Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2019-20 National Rankings

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Originally posted by FadedCrown View Post

    Should a team be perceived as a better team if they only won a game by 5 yet they were supposed to win by 15?

    You don't play to win by 1 point.
    If my team could win every game by 1 point, I would take it right now.

    I love digging through metrics, but this is insanity.

    Comment


    • FIFY

      Originally posted by Stickboy46 View Post
      If someone is just going to rank by KenPom, just give Pomeroy ALL THE AP vote.

      Comment


      • Originally posted by Cdizzle View Post

        If my team could win every game by 1 point, I would take it right now.

        I love digging through metrics, but this is insanity.
        The reason why KenPom and other efficiency metrics do not value W and Ls because of one reason.

        Ohio State is at home against Nebraska today. Ohio State is favored to win by 17 per KenPom. Let's say they win by 3, yes they won the game, but should OSU be perceived as a better team even though they performed worse than they were expected to?

        Comment


        • Originally posted by ShockerFever View Post
          (ESPECIALLY AT HOME WHERE YOU GET AN ASTRONOMICALLY BETTER WHISTLE)
          Agree with everything in your rebuttal but this. And only because, I'm sorry, this doesn't seem to apply to CKA. I wish it did, but man, it sure seems like we don't get a lot of "better" whistles, no matter where we play, even at home!

          Comment


          • Originally posted by WuShock Reaper View Post

            Jesse Newell , Kansas City Star (Kansas City, MO)
            Email = jnewell@kcstar.com
            Twitter - @jessenewell

            What a moron!

            Thank you for the research. Much appreciated.

            Comment


            • Plain and simple, clucky boy was bent that KU lost to Baylor and he had to formulate a way to justify them being ahead of Baylor in the polls. He glommed on to whatever "metric" he could to justify it. Bottom line is wins and losses. The other analytics are great, but they are subjective as well. Just looking at possessions is nonsense.

              And to say that whoever wins the National Championship might not be the best team, well you may be right, but I'd rather be the Champ than the "best" team I guess.

              Comment


              • A balanced schedule is impossible in college. In a perfect world all teams would play the other team 100 times (1000?) and we would know for sure who is the best team.

                KP and other analytics try to paint a more accurate, objective picture of the landscape, and they generally do a good job and are more reliable than subjective polls, but they’re still working with imperfect data and make many assumptions.

                On any given night a team can play better or worse than their average. Refs can suck. Players can be sick. Weird stuff can happen. Etc. The only way to really tell the difference between a 5 point win and a 15 point win is to watch the game and analyze every play of every game. No one has time to do that. KP and analytics are not gospel.

                Comment


                • There have been many ridiculous arguments on SN, but this is the winner of all time. It got to the point where winning no longer really means anything.

                  I guess I'm just old school. I use the scoreboard to determine who "won". If team A loses to Team B, it's going to take a lot more than some statistical model to convince me that Team A is still the better team. Those metrics were not achieved against identical competition. Accurately adjusting them for degree of difficulty based on the opponents is a fool's errand, but it does convince people who "want to believe" to pay subscription fees. Clever!
                  The future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
                  We like to cut down nets and get sized for championship rings.

                  Comment


                  • Why is critical analysis needed to analyze the results of a game we just saw with our own eyes? Baylor is hardly Evansville.

                    Who could watch those guards realistically Dominate (too bad it can't be underscored twice) in allen field house, and then come up with "yeah, but..." Oh, wait...

                    Dana.jpg (one of jamar's favorites)

                    Comment


                    • Just heard a quote on the radio this morning. I thought it ironic.

                      Scores are for winners and Metrics are for losers.

                      Comment


                      • Metrics are the insurance policy premiums for excuses when your favored team loses a game.

                        It just might affect metrics when a visiting team can't touch a KU player in AFH, but KU players can maul opponents there.
                        The future's so bright - I gotta wear shades.
                        We like to cut down nets and get sized for championship rings.

                        Comment


                        • Originally posted by FadedCrown View Post

                          Should a team be perceived as a better team if they only won a game by 5 yet they were supposed to win by 15?

                          You don't play to win by 1 point.
                          Uh, yeah, you do! Wins are better than losses and 30-point wins tally the same as 1-point wins in the ultimate record.

                          FIVE losses is NOT BETTER than ZERO losses. No debate. No question. If that math were to be true, cover your head because all the buildinngs and bridges the engineers have built are going to come crashing down!
                          "I not sure that I've ever been around a more competitive player or young man than Fred VanVleet. I like to win more than 99.9% of the people in this world, but he may top me." -- Gregg Marshall 12/23/13 :peaceful:
                          ---------------------------------------
                          Remember when Nancy Pelosi said about Obamacare:
                          "We have to pass it, to find out what's in it".

                          A physician called into a radio show and said:
                          "That's the definition of a stool sample."

                          Comment


                          • Wait wait wait wait wait

                            Same people saying "you don't play to win by 1 point" and "foul when up 3 with 10 seconds left."

                            The mind. It bottles.

                            Comment


                            • Lots of talk about metrics being excuses for losers. Boy were we losers in 2016 then. It's fascinating.

                              Comment


                              • Originally posted by Cdizzle View Post
                                Wait wait wait wait wait

                                Same people saying "you don't play to win by 1 point" and "foul when up 3 with 10 seconds left."

                                The mind. It bottles.
                                Are you serious? One is a strategy for a particular time and score situation in a game. The other is not.
                                "In God we trust, all others must bring data." - W. Edwards Deming

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X