ADVERTISEMENT

Wins vs. Rankings

Gallipoli

Gallipoli

Graduate Assistant
Aug 20, 2017
5,480
2,590
113
The Doghouse
In looking at the ranking of Hampton, I noticed that even though UR beat them by 17, our total rank declined. My reaction is so what? A record of 7-1 is signicant, almost eye popping. It is good to get easier wins, if it helps our team's confidence and prepares us for conference play. It also increases our team's visibility and helps with recruiting.
 
Gallipoli said:
In looking at the ranking of Hampton, I noticed that even though UR beat them by 17, our total rank declined. My reaction is so what? A record of 7-1 is signicant, almost eye popping. It is good to get easier wins, if it helps our team's confidence and prepares us for conference play. It also increases our team's visibility and helps with recruiting.
Click to expand...

Which ranking are you looking at? There are dozens out there.
 
Gallipoli said:
In looking at the ranking of Hampton, I noticed that even though UR beat them by 17, our total rank declined. My reaction is so what? A record of 7-1 is signicant, almost eye popping. It is good to get easier wins, if it helps our team's confidence and prepares us for conference play. It also increases our team's visibility and helps with recruiting.
Click to expand...
While I’m ecstatic with the 7-1 start, I don’t think the Hampton win does anything for us, except maybe confidence (but I think our guys are beyond Hampton helping confidence, as I believe they assume they’ll beat Hampton).

The lower level of competition, lack of hostile environment, short travel, and high school level broadcast, in my opinion, does nothing to help prepare us for conference play, increase visibility, or hep recruiting.

When push comes to shove, I’ll take a win any day of the week, but I don’t think we need to pretend that the win was beneficial to the program, and I believe the lowering of our ranking helps illuminate this.
 
I don't know where you are looking as we have moved up to 48 in ESPN BPI and up 6 spots to 71 in Kenpom.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spider93
urmite said:
I think this season and last, he has been mainly looking at RPI...
Click to expand...

Why would anyone look at the RPI? It is essentially the worst ranking system, but was relevant because of the selection committee. Now the committee uses a better system with NET, and there is literally no reason for anyone to look at the RPI.
 
  • Like
Reactions: VT4700
There are a number of threads on this topic Gallipoli. U tend to start a new thread often. If you don’t mind consider using existing threads to comment on similar subject matters. Easier to follow and also doesn’t push other relevant threads further down or off page. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Spiderstew1962, wr70beh and urfan1
fan2011 said:
Why would anyone look at the RPI? It is essentially the worst ranking system, but was relevant because of the selection committee. Now the committee uses a better system with NET, and there is literally no reason for anyone to look at the RPI.
Click to expand...
Because he is Gallipoli...
Warren Nolan RPI - UR from 45 to 57...
 
does someone have a good link to whatever the correct ranking ranking is that I should be looking at?
 
nathanw19 said:
While I’m ecstatic with the 7-1 start, I don’t think the Hampton win does anything for us, except maybe confidence (but I think our guys are beyond Hampton helping confidence, as I believe they assume they’ll beat Hampton).

The lower level of competition, lack of hostile environment, short travel, and high school level broadcast, in my opinion, does nothing to help prepare us for conference play, increase visibility, or hep recruiting.

When push comes to shove, I’ll take a win any day of the week, but I don’t think we need to pretend that the win was beneficial to the program, and I believe the lowering of our ranking helps illuminate this.
Click to expand...
It doesn't matter what we opine on, I am more interested in the psyche of our players. This is all about the confidence that is being developed among our players!!! More power to them...time will tell in the end. Keep on winning baby!!!!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 97spiderfan, invinoveritasinaquasanitas and urfan1
urmite said:
Yes, Kenpom is good for determining how good you team is, but most of it requires a subscription.

NET is what the committee sees, but I haven't seen the first one published yet this year...
Click to expand...

The committee also uses kenpom and 4 other rating systems.
 
  • Like
Reactions: urfan1
lol. just thought I'd get educated to keep up with the analytic savants here!
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
You really shouldn't be getting caught up in our ranking in November in December. When we get closer to March, then you can take a closer look. For now, just hope we win every game and enjoy the ride. :)
Click to expand...


Easier to move up 5 or 10 spaces to make the dance than to move up 40
 
Gallipoli said:
In looking at the ranking of Hampton, I noticed that even though UR beat them by 17, our total rank declined. My reaction is so what? A record of 7-1 is signicant, almost eye popping. It is good to get easier wins, if it helps our team's confidence and prepares us for conference play. It also increases our team's visibility and helps with recruiting.
Click to expand...
Eye popping? Lol. GM is 8-1, st. L is 7-1 and Dukes are 6-0 and I doint have to look at their schedules to know that those records are not eye popping. Many many teams have had good records to start season and they were deceiving. I hope that isnt the case here but your eye popping enthusiasm is a bit over the top imo. Anyone who has watched college bb for a while knows that early records mean little because the level of comp is uncertain.
St. Johns was 11-2 in the ooc two years ago then started BE 0-9.
 
Last edited:
YOu could look at it as the first of our 20 loss seasons we stunk in OOC but did OK in conference. Now that we are doing ok OOC, we're going to get crushed in conference. Nobody knows.
 
spiderman said:
does someone have a good link to whatever the correct ranking ranking is that I should be looking at?
Click to expand...

It depends on what you want in ratings. There is a composite of most available ratings on the Massey composite page:

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm

Rating meta-analysis is available in the links below and may help you evaluate the ranking systems themselves, but none of them seem to updated for the current season yet:
http://www.thepredictiontracker.com/predbb.html
https://www.markmoog.com/ranking_analysis
http://sports.vaporia.com/bb-fwin.html

If you are concerned with the NCAA tournament, you only need to care about the NET, which I don't think has been released yet for this year. If you are concerned about which teams will win future matchups, you want rankings with a high predictive accuracy. Kenpom, Sagarin, and Torvik all usually end up near the top in terms of predictive accuracy.
 
Can someone more versed in KenPom explain the "Luck Rating?"
I was looking at tonight's Providence @ Rhode Island game - URI has a slightly better record against a much tougher schedule, but Providence is more than 30 spots higher in his rankings. I realize his rankings are based on the Adjusted net efficiency margin, but I was wondering if luck played into his adjustments at all. Providence has had terrible "luck" - #347.

Ours is pretty high (#55) - just an observation.
 
I will try. I think I understand it, and hopefully will explain it properly.

Kenpom's luck rating has nothing to do with his overall ratings, meaning the actual luck numbers are not part of any calculation, but the luckier you are over time could lead to a lower rating in his overall rating because of the efficiencies. It is mainly used for future projections, and your projected record might be a little affected because of the luck factor. For example, if we are 7-1 and projected to win 23 based on efficiencies so far, but getting "lucky" so far, you might look at that at drop the projection down to 21 or 22. So, maybe the easiest way to sum it up is the "luck" rating just takes the win projections based on efficiencies one step further.

So, how does he get the "luck" number? Well, one thing the "Luck" number looks at is close, "unlucky" losses that might affect your record and how you do overall in close games. If you have 4 OT games and lose all 4, that would likely give you a much lower (with high number being low) rating than a team that wins all its OT games. Same with things like how you did in games or 5 points or less. Or, if you have 10 wins and all of them are close. It is designed to give you an idea of how unlucky or lucky a team might be when looking at their overall rating.

As with a lot of numbers this early, it will likely be a lot more meaningful the more games you play.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19
Thank you.

I thought it might be something like Pythagorean wins in baseball - in a nutshell, a team with a certain run differential "should" win X games. The bigger the delta of actual wins over X, the "luckier" you are.

So, a team with this good of an efficiency rating (in Providence's case) would be expected to have a better record against their schedule than they actually do. Hence, they've been "unlucky" so far.
 
ChoppinBroccoli said:
Thank you.

I thought it might be something like Pythagorean wins in baseball - in a nutshell, a team with a certain run differential "should" win X games. The bigger the delta of actual wins over X, the "luckier" you are.

So, a team with this good of an efficiency rating (in Providence's case) would be expected to have a better record against their schedule than they actually do. Hence, they've been "unlucky" so far.
Click to expand...
This is what he (Pomeroy) said in 2006:
"The new ones are Cons (Consistency) and Luck. The easiest one to understand is Luck, which is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest."

Don't know if it has changed.
 
  • Like
Reactions: nathanw19, gospidersgo, ChoppinBroccoli and 1 other person
You used both the singular "is" and plural "are" to describe Warren Nolan. Please stop trying to confuse us.

I will go with "is".....Warren Nolan is also predicting Duquesne to finish #28, and George Mason and Rhode Island as Quad 1 wins. According to WN, Dayton will finish the season as the #3 team in the country.
 
I like this Nolan guy...

He's actually been pretty accurate in the past. But yeah, that seems a BIT of a stretch.
 
Does anyone know when the NCAA is supposed to release the initial NET rankings for this year?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

spider23

Recruiting '16 - '24 Classes

Replies
8
Views
1K
UR Basketball Board
spiderman
spiderman
F

NET rankings

Replies
22
Views
973
UR Basketball Board
ChoppinBroccoli
ChoppinBroccoli
UR80sfan

SPIDER BASKETBALL ALL-TIME TEAM

Replies
126
Views
11K
UR Basketball Board
POMSpidur
P
N

2010-2011 vs. 2019-2020

Replies
12
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
nathanw19
N
plydogg

Davidson Preview

Replies
25
Views
2K
UR Basketball Board
fatherspider
F
ADVERTISEMENT

Latest posts

ADVERTISEMENT
Top Bottom
Back