Miami at #3

[hawkfarmer]

You could easily put it into a statistical model to account for a team's "value" at the time it played that team. Simple actually. @ bcl20, this is not an issue either as you could actually account for how the games were played, who they played, and the margin of victory or defeat etc. You can actually account for a variety of things with models, even account for the strenght of a conference. The problem is people who don't know how to do this are trying to explain things with simple formulas when it is not that simple.

 

[volhawk50]

The biggest thing I take issue with is that SOS use the RPI of the team as of right now. Well the MSU team now is not the team that got beat by Miami in Dec. I understand that Miami is not the same team now that got beat by Florida Gulf Coast, but that is still a horrible loss.

That's not really a horrible loss, it was on the road in November and FGC is likely a tournament team. Also, Indiana State has some respect in the rankings. Miami is #3 in AP polls because they've won 12 in a row, including a 27 point win over the #1 team and a 26 point win over North Carolina. As has been said on here, the AP poll is about moving up when you win and down when you lose; Miami hasn't lost in 7 weeks.

 

[bcl20]

You could easily put it into a statistical model to account for a team's "value" at the time it played that team. Simple actually. @ bcl20, this is not an issue either as you could actually account for how the games were played, who they played, and the margin of victory or defeat etc. You can actually account for a variety of things with models, even account for the strenght of a conference. The problem is people who don't know how to do this are trying to explain things with simple formulas when it is not that simple.

I agree with the simplistic formula too an extent. That's what RPI is and that's why it sucks.

 

[hawkfarmer]

I agree with the simplistic formula too an extent. That's what RPI is and that's why it sucks.

RPI is horrible, been harping on it for weeks. BPI is better, but not great. I think a big issue is that SOS is partly based on RPI, but RPI is 75% based on SOS, so how does that work. Answer: it doesn't.

Whoever said rankings don't matter, that is wrong. It doesn't for 1-4 for example, but it does if Wisconsin is top 25 it helps Iowa rather than them not being top 25. It matters for bubble teams quite a bit.

 

[hawkfan33]

You could easily put it into a statistical model to account for a team's "value" at the time it played that team. Simple actually. @ bcl20, this is not an issue either as you could actually account for how the games were played, who they played, and the margin of victory or defeat etc. You can actually account for a variety of things with models, even account for the strenght of a conference. The problem is people who don't know how to do this are trying to explain things with simple formulas when it is not that simple.

That sounds like an absolutely horrible idea to me. Good luck placing a value on teams in Nov when there is very little data to back up any ratings. RPI is extremely flawed as it just looks at winning percentage but KenPom uses a much more complete statistical formula and still has Miami's SOS at number 8.

 

[hawkfarmer]

That sounds like an absolutely horrible idea to me. Good luck placing a value on teams in Nov when there is very little data to back up any ratings. RPI is extremely flawed as it just looks at winning percentage but KenPom uses a much more complete statistical formula and still has Miami's SOS at number 8.

8 is very different from 1. You're right it would not be a perfect way to do it. You would probably need to include some additional games played for sure, but you could weight the value of each game played so that a game played 3 months later and affects a team's rank or value is not the same as the value when they played in Nov/Dec. It can be done.

 

[hawkfan33]

8 is very different from 1. You're right it would not be a perfect way to do it. You would probably need to include some additional games played for sure, but you could weight the value of each game played so that a game played 3 months later and affects a team's rank or value is not the same as the value when they played in Nov/Dec. It can be done.

So you're going to go back now and retroactively rank team's values in the past based on their performance after the game? No offense, but this is a terrible idea.

 

[hawkfarmer]

So you're going to go back now and retroactively rank team's values in the past based on their performance after the game? No offense, but this is a terrible idea.

Why, that's exactly what rankings, RPI, BPI do. Just in a different manner. For example you beat the #10 team in the nation in Dec, but lose to an unranked team the next week. What if by the end of Feb, the unranked team is now top 20 and the #10 is unranked. Why did this happen? Were they really just not what they were ranked at the time or did they get progressively better worse? You have to look at trends, but still the game at the time is the most important. You can weight games based on different factors and actually get the value.

 

[tm3308]

Why, that's exactly what rankings, RPI, BPI do. Just in a different manner. For example you beat the #10 team in the nation in Dec, but lose to an unranked team the next week. What if by the end of Feb, the unranked team is now top 20 and the #10 is unranked. Why did this happen? Were they really just not what they were ranked at the time or did they get progressively better worse? You have to look at trends, but still the game at the time is the most important. You can weight games based on different factors and actually get the value.

So, in other words, you're not judging a team based on what they were on a specific night, but rather based on what they do afterwards?

Isn't that what we're already doing?

 

[IowaFan81]

I don't understand why people throw a fit about college basketball rankings. They don't anything come tournament time. Just one variable that helps decide seeding. If you're in, you're in, still have to play games.

 

[FCAS]

Great googly moogly, the Hurricanes have 7 players on the roster of age 22 or greater.

 

[NYCHawkeye74]

Great googly moogly, the Hurricanes have 7 players on the roster of age 22 or greater.

I think that's what they call a veteran team.

 

[aaronzuriel]

Sometimes you have to wonder why people are allowed to post. Miami has a solid case to be #1 by every measure including SOS, RPI, BPI, Masseys, won-lost record, good wins and no bad losses.
If you have bothered to watch them they pass the eyeball test with flying colors.

They are senior laden, incredibly hungry and mature group of players with a great sophomore point guard in Larkin. They only thing that will hold them back for a deep run to the Final Four is lack of NCAA tournament experience. They do have NIT experience and a great coach in Jim L.

They are not over-rated at 3, they are under-rated... sheesh

 

[HawkPrdatr40]

Sometimes you have to wonder why people are allowed to post. Miami has a solid case to be #1 by every measure including SOS, RPI, BPI, Masseys, won-lost record, good wins and no bad losses.
If you have bothered to watch them they pass the eyeball test with flying colors.

They are senior laden, incredibly hungry and mature group of players with a great sophomore point guard in Larkin. They only thing that will hold them back for a deep run to the Final Four is lack of NCAA tournament experience. They do have NIT experience and a great coach in Jim L.

They are not over-rated at 3, they are under-rated... sheesh

Jealousy..

Miami is 11-0 in the ACC and for the OP they are 20-3 overall.

 

[volhawk50]

Sometimes you have to wonder why people are allowed to post. Miami has a solid case to be #1 by every measure including SOS, RPI, BPI, Masseys, won-lost record, good wins and no bad losses.
If you have bothered to watch them they pass the eyeball test with flying colors.

They are senior laden, incredibly hungry and mature group of players with a great sophomore point guard in Larkin. They only thing that will hold them back for a deep run to the Final Four is lack of NCAA tournament experience. They do have NIT experience and a great coach in Jim L.

They are not over-rated at 3, they are under-rated... sheesh

Agree, except I think their inexperience could be alleviated by JL's experience at George Mason. That would make them very dangerous.

 

[tm3308]

For the longest time, I couldn't figure out why Miami suddenly got so good.




Then I remembered Larranaga is the coach.