Keep digging. Nobody in the NCAA tournament cares about KenPom's rankings.
Brady Ellingson Commits to Iowa
- Thread starter HawkeyeBA
- Start date
Keep digging. Nobody in the NCAA tournament cares about KenPom's rankings.
You seem to care an awful lot about it.
LOL
I know you aren't bright, but I acknowledged that the NCAA Committee is more important, despite being a poorer indicator.
I'm not sure where you think I'm digging to.
Wassabbe
Well-Known Member
Oh I'm sorry, are you one of those guys who doesn't say "we" when talking about Iowa? I say, "We just beat Minnesota."
I'd rather Iowa bank at least one than offer more under the radar types (BUT WAHT ABOUT AARON WHITE!)
Big prospects are better than guard prospects when taking a shot in the dark
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
This is true, and that is why if Fran thinks he is a BIG player I wouldn't mind signing that Sioux City kid that is 6'11 and raw. Even if he isn't a great offensive player, athletic bigs are always good in conference for teams like Mich. St. and someone to match up against the Hammons of the world. This would give him a RS year, and his RS FR year to develop.
LaChance obviously was about as impressed as most of this board.
RPI, the most important factor to the committee, is 75% who you play and only 25% how you do against those teams, real solid metric there.
No, but I certainly don't say our when I refer to ISU, much like you shouldn't say our when refering to Iowa.
Actually, one of the big problems with RPI is that it doesn't care who you beat, just who you play. You can get crushed by a bunch of great teams, then squeak out wins against mid range teams, and end up with a good RPI, as it doesn't care that you lost to every good team you played, your SOS will still be good.
Again, the committee looks at all kinds of rankings. IMO the assumption that they look at only rpi is wrong. And a lot of what they use it for is top 50 or 100 wins, where those games are played, and SOS. It's not like they just look at the ranking and throw everybody in under a certain point.
deanvogs
Well-Known Member
RPI:
Iowa St. 41 Iowa 61 After Tourney play (45 & 78 Pre tourney)
BPI
Iowa St. 38 Iowa 43
KenPom
Iowa 23 Iowa St. 28
ColleyMatrix
Iowa St. 44 Iowa 48
Massey Ratings (Combines all the ratings)
Iowa St. 32 Iowa 36 (to me this is the most accurate as it reflects the nearly 40 rating services)
RPI was the outlier really in most of these ranking services. You usually throw out the outlier in any kind of statistical analysis, not really the most on it.
BTW I posted this on Cyclonefanatic.....I feel kind of dirty.
They say they do, but if you actually look at the picks, all but one of the at large selections did not coincide with their RPI rankings.
Last edited:
sportstalent
Well-Known Member
This committee came out and said they focused on RPI, it isn't the first one and it is really not smart because there are many teams that lost early that was measured by RPI. Oklahoma is one of those teams.
