2016-17 Bracketology

[ShockerFever]

If Baylor loses tomorrow, I would think that they'd have to drop from the 1 line.

Who are they playing? It depends if it's a quality loss or not.

[ShockerPrez]

Who are they playing? It depends if it's a quality loss or not.

KU.

Both will stay on the 1 line.

[WuShock16]

Who are they playing? It depends if it's a quality loss or not.

At home versus Kansas. Yes, we joke about the "quality losses." That said, that fourth 1 seed is up for grabs. Baylor has already lost three times in the past couple weeks, two against Texas Tech and Silo Tech. A second loss this week might drop them out of the Top 10.

EDIT: Maybe not OUT of Top 10, but certainly around 8 or 9.

[SHOCKvalue]

For perspective, early NCAA 1 seeds Baylor and KU are currently #8 and #9 in kenpom, respectively.

Wichita State is just 5 and 4 spots (again, respectively) behind those 1 seeds in kenpom, and we are fighting some well-known "bracket experts" to even be included in the tournament. No one else REMOTELY close to WSU in kenpom ranking is even contemplating a double digit seed, much less tournament inclusion. Think about that level of asinine nincompoopness for a moment.

The sooner we start minimizing subjective human emotion for objective, unbiased analytics, the better, but will it ever happen?

[Cdizzle]

For perspective, early NCAA 1 seeds Baylor and KU are currently #8 and #9 in kenpom, respectively.

Wichita State is just 5 and 4 spots (again, respectively) behind those 1 seeds in kenpom, and we are fighting some well-known "bracket experts" to even be included in the tournament. No one else REMOTELY close to WSU in kenpom ranking is even contemplating a double digit seed, much less tournament inclusion. Think about that level of asinine nincompoopness for a moment.

The sooner we start minimizing subjective human emotion for objective, unbiased analytics, the better, but will it ever happen?

I agree to an extent. But analytics are not inherently unbiased. They are filled with the bias' of the designer of the analytical system. It's the old "you can make stats say whatever you want" case.

I think there is a common sense middle ground, but as usual we seem short on that. I think it's reasonable to say that WSU's body of work should not earn them a 4 seed this year (as true kenPom rankings would). I think it's reasonable to say that WSU's body of work should (at this point) have WSU safely in the field as an at-large team.

[Kel Varnsen]

I agree to an extent. But analytics are not inherently unbiased. They are filled with the bias' of the designer of the analytical system. It's the old "you can make stats say whatever you want" case.

I think there is a common sense middle ground, but as usual we seem short on that. I think it's reasonable to say that WSU's body of work should not earn them a 4 seed this year (as true kenPom rankings would). I think it's reasonable to say that WSU's body of work should (at this point) have WSU safely in the field as an at-large team.

I generally agree with this. Accomplishment/wins and losses have to matter. You can't just include and seed teams based solely on KenPom/Sagarin/etc., but we're such an outlier in terms of accomplishment vs. quality ratings that you also have to take that into consideration. It's not like we're #30 in these ratings systems. If we were, we would have virtually no case for our inclusion. But that's not the case.

[SHOCKvalue]

Computer models have replaced human judgement in huge swaths of our culture and economy, but sports are just too unique?

[ccrunner101]

RPI experts, how is Akron's RPI 8-10 spots better than ours? They look pretty comparable if you ignore efficiency numbers. Does opponent SOS have that much weight?

[shocks02]

RPI experts, how is Akron's RPI 8-10 spots better than ours? They look pretty comparable if you ignore efficiency numbers. Does opponent SOS have that much weight?

Akron has a higher winning percentage at 88% compared to WSU's 84%. The strength of schedule is very close.

[ccrunner101]

Akron has a higher winning percentage at 88% compared to WSU's 84%. The strength of schedule is very close.

We are 24-4. They are 22-4? I meant strength of schedule not opponent SOS in my earlier post as they are only 16 spots different.

[WuShock16]

RPI experts, how is Akron's RPI 8-10 spots better than ours? They look pretty comparable if you ignore efficiency numbers. Does opponent SOS have that much weight?

Bleck. Only thing I can figure is that four road losses, granted a couple being bad, figured better than our two neutral losses and one home loss (along with the single road loss).

[pie n eye]

Computer models have replaced human judgement in huge swaths of our culture and economy, but sports are just too unique?

We should probably replace the actual games with computer simulations too.

[SB Shock]

RPI experts, how is Akron's RPI 8-10 spots better than ours? They look pretty comparable if you ignore efficiency numbers. Does opponent SOS have that much weight?

Their non-conference SOS is slightly better than WSU. In the end WSU will close the gap because conference SOS is slightly better for WSU.

[SHOCKvalue]

We should probably replace the actual games with computer simulations too.

Yeah, that's exactly what I was saying. Math is so useless in the context of sports, right?

Do you think the story that inspired Moneyball would be better if it was about the eye test instead. Do you think professional sports betters prefer a source like the AP Poll over one like Haslametrics?

[ROOT ANGRY!]

RPI experts, how is Akron's RPI 8-10 spots better than ours? They look pretty comparable if you ignore efficiency numbers. Does opponent SOS have that much weight?

Put simply, RPI is 25% your team's winning percentage, 50% opponents' winning percentage, and 25% opponents' opponents' winning percentage
Opponents' Sos has equal weight to your teams' winning percentage