Took a broader look at preseason vs final rankings in KenPom for the Big East post reformation, and it turns out the guy knows what he's doing.
In the immortal word of Brian Fontana, 60% of the time it works every time.
https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/ (https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/)
Forreal though, this kind of accuracy is seriously impressive.
(https://painttouches.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/image-9.png)
Facts no matta
How accurate was he with last year's team?
Quote from: pux90mex on October 19, 2022, 10:32:15 AM
Took a broader look at preseason vs final rankings in KenPom for the Big East post reformation, and it turns out the guy knows what he's doing.
In the immortal word of Brian Fontana, 60% of the time it works every time.
https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/ (https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/)
Forreal though, this kind of accuracy is seriously impressive.
(https://painttouches.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/image-9.png)
Analytics and predictive models don't decide the results and will be wrong, a lot in some cases!
However, anyone ignoring them or dismissing them are fools
Quote from: NCMUFan on October 19, 2022, 11:32:11 AM
How accurate was he with last year's team?
We overperformed by 31 spots. I believe some of this was in the article about Wojo before he got fired. Not a lot of overperformance in those years with some significant underperformance.
Yes. Wojo consistently failed to make a team better than the sums of its parts.
I like this Kevin McNamara guy....
Quote from: PointWarrior on October 19, 2022, 12:24:52 PM
I like this Kevin McNamara guy....
Like most online Providence fans, he really revels in making willful stupidity his brand.
Quote from: pux90mex on October 19, 2022, 10:32:15 AM
Took a broader look at preseason vs final rankings in KenPom for the Big East post reformation, and it turns out the guy knows what he's doing.
In the immortal word of Brian Fontana, 60% of the time it works every time.
https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/ (https://painttouches.com/2022/10/19/how-accurate-are-kenpoms-preseason-rankings/)
Forreal though, this kind of accuracy is seriously impressive.
(https://painttouches.files.wordpress.com/2022/10/image-9.png)
Now do AP and USA Today polls
Quote from: Pakuni on October 19, 2022, 02:07:09 PM
Now do AP and USA Today polls
He can't, those only go to 25, not 359
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 19, 2022, 04:17:57 PM
He can't, those only go to 25, not 359
1. He didn't do 359. He did 11, i.e. the Big East.
2. Throw in the others receiving voters and you can go to 40ish.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 19, 2022, 07:13:27 PM
1. He didn't do 359. He did 11, i.e. the Big East.
2. Throw in the others receiving voters and you can go to 40ish.
1. He did the Big East but looked at how those 11 teams fared in KenPom which ranks 359 teams. It's a lot harder to rank 359 teams than the top 25.
2. No you can't. The the top team in others receiving votes is not #26.
Hopefully our analytics this year will be better than Kenpom's projections based off last year.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 19, 2022, 09:35:58 PM
1. He did the Big East but looked at how those 11 teams fared in KenPom which ranks 359 teams. It's a lot harder to rank 359 teams than the top 25.
2. No you can't. The the top team in others receiving votes is not #26.
1. No it isn't. He's dumping data into an algorithm. The only skill here is in creating the best possible formula. Once that's done, ranking 350 teams is no different or harder than ranking five.
2. Says who?
Quote from: Pakuni on October 19, 2022, 10:57:43 PM
1. No it isn't. He's dumping data into an algorithm. The only skill here is in creating the best possible formula. Once that's done, ranking 350 teams is no different or harder than ranking five.
2. Says who?
1. ..... that's the whole point. He created an algorithm that can rank 359 teams better than most eye tests can
2. Logic. If 100/100 voters think that Marquette is the 26th best team in the country, they will get 0 votes. If one voter thinks that DePaul is the 25th best team in the county but every other voter thinks theyre ranked somewhere 90 or below, they will get 1 vote. Which team is more well regarded? The one with 100 voters thinking they are 26th best (but 0 votes) or the one with with 1 voter thinking they are 25th best and 99 voters thinking they are 90th best or worse (but 1 vote).
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 19, 2022, 11:21:06 PM
1. ..... that's the whole point. He created an algorithm that can rank 359 teams better than most eye tests can
2. Logic. If 100/100 voters think that Marquette is the 26th best team in the country, they will get 0 votes. If one voter thinks that DePaul is the 25th best team in the county but every other voter thinks theyre ranked somewhere 90 or below, they will get 1 vote. Which team is more well regarded? The one with 100 voters thinking they are 26th best (but 0 votes) or the one with with 1 voter thinking they are 25th best and 99 voters thinking they are 90th best or worse (but 1 vote).
1. Did he, though? You keep saying it, but you're not showing it. You're not comparing his predictions against an eye test or anything else. You're comparing his predictions against his predictions. Basically, the argument here isn't that KenPom's preseason rankings can accurately predict how good a team will be. It's that KenPom's preseason algorithm can accurately predict (sometimes) what KenPom's postseason algorithm will say.
Small sample size, but I made this post in August that shows, at least among the top 25 (because that's all we've got to compare against) KenPom's preseason rankings are no more or less accurate than the AP preseason poll in predicting final rankings.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=62634.msg1464165#msg1464165
The claim that he can rank 300+ teams better than any eye test - which actually hasn't been shown here - is specious because there is no AP poll or any other eye test ranking 300+ teams.
2. You've correctly identified how the AP poll works, but how is that different for team 23 or 24?
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 07:25:59 AM
1. Did he, though? You keep saying it, but you're not showing it. You're not comparing his predictions against an eye test or anything else. You're comparing his predictions against his predictions. Basically, the argument here isn't that KenPom's preseason rankings can accurately predict how good a team will be. It's that KenPom's preseason algorithm can accurately predict (sometimes) what KenPom's postseason algorithm will say.
Small sample size, but I made this post in August that shows, at least among the top 25 (because that's all we've got to compare against) KenPom's preseason rankings are no more or less accurate than the AP preseason poll in predicting final rankings.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=62634.msg1464165#msg1464165
The claim that he can rank 300+ teams better than any eye test - which actually hasn't been shown here - is specious because there is no AP poll or any other eye test ranking 300+ teams.
2. You've correctly identified how the AP poll works, but how is that different for team 23 or 24?
KenPom is more accurate than the AP Top 25 in the numbers aren't a slave to the moment.
Xavier of 2018 is a good example. Record was great and that's the goal, not being ranked high in the AP or KenPom but not a classic 1-seed and never higher than 11 all year in KenPom. Losing in the 2nd round was an upset, but not particularly surprising.
As for start of the season, the AP and KenPom will be wrong about a few teams. Over the course of the season, I'd trust KenPom much more than the AP. That is changing as more voters are looking at the analytics to see if it matches the eye.
We argue about this because I think some people interpret the analytics guys on this board trying to say the numbers matter more than wins. If Marquette is 14 in KenPom like X in 2018 and gets a 1-seed, I don't care. Give me the 1-seed and I hope the analytics driven posters agree.
Also, the majority of fans know the polls and don't care about any analytical numbers. We're conditioned to look at the number in front of the team when it's in the paper, on CBS sports dot com or see it on the TV screen. It's comforting when it's our team and infuriating when it's the other. We want to protect that number and hurt the other teams number. There's a world for both
Probably need something besides averages. If KenPom misses by 20 each year, but half the time it's -20, the other half +20 .. it looks like he's right on target.
That being said .. wow. No need to play the games and get sweaty.
Quote from: Uncle Rico on October 20, 2022, 07:38:17 AM
KenPom is more accurate than the AP Top 25 in the numbers aren't a slave to the moment.
Xavier of 2018 is a good example. Record was great and that's the goal, not being ranked high in the AP or KenPom but not a classic 1-seed and never higher than 11 all year in KenPom. Losing in the 2nd round was an upset, but not particularly surprising.
As for start of the season, the AP and KenPom will be wrong about a few teams. Over the course of the season, I'd trust KenPom much more than the AP. That is changing as more voters are looking at the analytics to see if it matches the eye.
We argue about this because I think some people interpret the analytics guys on this board trying to say the numbers matter more than wins. If Marquette is 14 in KenPom like X in 2018 and gets a 1-seed, I don't care. Give me the 1-seed and I hope the analytics driven posters agree.
I agree!
Once the season is underway and there is a reasonable amount data from a team to consider, KenPom is great.
I'm only questioning the value/accuracy of his preseason predictions. Now more than ever when most teams and their personnel go through so many changes year after year.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 07:25:59 AM
1. Did he, though? You keep saying it, but you're not showing it. You're not comparing his predictions against an eye test or anything else. You're comparing his predictions against his predictions. Basically, the argument here isn't that KenPom's preseason rankings can accurately predict how good a team will be. It's that KenPom's preseason algorithm can accurately predict (sometimes) what KenPom's postseason algorithm will say.
Small sample size, but I made this post in August that shows, at least among the top 25 (because that's all we've got to compare against) KenPom's preseason rankings are no more or less accurate than the AP preseason poll in predicting final rankings.
https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=62634.msg1464165#msg1464165
The claim that he can rank 300+ teams better than any eye test - which actually hasn't been shown here - is specious because there is no AP poll or any other eye test ranking 300+ teams.
You acknowledge here that KenPom's preseason numbers can somewhat accurately predict what KenPom's postseason numbers will be.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 07:45:23 AM
I agree!
Once the season is underway and there is a reasonable amount data from a team to consider, KenPom is great.
I'm only questioning the value/accuracy of his preseason predictions. Now more than ever when most teams and their personnel go through so many changes year after year.
Then you acknowledge here that KenPom's in season and postseason data is great. So if the preseason rankings can somewhat predict the "great" in season and postseason data. Doesn't the speak to the value/accuracy of his preseason rankings? Again, no one is saying it is gospel. Just one tool that has a history of being decently accurate.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 07:25:59 AM
2. You've correctly identified how the AP poll works, but how is that different for team 23 or 24?
It's not different. That's why once you get past the teams that are in the top 25 on every bracket, it's not an accurate measure. And this is part of the point. It's possible to look at a measure and see flaws with the structure without even looking at the results. Flawed structures can still post accurate results, but it doesn't mean that the structure isn't flawed. And to be clear, there are flaws with metrics like KenPom as well, just not as many.
Quote from: mu_hilltopper on October 20, 2022, 07:39:59 AM
Probably need something besides averages. If KenPom misses by 20 each year, but half the time it's -20, the other half +20 .. it looks like he's right on target.
I think he used absolute numbers which eliminates this point
Quote from: Frenns Liquor Depot on October 20, 2022, 08:12:16 AM
I think he used absolute numbers which eliminates this point
Using absolute helps, but still doesn't tell us much since many of the teams are on the higher end of the rankings. The margin for getting it wrong/right narrows. Being off by 7 on a team that averages a rank of 10 is not as impressive as being within 7 of a team that averages a rank of 70. We need to know the p-value
So how does the KemPom preseason rankings compare to the Big East Coaches preseason Poll/ranking?
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 20, 2022, 08:10:55 AM
You acknowledge here that KenPom's preseason numbers can somewhat accurately predict what KenPom's postseason numbers will be.
Then you acknowledge here that KenPom's in season and postseason data is great. So if the preseason rankings can somewhat predict the "great" in season and postseason data. Doesn't the speak to the value/accuracy of his preseason rankings? Again, no one is saying it is gospel. Just one tool that has a history of being decently accurate.
It's not different. That's why once you get past the teams that are in the top 25 on every bracket, it's not an accurate measure. And this is part of the point. It's possible to look at a measure and see flaws with the structure without even looking at the results. Flawed structures can still post accurate results, but it doesn't mean that the structure isn't flawed. And to be clear, there are flaws with metrics like KenPom as well, just not as many.
Just to be clear, Pomeroy doesn't predict or model rank, he predicts Adjust O and D, then ranks on the difference between the two (Adj EM). The differences in Adj EM at the top and bottom are much wider than in the majority middle as a rank forces distribution.
Said another way, the differences in rank are not the same along the curve. You have stated this in the past but just to reiterate it.
As to the Top 25 discussion, most voters rely on Pomeroy (confirmation bias) or they are homers and vote the home state public school. Pomeroy or other statistical models at least take the subjectivity out and are consistent in their objectivity. All are great for fan engagement and discussion.
How long until the games start so we can argue about actual things and not abstracts?
Quote from: tower912 on October 20, 2022, 08:38:50 AM
How long until the games start so we can argue about actual things and not abstracts?
Hahaha, thinking this argument will stop. I think Bob Dukiet did a better job than Wojo and an argument can be made Mike Deane was underrated.
What?!?!? You are saying roqqet level silly things to provoke a reaction?!?!?!?
Oh god. Now the number nerds are claiming the only accurate rankings are the teams that are on every single ballot? So week to week the only teams that are really "ranked" will change because the number of teams that are on every single ballot might change, and those are the only ones that can have an accurate ranking? So if a team is ranked 25th on every single ballot but another team is ranked in the top 10 of every ballot but some dumb SID or DOBO forgot that they exist and we can't say they're ranked?
Call it whatever you want to. Whether that's "this team is ranked third" or "this team has the third most votes this week," the team with the 26th most votes is "ranked" 26th.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 09:03:13 AM
Oh god. Now the number nerds are claiming the only accurate rankings are the teams that are on every single ballot? So week to week the only teams that are really "ranked" will change because the number of teams that are on every single ballot might change, and those are the only ones that can have an accurate ranking? So if a team is ranked 25th on every single ballot but another team is ranked in the top 10 of every ballot but some dumb SID or DOBO forgot that they exist and we can't say they're ranked?
Congratulations. I don't think anyone will manage to misrepresent more what TAMU said more than you just did.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 09:03:13 AMCall it whatever you want to. Whether that's "this team is ranked third" or "this team has the third most votes this week," the team with the 26th most votes is "ranked" 26th.
No, it's not and never has been, which is why the poll goes to 25 and there's no "26" only others receiving votes.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 20, 2022, 10:29:54 AM
No, it's not and never has been, which is why the poll goes to 25 and there's no "26" only others receiving votes.
Are the point totals for the "others receiving votes" calculated differently than the top 25?
Let's just call this out for what it is . . . an attempt to "own" the Providence writer using a deeply flawed yet valid-sounding statistical analysis.
Flaws:
1. A sample size of 11 is woefully insufficient to draw any conclusions about the accuracy of KenPom in a universe of ~360 D1 teams.
2. Similarly, a sample consisting only of Big East teams is not random enough to draw any conclusions.
3. There was no basis provided for comparison provided (i.e.. similar research into other preseason ranking performances over the same time period).
4. Separating the 19 top-twenty predictions (13/19 or nearly 70% predicted within 15 places) from the entire sample (48/99 or 48% predicted within 15 places) doesn't appear to have any purpose other than to allow the reported performance to be improved from 48% accurate within 15 spots to 70% accurate within 15 spots.
While this article makes for good fodder for bar room or message board debates, nobody could rightfully conclude that KenPom's predictions are any more or less accurate than anyone else's from what was presented.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 20, 2022, 08:10:55 AM
Again, no one is saying it is gospel. Just one tool that has a history of being decently accurate.
Define "decently accurate."
Because KenPom is no more decently accurate at predicting the top 25 than a bunch of sportswriters. And yeah, that's a small sample size, but so is Paint Touches' sample size of just one 11-team conference.
I just don't think getting within 30 spots 2/3 of the time is all that amazing. I mean, how often does a AP preseason top 25 team not finish as one of the best 30-55 teams in the country? I bet it's a lot less than one in three.
Again, no one is saying KenPom is useless.
Ken Pom crushed Vegas...still making money off of his stuff...his 1H totals for mid-major conferences are golden.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 09:03:13 AM
Oh god. Now the number nerds are claiming the only accurate rankings are the teams that are on every single ballot? So week to week the only teams that are really "ranked" will change because the number of teams that are on every single ballot might change, and those are the only ones that can have an accurate ranking? So if a team is ranked 25th on every single ballot but another team is ranked in the top 10 of every ballot but some dumb SID or DOBO forgot that they exist and we can't say they're ranked?
Call it whatever you want to. Whether that's "this team is ranked third" or "this team has the third most votes this week," the team with the 26th most votes is "ranked" 26th.
You really gotta just stop chiming in on things.
Quote from: avid1010 on October 20, 2022, 11:21:55 AM
Ken Pom crushed Vegas...still making money off of his stuff...his 1H totals for mid-major conferences are golden.
Where are 1H totals on his site?
Quote from: PGsHeroes32 on October 20, 2022, 11:38:45 AM
You really gotta just stop chiming in on things.
Go cry some more about managers not leaving their starters in for 7+ innings anymore or batters swinging at first pitch strikes or act like a team falling behind 2-0 in the third inning of game one means the series is over and the manager should be beheaded on the pitching mound.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 11:06:32 AM
Again, no one is saying KenPom is useless.
I'm pretty sure you have, at least the preseason numbers. But if I misunderstood, mea culpa.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 11:06:32 AM
Define "decently accurate."
Because KenPom is no more decently accurate at predicting the top 25 than a bunch of sportswriters. And yeah, that's a small sample size, but so is Paint Touches' sample size of just one 11-team conference.
I just don't think getting within 30 spots 2/3 of the time is all that amazing. I mean, how often does a AP preseason top 25 team not finish as one of the best 30-55 teams in the country? I bet it's a lot less than one in three.
The problem with the comparison you are trying to make here is sample size. The AP poll is not based on algorithm, it's people's opinions. When they are making their rankings, they aren't looking at all 363 teams (missed that some teams were added this season). In a given season, there's maybe what, 40-60 teams that you could reasonably argue would in the opening top 25? So picking the top 25 out of 40-60 teams is not that hard and it's unlikely that you're going to miss by more than 20 or 30 spots.
KenPom (and others like it) are based on algorithms. There is no opinion. There is also no bonus for being a high major team or a perceived better program. It's all based on the numbers the players produced a season ago. The #1 team (Kentucky this year) was evaluated in the exact same manor as the #363 team (IUPUI). IUPUI has just as much of a chance as Kentucky to be highly rated, but they don't have the numbers to back it up. So in that context, missing by 30 spots out for 363 (~8.3%) isn't amazing, but it's also not bad. In the case of the Big East, KP has done a little better than missing by 30 spots in most cases.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 11:46:29 AM
Go cry some more about managers not leaving their starters in for 7+ innings anymore or batters swinging at first pitch strikes or act like a team falling behind 2-0 in the third inning of game one means the series is over and the manager should be beheaded on the pitching mound.
Well this is when you know youve lost.
Let everyone know when your ability to read and comprehend is up to par.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 20, 2022, 11:49:08 AM
The problem with the comparison you are trying to make here is sample size.
You say this in defense of an article that examined only one conference, and a small one at that.
Quote
KenPom (and others like it) are based on algorithms. There is no opinion. There is also no bonus for being a high major team or a perceived better program. It's all based on the numbers the players produced a season ago. The #1 team (Kentucky this year) was evaluated in the exact same manor as the #363 team (IUPUI). IUPUI has just as much of a chance as Kentucky to be highly rated, but they don't have the numbers to back it up.
These two thoughts are contradictory.
In reality, IUPUI does not have as much a chance as Kentucky to be highly rated, because their ratings (for now) is based on what happened last year. Teams are largely bound by the previous season's results.
Which is fun to ponder, when you consider how different Kentucky's roster looks from one year to the next.
Quote
So in that context, missing by 30 spots out for 363 (~8.3%) isn't amazing, but it's also not bad.
It's also not something we know. Saying KenPom missing by 30 spots out of 363 is just extrapolating from the small and not representative sample size of a single 11-team conference. Until someone puts in the work to look at all those teams - or at least a larger, more representative group of teams - we have no idea how accurate he is.
And I'll take a pass on doing that work for now.
Quote from: LAZER on October 20, 2022, 11:45:30 AM
Where are 1H totals on his site?
Under fan match i believe. You won't find any discrepancies with vegas on the high major games...but if you hunt the mid/low majors there is value...especially when playing the under. It's drying up more and more each year.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 10:36:34 AM
Are the point totals for the "others receiving votes" calculated differently than the top 25?
In regards to calling a team #26? Yes, absolutely.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 20, 2022, 12:33:51 PM
In regards to calling a team #26? Yes, absolutely.
So, no?
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 12:42:37 PM
So, no?
I think you are both right. I'd guess 98/100 times the top 'other receiving votes' would be #26 if they voted for 26 teams. But the flaw in actually proclaiming them #26 n a vote for the top 25 becomes easy to see if you look at an example of having a top 15 poll but you can only vote for the top 10. You may not even get to 15 teams ranked even if all the voters felt one or multiple teams were between 11-15.
I think if you didn't even give a person a team's name but just gave them the conference that team plays for and told them to predict the final KenPom ranking for that team, and did that for every D1 college basketball team, and then averaged out how many spots off you were by conference, most semi-knowledgeable college basketball fans are probably going to be somewhat close to "within 30 spots" on average for conference.
The realistic range for a Big East basketball team really isn't one through 358. It's really like one to 150, with a large majority really being like 30-70, and that's the same with most power conferences.
Just like the realistic range for SWAC isn't 1 to 358. It's really like 200-358.
Welcome to the MOPES analytics thread.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 20, 2022, 02:36:11 PM
As I said, yes. Yes does not mean no.
You wrote "in regards to calling a team #26," whatever that means.
What I'm asking is whether the way they tabulate points for the top 25 is different than the way they tabulate points for the others receiving votes.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 03:20:43 PM
What I'm asking is whether the way they tabulate points for the top 25 is different than the way they tabulate points for the others receiving votes.
I don't believe so - which is why I think it's just as valid to call a team "#26" as it is "#3" (or whatever). Whether that ranking is accurate or not (in either case) is the original point of this conversation though. Or at least I think it is.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 03:20:43 PM
You wrote "in regards to calling a team #26," whatever that means.
What I'm asking is whether the way they tabulate points for the top 25 is different than the way they tabulate points for the others receiving votes.
No, but that's not the point. TAMU's example above, in a response to you, is the point.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 03:20:43 PM
You wrote "in regards to calling a team #26," whatever that means.
What I'm asking is whether the way they tabulate points for the top 25 is different than the way they tabulate points for the others receiving votes.
What it means is that you cannot call a team #26 based on a 25-team poll. It's an invalid response. TAMU noted this earlier, but here's the reason why. If one voter put DePaul #25 and no voters had Marquette on a ballot, your argument would be that DePaul is ahead of Marquette. But if the poll went to 26, and all of the voters would have put Marquette #26 and none of the voters would have put DePaul on their ballot, the points for Marquette would put them ahead of DePaul.
There is no #26. There is no #27. There is no numbered team beyond #30. There are other teams receiving votes, but only the top-25 are ranked because the system does not recognize teams beyond #25, so any total not reaching the top-25 isn't part of the poll result because the mathematical structure doesn't allow it.
Quote from: Sultan Sultanberger on October 20, 2022, 04:00:48 PM
No, but that's not the point. TAMU's example above, in a response to you, is the point.
Right, right. The very highly likely scenario in which the 26th best team in the country receives zero votes but 100th best DePaul gets one.
But what if, say, Xavier receives four 23rd place votes, three 24th votes and one 25th vote, giving them three fewer points than 25th ranked Iowa.
Is Xavier the same as a team that received no votes?
There are definitely some dweebs on Scoop.
We don't need to be data scientists when it comes to college basketball AP and Coaches polls.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 05:00:46 PM
There are definitely some dweebs on Scoop.
We don't need to be data scientists when it comes to college basketball AP and Coaches polls.
Without Bias is an interesting choice
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 04:58:32 PM
Right, right. The very highly likely scenario in which the 26th best team in the country receives zero votes but 100th best DePaul gets one.
But what if, say, Xavier receives four 23rd place votes, three 24th votes and one 25th vote, giving them three fewer points than 25th ranked Iowa.
Is Xavier the same as a team that received no votes?
It was an exaggerated scenario no doubt, but the point of it is accurate.
Quote from: WithoutBias on October 20, 2022, 05:00:46 PM
There are definitely some dweebs on Scoop.
We don't need to be data scientists when it comes to college basketball AP and Coaches polls.
So in this topic, you have called people "number nerds" and "dweebs." Outside of the fact that this would last gotten you laughs in seventh grade, I am not understanding why you even bother participating in the discussion.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 12:25:23 PM
You say this in defense of an article that examined only one conference, and a small one at that.
I didn't say that in defense of any article. I said that to counter your faulty argument that because AP voters can predict the top 25 about as accurately as KenPom that is somehow generalizable to ranking the entire 363 team division.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 12:25:23 PM
These two thoughts are contradictory.
In reality, IUPUI does not have as much a chance as Kentucky to be highly rated, because their ratings (for now) is based on what happened last year. Teams are largely bound by the previous season's results.
Which is fun to ponder, when you consider how different Kentucky's roster looks from one year to the next.
Yes they do. IUPUI just isn't as good as Kentucky nor recruits as well as Kentucky. They had every opportunity last season to put up as good of numbers as Kentucky or have as good of a recruitment cycle as Kentucky. They didn't so the algorithm correctly assigns them to be lower.
Also just to clarify in case you aren't aware, KenPom's preseason rankings are based on player stats. So last season when KenPom ranked MU in the preseason, it accounted for Moresell, Kuath, Kolek, and Omax' stats from their previous stops. It also accounts for the incoming freshmen and the fact that players departed. Yes there are things like coaching changes or how taking on new role could impact player performance that are not captured by the algorithm and these are things that are inherently unpredictable.
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 12:25:23 PM
These two thoughts are contradictory.
It's also not something we know. Saying KenPom missing by 30 spots out of 363 is just extrapolating from the small and not representative sample size of a single 11-team conference. Until someone puts in the work to look at all those teams - or at least a larger, more representative group of teams - we have no idea how accurate he is.
And I'll take a pass on doing that work for now.
You don't know it but that doesn't mean others don't. Pre-fatherhood I used to track this kind of stuff because I'm a nerd and there's varying levels of merit to all of the major algorithms. They've also been embraced by the majority of coaches, talking heads, and Vegas (and even AP voters) most of whom know a little more than us scoopers on this topic. All the major algorithms have their strengths and weaknesses but are all somewhat predicative. You can also read thier methodologies and see that the numbers are sound.
A funny part of all of this is that many AP voters use KenPom when making their preseason picks. There's at least one of them who just copy and pastes the KenPom top 25 every week. So at least a portion of the AP poll's accuracy is due to voters using KenPom.
Honestly, I don't think we're that far apart. You've acknowledged that KenPom's preseason rankings are somewhat predictive of KenPom's postseason rankings and the postseason rankings are great. So that means that the preseason rankings have some value, we just disagree about how much. Personally, I don't think they are worth much beyond having a neutral preseason evaluation
Quote from: Pakuni on October 20, 2022, 04:58:32 PM
Right, right. The very highly likely scenario in which the 26th best team in the country receives zero votes but 100th best DePaul gets one.
But what if, say, Xavier receives four 23rd place votes, three 24th votes and one 25th vote, giving them three fewer points than 25th ranked Iowa.
Is Xavier the same as a team that received no votes?
In the top-25? Yes. There's 1-25, also receiving votes, and everyone else.
And while the team at 26 would probably be reliably 26-28 if the ballot was longer, it's the 26-35 range where people are just getting random votes. The more teams that get votes, the less reliable anyone beyond 25 is.
Is Scoop University offering college credits for reading this thread?
Quote from: Dr. Blackheart on October 20, 2022, 07:26:32 PM
Is Scoop University offering college credits for reading this thread?
You need some CEUs? I'll get you some CEUs.
Oh Lord, let it be 11/7 so we can MOPE about not winning by more than 30 pts. instead of MOPPING about analytics, I have a headache
Quote from: Newsdreams on October 20, 2022, 09:08:40 PM
Oh Lord, let it be 11/7 so we can MOPE about not winning by more than 30 pts. instead of MOPPING about analytics, I have a headache
(https://www.rd.com/wp-content/uploads/2021/06/20210609-HowToMop-AD-0222.jpg?resize=700,467)
Bold assumption, at least one Mope is thinking we could lose to Radford.
Quote from: Newsdreams on October 20, 2022, 09:08:40 PM
Oh Lord, let it be 11/7 so we can MOPE about not winning by more than 30 pts. instead of MOPPING about analytics, I have a headache
Quote from: PointWarrior on October 20, 2022, 09:24:11 PM
Bold assumption, at least one Mope is thinking we could lose to Radford.
Of course we
could lose to Radford. The game's played on the court, not in a computer, once the ball is tipped anything can happen. Isn't that the whole reason behind your disdain for kenpom?
I don't think anyone realistically thinks we will lose to Radford, but could we? Sure.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 20, 2022, 07:00:13 PM
In the top-25? Yes. There's 1-25, also receiving votes, and everyone else.
And while the team at 26 would probably be reliably 26-28 if the ballot was longer, it's the 26-35 range where people are just getting random votes. The more teams that get votes, the less reliable anyone beyond 25 is.
Take an example of a runoff election--a situation where you have 7 candidates on the ballot, voters get one vote, and if nobody gets 50%, the top two vote-getters move to a runoff election.
Under your logic, there can't be a second-place finisher--because voters have only one vote. You can only determine 1st place. After that, using your logic, it is impossible rank 2nd through 7th. Pretty silly.
Since we can easily rank all candidates from 1st to 7th place with just one vote, under the same logic we can extend this to 25 votes in a pool of 360 candidates, and rank teams beyond 25th.
Its perfectly valid to rank teams also receiving votes in the delining order in which they received them, and it's going to be fairly accurate. The team receiving the 26th most votes in the current system is ranked 26th under the way the voting was conducted. The team receiving the 27 most votes in the current system is ranked 27th. And so on.
At this point, all you're doing is making perfect the enemy of the good. The current system is reasonably accurate in ranking teams 26th and beyond, even with the limitation of the 25-place ballot. Stop trying to argue otherwise.
Quite simply, if teams receiving votes beyond 25 were considered to be accurately ranked, they would be. But the reality is they are not. There is 1-25 and others receiving votes. Period. People can piss and moan all they want, but the reality is nothing beyond 25 is recognized and asserting otherwise is just your personal fantasy.
Quote from: The Equalizer on October 21, 2022, 08:23:48 AM
Take an example of a runoff election--a situation where you have 7 candidates on the ballot, voters get one vote, and if nobody gets 50%, the top two vote-getters move to a runoff election.
Under your logic, there can't be a second-place finisher--because voters have only one vote. You can only determine 1st place. After that, using your logic, it is impossible rank 2nd through 7th. Pretty silly.
Since we can easily rank all candidates from 1st to 7th place with just one vote, under the same logic we can extend this to 25 votes in a pool of 360 candidates, and rank teams beyond 25th.
Its perfectly valid to rank teams also receiving votes in the delining order in which they received them, and it's going to be fairly accurate. The team receiving the 26th most votes in the current system is ranked 26th under the way the voting was conducted. The team receiving the 27 most votes in the current system is ranked 27th. And so on.
At this point, all you're doing is making perfect the enemy of the good. The current system is reasonably accurate in ranking teams 26th and beyond, even with the limitation of the 25-place ballot. Stop trying to argue otherwise.
The purpose of an election is different from that of a ranking. An elections goal is to get most top votes. So you can clearly pick a second place winner because the only goal is most top votes and every elector gets a top vote.
A ranking is different. The purpose is not to identify each electors top vote but the gauge the perceived strength of each candidate. As already pointed out, 1 random team getting a 25th place vote from one voter does not necessarily mean that the electors as a whole think that team is better than another team with zero votes who all the electors agree is just outside the top 25.
All that being said, if someone wants to call the team with most "others receiving votes" the 26th best team, who cares? They aren't actually the 26th ranked team but we all know what they mean.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 21, 2022, 08:48:06 AM
Quite simply, if teams receiving votes beyond 25 were considered to be accurately ranked, they would be. But the reality is they are not. There is 1-25 and others receiving votes. Period. People can piss and moan all they want, but the reality is nothing beyond 25 is recognized and asserting otherwise is just your personal fantasy.
But that's a decision the polls have made, and this (admittedly stupid) debate seems to be whether there is any theoretical reason that it's more valid to call the team with the 25th most ranking points #25 than to call the team with the 26th most ranking points #26.
While I just called this is a stupid debate, as a connoisseur of the genre I've been giving it some thought. I think the intuition is that, since we only ask voters to rank their Top 25, the amount of information that we have about a team gets worse and worse as we go down the points ranking. At the extremes, if there are 10 teams in others receiving votes, and the last one gets 1, which means literally one voter had that team at position 25, then it is highly unlikely that that team would be ranked #35 if all voters ranked all the teams. Not that they'd definitely be worse, just that we literally have next to no information. This is essentially TAMU's point as I understand it and it makes sense.
But the other side of the argument says, that's essentially true for all teams near the lower end of the polls -- the #25 team wasn't ranked by every voter, and maybe they are polarizing and a lot of voters would rank them 35. If #25 and #26 have very similar point totals, and if everyone was asked to rank 26 teams maybe their order would switch (if every voter who previously gave points to the "#25" team ranked the "#26" team as 26, and no voters who gave points to the "#26" team but not the "#25" team ranked the "#25" team as 26). Without a complete ranking, it is possible for there to be movement for any team who is not included on every ballot. I get this point too -- 25 is an arbitrary cutoff for being "officially ranked" (though not seeming arbitrary because it corresponds to the number of teams voters are asked to rank).
So here's where I come down on this. To Brew's point, the polls can define their rankings however they want, and they say there are 25 ranked teams and "Others receiving points." Fine, so maybe it would be weird for, say, the ESPN chyron to list the rankings of teams #26... next to their names.
But more importantly, how should we behave on message boards? It's a little bit silly that if someone on a message board refers to the team with the 26th most points as #26, they get called out by pedants immediately saying "There is no #26, there are only 25 ranked teams," and their point not considered further. On the other hand, if you are trying to make a point about a team or coach by referring to their poll ranking being #30, then you probably are reaching.
Anyways, that's what I'm thinking right now but I'm happy to hear if I made any mistakes in thinking about how the rankings work.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 21, 2022, 08:52:04 AM
All that being said, if someone wants to call the team with most "others receiving votes" the 26th best team, who cares?
Yet you (and especially Brew) have been taking issue with it for a couple pages now :)
Quote from: rocky_warrior on October 21, 2022, 09:21:09 AM
Yet you (and especially Brew) have been taking issue with it for a couple pages now :)
I can't speak for brew but I haven't taken issue with calling the top others receiving votes getter as 26. How all of this started was I took issue with Pakuni's assertion that the AP poll goes out to 35-40 teams if you count others receiving votes. That's bad math. Calling the top others receiving votes getter the 26th ranked team, that's just a vocab choice. Online debates about math I enjoy because I'm nerd. Online debates about vocab are dumb (and I acknowledge that I've gotten into my fair share of them here)
Quote from: THRILLHO on October 21, 2022, 09:20:23 AM
While I just called this is a stupid debate, as a connoisseur of the genre I've been giving it some thought. I think the intuition is that, since we only ask voters to rank their Top 25, the amount of information that we have about a team gets worse and worse as we go down the points ranking. At the extremes, if there are 10 teams in others receiving votes, and the last one gets 1, which means literally one voter had that team at position 25, then it is highly unlikely that that team would be ranked #35 if all voters ranked all the teams. Not that they'd definitely be worse, just that we literally have next to no information. This is essentially TAMU's point as I understand it and it makes sense.
I don't remember which AP voter it is, but I do recall that there was one that would put a different mid-major at 25 every week just so they would show up in the "other receiving votes" category and get a little recognition, and that school every time would have exactly one vote. That voter didn't think that they were worthy of a top 25 ranking, but it was more of a kind of "looking out for the little guy" mindset.
Quote from: rocky_warrior on October 21, 2022, 09:21:09 AM
Yet you (and especially Brew) have been taking issue with it for a couple pages now :)
I'm not a fan of the war on math. Leave that blatant stupidity to the Providence College fans.
For years -- decades actually -- the AP had a top 20. The world's largest news-gathering organization didn't expand the poll to reflect a top 25 until 1989.
It's possible that AP will expand the poll again to top 30 someday. In the meantime, I don't see why it bothers anyone if somebody refers to the first 5 "others receiving votes" teams as #26, #27, #28, #29 and #30 -- just as calling them #21, #22, #23, #24 and #25 before 1989 shouldn't have bothered anybody.
Now, going all the way out to the handful of teams receiving 1 point apiece and calling each of them #41 (or whatever) seems like a stretch. But that's really only my opinion -- just as all the stuff discussed earlier were only the opinions of others.
Polls are for pride and for conversation, anyway. They don't really "mean" anything.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 21, 2022, 09:54:02 AM
I can't speak for brew but I haven't taken issue with calling the top others receiving votes getter as 26. How all of this started was I took issue with Pakuni's assertion that the AP poll goes out to 35-40 teams if you count others receiving votes. That's bad math.
It's not bad math. All you and Brew have done is argue that if the ballot went to 30 or 35 or 40 teams, the ranking of teams past 25 might be marginally more accurate while scolding everyone about semantics like a couple of Karens.
Yes, we all know the poll is called the "TOP 25", but data is collected on as many teams as voters believe should appear. It's purely semantics to argue that you can't rank order teams based on the vote totals they've received if that total is 26th or 27th instead of 24th or 25th.
Quote from: The Equalizer on October 21, 2022, 10:43:58 AM
It's not bad math. All you and Brew have done is argue that if the ballot went to 30 or 35 or 40 teams, the ranking of teams past 25 might be marginally more accurate
Lol. Yeah. That's the whole point. So you've basically just admitted that brew and TAMU are correct.
What are we even doing here?
Quote from: The Equalizer on October 21, 2022, 10:43:58 AM
It's not bad math. All you and Brew have done is argue that if the ballot went to 30 or 35 or 40 teams, the ranking of teams past 25 might be marginally more accurate while scolding everyone about semantics like a couple of Karens.
Yes, we all know the poll is called the "TOP 25", but data is collected on as many teams as voters believe should appear. It's purely semantics to argue that you can't rank order teams based on the vote totals they've received if that total is 26th or 27th instead of 24th or 25th.
This isn't about calling Texas A&M #26 or UConn #27 (at least not for me). Arguing that because UAB got 1 vote in the preseason poll, that makes them tied for the 40th best team in the country and that is somehow makes the AP Poll more comparable to things like KenPom, T-Rank, EvanMiya, etc. that rank all 363 teams is bad math.
Quote from: brewcity77 on October 20, 2022, 07:00:13 PM
In the top-25? Yes. There's 1-25, also receiving votes, and everyone else.
And while the team at 26 would probably be reliably 26-28 if the ballot was longer, it's the 26-35 range where people are just getting random votes. The more teams that get votes, the less reliable anyone beyond 25 is.
The poll stops at 25 and could be changed next week to the top 30. It is an arbitrary cutoff. In Al's days it was the top 20.
Quote from: The Equalizer on October 21, 2022, 10:43:58 AM
It's not bad math. All you and Brew have done is argue that if the ballot went to 30 or 35 or 40 teams, the ranking of teams past 25 might be marginally more accurate while scolding everyone about semantics like a couple of Karens.
Thank you for agreeing with me.
Lord, we're now mopping about "top others receiving votes".......
The only thing I will add is that prior to the 89-90 season the AP poll was only top 20. Why did they change it to 25?
So more people can get participation ribbons.
I do and will continue to call the top 'other receiving votes' team the #26 team.
I know by any mathematical, scientific or academic standard, I am wrong but it won't stop me.
Quote from: tower912 on October 21, 2022, 02:40:34 PM
So more people can get participation ribbons.
Well, I am on a personal crusade to NOT call the team with the 21st most votes, #21.
Quote from: WhiteTrash on October 21, 2022, 02:43:19 PM
I do and will continue to call the top 'other receiving votes' team the #26 team.
I know by any mathematical, scientific or academic standard, I am wrong but it won't stop me.
Become ungovernable
Quote from: tower912 on October 21, 2022, 02:40:34 PM
So more people can get participation ribbons.
That is all we have been getting the last 10 years.
Quote from: lawdog77 on October 21, 2022, 03:09:49 PM
Well, I am on a personal crusade to NOT call the team with the 21st most votes, #21.
Jeesh. Commit a crime like that, and you'd better change your handle to lawlessdog77.
Quote from: TAMU, the Wizard of MU Basketball on October 21, 2022, 11:13:40 AM
Arguing that because UAB got 1 vote in the preseason poll, that makes them tied for the 40th best team in the country and that is somehow makes the AP Poll more comparable to things like KenPom, T-Rank, EvanMiya, etc. that rank all 363 teams is bad math.
Said nobody ever.
Quote from: tower912 on October 21, 2022, 02:40:34 PM
So more people can get participation ribbons.
The AP poll is woke
The polls are not accurate. It depends a lot on whether you won your last game. The 25th ranked team can beat two nobodies during the week and the 24th ranked team can lose to the No. 1 ranked team and the 25th ranked team will most likely pass up the 24th ranked team in the next poll.
Quote from: bilsu on October 22, 2022, 09:22:36 AM
The polls are not accurate. It depends a lot on whether you won your last game. The 25th ranked team can beat two nobodies during the week and the 24th ranked team can lose to the No. 1 ranked team and the 25th ranked team will most likely pass up the 24th ranked team in the next poll.
I don't think anyone is arguing that they are. I think we are just having the classic scoop semantics argument of the term "ranked"