2020-21 Bracketology

[SB Shock]

When KenPom's metrics don't work (because they're maybe not as accurate as he would like us to think), he just puts in a "luck" factor, and then his projections are magically fixed and are right again.f

You don't know much about KenPom metrics do you? He doesn't use the "luck" factor as a fudge factor, he is using it to capture the story of the season. What his luck factor is telling you is WSU is a team that doesn't follow the normal statistical predictions because they just find ways to win where the average team would lose.

[Stickboy46]

BPI is an ESPN thing, not NCAA.

While true ... It IS on the official team sheets the selection committee uses (along with NET, KPI, SOR, KenPom and Sagarin)

[Aargh]

You don't know much about KenPom metrics do you? He doesn't use the "luck" factor as a fudge factor, he is using it to capture the story of the season. What his luck factor is telling you is WSU is a team that doesn't follow the normal statistical predictions because they just find ways to win where the average team would lose.

Nice spin. The fact that he calls it "Luck" comes off as if he's saying "they're really not as good as their record according to my analysis. My analysis can't be doubted, so they've just been getting lucky".

Seems a bit odd that the Shox have been "lucky" for more than 3/4 of the season. Nobody and no team can ride a "luck" factor that long. It would seem more logical for him to call that category "Coaching Factor" rather than "Luck". That would explain a season-long variation from predictions better than "Luck".

[Shockm]

Luck factor or Toughness factor, or he could just call it outliers. His term is prejorative, leading, and carries a negative connotation imo.

[TrackSuitAndTie]

Luck factor or Toughness factor, or he could just call it outliers. His term is prejorative, leading, and carries a negative connotation imo.

Barttorvik has a similar metric called FUN. Here is what he wrote about it:

"This is an equivalent stat to what Ken Pomeroy calls "luck." Here's how it is calculated: T-Rank goes back in time and calculates an expected winning percentage for each team schedule so far, based on their T-Rank profile. Then it compares it to their actual winning percentage. The difference (expected minus actual) is their FUN.

I'm avoiding the word "luck" here for a reason. If I call it luck, that implies that the T-Rank is a rather absolute reflection of a team's quality, and that any deviation from T-Rank's expected winning percentage is simply random variance, or luck."

[Shockm]

Barttorvik has a similar metric called FUN. Here is what he wrote about it:

"This is an equivalent stat to what Ken Pomeroy calls "luck." Here's how it is calculated: T-Rank goes back in time and calculates an expected winning percentage for each team schedule so far, based on their T-Rank profile. Then it compares it to their actual winning percentage. The difference (expected minus actual) is their FUN.

I'm avoiding the word "luck" here for a reason. If I call it luck, that implies that the T-Rank is a rather absolute reflection of a team's quality, and that any deviation from T-Rank's expected winning percentage is simply random variance, or luck."

Random variance or outliers. I can get on board with those accurate descriptive words. FUN and Luck are not accurate imo. But Bartovik and a Pomeroy own the metrics, so they own the right to be wrong and inaccurate.

[Kel Varnsen]

Random variance or outliers. I can get on board with those accurate descriptive words. FUN and Luck are not accurate imo. But Bartovik and a Pomeroy own the metrics, so they own the right to be wrong and inaccurate.

Didn’t realize you knew so much about college basketball analytics. Maybe you should reach out to those two guys and let them know how inept they are.

The term “luck” is literally predicated on the fact that there are random outliers and variances.

[ABC]

Shockers now in on 107 of 131 brackets on Bracket Matrix. We're now the No. 2 12 seed behind CSU and ahead of Drake and Seton Hall. Highest seed is 7.

http://bracketmatrix.com/

Very odd. WSU is now in 90 of the brackets. Though still the second #12 seed. Highest seed is still #7, though that is a significant outlier.

[Wuzee]

Very odd. WSU is now in 90 of the brackets. Though still the second #12 seed. Highest seed is still #7, though that is a significant outlier.

The number of total brackets fell from 131 to 107. They must have a “freshness” requirement that flushes some out if they haven’t updated in awhile.

[ABC]

The number of total brackets fell from 131 to 107. They must have a “freshness” requirement that flushes some out if they haven’t updated in awhile.

I see. Thanks. I am a liberal arts major but maybe our % increased.

[Shockm]

Didn’t realize you knew so much about college basketball analytics. Maybe you should reach out to those two guys and let them know how inept they are.

The term “luck” is literally predicated on the fact that there are random outliers and variances.

While you may know more about analytics than I, I don't think that you have a better grasp of word usage than I.

What I said had nothing to do with the analytics side, and I explained the reasons above for why their word usage isn't the best. I didn't say it wasn't accurate at all, just that it wasn't as accurate as other terms.

I'll give you an example to hopefully illustrate the difference:
If 100 people threw a baseball and hit a small target that was 75 yards away, it would be both lucky and an outlier. But while luck is probably true for everyone who hit the target, the ones who hit the target had to have had a good arm to throw it that far which is skill. This may or may not be the best example, but I hope it illustrates my point.

It's probably not that big of a deal anyway. :)

[Aargh]

I see. Thanks. I am a liberal arts major but maybe our % increased.

Went from 81.7% to 84.1%. Looks like an insignificant increase, but it is an increase.

[SB Shock]

Nice spin. The fact that he calls it "Luck" comes off as if he's saying "they're really not as good as their record according to my analysis.

It doesn’t matter what he calls it, it is what it actually represents that matter. Everything else is your own projection.

[shock-it-to-me]

I thought Palm was a little higher on WSU than most, but on Sports Daily he said if they lose to anyone but Houston, there bubble is burst, and even losing in finals to Houston may not do it.

[wichshock65]

I thought Palm was a little higher on WSU than most, but on Sports Daily he said if they lose to anyone but Houston, there bubble is burst, and even losing in finals to Houston may not do it.

Bullcrap