2018-2019 computer projections thread

[Sigmapolis]

Further thing I discovered looking about...

Game scores this season.



There clearly has been a softening of the quality of our play and its intensity the past three games. They are the worst three games we have played this season.

 

[cyclones500]

NET update: Iowa State rose from 32 to 31 after the Drake win. Drake is now 98, slight dip from 94.

As I've stated w/ all updates here, NET will have erratic fluctuations until connectivity is more --- um, connected.

Among non-ISU notables:
Common opponent: Arizona plummeted from 38th to 67th.

Belmont climbed from 58th to 39th after winning at UCLA, UCLA dropped from 33 to 41.

 

[cyclones500]

Iowa State opponents NET rankings, thru Dec. 15.

38 at Iowa
67 v Arizona
98 v Drake
100 Missouri
104 v Illinois
109 v San Diego State
161 Texas Southern
185 North Dakota State
231 Omaha
341 Alabama State
346 Southern

Home: 6-0
Road: 0-1
Neutral: 3-1
vs. top 25: 0-0
vs. top 50: 0-1
vs. top 75: 1-1
vs. 1-99: 2-1
vs. 100-199: 5-0
vs. 200 and below: 3-0

Next: Eastern Illinois, 280

 

[VegasCy]

Glass half empty: we are 0-2 against the top 99. Hopefully, Arizona can win a weak PAC 12 and Iowa, Mizzou, Illinois, and SD St can stay/ climb into the Top 100.

Glass half full: we are 4-2 against the top 109 with plenty of chances to get quality wins. All Big 12, except Baylor are in the top 100, plus the SEC/Big 12 challenge game.

Texas Tech 4
Kansas 5
Oklahoma 18
KSU 35
TCU 46
Ole Miss 50
Texas 58
Okie St 62
WVU 95

 

[Sigmapolis]

Almost up to 80% to make the tournament in their projections!

Up to #16 in the country and #3 in the Big 12, too!

69% (my favorite number) win expectation against OSU, too!

 

[cyclones500]

ISU rose from 32 to 28 in NET rankings.

 

[cyclones500]

Iowa State opponents NET rankings, thru Dec. 22.
v = neutral site

10-2 (0-0 Big 12)
37 at Iowa L
56 v Arizona L
86 Missouri W
101 v Drake W
113 v Illinois W
125 v San Diego State W
177 Omaha W
202 North Dakota State W
220 Texas Southern W
296 Eastern Illinois W
347 Southern W
349 Alabama State W

Home: 7-0
Road: 0-1
Neutral: 3-1
vs. top 25: 0-0
vs. top 50: 0-1
vs. 51-100: 1-1
vs. 101-200: 4-0
vs. 201 and below: 5-0

Next: at Oklahoma State (70)

 

[Daserop]

Can anyone enlighten me on why there is so much love for Nevada?

 

[Cyclonepride]

Can anyone enlighten me on why there is so much love for Nevada?

They were pretty good last year and I don't think they lost much. They haven't really overpowered the opponents on their schedule, but they haven't needed to either. The Arizona State win is looking like a good one, and they've played a couple other decent quality teams (South Dakota State, Tulsa). Once in conference, they aren't going to get tested often. Their main competition may be the San Diego State team that we beat by 30.

 

[Daserop]

They were pretty good last year and I don't think they lost much. They haven't really overpowered the opponents on their schedule, but they haven't needed to either. The Arizona State win is looking like a good one, and they've played a couple other decent quality teams (South Dakota State, Tulsa). Once in conference, they aren't going to get tested often. Their main competition may be the San Diego State team that we beat by 30.

Exact same thing could be said for Houston as well. Don't get me wrong they are definitely a top 20, heck even top 15 team. However, #6 this early I'm not buying it. Now of course if they go undefeated then I'll look the fool.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Exact same thing could be said for Houston as well. Don't get me wrong they are definitely a top 20, heck even top 15 team. However, #6 this early I'm not buying it. Now of course if they go undefeated then I'll look the fool.

Nevada-Reno is #16 on Barttovik (right behind the good guys) and #8 on KenPom.

I think anywhere from 5 through 20 is reasonable for them.

A mid-major team like that is always hard to rank given the limitations of their schedule.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I thought this was a fun chart for anticipating the conference season.



I think this shows the conference clearly in four tiers. In no order within the tiers...

Tier 1 = Texas Tech, Oklahoma, Kansas, Iowa State
Tier 2 = TCU, Texas
Tier 3 = Kansas State, West Virginia
Tier 4 = Baylor, Oklahoma State

Within Tier 1...

Oklahoma has a great defense but a suspect offense.
Kansas has a great offense but a suspect defense.
Texas Tech is a more extreme version of Oklahoma -- a total "tank."
Iowa State is a more extreme version of Kansas -- a total "glass cannon."

All four are very close to one another in terms of their overall quality. I think any of the four has a legitimate shot at the conference title and should make the tournament. Our efficient offense, even before adding Wigginton, should worry any defense that we face, but we have only proven an average defense at this level, which might catch up with us.

TCU is a less-good version of Kansas/Iowa State. Texas is a less-good version of TTU/Oklahoma. West Virginia is somehow a decent offensive team but sucks at defense, and Kansas State has a great defense but an absolutely moribund offense.

Baylor and OSU are just generally bad (compared to the rest of the conference), though OSU is more the offensive type and Baylor more the defensive one.

Tier 2 teams have a decent shot at the tournament, Tier 3 teams have an outside shot, and I think the Tier 4 teams might want to start thinking about next season.

This should be fun. I look forward to the round-robin between the top-four especially.

 

[Deleted member 8507]

Can anyone enlighten me on why there is so much love for Nevada?

I read somewhere that their top six players are all redshirt seniors. Next year might be a bit of a drop off for them.

 

[TykeClone]

I thought this was a fun chart for anticipating the conference season.

View attachment 61096

What do the blue lines signify?

 

[Sigmapolis]

What do the blue lines signify?

They are isoquants of overall team quality -- two teams on the same line are roughly as efficient as each other overall, even if one team might be to the upper-left (and therefore better at defense) and another to the bottom-right (and more offensively-oriented).

ISU and TTU are close to each other in the ratings. They just have different relative strengths. You could draw a line parallel to the blue lines that would cross them.

 

[cykadelic2]

Here are the current correlation coefficients of the following rankings to the new NET rankings for all 353 D1 teams:

KPI: 0.95270153
ESPN Strength of Record: 0.915528324
ESPN BPI: 0.910292911
Sagarin: 0.960191807
KenPom: 0.960471438
CBS RPI: 0.923792924

All of these except for RPI will appear on the 2019 Selection Committee's info sheets for each team.

The Committee's final 2018 Seed List correlated most closely with KPI. KPI also had the best record in terms of at-large selection with just one team missed in 2018.

BPI, Sagarin and KenPom are all Predictive based models with Margin of Victory factors. KPI, SOR and RPI are "Results' models with no MOV factors.

The NET does have MOV factors up to a 10 point ceiling for each game so it is interesting to note that it currently does correlate highest with Sagarin and KenPom. From what I've read, the intent of the RPI to NET shift was to incorporate more Predictive type data and it appears that is the case so far.

Here are ISU's current numbers:

NET: 29 (8 seed)
KPI: 40 (10 seed)
SOR: 45 (12 seed)
BPI: 15 (4 seed)
Sagarin: 21 (6 seed)
KenPom: 17 (5 seed)
RPI: 57 (at-large miss)

If ISU finishes 10-8 or better in conference play, their NET should increase to 7 seed or better.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Here are the current correlation coefficients of the following rankings to the new NET rankings for all 353 D1 teams:

KPI: 0.95270153
ESPN Strength of Record: 0.915528324
ESPN BPI: 0.910292911
Sagarin: 0.960191807
KenPom: 0.960471438
CBS RPI: 0.923792924

All of these except for RPI will appear on the 2019 Selection Committee's info sheets for each team.

The Committee's final 2018 Seed List correlated most closely with KPI. KPI also had the best record in terms of at-large selection with just one team missed in 2018.

BPI, Sagarin and KenPom are all Predictive based models with Margin of Victory factors. KPI, SOR and RPI are "Results' models with no MOV factors.

The NET does have MOV factors up to a 10 point ceiling for each game so it is interesting to note that it currently does correlate highest with Sagarin and KenPom. From what I've read, the intent of the RPI to NET shift was to incorporate more Predictive type data and it appears that is the case so far.

Here are ISU's current numbers:

NET: 29 (8 seed)
KPI: 40 (10 seed)
SOR: 45 (12 seed)
BPI: 15 (4 seed)
Sagarin: 21 (6 seed)
KenPom: 17 (5 seed)
RPI: 57 (at-large miss)

If ISU finishes 10-8 or better in conference play, their NET should increase to 7 seed or better.

So basically...

The RPI was/is trash.

ISU looks better when you account for margins of victory.

I can see degrading the impact of MOV after a point (e.g., similar weights to a win by 20 as to a win by 30), but I think giving the same credit to a one-possession game to solidly beating a team by 10-15 is kind of silly and throwing out good data that you should use.

We have not played a great schedule so far, but we have killed a few teams. On the flip side, Iowa beat us up pretty badly. They should get some credit for that, too.

 

[Cynonymous]

So basically...

The RPI was/is trash.

ISU looks better when you account for margins of victory.

I can see degrading the impact of MOV after a point (e.g., similar weights to a win by 20 as to a win by 30), but I think giving the same credit to a one-possession game to solidly beating a team by 10-15 is kind of silly and throwing out good data that you should use.

We have not played a great schedule so far, but we have killed a few teams. On the flip side, Iowa beat us up pretty badly. They should get some credit for that, too.

That's precisely where the traditional RPI was used. It didn't predict wins/losses, it merely measured how good your schedule was and how well you performed against it. While many would agree ISU is transitioning to a tourney level team, the fact is we haven't beat anyone outside of possibly Drake that is tourney level.

 

[Sigmapolis]

That's precisely where the traditional RPI was used. It didn't predict wins/losses, it merely measured how good your schedule was and how well you performed against it. While many would agree ISU is transitioning to a tourney level team, the fact is we haven't beat anyone outside of possibly Drake that is tourney level.

To be fair, most team's schedules right now are choked with cupcakes. The few high-major opponents we have had are kind of basket cases right now, and San Diego State is not having a great year. At least picking up a good win against what is turning out to be a very good mid-major team in Drake does give us a little bit of a boost.

Our "one chance" was really against Iowa, and, well, (1.) Iowa is a good team, despite our constant attempts to troll them, (2.) we did not react well to our first true road game, and (3.) they played a great game that night, and we did not. It happens.

We are going to have plenty of chances for quality wins in the Big 12. If the figures above hold true, the floor for the Big 12 is four tournament teams, and that could probably be as much as six depending on how conference season works out for UT and TCU.

 

[Cyclonepride]

To be fair, most team's schedules right now are choked with cupcakes. The few high-major opponents we have had are kind of basket cases right now, and San Diego State is not having a great year. At least picking up a good win against what is turning out to be a very good mid-major team in Drake does give us a little bit of a boost.

Our "one chance" was really against Iowa, and, well, (1.) Iowa is a good team, despite our constant attempts to troll them, (2.) we did not react well to our first true road game, and (3.) they played a great game that night, and we did not. It happens.

We are going to have plenty of chances for quality wins in the Big 12. If the figures above hold true, the floor for the Big 12 is four tournament teams, and that could probably be as much as six depending on how conference season works out for UT and TCU.

Yep, and if you look at the best conferences, all of those teams are going to have a chance to rise due to the quality of their leagues, and all the teams in the lesser conferences are going to struggle to gain due to the quality of their leagues.