10 PM)Stickboy46 Wrote:(04-14-2021 06:33 PM)TripleA Wrote: Big news for Memphis.That's really surprising ... But yes really good news.
Sent from my SM-F916U1 using Tapatalk
It has been a not well kept secret in Memphis for awhile, but yeah, from whenever it first became a topic, definitely surprising. Dude will be 25 next season.
We were a completely different team with him on the floor. Looks like we are keeping most of our core, with Williams, Nolley, Quinones, Lomax, Dandridge. Add transfers Timberlake and Warren + our freshman class of Minott, Ayomide and Camden, and 1-3 more transfers, and we look pretty good on paper.
RE: *** Basketball News Thread (Part 4) *** - Joprior23 - 04-14-2021 08:04 PM
Wow. That is freaking big-time. Really no reason that Houston and Memphis aren’t living in the top 25 next season.