Program Expectations and Reality

[WindsorHawk]

Honest question, other than a few NCAA berths, what has he actually "won" as far as Championships? Did he win conference a couple times at Sienna?

Good question. Also, what is his winning percentage at each of his stops when backing out the first 2 years...totally rebuilding and/or transitioning.

 

[PCHawk]

I got to thinking after Jay Bilas said he has never seen a team as prepared for what MSU was doing as iowa was. Maybe the reason we lose so many close games is because the team with better players has a better chance to win close games and maybe our team with worse players was only in the position to win because what Bilas said was true and Fran really gets a team prepared well. Once Patrick got diagnosed with cancer, Fran lost focus and we lost the one advantage we had. All we had left was an unprepared team that wasn't more talented than our opponents.

This theory also works well for why we were dominating first halfs and losing second halfs so bad. Fran finds a way to give his inferior team the advantage and at halftime, the better team adjusts and takes away that advantage and wins. Of course all of this stems on Bilas being correct in his assessment. It sure makes sense to me though.

Another reason i think my theory might be true is look at the individual players of last year's team. They sure didn't look like a top 10 team. But they earned that ranking. They didn't luck their way into it. We didn't keep running into teams that played like north carolina did against us. In fact, we were the opposite of lucky. We got pretty unlucky at the ends of the Villanova, ISU, and Wisconsin games. How else were we winning at the rate we were winning with the players we had if not for Fran being awesome at getting his team prepared?

 

[PCHawk]

Do you know why the NCAA uses the RPI and not Kenpom?

Because they're slow to change. That is the only reason.

 

[WindsorHawk]

That is very interesting because Bracketology is a Highly subjective process. It is also what you would call very fluid and my guess is Lunardi has Iowa's stock dropping and seed dropping because of what just happened these last two games.

As for my focus it is on the entire body of Iowa's work to date, which is that Iowa is 15-10 and 6-6 in conference play which isn't over impressive. Iowa has work left to do in order to secure a NCAA a Bid and Bracketology isn't something the least bit concerned with.

Fair enough. I have another post later above with Kenpom rankings. At the end of the day I know we both want to see Iowa's name called on Selection Sunday.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Minnesota is athletic and talented. That loss did not surprise me that much.

NW was a bad loss. Period.

Next 6 games are going to tell the story of this season

I agree on NW. And while I wish we had beaten MN it's not as if they swept us or have no talent. That home loss is canceled out by road win IMO. Unfortunately, that road win is also canceled out by the home loss.

 

[clicheusername3]

Because they're slow to change. That is the only reason.

Nah...it's because Kenpom is a predictor, not a ranking. You can make predictions until your eyes bleed but at the end of the day what actually happens is what matters.

 

[WindsorHawk]

I got to thinking after Jay Bilas said he has never seen a team as prepared for what MSU was doing as iowa was. Maybe the reason we lose so many close games is because the team with better players has a better chance to win close games and maybe our team with worse players was only in the position to win because what Bilas said was true and Fran really gets a team prepared well. Once Patrick got diagnosed with cancer, Fran lost focus and we lost the one advantage we had. All we had left was an unprepared team that wasn't more talented than our opponents.

This theory also works well for why we were dominating first halfs and losing second halfs so bad. Fran finds a way to give his inferior team the advantage and at halftime, the better team adjusts and takes away that advantage and wins. Of course all of this stems on Bilas being correct in his assessment. It sure makes sense to me though.

That's interesting food for thought.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Do you know why the NCAA uses the RPI and not Kenpom?

I think it's because they don't want to admit someone else has a better system for rating teams. NCAA Ego! But that's just a guess.

 

[WindsorHawk]

Nah...it's because Kenpom is a predictor, not a ranking. You can make predictions until your eyes bleed but at the end of the day what actually happens is what matters.

Actually it's not a predictor or a ranking. It's a rating. The Kenpom rating is better than the RPI.

 

[PCHawk]

Nah...it's because Kenpom is a predictor, not a ranking. You can make predictions until your eyes bleed but at the end of the day what actually happens is what matters.

I was refering to why they still use RPI more so than why they don't use Kenpom.

 

[PCHawk]

That's interesting food for thought.

It just really makes sense in a lot of ways. If we would have finished in the top 10 or so last year, almost everyone would be happy with Fran reguardless of what happens these last 6 games. I would hate to give up on a coach who was on pace for a top 10 finish before some extremely unfortunate circumstances.

 

[Knight78]

So after 5 years, you are good going into seasons thinking we have a 50/50 chance at the NCAA tourney? Not exactly a ringing endorsement for a program turn around.

I would say that this year, Fran is lucky that there is only one team in the Big 10 that is a legitimate final 4 contender. Most years there are 2 or 3 in addition to 3 or 4 others that are possible sweet 16 teams. The Big 10 is a bit down this year and yet we are still riding the bubble. (if we are lucky) I still find it hard to believe that at 15-10, Iowa is still considered to be "in".

Iowa has had much better teams than this one, left out.

So what were our chances of making the tourney under Lickliter? You must think it's easy to turn around a Power 5 conference team; if so, why aren't you coaching instead of whining on a message board?

 

[BryceC]

First off, I think Iowa will still make the NCAA tourney and that's what it's all about. Obviously a good regular season is important, and a good season is nice, the tourney can be a total crapshoot which is why it's so important to just get in. It's like the baseball playoffs that way, and the Royals from last year are a good example. If you are surprised by the fact that most people still have Iowa in the tourney, don't compare them to waht you think and NCAA tourney team should be compare it to the other teams on the bubble. You'll be surprised at what you find.

Secondly, the only thing that confuses and confounds me is the lack of home court advantage. Iowa is 15-10, with 4 home losses. ISU has 6 losses, none at home. The only real difference between the two is those home losses. And those are incredibly damaging to something like the RPI.

The other thing I think that is really tough for Iowa fans in relation to basketball is the Lucy pulling the football effect. Iowa has two good wins 2 weeks ago, everybody is riding high, and the follow it up by home losses to MN and @NW, likely the two worst losses so far on the season. Last year like people have said, Iowa crushes Mich last year, gets in the top ten, and craps the bed. They lose at home. It seems like you can't have any expectations with this squad.

 

[deanvogs]

It just really makes sense in a lot of ways. If we would have finished in the top 10 or so last year, almost everyone would be happy with Fran reguardless of what happens these last 6 games. I would hate to give up on a coach who was on pace for a top 10 finish before some extremely unfortunate circumstances.

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense at all. You judge a season on the complete season, not 1/2 way or 3/4 of the way through. Who cares what you are before the end of the season, you are what you are at the end of the season, not what you were rank pre season, or 1/2 way though. That is why everything I say about this stuff is dependent on where we finish, not where we are right now.

 

[PCHawk]

First off, I think Iowa will still make the NCAA tourney and that's what it's all about. Obviously a good regular season is important, and a good season is nice, the tourney can be a total crapshoot which is why it's so important to just get in. It's like the baseball playoffs that way, and the Royals from last year are a good example. If you are surprised by the fact that most people still have Iowa in the tourney, don't compare them to waht you think and NCAA tourney team should be compare it to the other teams on the bubble. You'll be surprised at what you find.

Secondly, the only thing that confuses and confounds me is the lack of home court advantage. Iowa is 15-10, with 4 home losses. ISU has 6 losses, none at home. The only real difference between the two is those home losses. And those are incredibly damaging to something like the RPI.

The other thing I think that is really tough for Iowa fans in relation to basketball is the Lucy pulling the football effect. Iowa has two good wins 2 weeks ago, everybody is riding high, and the follow it up by home losses to MN and @NW, likely the two worst losses so far on the season. Last year like people have said, Iowa crushes Mich last year, gets in the top ten, and craps the bed. They lose at home. It seems like you can't have any expectations with this squad.

Go sit in Carver for a game and you'll understand why there is no home court advantage.

 

[BryceC]

I thought I'd chime in on the Kenpom/RPI discussion. The selection committee allows members to use all kinds of rankings, and most people have several different lists. Many make their own. I thought I'd link some good articles that discuss the process:

http://deadspin.com/5890921/for-the...-committee-reveals-how-the-brackets-are-built

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/26283066/34887185

I do think RPI still holds a big part of it as it's primarily what is on the Nitty Gritty sheets. Norlander covers that well in the second article. That is a problem and I'd like to see some sort of consolidation of the various metrics used.

For the record I prefer Sagarin over KenPom, as I don't like how kenpom does not factor in winning. I do think KenPom is awesome for tempo-free stats and efficiency ratings.

 

[PCHawk]

I'm sorry, but that makes no sense at all. You judge a season on the complete season, not 1/2 way or 3/4 of the way through. Who cares what you are before the end of the season, you are what you are at the end of the season, not what you were rank pre season, or 1/2 way though. That is why everything I say about this stuff is dependent on where we finish, not where we are right now.

Not when something that bad happens at the exact same time the season derails. Like i said though, I'm not guaranteeing that's what happened. It's just a theory. If we could hire a coach today that was a sure thing i would be on board. But in my opinion, the odds of last season falling apart because of Fran's personal matters, and it not happening again, are far better than the odds of hiring a new coach and having him get us into the top 10.

 

[WindsorHawk]

I thought I'd chime in on the Kenpom/RPI discussion. The selection committee allows members to use all kinds of rankings, and most people have several different lists. Many make their own. I thought I'd link some good articles that discuss the process:

http://deadspin.com/5890921/for-the...-committee-reveals-how-the-brackets-are-built

http://www.cbssports.com/mcc/blogs/entry/26283066/34887185

I do think RPI still holds a big part of it as it's primarily what is on the Nitty Gritty sheets. Norlander covers that well in the second article. That is a problem and I'd like to see some sort of consolidation of the various metrics used.

For the record I prefer Sagarin over KenPom, as I don't like how kenpom does not factor in winning. I do think KenPom is awesome for tempo-free stats and efficiency ratings.

Iowa looks good in both Sagarin and Kenpom. And the NCAA constantly tells teams to go play somebody. Iowa should win some tiebreakers on SOS.

 

[Knight78]

I believe, if I heard right yesterday, for his coaching career Fran has won 57% of his games. 55% at Iowa. Take that info and do with it what you want. Not exactly a world beater.
My patience is wearing a little thin I admit. I respect much of what he has done, but I also see a weak Big Ten this year and with an experienced team like we have there are no excuses for losing to Minny & NW....NONE! I also have worn tired of the childishness he acts with regularly. I do give him credit though for improving his sideline antics this year, that is a step in the right direction. Just not sure he can handle the pressure of Big Time Basketball. I'm waivering on my support for him right now, teetering.

To be fair about Fran's win percentage, he has taken on teams that have not done well and vastly improved them.

• His first job was with Lehigh. The year before he got there, Lehigh was worse than the year before Fran got to Iowa. He inherited a terrible program. He was there three years and in his final year they qualified for the NCAA tournament. It would take Lehigh 16 years before their next post season appearance.
• He then took the job at UNC Greensboro, who had won 10 games or less in each of the previous three seasons. He was there six seasons and qualified for the NIT one time and the NCAA one time. UNC Greensboro has not qualified for a post season tournament of any kind since.
• He then took the job at Siena, who was coming off a whopping 6 win season. He was there five seasons and qualified for the NCAA three times, knocking off a #3 seeded Stanford one year. Siena has not qualified for the NCAA tournament since.

So he really was a good one to come into Iowa; he was used to rebuilding programs that were not good - and to say Iowa was not good under Lick is an understatement.

 

[clicheusername3]

Actually it's not a predictor or a ranking. It's a rating. The Kenpom rating is better than the RPI.

The first thing you should know about this system is that it is designed to be purely predictive. If you’re looking for a system that rates teams on how “good” their season has been, you’ve come to the wrong place.

So what you are saying is it's better to use a system that doesn't look at a body of work and what has actually happened, as opposed to a system that is (and I quote) purely PREDICTIVE to decide NCAA tournament entrants and seeds? Like I said, the predictions have to end at some point, but the actual results remain.

I get it, Iowa is an outlier in kenpom, usually to the "higher" side, however, I'm sure your tone would change if they were outlying in the opposite direction. Intelligent question for you:

Do you think Iowa is more accurately described as the 36th best team in nation? The 56th best team in the nation? Or the 46th best team in the nation (right in the middle of the two systems)?