Top 3 in each conference

[Kevin Bryan]

That's just not true. You can try to explain it all you want--It doesn't make it true.

What is not true? I am asking you to tell me. I am not saying I am right. Certainly not claiming to be an expert with anything pertaining to analytics. I honestly could not care less. That is not what I base my opinions on. I realize some people base their opinions heavily on that stuff and that's fine too, just not me. But I am always willing to hear other opinions and learn new things. Edumicate me! Don't simply say "that's just not true". Tell me WHY that is not true. That is all I am asking. Nobody replied to my example on efficiency ratings between Duke and SFA. I was hoping to get clarification.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

Funny thing about this thread is.....it's all speculation at this point. So however good your arguement is....it's moot right now. Come February, the top 3 in each conference will be defined by actual conference play records. Can we put our little johns back in our pants, and just wait and see what the actual records dictate? It's just too early to know what the best 3 teams in each conference are. I go off conference records. Pretty cut and dry.

Facts are actual results don't fly on this board. Are you new?

 

[GE Nole]

Funny thing about this thread is.....it's all speculation at this point. So however good your arguement is....it's moot right now. Come February, the top 3 in each conference will be defined by actual conference play records. Can we put our little johns back in our pants, and just wait and see what the actual records dictate? It's just too early to know what the best 3 teams in each conference are. I go off conference records. Pretty cut and dry.

Obviously we will all get to watch the results. This was just a thread to get some predictions going before the conference season kicks into high gear.

By your logic we shouldn't discuss anything other than what already happened. I guess we should just cancel the weekly prediction threads.

 

[GE Nole]

What is not true? I am asking you to tell me. I am not saying I am right. Certainly not claiming to be an expert with anything pertaining to analytics. I honestly could not care less. That is not what I base my opinions on. I realize some people base their opinions heavily on that stuff and that's fine too, just not me. But I am always willing to hear other opinions and learn new things. Edumicate me! Don't simply say "that's just not true". Tell me WHY that is not true. That is all I am asking. Nobody replied to my example on efficiency ratings between Duke and SFA. I was hoping to get clarification.

I already addressed your questions with specific examples. The Georgetown/UF example. The Duke example with their adjusted efficiency vs Southern and Michigan State, respectively. I explained how the adjusted efficiencies work.

You're just not accepting it.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

I already addressed your questions with specific examples. The Georgetown/UF example. The Duke example with their adjusted efficiency vs Southern and Michigan State, respectively. I explained how the adjusted efficiencies work.

You're just not accepting it.

No, I get how it works and how the ratings are achieved. But like I said, SFA would obviously have a much worse defensive efficiency rating (adjusted or not) playing in the ACC than they would in the Southland. Again, true quality of competition can't be accounted for with a mathematical algorithm.

 

[GE Nole]

No, I get how it works and how the ratings are achieved. But like I said, SFA would obviously have a much worse defensive efficiency rating (adjusted or not) playing in the ACC than they would in the Southland. Again, true quality of competition can't be accounted for with a mathematical algorithm.

They would have a worse raw efficiency. They wouldn't have a significantly different adjusted efficiency.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

They would have a worse raw efficiency. They wouldn't have a significantly different adjusted efficiency.

I think it would be pretty significant. Like I said, the Southland literally has half of their teams below 300 in offensive efficiency with the rest barely over that mark while the ACC has nearly every team within the top 50. If the adjusted efficiency is based on the "average" team to literally mean the middle of the pack, we are talking about two opposite ends of the spectrum. Well above average and well below average.

 

[GE Nole]

I think it would be pretty significant. Like I said, the Southland literally has half of their teams below 300 in offensive efficiency with the rest barely over that mark while the ACC has nearly every team within the top 50. If the adjusted efficiency is based on the "average" team to literally mean the middle of the pack, we are talking about two opposite ends of the spectrum. Well above average and well below average.

Like I said, you won't accept the answer. You keep falling back to "I think..." despite admitting that you don't really know how they work and you don't care all that much.

 

[GE Nole]

Just to be clear, Stephen F. Austin is ranked 122nd on KenPom and their game against Mizzou is their second highest adjusted efficiency game against a D1 opponent this year. The LSU game is third.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

Like I said, you won't accept the answer. You keep falling back to "I think..." despite admitting that you don't really know how they work and you don't care all that much.

AdjD – Adjusted defensive efficiency – An estimate of the defensive efficiency (points allowed per 100 possessions) a team would have against the average D-I offense.

I do understand and you are not getting what I am saying, apparently. This is flawed because no team in the Southland Conference is "the average D-1 offense". They are way, way, way below that just as the ACC is way, way, way above that. So by this "metric" they are giving Southland Conference teams way too much credit by saying they are "average". They are NOT average. Just as the ACC teams are NOT average in terms of offensive efficiency. One is well above and one is well below. That is what makes this severely flawed.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

Just to be clear, Stephen F. Austin is ranked 122nd on KenPom and their game against Mizzou is their second highest adjusted efficiency game against a D1 opponent this year. The LSU game is third.

SFA was the example I picked because they are the best team in the Southland Conference at this time. My point was that the rest of the teams in that conference are garbage, enabling them to fluff up the defensive efficiency and based on what we are talking about their adjusted defensive efficiency would be highly over-inflated because the sub 300 teams would be getting credited as 175ish teams...

 

[GE Nole]

AdjD – Adjusted defensive efficiency – An estimate of the defensive efficiency (points allowed per 100 possessions) a team would have against the average D-I offense.

I do understand and you are not getting what I am saying, apparently. This is flawed because no team in the Southland Conference is "the average D-1 offense". They are way, way, way below that just as the ACC is way, way, way above that. So by this "metric" they are giving Southland Conference teams way too much credit by saying they are "average". They are NOT average. Just as the ACC teams are NOT average in terms of offensive efficiency. One is well above and one is well below. That is what makes this severely flawed.

You aren't reading the entire breakdown.

It is adjusted after the fact based on the performance relative to what the expected performance would be.

If Team A is playing Team B and Team B is 10% below average, there is an expectation that Team A would perform 10% above its average in that game. If they don't, their adjusted efficiency goes down.

It factors in the SOS of every single game. I keep telling you this.

 

[GE Nole]

SFA was the example I picked because they are the best team in the Southland Conference at this time. My point was that the rest of the teams in that conference are garbage, enabling them to fluff up the defensive efficiency and based on what we are talking about their adjusted defensive efficiency would be highly over-inflated because the sub 300 teams would be getting credited as 175ish teams...

And your point, as I've said numerous times, is incorrect.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

You aren't reading the entire breakdown.

It is adjusted after the fact based on the performance relative to what the expected performance would be.

If Team A is playing Team B and Team B is 10% below average, there is an expectation that Team A would perform 10% above its average in that game. If they don't, their adjusted efficiency goes down.

It factors in the SOS of every single game. I keep telling you this.

Once again, you cannot calculate the quality of an opponent with a mathematical algorithm. KenPom and Sagarin and whoever else might have some handy dandy formulas that in some cases work great and in others they are severely flawed. We can agree to disagree. I much prefer to watch things unfold on the court rather than crunching numbers to see what "should" happen, who "would" win a hypothetical game, or to find out who the paper tigers are.

 

[GE Nole]

Once again, you cannot calculate the quality of an opponent with a mathematical algorithm. KenPom and Sagarin and whoever else might have some handy dandy formulas that in some cases work great and in others they are severely flawed. We can agree to disagree. I much prefer to watch things unfold on the court rather than crunching numbers to see what "should" happen, who "would" win a hypothetical game, or to find out who the paper tigers are.

That's fine. Just don't keep repeating stuff that isn't true about how the SOS is factored in as if it's fact. Just say you don't accept it and move on.

 

[Kevin Bryan]

That's fine. Just don't keep repeating stuff that isn't true about how the SOS is factored in as if it's fact. Just say you don't accept it and move on.

OK, Ken. My bad. I accept that there is no way to calculate the quality of a team/opponent based on mathematical analysis and I am moving on. Turning in my pocket protector and stepping out of mom's basement.

 

[jhmossy]

So I'm guessing you don't need to know that much about basketball to become a mod here?

 

[HRTheCard]

So I'm guessing you don't need to know that much about basketball to become a mod here?

No leash.....Dakota's still here.....

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

@Mgkcbb didn’t UK fans have sandy vaginas over you not considering UK top 3 in the SEC?

 

[Mgkcbb]

@Mgkcbb didn’t UK fans have sandy vaginas over you not considering UK top 3 in the SEC?

Even worse. They got mad that I copy and pasted BPI. Didnt take long for them to look silly.

 

[3speedchicken]

Obviously we will all get to watch the results. This was just a thread to get some predictions going before the conference season kicks into high gear.

By your logic we shouldn't discuss anything other than what already happened. I guess we should just cancel the weekly prediction threads.

Ok...you got me. Keep on chatting about predictions. Have to admit it's kinda fun. And I will continue to predict Arky will surprise a lot of you this year. Cheers

 

[Mgkcbb]

 

[MGC_07]

View embedded media

MSU has had alot of neutral sight games, but yeah I guess no true road non conference game.

 

[anon_0astpxev9h4gk]

View embedded media

Yikes. UK should at least have one away game vs a team in the top 50.

 

[GE Nole]

Man those are some DUMB schedules. ADs should be fired at some of those schools.

Teams like NCSU and Okie State might have cost themselves an NCAAT bid just with their scheduling.

 

[Wolves198921]

Unfortunately after Saturday I need to update my SEC prediction

A&M
Tennessee
Arkansas

 

[BleedinGold]

BIG= MSU, MINNY, MARYLAND
PAC=ASU OREGON UCLA
SEC= KENTUCKY, A&M, FLA
B12= KANSAS, WVU, OKLAHOMA
Acc= DUKE, VIRGINA, UNC

Wow. Those are some extreme outlier picks.

- No Purdue in the Top3 in the Big10.
- No Arizona in the PAC
- I'm not sure what UK has proven to be the favorite in the SEC (but they could put it together).
- Big 12 I'm okay with this but I think any of those 3 could finish #1.
- ACC has a log jam in the top 5 spots, but I'm just not a buyer in UVA yet. January will tell me a lot about them.

 

[Mgkcbb]

Man those are some DUMB schedules. ADs should be fired at some of those schools.

Teams like NCSU and Okie State might have cost themselves an NCAAT bid just with their scheduling.

Doesnt make sense how coaches know exactly what will get them in and they still continue to cower behind a bunch of home games against RPI and SOS wrecking cupcakes.

 

[GE Nole]

Doesnt make sense how coaches know exactly what will get them in and they still continue to cower behind a bunch of home games against RPI and SOS wrecking cupcakes.

Totally agree. It’s baffling to me.

 

[B-Westy]

You're using BPI in December, that's your first problem.
Your second problem is you're a Purdon't fan.
You're third problem is you think Purdon't is actually going to do something of note this year or anytime soon.
You're fourth problem is you haven't learned yet that Purdon't always falls flat on their face when it counts, yet you guys are here talking smack on the daily, as if you're some blue blood.
You're fifth problem is you think Purdon't would be the best team in ANY conference with the absolute slowest big man I have ever seen play the game.
And your last problem is you're a Purdon't fan that's using BPI as a barometer in December.
Some people are going to say I doubled up on your problems list, but they were so bad I had to list them twice.
Have a Merry Christmas

Did you graduate high school?

 

[kyjeff1]

Did you graduate high school?

Obviously your parents didn't have any kids that lived.
Since you felt the need to respond to my post the way you did, I assume you disagree with some, or all of it. So, by all means, shoot, what did I say that was inaccurate?
Or did I just hurt your feelings by stating the obvious truth about the program you care most about?
I think it's the latter.

 

[B-Westy]

Obviously your parents didn't have any kids that lived.
Since you felt the need to respond to my post the way you did, I assume you disagree with some, or all of it. So, by all means, shoot, what did I say that was inaccurate?
Or did I just hurt your feelings by stating the obvious truth about the program you care most about?
I think it's the latter.

Just the way you articulate your point makes you seem like the stereotypical Kentucky fan/resident. Thanks for confirming my inclination.

 

[pig1960]

Obviously your parents didn't have any kids that lived.
Since you felt the need to respond to my post the way you did, I assume you disagree with some, or all of it. So, by all means, shoot, what did I say that was inaccurate?
Or did I just hurt your feelings by stating the obvious truth about the program you care most about?
I think it's the latter.

I think most Purdue fans are fine with your view on the Boilermakers based on your opinions voiced in the classic "November Thoughts" thread where you recorded your lack of BB IQ for all to see. Seriously - did you get a single "thought" right? Now being consistently wrong has morphed into a "truth". Good to know Jeff.

 

[kyjeff1]

I think most Purdue fans are fine with your view on the Boilermakers based on your opinions voiced in the classic "November Thoughts" thread where you recorded your lack of BB IQ for all to see. Seriously - did you get a single "thought" right? Now being consistently wrong has morphed into a "truth". Good to know Jeff.

LMFAO, so my top 10 in November, which turned out to be pretty damn accurate in the following games, with the exception of Notre Dame and Wichita State, is how you want to judge my basketball knowledge?
That's rich coming from a Purdon't fan.
The fact that you guys think Purdon't is a good basketball program is all I need to know about your basketball knowledge.

 

[Mgkcbb]

Meh. Using advanced metrics only (in any sport, let alone one that is lacking like college basketball) is dumb. Looking at BPI, for instance, there is not a chance in the world Arizona State is the 25th best team and UK is only the 35th. That is asinine. Eye test matters. As does metrics.
I have no idea how good/bad Purdue is as I've watched them for about 10 mins this year. No WKU isn't better then them because they lost to them. That is an atrocious loss that you have to talk about when you factor in how good they really are, though.

So do you still believe in the bolded or are you ready to admit humans way overreacted and adcanced metrics had it correct per usual?

 

[Mgkcbb]

BIG= MSU, MINNY, MARYLAND

 

[Mgkcbb]

You're using BPI in December, that's your first problem.
Your second problem is you're a Purdon't fan.
You're third problem is you think Purdon't is actually going to do something of note this year or anytime soon.
You're fourth problem is you haven't learned yet that Purdon't always falls flat on their face when it counts, yet you guys are here talking smack on the daily, as if you're some blue blood.
You're fifth problem is you think Purdon't would be the best team in ANY conference with the absolute slowest big man I have ever seen play the game.
And your last problem is you're a Purdon't fan that's using BPI as a barometer in December.
Some people are going to say I doubled up on your problems list, but they were so bad I had to list them twice.
Have a Merry Christmas

 

[ZonaCat2301]

Wow. Those are some extreme outlier picks.

- No Purdue in the Top3 in the Big10.
- No Arizona in the PAC
- I'm not sure what UK has proven to be the favorite in the SEC (but they could put it together).
- Big 12 I'm okay with this but I think any of those 3 could finish #1.
- ACC has a log jam in the top 5 spots, but I'm just not a buyer in UVA yet. January will tell me a lot about them.

Lol, pretty close with these picks. Is that why November games really don't mean much? Arizona is starting to roll, winning 13 of 14.

And @Mgkcbb, Purdue is freaking good.

 

[Mgkcbb]

Lol, pretty close with these picks. Is that why November games really don't mean much? Arizona is starting to roll, winning 13 of 14.

And @Mgkcbb, Purdue is freaking good.

As is Arizona

 

[Boilermaker03]

Meh. Using advanced metrics only (in any sport, let alone one that is lacking like college basketball) is dumb. Looking at BPI, for instance, there is not a chance in the world Arizona State is the 25th best team and UK is only the 35th. That is asinine. Eye test matters. As does metrics.
I have no idea how good/bad Purdue is as I've watched them for about 10 mins this year. No WKU isn't better then them because they lost to them. That is an atrocious loss that you have to talk about when you factor in how good they really are, though.

Atrocious?

Western Kentucky
RPI: 38 BPI: 52 Kenpom: 43

Metrics say it wasn't a bad loss at all. I use metrics here because that's what the committee does.