Jump to content

Louisville Pre-Game Thread


IUFLA

Recommended Posts

1 hour ago, IUFLA said:

"Statistics are like bikinis...they show a lot, but not everything."

I don't know how else to take the numbers you presented...As i looked through it, I really didn't see much positive...

It's 4 games into the season...Relax...

 

That's because there isn't much positive at the moment. 

As you said, it's only 4 games into the season so that can change, but at the present it isn't good.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

12 minutes ago, Seeking6 said:

Today seems like a good day to check out. Go cook dinner for 80 retired Vets for an early Thanksgiving dinner. You guys have fun and play nice but I'll just say this.

We have 2 years worth of data with our own eyes showing that each year we've improved from start of season to the end under Coach Woodson. There is no way I'm going down any rabbit hole of panic until the earliest late January. 

In all fairness, I’m fairly certain the numbers suggested we improved the first two years under CAM. But here we are. 

Edited by kyhoosier29
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, BGleas said:

Yeah and we haven't won by 10 against subpar opponents at home. You're also focusing on in specific metric, the overall point was Selection Sunday goes much deeper than just overall record. 

I just provided the actual metric that the NCAA uses to select teams, and it explicitly says the margin of victory is capped at 10, yet you choose to ignore that...I don't know what else to say...It's a fact...

I guess the NCAA could rule us out by winning over Army by 9 instead of 10...But come on...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

9 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

Is that the current one? I thought they removed that cap last year.

Latest one I saw...But if they removed the cap, then that buttresses my point all the more...

Edit: That was from 2022...Can't find anything that says the cap was removed...

Edited by IUFLA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

image.thumb.png.af06efd72f109cce44feb4ea67df4f90.png

The problem is that IU's efficiency numbers against weak opponents have been bad. Unless things change, they'll only get worse.

Army was a weak team, one of the weakest in the nation. FGCU was winless last I saw, so they're not looking like a good opponent.

Things can improve, but as they are right now, it's not good. That's why the stats @5fouls post don't look positive. They aren't.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2020-05-12/net-explained-ncaa-adopts-new-college-basketball-ranking-replace-rpi

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

I just provided the actual metric that the NCAA uses to select teams, and it explicitly says the margin of victory is capped at 10, yet you choose to ignore that...I don't know what else to say...It's a fact...

I guess the NCAA could rule us out by winning over Army by 9 instead of 10...But come on...

You're point was that we're 3-1 and the record is all that matters come Selection Sunday. 

That point is completely wrong. I did not only zero in on margin of victory, that was you. 

I said there are a myriad of things they look at and it goes much deeper than overall record. 

  • Like 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites

6 minutes ago, BGleas said:

You're point was that we're 3-1 and the record is all that matters come Selection Sunday. 

That point is completely wrong. I did not only zero in on margin of victory, that was you. 

I said there are a myriad of things they look at and it goes much deeper than overall record. 

We’re a long way from Selection Sunday, and if we’re good enough things will take care of themselves…let’s just win today.

  • Like 2
Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'm nervous and excited about this one.  I kinda love that it is a 430 start because I get home around 330.  I'm anxious to see us play against a team I feel like we should beat, but looked good yesterday.  This is a better game to measure ourselves with.  That said, I am really curious to see how we come out.  A consolation game at 430pm the day after a loss can be tough to get up for.  Clearly we should want to redeem ourselves, but I think you never know how a team will come out in this situation.  Obviously same with Louisville.    

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BGleas said:

Not really, because the committee doesn't go off straight up record, they go off of many of the different efficiency metrics (kenpom, the NCAA Quad thing, and more). 

Who you beat, by how much and how you looked matters. Margin of defeat/victory matters, etc., etc. We've already dropped nearly 30 spots in Kenpom because the analytics see through those 3 concerning wins. 

I'd guess your baseball coach would have reacted differently to a 1-1 record if you beat the worst team in your league in 10 innings abd lost to another team by 6 runs, as opposed to beating the worst team by 6 runs and losing to a team above you in the standings in 10 innings. 

The NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom...

While both methods use similar data, the biggest differences are

1) NET uses game location as a factor in the ranking system, while KenPom does not factor where the game was played in rankings.

2) Ken Pom uses adjusted efficiency based on how many possessions a team has per game while NET uses points per 100 possessions regardless of possession per game.

3) Scoring margin does not matter to the NET, but it does to KenPom.

4) KenPom does not factor wins and losses, it is simply a efficiency number.

5) KenPom uses strict formulas (predictive) to create ranking while NET uses a learning algorithm comparing what is expected to what happens.

49 minutes ago, go_iu_bb said:

image.thumb.png.af06efd72f109cce44feb4ea67df4f90.png

The problem is that IU's efficiency numbers against weak opponents have been bad. Unless things change, they'll only get worse.

Army was a weak team, one of the weakest in the nation. FGCU was winless last I saw, so they're not looking like a good opponent.

Things can improve, but as they are right now, it's not good. That's why the stats @5fouls post don't look positive. They aren't.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2020-05-12/net-explained-ncaa-adopts-new-college-basketball-ranking-replace-rpi

That's an older chart than I brought in...

44 minutes ago, BGleas said:

You're point was that we're 3-1 and the record is all that matters come Selection Sunday. 

That point is completely wrong. I did not only zero in on margin of victory, that was you. 

I said there are a myriad of things they look at and it goes much deeper than overall record. 

My overall point is, that the MAIN thing they're going to look at, and it says in the metric chart, is whether we won or not...I understand there is more to it, but the difference between winning and losing to those opponents is huge...

 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, IUFLA said:

The NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom...

While both methods use similar data, the biggest differences are

1) NET uses game location as a factor in the ranking system, while KenPom does not factor where the game was played in rankings.

2) Ken Pom uses adjusted efficiency based on how many possessions a team has per game while NET uses points per 100 possessions regardless of possession per game.

3) Scoring margin does not matter to the NET, but it does to KenPom.

4) KenPom does not factor wins and losses, it is simply a efficiency number.

5) KenPom uses strict formulas (predictive) to create ranking while NET uses a learning algorithm comparing what is expected to what happens.

That's an older chart than I brought in...

My overall point is, that the MAIN thing they're going to look at, and it says in the metric chart, is whether we won or not...I understand there is more to it, but the difference between winning and losing to those opponents is huge...

 

Yes, IF they get things figured out then winning those first few games instead of losing helps. However, that is a big IF. They've struggled against bad teams they should blow out and got blown out against the only good team they've played. If they don't get things figured out, these early wins will be moot since they won't win enough to even sniff the tournament.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, go_iu_bb said:

Yes, IF they get things figured out then winning those first few games instead of losing helps. However, that is a big IF. They've struggled against bad teams they should blow out and got blown out against the only good team they've played. If they don't get things figured out, these early wins will be moot since they won't win enough to even sniff the tournament.

Lots of "IFs" in there...

I think it boils down to those of us who believe in these kids, and Woody in particular...

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

But you do realize that NET isn't the only thing they look at, right?

They look at the games, they look at other metrics...

I understand that...But I also understand that the exact formula is a secret guarded like The Colonel's 11 herbs and spices, else guys like Lunardi would nail the field exactly every year...

Edited by IUFLA
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

The NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom...

While both methods use similar data, the biggest differences are

1) NET uses game location as a factor in the ranking system, while KenPom does not factor where the game was played in rankings.

2) Ken Pom uses adjusted efficiency based on how many possessions a team has per game while NET uses points per 100 possessions regardless of possession per game.

3) Scoring margin does not matter to the NET, but it does to KenPom.

4) KenPom does not factor wins and losses, it is simply a efficiency number.

5) KenPom uses strict formulas (predictive) to create ranking while NET uses a learning algorithm comparing what is expected to what happens.

That's an older chart than I brought in...

My overall point is, that the MAIN thing they're going to look at, and it says in the metric chart, is whether we won or not...I understand there is more to it, but the difference between winning and losing to those opponents is huge...

 

When you say the NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom, what are you even talking about?

NET is a different formula than Kenpom, but the NCAA looks at both (as well as other metrics).

Have all your replies been on the premise that NET is the only selection criteria? Because..... no. They'd just rank teams 1-68 based on NET if that was the case. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 minute ago, KoB2011 said:

When you say the NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom, what are you even talking about?

NET is a different formula than Kenpom, but the NCAA looks at both (as well as other metrics).

Have all your replies been on the premise that NET is the only selection criteria? Because..... no. They'd just rank teams 1-68 based on NET if that was the case. 

All I did was delineate the differences between the NET and Kenpom...See  above

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I watched the Texas Louisville game, and have a couple of thoughts...

Payne started the Dennis Evans kid (7'1 frosh) and he wasn't much on defense...Only played 13 minutes and didn't look very good when he did...Brandon Huntley-Hatfield on the other hand, looked like a handful inside...Big strong kid...Louisville eventually went small and had better success. We have to guard the perimeter better...The Cards only took 16 3 pointers, making 7 of them...Skyy Clark was more effective than I've ever seen him, going 4-6 fro behind the arc...

Louisville did play some 2-3 zone on Texas, so we might see more of that...

Texas won despite going 2-17 from 3 and getting outboarded...Texas big man 6'11 Kadin Shedrick (Virginia transfer) had a huge game...Career high 27 points despite averaging 10 ppg coming in...

 

  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

15 minutes ago, IUFLA said:

All I did was delineate the differences between the NET and Kenpom...See  above

I mean you said "the NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom" and I took that to mean that you were saying the NET is the metric the NCAA looks at and Kenpom isn't.

Glad you understand that our drop in Kenpom is alarming and needs to be corrected. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I’m not too sure how good this Louisville team actually is. They didn’t look very good in the first few games, but they looked solid against Texas. At a bare min minimum, they’ve been good at offensive rebounding. That’s been one of our biggest weaknesses, so we’ll at least be tested there. If we’re going to play a big lineup, we absolutely need to be a better rebounding team.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

19 minutes ago, KoB2011 said:

I mean you said "the NCAA uses a different formula than Kenpom" and I took that to mean that you were saying the NET is the metric the NCAA looks at and Kenpom isn't.

Glad you understand that our drop in Kenpom is alarming and needs to be corrected. 

I think that winning makes that inevitable, right?

Link to comment
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.

×
×
  • Create New...