So....What are we ranked on Monday - 11/1/2024?

[Johnny B]

Think we were ranked 7 in jae's jr or senior year for a week or two

[JakeBarnes]

I gave him some crap on twitter for his rankings of Florida (25), Wisconsin (16), Purdue (15) and Nebraska (14), which seemed like the most out of leftfield teams he had ranked, and where.  He responded that he uses per possession measures like Kempom, TRANK, Sagarin, etc., for his rankings.  As someone else said, it actually looks like he may just use Kenpom verbatim.  Seems super lazy to me, but at least he has some method and isn't actually ranking these teams based on who he thinks are the best teams or resumes. 

His response had me thinking, why are the per possession metrics like Kenpom (34), Torvik (38) and Haslam (43) so much lower on Marquette?  @BrewCity77, @TAMU Eagle or somebody else who pays more attention to metrics care to explain?

Because we aren't particularly efficient for metrics, especially on the offensive end. The fewer possessions and higher success like a Wisconsin is largely due to pace of play. I am a big advanced stats person, but to rank your teams based on stats rather than results seems a bit odd. It's like saying the Angels won the West because Mike Trout was a 10 win player in WAR stats.

Using independent stats without an understanding of actual results just doesn't work here.

[BM1090]

I gave him some crap on twitter for his rankings of Florida (25), Wisconsin (16), Purdue (15) and Nebraska (14), which seemed like the most out of leftfield teams he had ranked, and where.  He responded that he uses per possession measures like Kempom, TRANK, Sagarin, etc., for his rankings.  As someone else said, it actually looks like he may just use Kenpom verbatim.  Seems super lazy to me, but at least he has some method and isn't actually ranking these teams based on who he thinks are the best teams or resumes. 

His response had me thinking, why are the per possession metrics like Kenpom (34), Torvik (38) and Haslam (43) so much lower on Marquette?  @BrewCity77, @TAMU Eagle or somebody else who pays more attention to metrics care to explain?

We've won some close games. We had a bad performance against UTEP that dropped us 6 spots I believe. 2 of our 3 losses we were 2-3 point underdogs and lost by 20+. That will hurt your efficiency numbers.

We were 28 pre-Indiana. That loss dropped us to 34.  Over the course of 5 games we worked our way back to 29. The game vs. UTEP dropped us back to 35. We worked our way back up to 28 pre SJU. That loss dropped us back to 36.

[Skip Intro]

Anyone else looking forward (hopefully) to the Monday where we outrank VT?  I know it's petty, but it'll be a nice reminder that MU and the Big East are just fine, Mr. teamcoachbuzzusahooaaa.  And if there's a stretch for it to happen, this next 2 weeks seems like the one.  We have a relatively light schedule, while VT sees Virginia, UNC, and Syracuse.

Sidebar:  that SOTG image of Theo needs to become a banner on the side of the FF.

[LloydsLegs]

Anyone else looking forward (hopefully) to the Monday where we outrank VT?  I know it's petty, but it'll be a nice reminder that MU and the Big East are just fine, Mr. teamcoachbuzzusahooaaa.  And if there's a stretch for it to happen, this next 2 weeks seems like the one.  We have a relatively light schedule, while VT sees Virginia, UNC, and Syracuse.

Sidebar:  that SOTG image of Theo needs to become a banner on the side of the FF.

(embarrassed to admit it is my screensaver...; I'm 54 years old...)

[HowardsWorld]

Anyone else looking forward (hopefully) to the Monday where we outrank VT?  I know it's petty, but it'll be a nice reminder that MU and the Big East are just fine, Mr. teamcoachbuzzusahooaaa.  And if there's a stretch for it to happen, this next 2 weeks seems like the one.  We have a relatively light schedule, while VT sees Virginia, UNC, and Syracuse.

Sidebar:  that SOTG image of Theo needs to become a banner on the side of the FF.

I think it would be better if Marquette made a deep run even to the S16 ahead of Buzz. VT was not a powerhouse program nor will they ever be in the ACC. I think it would be sweet revenge knowing that he left Marquette and 5 years later they are better than the team he left for even with dealing with the mess he left behind. VT still has yet to with a NCAA touranment game under him. Likely that changes this year barring an upset but still taking longer at VT than we all thought.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I think it would be better if Marquette made a deep run even to the S16 ahead of Buzz. VT was not a powerhouse program nor will they ever be in the ACC. I think it would be sweet revenge knowing that he left Marquette and 5 years later they are better than the team he left for even with dealing with the mess he left behind. VT still has yet to with a NCAA touranment game under him. Likely that changes this year barring an upset but still taking longer at VT than we all thought.

Bert has been there 5 years now, I'd be surprised if he doesn't take a different job this offseason. But frankly, I don't really care much about Buzz one way or the other.  He was a great coach at MU and I loved his teams.  He left in douchey fashion, no doubt.  But don't really care all that much one way or the other about how he does. 

Anyways, I've done enough of my part to derail this thread into another Buzz thread...

[Skip Intro]

Bert has been there 5 years now, I'd be surprised if he doesn't take a different job this offseason. But frankly, I don't really care much about Buzz one way or the other.  He was a great coach at MU and I loved his teams.  He left in douchey fashion, no doubt.  But don't really care all that much one way or the other about how he does. 

Anyways, I've done enough of my part to derail this thread into another Buzz thread...

Yeah, I certainly didn't mean to derail, it just came into my head as I looked over the rankings.  I'm just happy MU is in a position where the "where will we be ranked?" thread will probably be continuous for the next 1+ years.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I gave him some crap on twitter for his rankings of Florida (25), Wisconsin (16), Purdue (15) and Nebraska (14), which seemed like the most out of leftfield teams he had ranked, and where.  He responded that he uses per possession measures like Kempom, TRANK, Sagarin, etc., for his rankings.  As someone else said, it actually looks like he may just use Kenpom verbatim.  Seems super lazy to me, but at least he has some method and isn't actually ranking these teams based on who he thinks are the best teams or resumes. 

His response had me thinking, why are the per possession metrics like Kenpom (34), Torvik (38) and Haslam (43) so much lower on Marquette?  @BrewCity77, @TAMU Eagle or somebody else who pays more attention to metrics care to explain?

Quick off the top of my head answer, those metrics love themselves some blowouts. We don't blow teams out but we do win. If you look at KenPom, they will tell you that we are the 31st luckiest team in the country.  It's not wrong to say that we are very lucky to be where we are now. A few individual plays go the other way and we could be 10-7 right now.

Personally, I think the answer is somewhere between polls and the metrics. I still think we look like a team ranked somewhere between 20-30. We have the resume of a team ranked 10-20, and that suits me just fine.

[MUBigDance]

Quick off the top of my head answer, those metrics love themselves some blowouts. We don't blow teams out but we do win. If you look at KenPom, they will tell you that we are the 31st luckiest team in the country.  It's not wrong to say that we are very lucky to be where we are now. A few individual plays go the other way and we could be 10-7 right now.

Personally, I think the answer is somewhere between polls and the metrics. I still think we look like a team ranked somewhere between 20-30. We have the resume of a team ranked 10-20, and that suits me just fine.

I wonder about MU along the same lines...great we have a really good resume..we did win those games. But did we underachieve and our opponents were lucky to be close or did we overachieve and win by "lucky bounces". LV and CR certainly seem like "lucky bounces". WI and SH seemed like we were better.  The two lopsided road losses make we question.

I'm just going to enjoy the ride...but I wonder if come March, MU will be that chic upset pick for 5-12 bracket prognosticators.

[MuMark]

13 in the coaches poll

[Not A Serious Person]

Think we were ranked 7 in jae's jr or senior year for a week or two

https://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/marquette/

We peaked at #8 on seven different occasions between 2003 and 2012.

February 27, 2012

Jan 26, Feb 2 and Feb 23, 2009

Nov 28, 2006

March 4 and March 11, 2003

Then you have to go back to the 1977/1978 year to find a higher ranking.  That year the high #1 was Feb 21, 1978, the regular season low was #5 on December 21, 1977

[dgies9156]

Rankings are like candy. You feel really nice when you consume but does not mean a whole lot in the greater scheme of things.

Just win, Baby!

[JakeBarnes]

Rankings are like candy. You feel really nice when you consume but does not mean a whole lot in the greater scheme of things.

Just win, Baby!

Perhaps not to the current team and how they play. However, the actual action of being ranked--and being consistently ranked--does have an effect on recruiting.

[LoudMouth]

Rankings are like candy. You feel really nice when you consume but does not mean a whole lot in the greater scheme of things.

Just win, Baby!

Hopefully recruits like candy!

[JakeBarnes]

Hopefully recruits like candy!

Candy is an impermissible benefit.

[JoeSmith1721]

Think we were ranked 7 in jae's jr or senior year for a week or two

We were ranked #7 in the ESPN/Coaches poll for a week until we lost at Cincy that same week.

[KampusFoods]

Hopefully recruits like candy!

We all know Wojo uses ice cream

[ChitownSpaceForRent]

We were ranked #7 in the ESPN/Coaches poll for a week until we lost at Cincy that same week.

Still think that team was better than the one that went to the Elite Eight the following year.

[Galway Eagle]

Still think that team was better than the one that went to the Elite Eight the following year.

They were, when otule went down they didnt have a shot against any tall teams.

[brewcity77]

His response had me thinking, why are the per possession metrics like Kenpom (34), Torvik (38) and Haslam (43) so much lower on Marquette?  @BrewCity77, @TAMU Eagle or somebody else who pays more attention to metrics care to explain?

I was going to write a long explanation, but Andrei Greska did it for me: https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=57504.0

[Silkk the Shaka]

They were, when otule went down they didnt have a shot against any tall teams.

Totally agree, Otule was a huge difference maker on that team

[MU82]

I liked our ranking at the end of our game on March 28, 1977.

[TallTitan34]

I liked our ranking at the end of our game on March 28, 1977.

Marquette was ranked 7 in the end of season poll that year.

[geps]

I was going to write a long explanation, but Andrei Greska did it for me: https://www.muscoop.com/index.php?topic=57504.0

Very thorough explanation of rankings over at PTs which sadly makes me think that we might be a tad overrated in the AP poll. Good news is we can now probably survive an 0-2 week still ranked. Realistically we could easily be 1-3 in the BE, UL could have made one of those 3 game ending layups, the UW game, etc., however good TEAMS figure out how to win these close games and use luck in their favor. That said sure would like to see an easy blowout of someone soon.