Dayton Message Board

[The Mad Hatter]

Not saying you use these stats for selection - I'd like to see them AFTER the bracket is announced to get a picture of how teams stack up to the competition that made the dance. One example is I believe you guys have a better bench than we do. A lot less drop- off in production. In a blowout against weak teams - and. Both teams have those games in their stats. When we are up by 20 and bring in the bench, we win that game by 8-10 because there is a drop off. You guys might still win that game by 18-20, or more, because your bench is deeper than ours, etc. if every game was played with normal subbing, not score-based subbing, our margin of victory would be different. And your great bench strength does count in games that aren't blowouts. I realize that. But I'm not expecting a blowout by either team in this one. So where do the stats fall in competitive games for each team? I don't know of anyone who runs those type of stats. Do you? And for the record, I'm a marketing executive so I'm very familiar with sample size and how it impacts numbers. I'm not cherry picking anything in what I'm talking about here. Just wondering if there is a matrix that runs stats for the tournament teams only using something more like tournament-quality teams likely to get out of the first round. Because we all know with the conference auto bids there are some weak teams in every tournament. WSU and Dayton never get to play those teams (except maybe the year you guys were a top seed). Seasonal stats this time of year just don't reflect what's ahead for either team. Wish I had a better source. Our vball team was 30-1 headed into the NCAAs this year. We all knew it was because a young team developed faster than anticipated and played a weak schedule that was put together knowing we would be young. We got bounced in the first round by Pitt. Didn't surprise those of us who had been following the team. Our conference was weak, so it was impossible to know how good we were, but we all knew we weren't as good as 30-1 if our schedule had more tourney teams on it. You guys appear to have some of those unknowns with your men's bball team. It's just hard to tell.

While I understand what you are trying to get at, if you aren't convinced that small sample sizes make for worse metrics, I don't know what to tell you. So maybe cherry picking games eliminates the variable of how walk-ons play in blowouts, but it makes literally every other variable worse by shrinking sample size.

I don't think your volleyball comparison says what you think it does. The advanced metrics in volleyball like Massey and Pablo didn't rank Dayton very high, in spite of the gaudy record. Massey, for instance, has Dayton's final rank at #46, 1 spot behind Wichita State's 24-8 volleyball team. I don't have access to the final Pablo numbers.

In other words, the advanced metrics did their job perfectly. They were able to adjust a team's record for their level of competition and conclude that in spite of 30 wins, Dayton volleyball was a mid-40s volleyball team. That was proven correct when they lose to Pitt (which Massey ranked as #39 - meaning the advanced metrics correctly predicted the outcome).

WSU's basketball is nothing like Dayton's volleyball team and it is precisely advanced metrics that reduce unknowns and let us know that regardless of record, Dayton volleyball was just inside the top 50 in the nation, while WSU basketball is in the top 10 in the nation. It's not hard to tell precisely because we have these tools.

[Stickboy46]

What the poster is trying to get at is exactly what the NCAA.

1. Come up with a preferred viewpoint without looking at any data.

2. Search for metric that matches viewpoint

3. If data does not exist, create your own

4. Profit

[Flyer Visitor]

It's not hard for me to tell, I've watched every game this year. The KenPom numbers back up what I see on the court. WSU is really good.

I'm sure Dayton is as well but I don't know because I don't have the same exposure to them.

I don't think picking out stats against tournament teams is that fruitful of an exercise. A team shouldn't be judged by just their best performances. Good bad and ugly, what a team did over the course of the regular season should all be considered part of their "resume".

One correction here, I'm not talking about only the teams that made the tournament here. That's why I initially posted top 100 rpi, even tho the rpi has its flaws. We all know if there weren't conference auto bids, other teams would get in. Tournament teams are not the best 68 teams in the country. The sample size here is not going to be 2 and if it is, shame on whoever put your schedule together. The point is how much do weak teams pad any given teams stats? How much do those games gloss over solid teams but maybe not good teams that can make a run? Neither WSU or Dayton will be playing anymore of weak teams. So looking at this match up, what are the here and now stats against similar tough/quality opponents. And I agree, I don't think anyone puts those together. Maybe if they did we would have our first perfect bracket, or at least move closer to that fantasy. LOL.

[Stickboy46]

One correction here, I'm not talking about only the teams that made the tournament here. That's why I initially posted top 100 rpi, even tho the rpi has its flaws. We all know if there weren't conference auto bids, other teams would get in. Tournament teams are not the best 68 teams in the country. The sample size here is not going to be 2 and if it is, shame on whoever put your schedule together. The point is how much do weak teams pad any given teams stats? How much do those games gloss over solid teams but maybe not good teams that can make a run? Neither WSU or Dayton will be playing anymore of weak teams. So looking at this match up, what are the here and now stats against similar tough/quality opponents. And I agree, I don't think anyone puts those together. Maybe if they did we would have our first perfect bracket, or at least move closer to that fantasy. LOL.

Yet again .. If you look at raw stats, your concerns are valid. If you are looking at advanced metrics, most if not all, account for quality of opponent. So scoring 1.3 points per possession against a defense that ranks 300 out of 351 doesn't mean as much as scoring 1 point per possession against the 10th best defense. (completely theoretical number there). So you have the data available. Look at KenPom, Look at Sagarin, Look at Massey .. take your pick.

Also stated Earlier. Haslametrics truncates play by play data once a game is mathematically over and WSU is ranked 4th in that ranking ..

[shocker43]

Wow this fan base talks a lot of ****.

[chitown_shocker]

One correction here, I'm not talking about only the teams that made the tournament here. That's why I initially posted top 100 rpi, even tho the rpi has its flaws. We all know if there weren't conference auto bids, other teams would get in. Tournament teams are not the best 68 teams in the country. The sample size here is not going to be 2 and if it is, shame on whoever put your schedule together. The point is how much do weak teams pad any given teams stats? How much do those games gloss over solid teams but maybe not good teams that can make a run? Neither WSU or Dayton will be playing anymore of weak teams. So looking at this match up, what are the here and now stats against similar tough/quality opponents. And I agree, I don't think anyone puts those together. Maybe if they did we would have our first perfect bracket, or at least move closer to that fantasy. LOL.

If you want the best stats to measure what a team is regardless of competition level, the adj O and adj D are the gold-standard.
e

[Aargh]

Top 100 is a convenient stat for Dayton. Dayton had 7 wins against rpi 51-100. Tourney teams are SUPPOSED to beat those teams. Dayton had a large number of opportunities to win games they should have won. Dayton had that opportunity throughout the season. WSU didn't have that same opportunity.

If we can cherry pick and count only certain games or time frames, I'll pick January through March. WSU is 2-1 against the top 50 and that is their only loss. Our average margin of victory against the top 50 is 14.67 points.

[rZ]

What the poster is trying to get at is exactly what the NCAA.

1. Come up with a preferred viewpoint without looking at any data.

2. Search for metric that matches viewpoint

3. If data does not exist, create your own

4. Profit

To many steps in that NCAA business plan...probably more like the attached, with an emphasis on the "?".

[SHOCKvalue]

While I understand what you are trying to get at, if you aren't convinced that small sample sizes make for worse metrics, I don't know what to tell you.

I think we can almost end this line of conversation with that sentence. It is a summation of the very foundation of academic statistical analysis. The world is round, the sky is blue, and the quality of statistical data is directly related to sample size.

[ShockerFever]

Stat person doesn't come across as a stat person.

[SHOCKvalue]

What the poster is trying to get at is exactly what the NCAA.

1. Come up with a preferred viewpoint without looking at any data.

2. Search for metric that matches viewpoint

3. If data does not exist, create your own

4. Profit

Yes. It's called confirmation bias.

[Stickboy46]

More cherry picking. Our WORST loss was 15 spots behind Dayton in KenPom

Dayton's Worst Loss was 148 Spots behind WSU in KenPom ...

[wichshock65]

I actually think of Dayton as a sort of kindred spirit. Everyone hates their fan base, they pack their arena, actually spend money on basketball, have a proud history including a Final Four and frequent tournament success, are a "city" school (yes, yes, public v. private, I know) and seem to come up with the short end of the stick from the Committee more often than not.

Let's hate each other until Friday then be friends after that. Would love to have us both land in the AAC.

^^^this^^^

[shock]

Wow this fan base talks a lot of ****.

I think it's more due to ignorance than raw **** talking. It seems like there are more casual Dayton fans and they don't dive into the deeper stats that don't show up on the box score. That's where the WSU fan base is lucky. We have a handful of very educated, very smart statisticians that could talk circles around Rosie Palm and Goatlube.

[Stickboy46]

I think it's more due to ignorance than raw **** talking. It seems like there are more casual Dayton fans and they don't dive into the deeper stats that don't show up on the box score. That's where the WSU fan base is lucky. We have a handful of very educated, very smart statisticians that could talk circles around Rosie Palm and Goatlube.

Any fan base that dismisses advanced analytics because "they didn't play anyone" loses a bit of respect from me.