Is this the best basketball team in the past 50 year for U of R?

[ChoppinBroccoli]

but it anyone still mocking the proclamation that the current juniors might be the best class ever?

That's not at all what's happening in this thread. But since it's now been diverted to the #bestclassever debate, I don't think this year's SRS is very helpful to determine that either way. This very well may be the most talented group of juniors we've had together at one time. But let's not forget, the majority of this class not named Blake Francis needs to start the season 16-1 just to reach .500.

 

[spiderman]

Cause it took him about 8 year to assemble said class and then he wants a damn cookie for assembling it.

if that's your interpretation. to me he was just saying he was excited about this group, this team, this season. I didn't see him looking for praise.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

Yes SM, but group better than saying class. Mooney has the "perfect storm" starting 5 in continuing at UR well beyond 20-21. Even a NCAA bid and worried about the future with Mooney

 

[97spiderfan]

if that's your interpretation. to me he was just saying he was excited about this group, this team, this season. I didn't see him looking for praise.

Fair enough. I'll give you that.

 

[spiderman]

Yes SM, but group better than saying class. Mooney has the "perfect storm" starting 5 in continuing at UR well beyond 20-21. Even a NCAA bid and worried about the future with Mooney

if he said this might be the best group ever, to me that would mean the team. that would be quite a statement. I don't think anyone including myself was or is ready to call this the best Spider team ever. but I'm on board with the current junior class being one of if not the top class. they're at a minimum in the discussion.

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

In the recruiting sense reality it's not a junior class.

 

[spiderman]

In the recruiting sense reality it's not a junior class.

of course. nobody claimed that. but they're all in the same class. and hopefully they'll all graduate together.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

Back to the subject of this thread...

Let's try an experiment. Take 3 points away from us in our game against St. Francis, and 2 points away in our game against Vanderbilt, and add 10 Spiders points to any other game on the schedule.

We'd be 6-3, with two bad home losses, and pretty much already eliminated from at-large consideration.
Are you still asking this question?

If not, why? Our SRS ranking would be even better than it is now.

 

[UR80sfan]

Back to the subject of this thread...

Let's try an experiment. Take 3 points away from us in our game against St. Francis, and 2 points away in our game against Vanderbilt, and add 10 Spiders points to any other game on the schedule.

We'd be 6-3, with two bad home losses, and pretty much already eliminated from at-large consideration.
Are you still asking this question?

If not, why? Our SRS ranking would be even better than it is now.

There might be better ranking systems that goes back 40 years, but I haven't found them yet. The SRS is supposed to take winning margin into account. I also think the team is much better now than it was during our 1st 2 games. We have won our lat 6 games by a margin of over 20 points.

Instead of people criticizing the methodology, how about going on the record and predicting how this team will rank over the next 2 years relative to previous teams?

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

The SRS doesn't take "winning" margin into account. It just takes scoring margin into account. It ignores wins & losses entirely. It thinks a 30 point win and 5 point loss are preferable to two 10 point wins. Theoretically, a 2-7 team could have a higher SRS than a 7-2 team that played the exact same schedule.

I have no problem with SRS for what it is. But it should not be used to compare teams from different eras. This quote is directly from the publishers of the SRS:

It is a predictive system rather than a retrodictive system - this is a very important distinction. You can use these ratings to answer the question: which team is stronger? I.e. which team is more likely to win a game tomorrow? Or you can use them to answer the question: which of these teams accomplished more in the past? Some systems answer the first questions more accurately; they are called predictive systems. Others answer the latter question more accurately; they are called retrodictive systems. As it turns out, this is a pretty good predictive system. For the reasons described below, it is not a good retrodictive system.

The Tarrant teams of the 80s and early 90s routinely scheduled multiple ACC opponents, Virginia Tech (not ACC back then), and other power teams. They also had to face David Robinson in conference 10 times in four years! And yes, while we were "only" in the CAA, those games were generally hard fought. It could be argued - although I don't want to rekindle the scheduling argument - that Tarrant, Beilein and Wainwright were all more willing to schedule a challenging OOC. There weren't as many opportunities to rack up 20 point wins. Also, when we've lost our last game of the year that brings down our SRS, sometimes dramatically so. Those losses to Indiana and Temple, the blowouts by Duke and Kansas, etc. - SRS doesn't care that those happened in the NCAA tournament.

It is too early to predict - I will be happy to go "on the record" after the season - but this team needs to win an A10 championship and/or go past the first round of the NCAA to be in that conversation.

I will say that if #bestclassever doesn't reach the NCAAs, it will probably be the most disappointing team of the past 50 years.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

I don't think anyone including myself was or is ready to call this the best Spider team ever.

That is literally the original subject of this thread.

 

[spiderman]

That is literally the original subject of this thread.

it was in the form of a question, because some metrics say it is.

 

[GKiller]

It is interesting that a lot of people criticized the coach for saying this is “the best class ever” before we even played a game, but I point data which shows through 9 games we have a higher SOR ranking than any previous year end ranking over the past 50 years (I am changing the subject line), which so far confirms Mooney's statement and I get criticized.

The ranking also counters those who have complained about the difficulty of our schedule since the ranking takes into consideration the SOS.

I can only speak for myself but I didn't criticize Mooney for saying best class ever, I actually liked that he said it. My point was/is that you have to both expect and accomplish NCAAs as part of that, it's a must. Best class ever is dead in year 1 with no NCAA. Yet virtually nobody incl yourself were expecting it, heck you still don't even after posting this thread which is a little ironic to say the least.

Hop on board the NCAA bandwagon. It's a great free ride, doesn't end until March.

Also if you look at any of the metrics I know you realize that SOS is our weakness to this point. If we lose any of the next 3 games our rankings will drop a lot. But we're not going to do that. Go Spiders.

 

[VT4700]

That's not at all what's happening in this thread. But since it's now been diverted to the #bestclassever debate, I don't think this year's SRS is very helpful to determine that either way. This very well may be the most talented group of juniors we've had together at one time. But let's not forget, the majority of this class not named Blake Francis needs to start the season 16-1 just to reach .500.

Not named Nick either.

 

[VT4700]

Back to the subject of this thread...

Let's try an experiment. Take 3 points away from us in our game against St. Francis, and 2 points away in our game against Vanderbilt, and add 10 Spiders points to any other game on the schedule.

We'd be 6-3, with two bad home losses, and pretty much already eliminated from at-large consideration.
Are you still asking this question?

If not, why? Our SRS ranking would be even better than it is now.

And take away a few points from New England in their super bowl wins, and Brady would be 1 - 7 in super bowls. Pretty weak to be going there.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

Not named Nick either.

ma·jor·i·ty
/məˈjôrədē,məˈjärədē/

noun
1.
the greater number.

 

[urmite]

And take away a few points from New England in their super bowl wins, and Brady would be 1 - 7 in super bowls. Pretty weak to be going there.

That depends on whether it is a criticism of our performance or a criticism of how the SRS is used.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

And take away a few points from New England in their super bowl wins, and Brady would be 1 - 7 in super bowls. Pretty weak to be going there.

Pretty weak reading comprehension. I was merely pointing out how easily our SRS could be better, even with a worse record. This is the example from the publishers of the SRS I was paraphrasing, when they are describing why the SRS isn't a good system to compare teams from the past:

It weights all points equally, and therefore ignores wins and losses - take a look at the Colts season chart above. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give them back 10 points in week 4, you've just changed their record, but you haven't changed their rating at all. If you take away 10 points in week 3 and give back 20 points in week 4, you have made their record worse but their rating better. Most football fans put a high premium on the few points that move you from a 3-point loss to a 3-point win and almost no weight on the many points that move you from a 20-point win to a 50-point win.
It is easily impressed by blowout victories - this system thinks a 50-point win and a 10-point loss is preferable to two 14-point wins. Most fans would disagree with that assessment.

Also, pretty rich coming from the "If we had Nick, our record would have been _____" guy.

 

[VT4700]

ma·jor·i·ty
/məˈjôrədē,məˈjärədē/

noun
1.
the greater number.

Yes, but then why did you mention Blake? Isn't 3 out of 5 still a majority? Sorry, I was just confused by the wording, and it made it sound like you were including Nick in with the "needs to go 16-1 to reach .500" talk. No big deal.

 

[VT4700]

Also, pretty rich coming from the "If we had Nick, our record would have been _____" guy.

Funny you said that. I was just ready to ask if those that felt Nick was only worth one extra win last year still feel that way?

 

[SouthJerseySpiderFan]

Best class ever is dead in year 1 with no NCAA.

Also if you look at any of the metrics I know you realize that SOS is our weakness to this point. If we lose any of the next 3 games our rankings will drop a lot.

Key accurate facts.

 

[VT4700]

Pretty weak reading comprehension. I was merely pointing out how easily our SRS could be even better, even with a worse record.

Thanks. Sorry I missed that. I agree that was weak comprehension om my part. My mistake.

 

[spiderman]

Funny you said that. I was just ready to ask if those that felt Nick was only worth one extra win last year still feel that way?

he was worth more than one win for sure ... but this year's version is also playing better than last years.

 

[VT4700]

he was worth more than one win for sure ... but this year's version is also playing better than last years.

No question about it. And, we have Blake. So, if we win 20+, it does not mean we would have won 20 with Nick last year. I never said that. I felt we would win 20 some this year because Nick and Blake are worth at least four wins each. How about we just say the whole starting five is now worth 4 wins each, add at least three wins for the bench, and we have 23 + wins.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

because some metrics say it is.

Which metrics?

 

[gcarter52]

Back to the subject of this thread...

Let's try an experiment. Take 3 points away from us in our game against St. Francis, and 2 points away in our game against Vanderbilt, and add 10 Spiders points to any other game on the schedule.

We'd be 6-3, with two bad home losses, and pretty much already eliminated from at-large consideration.
Are you still asking this question?

If not, why? Our SRS ranking would be even better than it is now.

 

[spiderman]

Which metrics?

the one in the original post which you referenced when you said "that's literally the subject of the thread".
I said nobody is calling this the best Spider team ever. we're 8-1. that's all.

 

[spider23]

Here is my take on all time 50 Year Best Team:
PG: Kevin Anderson/Gilly - TBD - apologies to Atkinson and Beckwith
SG: Curtis Blair
Forward: Johnny Newman
Forward: John Schweitz
C: Mike Perry / Grant Golden - TBD apologies to Mike W., TJ, Kratzer, Woolfolk, et al

Justin Harper or Schweitz?

 

[nathanw19]

Here is my take on all time 50 Year Best Team:
PG: Kevin Anderson/Gilly - TBD - apologies to Atkinson and Beckwith
SG: Curtis Blair
Forward: Johnny Newman
Forward: John Schweitz
C: Mike Perry / Grant Golden - TBD apologies to Mike W., TJ, Kratzer, Woolfolk, et al

No Duinker?!?!

 

[spider23]

No Duinker?!?!

Dunk and #FreePaul Friendshuh just missed. All they needed was opportunity and would have probably bumped someone.

 

[fan2011]

Here is my take on all time 50 Year Best Team:
PG: Kevin Anderson/Gilly - TBD - apologies to Atkinson and Beckwith
SG: Curtis Blair
Forward: Johnny Newman
Forward: John Schweitz
C: Mike Perry / Grant Golden - TBD apologies to Mike W., TJ, Kratzer, Woolfolk, et al

Justin Harper or Schweitz?

TJ over GG for sure. Different level of efficiency and passing.

 

[GKiller]

Perhaps I've misinterpreted but UR80s is comparing metrics thru 9 games with the final results of past seasons, correct? In fact I expect we've had higher rankings with SRS or RPI or whatever than we do now at various points in last 50 years especially early in season. Maybe when Beilein's 97-98 team upset UVA to open season we were way up there I don't know. We'd need the stats on that. And maybe somewhere around a water cooler pre message board somehow asked if this was the best UR team in the last 15 years. These are fun to look at and I hope we finish higher than we ever had but the end of season numbers are what matter.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

the one in the original post which you referenced when you said "that's literally the subject of the thread".
I said nobody is calling this the best Spider team ever. we're 8-1. that's all.

Oh, the one (not "some") metric, SRS.

It does say that this year's team, over 9 games, has a higher average scoring margin than any previous Spider team has been able to achieve over an entire season - 30 plus games, sometimes with multiple conference tournament and post-season games.

 

[ChoppinBroccoli]

Perhaps I've misinterpreted but UR80s is comparing metrics thru 9 games with the final results of past seasons, correct? In fact I expect we've had higher rankings with SRS or RPI or whatever than we do now at various points in last 50 years especially early in season.

You are interpreting it correctly. It is possible to calculate historical SRS at 9 games into the season (with some variance because it would be a ****ton of work to re-calc every opponent's SRS at that point, instead of using their end of year numbers).

If this year's team is able to sustain a double-digit scoring margin this entire season, that would indeed be magical and probably result in our best SRS ever. Our SRS is going to drop once we have a few close games and/or losses. It's just math.

Our total PF-PA is 716-604, for average scoring margin of 12.5.
In 2010-11 through 9 games, it was 665-531, average scoring margin of 14.9. Including a win at #8 Purdue.

 

[gcarter52]

But that is not the case!!

Here is my take on all time 50 Year Best Team:
PG: Kevin Anderson/Gilly - TBD - apologies to Atkinson and Beckwith
SG: Curtis Blair
Forward: Johnny Newman
Forward: John Schweitz
C: Mike Perry / Grant Golden - TBD apologies to Mike W., TJ, Kratzer, Woolfolk, et al

Justin Harper or Schweitz?

How in the world can you leave John Davis off the list

 

[spider23]

But that is not the case!!

How in the world can you leave John Davis off the list

Ok, JD and Jeff Butler and Kevin Smith have a place.

 

[gospidersgo]

On the question of whether this is the best Spider team in 50 years, there are 2 things I know for sure:

1. This year's team is much better than we have been in recent years.

2. Any attempt to rank us historically after only 9 games is a wasted effort.

 

[SpiderTrap]

In order to be considered the best team or even one of the best teams in the last 50 years of UR basketball - they need to make the NCAA tournament. Do that - then we can come back to this thread.

 

[SpiderRick]

Bill Flye
Johnny Moates

 

[Gallipoli]

Back to the subject of this thread...

Let's try an experiment. Take 3 points away from us in our game against St. Francis, and 2 points away in our game against Vanderbilt, and add 10 Spiders points to any other game on the schedule.

We'd be 6-3, with two bad home losses, and pretty much already eliminated from at-large consideration.
Are you still asking this question?

If not, why? Our SRS ranking would be even better than it is now.

Yes, but good teams find a way to win tough or close games. This is a sign of a good team.