Bracketology and Team Resumes

[RaceToTheTop 27,121]

2 hours ago, Uspshoosier said:

https://x.com/TheAndyKatz/status/1884254185543389403
 

a little more on the WAB and NET.   Always nice to get more info from the people the help create it.   If you listen to it you will notice some notes that I say all the time when dealing with the NET, Quads and such 

WAB is my all time favorite metric.

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

Just now, RaceToTheTop said:

WAB is my all time favorite metric.

I’m interested in how they use it and how important it will be moving forward.   I appreciated him breaking it down.  

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

https://x.com/theandykatz/status/1885029110000332871?s=46

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

IU now has 3 Q2 wins thanks to Rutgers winning a road game yesterday.  

[Stuhoo 83,044]

Just now, Uspshoosier said:

IU now has 3 Q2 wins thanks to Rutgers winning a road game yesterday.  

But less than a 10% chance of making the tournament according to Torvik.

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

Just now, Stuhoo said:

But less than a 10% chance of making the tournament according to Torvik.

Yeah he probably projects them to only win 2 more games all year in the regular season.   That number will go up if they wins some games he has them projected to lose 

[Stuhoo 83,044]

4 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Yeah he probably projects them to only win 2 more games all year in the regular season.   That number will go up if they wins some games he has them projected to lose 

Makes sense.

But there’s a really tough path to four or five more wins in ten games when you’re a team with shitty defensive recognition and the next six opponents play connected team bball.

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

1 minute ago, Stuhoo said:

Makes sense.

But there’s a really tough path to four or five more wins in ten games when you’re a team with shitty defensive recognition and the next six opponents play connected team bball.

For sure but I’ve seen teams string together wins out of now where in years past.  Nothing surprises me anymore in college basketball.   I will always point out the path until that path is closed.   Personally I’m with you and don’t see it however the path is still there and despite the coach (bringing a knife to a gun fight) those players are still talented enough to win games especially at home 

[RaceToTheTop 27,121]

49 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Yeah he probably projects them to only win 2 more games all year in the regular season.   That number will go up if they wins some games he has them projected to lose 

I believe he projects them to win 3 more.  

[woodenshoemanHoosierfan 6,322]

Here is an interesting metric this guy made up. I think i like it better than NET.

https://blog.evanmiya.com/p/abolish-the-quadrant-system-and-use

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk

[RaceToTheTop 27,121]

21 minutes ago, woodenshoemanHoosierfan said:

Here is an interesting metric this guy made up. I think i like it better than NET.

https://blog.evanmiya.com/p/abolish-the-quadrant-system-and-use

Sent from my SM-S908U using Tapatalk
 

The measure he is using is basically what the NCAA is using with WAB (wins above bubble).  They are using the torvik ranking to calculate that.

My opinion is that WAB or Evan Miya's win value ratings are the single most important metrics.  When IU lost to Maryland by 1 last Sunday, I certainly didn't take any solance in it being just a one point loss.  You either win or you lose.

What's interesting is how consistent WAB is with Evan Miya (I would bet it's pretty consistent with the WAR ratings I ran the last few years).  Torvik has IU 51st in WAB;  Miya has IU 50th in win value - loss value.

And WAB/win value-loss value actually would promote mid major conference teams running up elite win totals into the tournament.  Indiana State would most certainly have been in last year.  This year the WAB/win value-loss value measures would put Drake in (on the 9/10 line) and would have North Texas (16-4 overall) as a team squarely on the bubble.

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

Brutal back to back closer losses to tourney quality teams for the Hoosiers.   Last night gave them a chance to get the best win in the B1G currently (NET 9 on the road).  If they would have won that then they are probably on the right side of the bubble and the Wisky road game is house money.    Even with a loss to Wisky they will have a shot at making a run as long as they take care of their home games.     Michigan becomes the most important game on the schedule.   Michigan, UCLA and Purdue, OSU all at home and all tourney teams as of today.   Take care of your home games and they are probably dancing 

[RaceToTheTop 27,121]

IU went from 67 to 65 NET after the loss at Purdue last night.

I hate NET.

[IUHoosierJoe 1,393]

20 minutes ago, RaceToTheTop said:

IU went from 67 to 65 NET after the loss at Purdue last night.

I hate NET.

Do you think they should have dropped from 67 after a 5-point road loss to the #9 team?

[Uspshoosier 47,331]

Just now, IUHoosierJoe said:

Do you think they should have dropped from 67 after a 5-point road loss to the #9 team?

Probably thinks they should have moved up more with a close loss.  I’m fine with where they moved after a close loss.  If they would of won I would of expected them to move up more spots 

[IUHoosierJoe 1,393]

1 minute ago, Uspshoosier said:

Probably thinks they should have moved up more with a close loss.  I’m fine with where they moved after a close loss.  If they would of won I would of expected them to move up more spots 

OK, gotcha.  I'm fine with it too.  They were probably 11 or 12-point dogs in the NET and lost by 5.  That's not a whole lot of difference, and they've played 22 games now, so it seems fair to just move up 2.

[LIHoosier 26,846]

10 minutes ago, IUHoosierJoe said:

Do you think they should have dropped from 67 after a 5-point road loss to the #9 team?

 

8 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Probably thinks they should have moved up more with a close loss.  I’m fine with where they moved after a close loss.  If they would of won I would of expected them to move up more spots 

The bigger drop is gonna be if most of the teams 6-7 spots around IU win today. Winning at Purdon't probably would've put IU in the 50's at least for a day.

[IUHoosierJoe 1,393]

4 minutes ago, LIHoosier said:

 

The bigger drop is gonna be if most of the teams 6-7 spots around IU win today. Winning at Purdon't probably would've put IU in the 50's at least for a day.

The bigger question with NET is not necessarily if they win, but if they perform better than the NET expected--i.e., who did they play, where did they play, and what was the score margin.  There is a small portion of result-based metric in the NET, but not a whole lot.

[RaceToTheTop 27,121]

4 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Probably thinks they should have moved up more with a close loss.  I’m fine with where they moved after a close loss.  If they would of won I would of expected them to move up more spots 

I don't think teams should ever move up after a loss (with the exception of wins or losses in other games that day which would effect a shuffling).  

I'm simply not a big fan of efficiency metrics being used as selection criteria.  It's why I'm such a big fan of WAB.  

Let's say that two teams play the exact same schedule -- one goes 22-8 and the other goes 19-11.  The 22-8 team won a lot of close games and were blown out a few times while the 19-11 team lost a lot of close games and blew a few teams out, the 19-11 team likely have a better efficiency rating and potentially a better NET.

At the end of the day if I were to be selecting teams I would only care about wins/losses and who you played (SOS rankings, who you played and where).  It's not that I don't like the predictive measures like Pom and Torvik -- I love them -- but I don't like them being used as selection measures.  And I do believe by the end of the season that wins and losses are better predictive measures of future success than are Pom and Torvik.  I'm sure you are familiar with Bill James' Pythagareon Theorem for predicting wins....but even he said that there does reach a certain point of the season where previous win/loss totals become better predictors of future success than does net runs.  So a team that is coached poorly in late game situations -- like IU is -- those close losses aren't an accident (or, using Pom's term 'luck').

That said, I know each committee member weighs different factors differently.  Just stating my preference and what I would be looking at.

[go iu bb 7,037]

21 minutes ago, Uspshoosier said:

Probably thinks they should have moved up more with a close loss.  I’m fine with where they moved after a close loss.  If they would of won I would of expected them to move up more spots 

And Purdue found out what IU fans already know from the past few seasons: you can drop in the NET after a win if that win is closer than expected against a bad team.