Kenpom has Centenary's RPI at 345, dead last.
Centenary is 0-18 and expected to go winless all season.
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Centenary
If Centenary can catch fire and win a game or two this year, and say get their RPI to 300ish (up 40ish places), does that help our SOS and help our RPI to any meaningful degree? Or does a big run by, say, Bucknell to going from 107 to the 60 (also about 40ish places) help more? In other words are all 40 place improvements in RPI the same? If so, is our best bet that the 345th team improves (it cannot get worse!)
That said it will be tough for Centenary to win as KenPom gives them no more than a 19% chance to win any game here on out (home against Western IL).
---
side note ... before Duke lost we played the best and worst RPI this season.
Nothing centenary does will have any meaningful impact on our season. On a side note, take a look at the ratings, and try and figure out how Belmont has the 27th highest rpi.
Both of those moves you mention are nearly impossible at this point in the season, with the opponents they have left and the games already played. I suggest doing some poking around RPI Forecast (http://www.rpiforecast.com/index2.html) as they have a lot of the data on where teams can end up and how much various opponents (or opponents' opponents) affect a team's RPI.
It would be beneficial for Bucknell to get to the top 100 just because that will help boost our record against the top 100 RPI, which is shown a lot in bubble talks. Other than that I don't think either have a huge impact on our season.
Quote from: cheebs09 on January 21, 2011, 10:15:05 AM
It would be beneficial for Bucknell to get to the top 100 just because that will help boost our record against the top 100 RPI, which is shown a lot in bubble talks. Other than that I don't think either have a huge impact on our season.
Bucknell's actually already top 100 RPI, and will probably finish there. I think the 107 referenced in the first post is their ranking on kenpom - which has some impact on our ranking there but not nearly to the degree that it does in RPI.
Would be nice if a Seton Hall or Providence finished top 100 but not sure that'll happen.
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 10:33:00 AM
...Would be nice if a Seton Hall or Providence finished top 100 but not sure that'll happen.
Hate to possibly throw in a jinx, but they are more likely to finish in the top 100 if the beat teams such as Marquette.
Centennary's impact is small, only 2.63% of our total RPI. By year's end, they will have a 1.61 weighted impact. Nevertheless, their impact is negative to us at this point
http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/Marquette.html#futwgt
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 10:33:00 AM
Bucknell's actually already top 100 RPI, and will probably finish there. I think the 107 referenced in the first post is their ranking on kenpom - which has some impact on our ranking there but not nearly to the degree that it does in RPI.
Would be nice if a Seton Hall or Providence finished top 100 but not sure that'll happen.
Thanks for the clarification.
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 10:33:00 AM
Bucknell's actually already top 100 RPI, and will probably finish there. I think the 107 referenced in the first post is their ranking on kenpom - which has some impact on our ranking there but not nearly to the degree that it does in RPI.
Would be nice if a Seton Hall or Providence finished top 100 but not sure that'll happen.
Keep in mind that a rank of 100 isn't the upper boundary of a good win--its the lower boundary of a bad loss.
An NCAA at-large team should win most (if not all) of its games against teams in the 50-100 range--especially playing at home. We won't get extra credit for beating a team that is expected to finish 90th in the RPI.
I hate to
Quote from: Marquette84 link=topic=23805.msg263966#msg263966 date=1295635757
I hate to
/quote]
No you don't.
Quote from: Marquette84 on January 21, 2011, 12:49:17 PM
Keep in mind that a rank of 100 isn't the upper boundary of a good win--its the lower boundary of a bad loss.
An NCAA at-large team should win most (if not all) of its games against teams in the 50-100 range--especially playing at home. We won't get extra credit for beating a team that is expected to finish 90th in the RPI.
I hate to
I believe record against RPI 1-25, 1-50, and 1-100 are shown on the committee sheets. Not saying it'd really improve our chances to get in like a win over one of the top teams, but our 1-100 record is artificially low right now because we've played so few 50-100 teams so far.
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 01:04:19 PMI believe record against RPI 1-25, 1-50, and 1-100 are shown on the committee sheets. Not saying it'd really improve our chances to get in like a win over one of the top teams, but our 1-100 record is artificially low right now because we've played so few 50-100 teams so far.
That won't change. There aren't any teams left on our schedule that are in the 50-100 range. Everyone is either projected to finish top 50 RPI, which is 11 of the 16 Big East Teams, or 101-200 RPI, which is the other 5 Big East teams.
I think that what we are seeing right now is that we aren't picking the right cupcakes. It's great to pound a Centenary or Longwood, but we get a similar result against a Green Bay and it doesn't kill our RPI. We should really be focusing on trying to bring in teams that will finish 150-200 in RPI rather than 250 and lower. I know it is a bit harder to get them, probably would cost a little more, but with our basketball budget (2nd highest in D1) we should be able to do that.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 21, 2011, 02:00:10 PM
That won't change. There aren't any teams left on our schedule that are in the 50-100 range. Everyone is either projected to finish top 50 RPI, which is 11 of the 16 Big East Teams, or 101-200 RPI, which is the other 5 Big East teams.
...which is why my first comment was about some of those borderline 100+ teams bumping into the top 100. Probably won't happen, but isn't impossible either.
I understand the need to buy games and to have easy opponents for the new players to get some playing time against. However, I think we should make an effort to buy games from teams that generally fall in the 250 to 299 range than buying games against a team that has a history of being in 300 to 345 range.
The RPI (KenPom calculations) of selected games this year.
Fri Nov 12, Prairie View A&M = 329
Wed Nov 17, Wisconsin Green Bay = 154
Sat Nov 20, South Dakota = 268
Sat Nov 27, Wisconsin Milwaukee = 169
Sat Dec 4, Longwood = 328
Tue Dec 7, Texas A&M Corpus Chris = 317
Sat Dec 18, Centenary = 345
Tue Dec 21, Mississippi Valley St. = 314
Tue Jan 18, DePaul = 176
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 01:04:19 PM
I believe record against RPI 1-25, 1-50, and 1-100 are shown on the committee sheets. Not saying it'd really improve our chances to get in like a win over one of the top teams, but our 1-100 record is artificially low right now because we've played so few 50-100 teams so far.
You're close. The record against 1-25,
26-50 and
51 to 100 are shown.
Quote from: dsfire on January 21, 2011, 02:20:49 PM
...which is why my first comment was about some of those borderline 100+ teams bumping into the top 100. Probably won't happen, but isn't impossible either.
We should just go ahead and beat Providence and Seton Hall, so that we don't have to worry about whether they're ranked in the top 100. Barring a major miracle, they're not going to make it to the top 50, so they'll never be good wins--just expected wins.
Quote from: AnotherMU84 on January 21, 2011, 07:12:00 PMThe RPI (KenPom calculations) of selected games this year.
Fri Nov 12, Prairie View A&M = 329
Wed Nov 17, Wisconsin Green Bay = 154
Sat Nov 20, South Dakota = 268
Sat Nov 27, Wisconsin Milwaukee = 169
Sat Dec 4, Longwood = 328
Tue Dec 7, Texas A&M Corpus Chris = 317
Sat Dec 18, Centenary = 345
Tue Dec 21, Mississippi Valley St. = 314
Tue Jan 18, DePaul = 176
Probably more fair to include 108 Bucknell instead of DePaul, since they were non-conference and DePaul is a team we'll play year-in and year-out regardless. Can't really blame anyone at Marquette for scheduling that. Though I suppose both UWGB and Bucknell were part of the CBE package, but you knew you'd get two mid-majors.
My issue is the teams that we deliberately chose, being the 7 other non-conference games. Only UW-M is in the top 200. And only one more in the top 300. You can't tell me that it's that much harder to schedule the likes of Middle Tennessee, Cal Poly, Wagner, Western Carolina, or other 200-250 opponents. What about IUPU-Fort Wayne, Denver, or Evansville, all 150-200 teams. Would we have that much more trouble with any of those than we did with the likes of Centenary, Longwood, or TAMU-CC? Longwood has been a D1 for only 3 years and still hasn't gotten into a conference. Centenary is about to drop to D3. TAMU-CC has had one good season, when they messed up a chance to upset Wisconsin in 2007. What have they done before (or since) in their amazing 10 years of D1 basketball?
Okay, maybe there was cause to think South Dakota would be a decent opponent, as they have dropped a few close headscratchers and should have a shot at winning their conference, but most of these teams simply are nothing more than a point closer to 20 wins. I really think we'd be better off finding easy pickings in the 150-200 range. At least if those teams fail to meet expectations they should still be in the top 250.
Quote from: Marquette84 on January 21, 2011, 08:41:58 PM
You're close. The record against 1-25, 26-50 and 51 to 100 are shown.
We should just go ahead and beat Providence and Seton Hall, so that we don't have to worry about whether they're ranked in the top 100. Barring a major miracle, they're not going to make it to the top 50, so they'll never be good wins--just expected wins.
Wait, what? Where did you get the idea I was talking about
losing to these teams? That'd be bad news for a variety of reasons.
Do you have a source for the 1-25, 26-50, 51-100 intervals?