MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Cheeks on December 12, 2019, 08:49:40 AM

Title: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 12, 2019, 08:49:40 AM
As stated earlier, too early in my opinion to be as valuable as they are later in season when more games are played, but for those interested a link to the composite rankings page of 41 ranking systems.

Marquette has a rating of 32 when aggregating them all.  A high of 17, a low in the 70’s.  Not here to say one is better than another.

https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm

Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: UWW2MU on December 12, 2019, 08:59:35 AM
Luckily the "analyst" that has MU in the 70's also thinks they play at the BMO.  I'm sure that's the reason for being such an outlier and has nothing to do with a poor dataset or issues with their modeling.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Galway Eagle on December 12, 2019, 09:04:07 AM
Only seem to be three major outliers for low ranking. That 17 is out of the blue as well
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: wadesworld on December 12, 2019, 09:17:57 AM
“Too early to be as valuable as they are later in the season.”

Lol. What a nut.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 12, 2019, 09:35:55 AM
“Too early to be as valuable as they are later in the season.”

Lol. What a nut.

 Sagarin, Pomeroy, Massey and others....the inventors of their systems...are nuts for saying essentially the same thing.  Classic.


At any rate, for you bettors out there, some comparisons of Bovada, Sagarin and Pomeroy

https://www.sportsbettingdime.com/guides/strategy/kenpom-vs-sagarin/



Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: UWW2MU on December 12, 2019, 09:38:39 AM
Only seem to be three major outliers for low ranking. That 17 is out of the blue as well

You're wrong!  David Wilson is the smartest of all the geniuses who ever geniused with basketball analytics.  He knows something no one else does and his system in flawless.   How DARE you?!

Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Jay Bee on December 12, 2019, 09:48:29 AM
“Hey coach Chicos, should we start stalling? We’re up by 24 with 1:14 left.”

“It’s too early to stall”

“Ok, we won’t stall the offense”

“Oh no, we should stall. I meant that stalling now is too early to be as valuable as stalling with 8 seconds left.”

Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: wadesworld on December 12, 2019, 09:58:25 AM
“I don’t put any stock in this but here’s a link to something I put no stock in just in case anybody else wants to know what the rankings are showing!”

PS Your statement will hold true through the final buzzer of the National Title game. The rankings will be their most “valuable” after every single game of the season has been played. So please refrain from using any ranking system here until every last game has been played. Just too early to be as valuable as the rankings will be come a week into April.

Lol.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Elonsmusk on December 12, 2019, 10:02:51 AM
Others of interest:

Maryland = 5
Purdue = 19
USC = 62
Davidson = 98
Kansas State 106

Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Galway Eagle on December 12, 2019, 10:55:44 AM
“I don’t put any stock in this but here’s a link to something I put no stock in just in case anybody else wants to know what the rankings are showing!”

PS Your statement will hold true through the final buzzer of the National Title game. The rankings will be their most “valuable” after every single game of the season has been played. So please refrain from using any ranking system here until every last game has been played. Just too early to be as valuable as the rankings will be come a week into April.

Lol.

No the tournaments a crap shoot so the rankings are useless
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 12, 2019, 12:09:58 PM
“Hey coach Chicos, should we start stalling? We’re up by 24 with 1:14 left.”

“It’s too early to stall”

“Ok, we won’t stall the offense”

“Oh no, we should stall. I meant that stalling now is too early to be as valuable as stalling with 8 seconds left.”

Yeah, that’s analogous.  Super tight
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 12, 2019, 12:15:50 PM
“I don’t put any stock in this but here’s a link to something I put no stock in just in case anybody else wants to know what the rankings are showing!”

PS Your statement will hold true through the final buzzer of the National Title game. The rankings will be their most “valuable” after every single game of the season has been played. So please refrain from using any ranking system here until every last game has been played. Just too early to be as valuable as the rankings will be come a week into April.

Lol.

Again, your willingness to go to the absurd is fully on display.  You forgot about the part where usually come sometime in January the movement is small and the data set more valuable.  Yes, it is most valuable at the end if you wish to be absurd, but using common sense (I know you can do it if you try or simply listen to the guys that created these) the usefulness improves after the population of data reaches a certain state. 

It’s also why I said it is valuable now, but more valuable in January.  The incremental jumps in value are made Nov to Dec, Dec to Jan.  The improvements beyond that are small because the data set is robust enough.  I know you know this and you are just being you...so carry on.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: UWW2MU on December 12, 2019, 12:43:31 PM
I realize I didn't exactly add anything of value to this conversation... but just gotta say you guys can suck the fun out of any topic.    You realize you all argued about this in 15 other threads, right?

Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: brewcity77 on December 12, 2019, 12:58:04 PM
I realize I didn't exactly add anything of value to this conversation... but just gotta say you guys can suck the fun out of any topic.    You realize you all argued about this in 15 other threads, right?

But that's what makes this thread so special, it was started for the express purpose of sucking the fun out of the topic!
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 12, 2019, 01:47:30 PM
I realize I didn't exactly add anything of value to this conversation... but just gotta say you guys can suck the fun out of any topic.    You realize you all argued about this in 15 other threads, right?
There is a common denominator.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Small Orange Soda on December 12, 2019, 05:25:22 PM
32 sounds about right.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Slim on December 12, 2019, 06:47:12 PM
There is a common denominator.

Thought every poster on every thread!
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 13, 2019, 12:07:06 AM
There is a common denominator.

Yup, the attackers who attack constantly....you nailed it.  Not what is said, but who says the what.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: wadesworld on December 13, 2019, 12:32:34 AM
Yup, the attackers who attack constantly....you nailed it.  Not what is said, but who says the what.

Lol.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 13, 2019, 08:35:22 AM
Yup, the attackers who attack constantly....you nailed it.  Not what is said, but who says the what.
So true--it's everyone else's fault. Common Denominator is just a victim, always.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 14, 2019, 08:23:09 PM
So true--it's everyone else's fault. Common Denominator is just a victim, always.

Always, never...lazy
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: TSmith34, Inc. on December 15, 2019, 08:47:58 PM
Ok, Common
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 16, 2019, 08:53:37 AM
Up slightly to number 31
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 17, 2019, 05:15:50 PM
Luckily the "analyst" that has MU in the 70's also thinks they play at the BMO.  I'm sure that's the reason for being such an outlier and has nothing to do with a poor dataset or issues with their modeling.

??
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: UWW2MU on December 17, 2019, 06:28:58 PM
??

I was inferring that if they can't even get the correct arena information how can we trust any of their data or analysis thereof.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 17, 2019, 07:37:45 PM
I was inferring that if they can't even get the correct arena information how can we trust any of their data or analysis thereof.

Looks like the info is correct or updated.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Cheeks on December 31, 2019, 02:56:04 PM
Up to 25th in the 48 composite rankings average


https://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm


Highest rank 13th    http://sonnymoorepowerratings.com/m-basket.htm
Lowest rank 49th   http://sevenovertimes.com/
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: WhiteTrash on December 31, 2019, 03:20:48 PM
Can anyone explain to me how Auburn is a top 10 team? Their schedule is a joke and the have some near losses with that crap schedule.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on December 31, 2019, 03:54:32 PM
Can anyone explain to me how Auburn is a top 10 team? Their schedule is a joke and the have some near losses with that crap schedule.

Because they're undefeated and the rankers will keep moving you up until you lose
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: WhiteTrash on December 31, 2019, 05:19:52 PM
Because they're undefeated and the rankers will keep moving you up until you lose
I guess so but when DePaul was undefeated against a much stronger schedule they were not ranked. I hope the committee seeds them correctly or they will encourage all schools to schedule like Auburn. 
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: Herman Cain on December 31, 2019, 05:46:26 PM
I guess so but when DePaul was undefeated against a much stronger schedule they were not ranked. I hope the committee seeds them correctly or they will encourage all schools to schedule like Auburn.
Auburn has a 7 NET ranking as of Today. Their strength of schedule as of the day before was 26. Pomeroy has them ranked at 15.  Lunardi had them as a 2 seed as of his latest bracket December 23.
Title: Re: Composite Rankings (40+ ranking systems)
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on December 31, 2019, 06:33:05 PM
I guess so but when DePaul was undefeated against a much stronger schedule they were not ranked. I hope the committee seeds them correctly or they will encourage all schools to schedule like Auburn.

Because preseason Auburn was viewed as a top 25 team and Depaul was viewed as a top 100 team at best. DePaul had a lot further to climb than Auburn.

And while I understand your point, KenPom has Auburn as #14 and DePaul as #68. As impressive as their win over Iowa was, they've also had pretty meh home performances over #336 Alcorn State (+18), #297 Fairleigh Dickinson (+11), #194 Central Michigan (+13), #125 Buffalo (-5), #109 Northwestern (+5). Escaping #314 Cleveland State on the road by single digits doesn't look great either. If the season ended right now, I would seed Auburn above DePaul.