Re: College Basketball 2008-2009

[Butterscup1679666578]

Mizzou sneaks in the AP at #25, just one vote ahead of #26 Memphis. Crazy.

[bukie]

New ESPN Top 25 out:

 

1. North Carolina (31) 11-0 775

2. Connecticut 10-0 737

3. Pittsburgh 12-0 715

4. Oklahoma 11-0 683

5. Duke 10-1 651

6. Wake Forest 10-0 552

7. Gonzaga 8-2 499

8. Texas 9-2 486

9. Georgetown 8-1 476

10. UCLA 8-2 465

11. Notre Dame 8-2 398

12. Xavier 9-1 392

13. Ohio State 8-0 371

14. Syracuse 11-1 368

15. Purdue 9-2 341

16. Villanova 10-1 324

17. Arizona State 9-1 306

18. Michigan State 8-2 254

19. Louisville 7-2 231

20. Clemson 12-0 218

21. Tennessee 8-2 215

22. Baylor 9-1 163

23. Minnesota 10-0 78

24. Memphis 6-3 60

25. Marquette 9-2 58

 

Others Receiving Votes

Brigham Young 44, Davidson 39, Michigan 38, Missouri 28, Dayton 26, Butler 14, Saint Mary's 14, Miami (FL) 10, Kansas 10, Arizona 9, Wisconsin 9, West Virginia 5, Florida 4, Illinois State 3, LSU 3, Stanford 3.

 

AP:

 

1. North Carolina (71) 11-0 1,775

2. Connecticut 10-0 1,693

3. Pittsburgh 12-0 1,618

4. Oklahoma 11-0 1,580

5. Duke 10-1 1,486

6. Wake Forest 10-0 1,294

7. Gonzaga 8-2 1,154

8. Notre Dame 8-2 1,116

9. Texas 9-2 1,108

10. Purdue 9-2 1,083

11. Michigan State 8-2 907

12. Georgetown 8-1 880

13. UCLA 8-2 873

14. Xavier 9-1 861

15. Ohio State 8-0 766

16. Tennessee 8-2 758

17. Syracuse 11-1 742

18. Villanova 10-1 594

19. Louisville 7-2 521

20. Arizona State 9-1 477

21. Baylor 9-1 466

22. Clemson 12-0 462

23. Minnesota 10-0 198

24. Michigan 8-2 183

25. Missouri 9-1 71

 

Others Receiving Votes

Memphis 70, Marquette 69, Davidson 66, Butler 40, Dayton 25, Saint Mary's 25, Illinois 20, Brigham Young 18, Maryland 16, Texas A&M 11, Kansas 10, Florida 8, Florida State 8, Stanford 8, Miami (FL) 6, Wisconsin 5, UNLV 1, West Virginia 1, Western Kentucky 1, George Mason 1.

 

Wake Forest, IMO, is hugely overrated right now, as their best win is probably Indiana.

[Guest]

Why are Arizona and Stanford getting votes?

[bukie]

Why are Arizona and Stanford getting votes?

Arizona beat Gonzaga, and they're Arizona.

 

Stanford is Stanford, and beat...Northwestern, I guess?

[Transmogrified Tiger]

Wake beat Baylor.

[bukie]

Wake beat Baylor.

Oh right, Baylor is good now. That will take some getting used to.

[rchap24]

Why are Arizona and Stanford getting votes?

Arizona beat Gonzaga, and they're Arizona.

 

Stanford is Stanford, and beat...Northwestern, I guess?

 

reasoning behind Arizona make sense...Stanford makes no sense

[Guest]

Arizona followed up their upset of Gonzaga by getting blown out by UNLV.

[bukie]

Arizona followed up their upset of Gonzaga by getting blown out by UNLV.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams.

[rchap24]

Arizona followed up their upset of Gonzaga by getting blown out by UNLV.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams.

 

Yeah that makes no sense though...

[bukie]

Arizona followed up their upset of Gonzaga by getting blown out by UNLV.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams.

 

Yeah that makes no sense though...

It's a popular vote by coaches (assistants?) and media. Legacy and televised games will tend to dominate the mindset of those type of crowds.

[rchap24]

Arizona followed up their upset of Gonzaga by getting blown out by UNLV.

I said, Arizona beat Gonzaga. No further explanation necessary. People don't watch other games that don't involve big name or ranked teams.

 

Yeah that makes no sense though...

It's a popular vote by coaches (assistants?) and media. Legacy and televised games will tend to dominate the mindset of those type of crowds.

 

I could understand like a fan vote for them, but coaches should have better knowledge of whats going on

[SouthSideRyan]

The Coaches poll is consistently terrible. Ignore it.

[bukie]

Coaches have no idea what's going on outside of the teams in their conference and on their schedule, for the most part, at least until March.

 

Plus, the ones that do know what's going on will consistently rank teams from their own conference higher than average in an effort to boost perception of the conference.

[rchap24]

Coaches have no idea what's going on outside of the teams in their conference and on their schedule, for the most part, at least until March.

 

Plus, the ones that do know what's going on will consistently rank teams from their own conference higher than average in an effort to boost perception of the conference.

 

that's true

[bukie]

For a more stat-oriented POV, here's the top 25 according to Sagarin's predictor (and some of this will look weird, but it has a lot to do with performance vs. perception):

 

1. North Carolina

2. Duke

3. Gonzaga

4. Pittsburgh

5. Georgetown

6. West Virginia

7. Connecticut

8. Kansas

9. Clemson

10. Purdue

11. Oklahoma

12. Louisville

13. Missouri

14. Memphis

15. Ohio State

16. Tennessee

17. Xavier

18. UCLA

19. Kansas State

20. Texas

21. BYU

22. Illinois

23. Notre Dame

24. Villanova

25. Davidson

 

Other notables: Wake Forest 26, Syracuse 29, Arizona State 30, Michigan State 32, Baylor 34, Marquette 57

[rchap24]

For a more stat-oriented POV, here's the top 25 according to Sagarin's predictor (and some of this will look weird, but it has a lot to do with performance vs. perception):

 

1. North Carolina

2. Duke

3. Gonzaga

4. Pittsburgh

5. Georgetown

6. West Virginia

7. Connecticut

8. Kansas

9. Clemson

10. Purdue

11. Oklahoma

12. Louisville

13. Missouri

14. Memphis

15. Ohio State

16. Tennessee

17. Xavier

18. UCLA

19. Kansas State

20. Texas

21. BYU

22. Illinois

23. Notre Dame

24. Villanova

25. Davidson

 

Other notables: Wake Forest 26, Syracuse 29, Arizona State 30, Michigan State 32, Baylor 34, Marquette 57

 

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

[bukie]

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

 

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

[rchap24]

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

 

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

 

Agree with some of it,but some is off I think, but that's a pretty cool ranking system

[bukie]

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

 

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

 

Agree with some of it,but some is off I think, but that's a pretty cool ranking system

The main drawback to this and Ken Pomeroy's system (http://www.kenpom.com) is that it's still early enough in the season that a blowout or two in either direction can really affect the overall standing of a team. As the season progresses, the systems get more and more accurate.

[SouthSideRyan]

Pomeroy Top 25(Sample Size grain of salt)

 

1 Georgetown

2 Gonzaga

3 Pittsburgh

4 North Carolina

5 Duke

6 Connecticut

7 Purdue

8 Missouri

9 Oklahoma

10 Clemson

11 Ohio St.

12 West Virginia

13 Kansas

14 Brigham Young

15 Louisville

16 Illinois

17 Washington St.

18 Arizona St.

19 Northwestern

20 UCLA

21 Xavier

22 Maryland

23 Kansas St.

24 Washington

25 Wake Forest

[rchap24]

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

 

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

 

Agree with some of it,but some is off I think, but that's a pretty cool ranking system

The main drawback to this and Ken Pomeroy's system (http://www.kenpom.com) is that it's still early enough in the season that a blowout or two in either direction can really affect the overall standing of a team. As the season progresses, the systems get more and more accurate.

 

Well It'll be interesting to look at when we get there

[mul21]

How does Illinois not even get a vote in the coaches poll? I don't think they should be ranked yet, but the vote totals in the other poll seem a little more realistic.

[UMFan83]

Michigan is ranked in the AP! Woo #24!

 

This just adds to the negativity that will surround their eventual collapse in Big 10 play.

[CubInOK]

Wait I'm kind of confused what exactly does he base it off?

 

He bases that analysis completely off point differential in games (including a calculated strength of schedule based on the same information). Wins and losses don't directly affect it at all. It's not as "fair" or "sensible" as a system that relates all wins and losses equally, but it's a much better predictor of future performance (thus why he calls it his "predictor"). He actually runs three separate ratings, one on pure point differential, one on pure wins/losses, and one 50/50 combination of the two.

 

Agree with some of it,but some is off I think, but that's a pretty cool ranking system

The main drawback to this and Ken Pomeroy's system (http://www.kenpom.com) is that it's still early enough in the season that a blowout or two in either direction can really affect the overall standing of a team. As the season progresses, the systems get more and more accurate.

OK I was kind of wondering why Kansas was rated ahead of both Oklahoma and Texas in the Sagarin system. Now it makes sense. Oklahoma hasn't really been blowing teams out this season.