Dayton Message Board

[Shocker-maniac]

I think it's more due to ignorance than raw **** talking.

I am coming to the same conclusion.

[WstateU]

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.

Did somebody say Goatlube?

[shocka khan]

Yes. It's called confirmation bias.

"Don't tell me something I don't know, tell me something I DO know."

Gotta love it!

[ShockerFever]

Who knew we were playing the Duke of the Midwest?

[Kung Wu]

The world is round, the sky is blue, and the quality of statistical data is directly related to sample size.

At some point there is a diminishing return on the sample size. Which is why I think we should have a 15 month, 100 game schedule. And more roster spots. So we would theoretically play the 2016 championship match in the first quarter of 2018, but there would be less arguing about who's in and who's out.

Oh and the newcomers that join in 2017 can't play in the 2016 season matches, but they can play with the players that still have eligibility from 2016 in the 2017 season games.

It's tricky, but that's the only way I can be sure that WSU didn't deserve a 10 seed. All those other metrics that people are using to wager $9.2 billion just can't be right.

[jdshock]

At some point there is a diminishing return on the sample size. Which is why I think we should have a 15 month, 100 game schedule. And more roster spots. So we would theoretically play the 2016 championship match in the first quarter of 2018, but there would be less arguing about who's in and who's out.

Oh and the newcomers that join in 2017 can't play in the 2016 season matches, but they can play with the players that still have eligibility from 2016 in the 2017 season games.

Throw in a relegation system that requires a doctoral degree to understand, and I'm sold.

[Kung Wu]

Throw in a relegation system that requires a doctoral degree to understand, and I'm sold.

A _simple_ relegation system is EXACTLY what could actually save the Valley. Dead serious.

If Elgin would divide the Valley into two divisions where teams would play a home and away series with ONLY the other teams in their division, and then only ONE game against the OTHER division teams -- the universe would open up. Then if he had leadership skills to get the MWC, AAC, or whoever to join that relegation league, we would soon be as strong as any conference out there.

Serious.

[jdshock]

A _simple_ relegation system is EXACTLY what could actually save the Valley. Dead serious.

If Elgin would divide the Valley into two divisions where teams would play a home and away series with ONLY the other teams in their division, and then only ONE game against the OTHER division teams -- the universe would open up. Then if he had leadership skills to get the MWC, AAC, or whoever to join that relegation league, we would soon be as strong as any conference out there.

Serious.

Lol, your proposal is mostly what I was making a (tongue-in-cheek) reference to.

In all honesty, I actually think it's a good idea.

[shock]

A _simple_ relegation system is EXACTLY what could actually save the Valley. Dead serious.

If Elgin would divide the Valley into two divisions where teams would play a home and away series with ONLY the other teams in their division, and then only ONE game against the OTHER division teams -- the universe would open up. Then if he had leadership skills to get the MWC, AAC, or whoever to join that relegation league, we would soon be as strong as any conference out there.

Serious.

meh I'm not too crazy about playing one game against the other division thing.

Join three conferences into one mega conference, three divisions that are fluid based on prior year performance. The top division plays h&h with themselves and one game against tier 2. Tier 2 plays one game against themselves and one game against tier 3. Tier three plays one game against themselves and one against tier 2. Tier 3 has no direct impact on tier 1. Tier 3 cannot participate in the conference tourney, but theoretically could earn an at large bid. And you can only move one tier at a time so a team like Drake couldn't have a dream season and be a 300+ team the next year in the top tier of the conference.

[GottliebHater]

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.

Dayton and Wichita State play Friday. The team that scores the most points will win.

[Kung Wu]

Join three conferences into one mega conference, three divisions that are fluid based on prior year performance. The top division plays h&h with themselves and one game against tier 2. Tier 2 plays one game against themselves and one game against tier 3. Tier three plays one game against themselves and one against tier 2. Tier 3 has no direct impact on tier 1. Tier 3 cannot participate in the conference tourney, but theoretically could earn an at large bid. And you can only move one tier at a time so a team like Drake couldn't have a dream season and be a 300+ team the next year in the top tier of the conference.

Yes, that is the ideal scenario, but in lieu of being able to merge with ANY conference, it can still work with JUST the Valley. The downside is instead of an automatic 18 games, there would only be an automatic 13 games. So coaches would have to schedule 5 more games each season that they wouldn't have to normally. You could also make it where the previous year's top division 2 team that didn't get promoted would get two games against the higher division teams. That would make it an automatic 14 games, with only 4 more to schedule and provide more incentive to compete for the top spot in division 2.

[Stickboy46]

We are the better program. We come from a better conference. We have the NCAA experience. We have the battle tested Seniors. We have the best fans in the country. We have the best young coach in the nation. We are supposed to beat WSU, we should beat WSU, and we will beat WSU. I don't understand why more people aren't talking about us beating UK on our way to the Sweet 16. We are going to win people, get over it.

Better Conference .. Ok
NCAA Experience .. Last 2 years, Dayton, 4 games, WSU 5 games ... I guess if you count their seniors games from 3 years ago .. sure.
Battle tested Seniors .. Ok .. Not sure its that much better than battle tested Juniors .. but I'll give it to them
Best Fans .. Push
Best Young Coach .. Unless you are REALLY pushing that young part .. No ... edge Marshall.
Supposed to win ... WSU is a 6.5 point favorite.

And back to the first. Best Program? Really? In the HISTORY of their program, they have made it to the round of 32 exactly 5 times. WSU has done it 5 times since 2006.
Final Fours
Dayton 1 (1967)
WSU 2

Elite 8
Dayton 3
WSU 4

Sweet 16 (not counting 1952 when the first game was a "sweet 16")
Dayton 6 (1 since 1985)
WSU 6 (3 since 2006)

Conference Regular Season Championships:
Dayton 2
WSU 11

Conference Tournament Championships:
Dayton 2
WSU 4

Definitely the better program ...

[Stickboy46]

They love to cherry pick data points over there. Just saw someone comparing First Half stats only. Pointing out that we only score on average 4 more points in the first half from them, and since they are a really good 2nd half team, that means they have a really good chance. That completely negates the fact that we have a 10-11 man rotation that wears people down and we extend leads in the 2nd half because of it.

[jocoshock]

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.

My solution:
68 Total bids
Power 5 gets 25 bids
5 P5 Automatic/20 at large bids
P5 teams are awarded at large based on metrics
Roughly 60 some odd teams competing for 20 at large bids.

Non P5 get the remaining 43 bids
31 automatic bids/12 at large
Non P5 conferences compete for their 12 at large based on metrics of non P5 teams
Roughly 260 teams competing for 12 bids .

[ShockerPrez]

Don't Shaq, Brown and Kelly have 6 NCAA games experience?

Indiana, KU, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt, Arizona, Miami

Frankamp (whoever KU beat in 2013), and Stanford, Vandy, Arizona, Miami.

McDuffie, Nurger 3

I thought I counted 26 total NCAA game experience on our team. Could be wrong, but thats pretty effing experienced...