Jump to content

Welcome to Hoosier Sports Nation | Indiana Basketball and Sports Forum

Welcome to HoosierSportsNation 3.0 -- our newest and best iteration.  We promise we won't bite -- come on in and register to join the party!


Sign in to follow this  
DWB

B1G Teams in NCAA (early projection)

Recommended Posts

2 hours ago, JugRox said:

What if the unranked team at home was being beat by 16 with 3 mins to go,  and the unranked team went off on the 3 point line for the last 3 mins?

You want to reward them for 3 mins of play?

The final score tells a part of the story, not the whole story.

KenPom doesn't account for wins or losses in anyway.

I'm the guy that has been posting all of the computer rankings just for the sake of the entire picture.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Agree with those that question the metrics, they're pretty bad off right now on IU, can rationalize all you want, they're just crap looking at teams like Minn, etc.

But none of it really matters, it's all just noise at this point -- what matters is taking care of business through our remaining games. Get to 20 wins there's really no question we're in. Get to 19, probably but I'm a little nervous. I think we'll be in the NCAA tourney. But work remains to be done, picking up from this W.

  • Like 2

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, 5fouls said:

Chew on this for a moment.  IU's loss to Purdue is considered a Quad 1 loss for IU because the Boilers are #29 in the NET.  Now, assume IU had beaten Purdue instead.  Would it be a Quad 1 win?  No, it would not.  With a loss to IU, there is no way Purdue stays in the Top 30 of the Net, which is the requirement for IU to get credit for a Quad 1 win. 

So, in essence, forget the actual score.  Forget who won or lost.  The game became more important in the overall scheme of things because Purdue won instead of IU.  That's illogical if you ask me.    The season is 31 games long for a reason.  Teams have highs and teams have lows.  Good games and bad games.  IU had a low at the same time where Purdue had a relative high.  Does who won matter?  Sure, it does.  But, it should not matter any more than IU's loss at home to Maryland.  But, because of the arbitrary cutoff assigned to the NET ratings, it does.  

Can you imagine if they used NET ratings back in '81 when IU won the championship?  That loss to Pan American would have destroyed IU's resume and likely affected their tournament seed.  But, with their run through the tournament, IU clearly showed they were the best team in the country, despite losing to Pan American.  

You have a point about where it stands right now as far as the Purdue game, but they calculate the quadrant of each win and loss at the end of the season based on where each team finishes the season after all the games have been played.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, rogue3542 said:

I think this year, with how wide open the Big Ten and, really, the entire NCAA is, we are seeing just how far stats can take us (hint: not very far).

There's some obvious shortcomings in several of these advanced statistical rankings, and, at the end of the day, whether you win by 50 or lose by 100, a win is a win, and a loss is a loss, and right now, IU has 16 in the win column.

IU: 16-8, 58 in NET ranking

Minnesota: 12-11, 40 in NET ranking

Clear example of how stats can only tell you so much.

Even looking just at the wins and losses, there’s an argument that Minnesota has a better resume than IU.  But an 18 spot difference is probably too much.

Minnesota: 5 wins against top 50 teams (4 home, 1 away). 3 losses to sub-50 teams (1 home, 2 away).

Indiana: 4 wins against top 50 teams (4 home).  No losses to sub-50 teams.

If the teams switched schedules, they’d probably also switch records.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Even looking just at the wins and losses, there’s an argument that Minnesota has a better resume than IU.  But an 18 spot difference is probably too much.

Minnesota: 5 wins against top 50 teams (4 home, 1 away). 3 losses to sub-50 teams (1 home, 2 away).

Indiana: 4 wins against top 50 teams (4 home).  No losses to sub-50 teams.

If the teams switched schedules, they’d probably also switch records.

I don't see how those stats suggest that Minnesota has a better resume. They have one more win against the top 50, but three "bad" losses whereas IU has zero.

 

  • Like 3

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
13 hours ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Even looking just at the wins and losses, there’s an argument that Minnesota has a better resume than IU.  But an 18 spot difference is probably too much.

Minnesota: 5 wins against top 50 teams (4 home, 1 away). 3 losses to sub-50 teams (1 home, 2 away).

Indiana: 4 wins against top 50 teams (4 home).  No losses to sub-50 teams.

If the teams switched schedules, they’d probably also switch records.

You are going to have to explain your logic...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
1 hour ago, rico said:

You are going to have to explain your logic...

Actually my original post was wrong.  Minnesota now only has 2 losses against sub-50 teams — #79 Utah on the road and #67 DePaul at home.  We have the exact same conference record, with IU owning top-50 wins over #14 FSU, #11 MSU, #23 OSU, and #30 Iowa at home, and Minnesota having wins over OSU, #28 Michigan, #18 Penn State, and #31 Wisconsin at home, and OSU on the road.  So they have more wins against top 50 teams, including a win against OSU away from home.

And again, they had a more challenging non-conference schedule.  Their losses came against #45 Oklahoma at a neutral site, on the road against #12 Butler and #79 Utah, and at home against #67 DePaul.  Like I said in my earlier post, if the teams switched schedules, they’d also likely switch records.  IU fans can continue to stick their head in the sand and act like the only thing that matters is total wins and losses, but the rankings and selection committee value games away from home far more than they value home games.

Edit: Another metric that shows why Minnesota is ahead of Indiana in the NET right now: Minnesota is 4-9 in Quad 1 games, 2-2 in Quad 2 games, 2-0 in Quad 3 games, and 4-0 in Quad 4 games.  IU is 4-7, 2-1, 4-0, and 6-0.  The only real difference between the two is that Minnesota has played a more difficult schedule, hence the 3 more losses.  But like I also said, there’s no way it should be an 18 spot difference.

Edited by FW_Hoosier
  • Thanks 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I was reading somewhere yesterday where the author was breaking down the B1G.  The number of teams the B1G gets in probably will come down to what teams have bad losses.  With the exception of getting beat by Nebraska or Northwestern, there are no other bad losses.  Taking that into account then it would come down to the bad losses outside of conference.  It was a good read...I am trying to locate it again as he had it broke down team by team.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
10 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Actually my original post was wrong.  Minnesota now only has 2 losses against sub-50 teams — #79 Utah on the road and #67 DePaul at home.  We have the exact same conference record, with IU owning top-50 wins over #14 FSU, #11 MSU, #23 OSU, and #30 Iowa at home, and Minnesota having wins over OSU, #28 Michigan, #18 Penn State, and #31 Wisconsin at home, and OSU on the road.  So they have more wins against top 50 teams, including a win against OSU away from home.

And again, they had a more challenging non-conference schedule.  Their losses came against #45 Oklahoma at a neutral site, on the road against #12 Butler and #79 Utah, and at home against #67 DePaul.  Like I said in my earlier post, if the teams switched schedules, they’d also likely switch records.  IU fans can continue to stick their head in the sand and act like the only thing that matters is total wins and losses, but the rankings and selection committee value games away from home far more than they value home games. 

Thanks for expanding.  And I tend to agree with you.  Minny played a very, very tough non-con schedule as a matter of fact you left out they had wins over Clemson and Okie St.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, rico said:

Thanks for expanding.  And I tend to agree with you.  Minny played a very, very tough non-con schedule as a matter of fact you left out they had wins over Clemson and Okie St.

Yep.  Everyone wants to act like IU should be rewarded for going 10-1 in a non-conference schedule with only two games against top-50 teams (both at home, one of which we lost) and zero true road games, but that’s just not going to happen.  It was clear this was going to be an issue before the season started, and here we are.

Edited by FW_Hoosier

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
9 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Yep.  Everyone wants to act like IU should be rewarded for going 10-1 in a non-conference schedule with only two games against top-50 teams (both at home, one of which we lost) and zero true road games, but that’s just not going to happen.  It was clear this was going to be an issue before the season started, and here we are.

I understand...but I would say both teams have no bad losses and IU had better wins in the non-con.  I think a win at home over Fla. St. and neutral floor wins over ND and UConn trumps a home court win over Clemson and a neutral floor win over Okie St.  But the Minnesota vs. IU debate is really moot seeing how they play each other twice coming down the stretch.

  • Like 1

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
3 minutes ago, rico said:

I understand...but I would say both teams have no bad losses and IU had better wins in the non-con.  I think a win at home over Fla. St. and neutral floor wins over ND and UConn trumps a home court win over Clemson and a neutral floor win over Okie St.  But the Minnesota vs. IU debate is really moot seeing how they play each other twice coming down the stretch.

Definitely an argument to be made either way.  I’d say IU’s best two wins over FSU and MSU at home are probably better than Minnesota’s best two wins over PSU at home and OSU on the road.  And I do agree with everyone else that the disparity between the two in the current rankings doesn’t make much sense.  Will be interesting to see how everything shakes out at the end of the season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, FW_Hoosier said:

Definitely an argument to be made either way.  I’d say IU’s best two wins over FSU and MSU at home are probably better than Minnesota’s best two wins over PSU at home and OSU on the road.  And I do agree with everyone else that the disparity between the two in the current rankings doesn’t make much sense.  Will be interesting to see how everything shakes out at the end of the season.

At some point in time the win total will matter.  And I give credit to Minny for their scheduling and if they would have won 1 or 2 of those non-con games we wouldn't be having this discussion.  

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I’m seeing 18-13 and having to play our way into the tournament in the BTT again.  Hopefully we can avoid playing on the first day of the tournament, as a win over Nebraska/Northwestern and a 19-14 finish may not be enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

Sign in to follow this  

×
×
  • Create New...