2019-20 National Rankings

[ShockerFever]

Well since head to head is the only thing that matters, then we should just have teams stop playing as soon as they lose. I mean Evansville has to be better than Kentucky this year. Why is Kentucky even playing the rest of the season?

When all things are equal, yes, head to head should mean something. But it is not the end all be all that people are making it out to be.

Did you just compare Kentucky and Evansville to Baylor and KU?

[Stickboy46]

Here it is, straight from the horse's ass..... sorry, mouth.

We would be Vegas favorites over multiple teams that he put ahead of us ... so He's just trying to justify an incorrect position.

[ShockerFever]

Not every person who puts us low is a bad person or making an attack against WSU. There are objective reasons we could be as low as Newell put us. It's a freaking AP ballot it means nothing, in a poll that means nothing. People need to chill.

Well when the rankings are plastered everywhere around the country in all forms of media, I'd say it kinda matters.

Have all the pollsters leave KU off their ballots next week and see if any KU fan thinks it doesn't matter.

Dumb take.

[Stickboy46]

Not every person who puts us low is a bad person or making an attack against WSU. There are objective reasons we could be as low as Newell put us. It's a freaking AP ballot it means nothing, in a poll that means nothing. People need to chill.

Yet again .. the ONLY person that put us lower that 19th ... at 23 ... was a KU guy. There are definitely reasons he put us there, but they aren't obejctive

[MadaboutWu]

I agree with you when we're talking about accomplishment, or descriptive metrics. If we're talking about accomplishment, then yes, Baylor has the best set of wins and losses in the country based on who they've beaten, and we're top ten in that regard. I'm all for having seeding in the NCAA tournament reflect that. But there's a difference between looking at what a team has accomplished (wins and losses) and looking at how good they are (efficiency adjusted for opponent/location). Wins and losses tell part of the story, but they don't have the ability to tell us how a team got to that record. Are they blowing teams out or scraping by with a bunch of single-digit wins? Are they playing good teams, middle-of-the-road teams, or bad teams?

Of course wins and losses tell us who they are playing (good, bad, middle) as the first half of your example demonstrates. On a side note I wonder how ranked us in 2016 when our KP was much higher than our resume. I'm guessing he didn't follow his method then.

[Stickboy46]

Well since head to head is the only thing that matters, then we should just have teams stop playing as soon as they lose. I mean Evansville has to be better than Kentucky this year. Why is Kentucky even playing the rest of the season?

When all things are equal, yes, head to head should mean something. But it is not the end all be all that people are making it out to be.

Lets be clear here ... head to head when two teams are drastically different in metrics and other performances ... sure you can write off head to head. When two teams are very similar in metrics and other performances then head to head means a TON. Especially when the head to head is a blowout on one teams home floor.

[ShockerFever]

I agree with you when we're talking about accomplishment, or descriptive metrics. If we're talking about accomplishment, then yes, Baylor has the best set of wins and losses in the country based on who they've beaten, and we're top ten in that regard. I'm all for having seeding in the NCAA tournament reflect that. But there's a difference between looking at what a team has accomplished (wins and losses) and looking at how good they are (efficiency adjusted for opponent/location). Wins and losses tell part of the story, but they don't have the ability to tell us how a team got to that record. Are they blowing teams out or scraping by with a bunch of single-digit wins? Are they playing good teams, middle-of-the-road teams, or bad teams?

I understand your point and I generally agree with a lot of it. But ultimately, the game is about wins and losses. Let's put it this way. Would you rather have a team go 25-5 with an average margin of victory of 13 points/game or go 30-0 with an average margin of victory of 5 points/game.. same team playing the same schedule? I get there's style involved and margin of victory does account for something. But again, isn't ultimately about the W's?

And regarding this particular case, when you have 2 teams with basically very close to nearly identical resumes and metrics, wouldn't you give the nod to the team who just beat the other team on the road by double digits?

And also, Ohio State is currently 7th in KP. Do you really think they should be ranked in the Top 10 right now?

[Stickboy46]

Of course wins and losses tell us who they are playing (good, bad, middle) as the first half of your example demonstrates. On a side note I wonder how ranked us in 2016 when our KP was much higher than our resume. I'm guessing he didn't follow his method then.

I went and looked .. he didn't have an AP vote in 2016

[ShockCrazy]

He voted in 2017. There were weeks he had us highest than everyone, weeks he had lower. People are really getting worked up for a slight that just isn't there.

https://collegepolltracker.com/basketball/team/wichita-state-shockers/2017

[ShockerFever]

He voted in 2017. There were weeks he had us highest than everyone, weeks he had lower. People are really getting worked up for a slight that just isn't there.

https://collegepolltracker.com/baske...-shockers/2017

You seem to be getting worked up about people getting worked up.

[Stickboy46]

He voted in 2017. There were weeks he had us highest than everyone, weeks he had lower. People are really getting worked up for a slight that just isn't there.

https://collegepolltracker.com/baske...-shockers/2017

Eh .. we can get worked up for whatever we want. He's the major outlier in voting for us. He's showing bias towards the team he covers, and against one of their "rivals". Not cool as an AP voter

[ShockCrazy]

Eh .. we can get worked up for whatever we want. He's the major outlier in voting for us. He's showing bias towards the team he covers, and against one of their "rivals". Not cool as an AP voter

Look at his history and consider if you think he's actually biased. https://collegepolltracker.com/baske...-jayhawks/2019

[Shockm]

It's time to quit keeping score. Besides, the loser feels bad.

6853GOM.jpg

Wisdom according to Jesse and others = Possessions determine the winner, not the score.

[Cdizzle]

I'm willing to accept, based on his voting history, that he does not have a significant anti-WSU bias.

I'm not willing to accept, based on his voting history, that he does not have a significant pro-KU bias.

Setting those 2 things aside, as I've tried to have people do before in this discussion; look at the rest of his ballot. It's a disaster.

[shockerfan]

He voted in 2017. There were weeks he had us highest than everyone, weeks he had lower. People are really getting worked up for a slight that just isn't there.

https://collegepolltracker.com/baske...-shockers/2017

You arent paying very close attention. Yes, the original gripe is the Shockers. But it's not just us. Its others as well, like the Baylor one. And the method he is using.

It's not as simple as just saying, "Boo, he hates the Shockers".