https://mobile.twitter.com/kenpomeroy/st...0814929920

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Since it's behind a pay wall why don't you give up the top 50 or top 100

(08-17-2019 07:32 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Since it's behind a pay wall why don't you give up the top 50 or top 100

Yup - where is Illinois? NAU?

Is Virginia Tech in the top 100? Thinking about 1997-2003, I wouldn't think so.

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Tournament performance wasn't a large factor.
Regular season performance mattered more and the last two UConn national title teams weren't stellar in the regular season.
UConn playing in the AAC was also a negative since it isn't like they are dominating the conference. That cost them two to three spots.

Matt Norlander talked to Ken and on his podcast with Gary Parrish, Matt retold the factors Ken used in addition to results:
Conference Affiliation
Top 100 recruits over the last decade
Recency Bias.


Ken also wrote a blog post about his method.

https://kenpom.com/blog/program-ratings/

(08-17-2019 07:32 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Since it's behind a pay wall why don't you give up the top 50 or top 100

For whatever reason, if you click the link from Twitter, you can get all 353, but you can't from here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/kenpomeroy/st...0814929920

I mean, if I knew I wasn't breaking the rules I'd even do all 353 if you wanted, but I'd need the okay from a mod for how much I can post.

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://mobile.twitter.com/kenpomeroy/st...0814929920

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Texas was remarkably consistent during the Rick Barnes years. 1999-2015 only missed the NCAA tourney once. 5 top 10 finishes. Only 1 final 4 though and 3 elite 8s. Which is basically why he's successful at Tennessee now instead of Texas.

(08-18-2019 12:04 PM)Mav Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:32 PM)Statefan Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Since it's behind a pay wall why don't you give up the top 50 or top 100

For whatever reason, if you click the link from Twitter, you can get all 353, but you can't from here.
https://mobile.twitter.com/kenpomeroy/st...0814929920

I mean, if I knew I wasn't breaking the rules I'd even do all 353 if you wanted, but I'd need the okay from a mod for how much I can post.

Thanks.
Illinois at 23, NAU at 237 Time frame includes some of the better teams each had (for NAU, the Howland years, two tourney appearances, high of 71). For Illinois, the NC stolen by the refs.

Ken Pom has some good stuff but this seems like a flawed metric. He has South Carolina’s best season as 2006 when they didn’t even make the tournament over an SEC championship team and a Final Four team that both won a lot more games?

(08-18-2019 08:10 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Ken Pom has some good stuff but this seems like a flawed metric. He has South Carolina’s best season as 2006 when they didn’t even make the tournament over an SEC championship team and a Final Four team that both won a lot more games?

I suspect the data showed that squad was much better than it's record. I saw a lot of 1-5 point losses on that schedule. Remember that systems like Kenpom care more about how you played than the W or L. And that was also the squad that went on to win the NIT. You'd also have to dig down into the two seasons to see what the respective strength of schedules were and how far apart the Kenpom scores were. The 2006 squad was probably just barely above the other.



But I actually came to say I was really surprised to see NDSU at 140 and on top of the Summit. I expected to see us in the 170-190 range, and honestly wouldn't have been shocked to see us in the 200s. We're definitely a football-school first and foremost, but it's nice to see basketball making its way up. Now we need to start working towards top-125, then top-100. Lots of work to do.

Kent State at 108 is not bad, ahead of Akron which is most important.

(08-18-2019 10:20 AM)Renandpat Wrote:  

(08-17-2019 07:10 PM)Mav Wrote:  https://kenpom.com/programs.php

Here's the top 10:

1. Duke
2. Kentucky
3. Kansas
4. North Carolina
5. Arizona
6. Michigan St.
7. Villanova
8. Louisville
9. Florida
10. Texas
    

He seemed to know it'd be controversial. Putting Texas over UConn is a little silly, but if that's what the numbers say, that's what they say.

Tournament performance wasn't a large factor.
Regular season performance mattered more and the last two UConn national title teams weren't stellar in the regular season.
UConn playing in the AAC was also a negative since it isn't like they are dominating the conference. That cost them two to three spots.

Matt Norlander talked to Ken and on his podcast with Gary Parrish, Matt retold the factors Ken used in addition to results:
Conference Affiliation
Top 100 recruits over the last decade
Recency Bias.


Ken also wrote a blog post about his method.

https://kenpom.com/blog/program-ratings/

That's why you finish the list by using human logic. Sure it's flawed and you by default get accused of bias or incompetence but you iron out the details that a computer can't, it just calculates numbers--Or at least be smart enough to make it weigh certain factors like major postseason accomplishments as much as possible.

UConn has been hit or miss and Tournament results can be flukey and devalue (or overrate) the regular season of each team but 4 titles speaks a lot. UConn was probably the best team for two and though the other two were crapshoot wins (especially 2014), they had other years when they were one of the 4-5 best regular season teams.

Whatever Houston's ranking was, it probably skyrocketed by 100 spots in the last two years.

(08-18-2019 09:24 PM)Sultan of Euphonistan Wrote:  Kent State at 108 is not bad, ahead of Akron which is most important.

I figured KSU would be much better than that. They were probably one Sweet 16 or beyond run from a 40 spot jump. Very consistent, even long after the Elite 8 run.

(08-18-2019 09:06 PM)Hammersmith Wrote:  

(08-18-2019 08:10 PM)Gamecock Wrote:  Ken Pom has some good stuff but this seems like a flawed metric. He has South Carolina’s best season as 2006 when they didn’t even make the tournament over an SEC championship team and a Final Four team that both won a lot more games?

I suspect the data showed that squad was much better than it's record. I saw a lot of 1-5 point losses on that schedule. Remember that systems like Kenpom care more about how you played than the W or L. And that was also the squad that went on to win the NIT. You'd also have to dig down into the two seasons to see what the respective strength of schedules were and how far apart the Kenpom scores were. The 2006 squad was probably just barely above the other.



But I actually came to say I was really surprised to see NDSU at 140 and on top of the Summit. I expected to see us in the 170-190 range, and honestly wouldn't have been shocked to see us in the 200s. We're definitely a football-school first and foremost, but it's nice to see basketball making its way up. Now we need to start working towards top-125, then top-100. Lots of work to do.

There were a lot of close losses in conference play so that may have been it. From what I remember we lost like 7 of our last 10 to fall off the bubble

Take the 2007-2010 teams out of the equation and Cornell is a sub 300 level school. Probably the widest variance between their best and worst seasons.

Baylor at 49th speaks to how good Scott Drew has been. 1997 to 2002 was nothing prior to his arrival and his first few years were a rebuild from as low as you can get a program. He’s gotta be top 20 since 08 if I had to guess.

I found this really interesting, and helpful in handling some of the debates that have gone on with respect to UConn's move.

Here are the averages for each conference, including what happens to both the American and the Big East once UConn changes. Numbers are the average KenPom rating and the average ranking of the conference teams:

ACC 22.298 34.53333333
Big 12 20.504 38.8
B1G 19.423 41.14285714
SEC 19.414 47.07142857
BE (w/UConn) 18.08 46.09090909
BE 17.622 48.8
Pac-12 17.365 51.58333333
AAC 10.845 88.66666667
AAC w/o UConn 9.771 95
Mt. West 7.071 112.1818182
MWC 6.683 111
WCC 5.759 128.3
MVC 4.565 124.3
MAC 1.868 150.5833333
CUSA 1.183 160
Horizon -0.413 175.1
Colonial -1.498 188.8
Big West -3.009 207
Metro Atl. -3.348 208.8181818
Sunbelt -3.51 210.0833333
Ivy -3.552 213.5
Summit -3.722 214.3333333
OVC -5.699 237.9166667
Big Sky -5.874 242
WAC -6.092 240.5555556
Patriot -6.167 244.5
Southern -6.235 242.5
America East -9.162 274.7777778
Southland -10.349 285.4615385
Big South -10.459 288.0909091
Northeast -10.492 293.3
A-Sun -11.031 293.6666667
MEAC -16.417 332.6666667
SWAC -17.655 337.8

(by the way, it sucks that there's no simple way to display tabular data on csnbbs, but I digress)...

Even as a fan of an AAC team, there's no denying that the Big East is a better conference under this independent measure than the AAC. Furthermore, the numbers speak for themselves, there's a pretty significant drop from the Pac-12 and the AAC with or without UConn. By contrast, there are four conferences below the AAC (w/o UConn) that are closer to the AAC than the AAC is to the Pac-12. Time to put that fairy tale to bed.

USFFan

/\

You can't just use the quote feature?

Somehow we are in the 180's.