bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,381 
|
Post by bluepenquin on Sept 14, 2014 21:14:55 GMT -5
Below is an estimate of the final RPI. This is based on a 'reasonable' projection of each team's final record - which can fluctuate by quite a bit - and the projected opponent records. This is NOT a prediction. As mentioned before, 75% of what makes up the RPI has very little room to change. RPI futures is used to project what record a specific team will need in order to be considered or to be safe for a seed. For this - it is pretty accurate. Once you get out of the top 20 or so, the margin between the rankings gets significantly smaller raising the margin of error.
The final records are fairly quickly determined by using Pablo, current performance, remaining schedule, and my own bias (so take it with a grain of salt).
1. Stanford (28-2)
2. Texas (23-2)
3. Washington (27-4)
4. Florida State (26-4)
5. USC (23-7)
6. Oregon (24-6)
7. Wisconsin (26-4)
8. North Carolina (24-4)
9. Florida (23-5)
10. Penn State (29-4)
11. Nebraska (21-8)
12. Kentucky (25-6)
13. BYU (25-4)
14. Kansas (22-8)
15. Colorado State (28-3)
16. Texas A&M (21-8)
17. Oklahoma (20-10)
18. Loyola Marymount (26-4)
19. Iowa State (17-10)
20. Marquette (24-7)
21. Illinois (21-10)
22. Hawaii (22-5)
23. Arizona State (21-11)
24. Duke (21-8)
25. UCLA (18-13)
26. Arizona (20-12)
27. Purdue (25-7)
28. Pittsburgh (25-6)
29. Utah (18-13)
30. Cal State Northridge (21-7)
31. Kansas State (20-10)
32. Western Kentucky (28-4)
33. Minnesota (21-10)
34. Creighton (22-9)
35. Colorado (17-15)
36. Ohio (22-6)
37. Virginia Tech (18-13)
38. Wichita State (22-6)
39. Louisville (20-10)
40. North Carolina State (20-10)
41. Lipscomb (20-7)
42. San Diego (19-11)
43. SMU (26-6)
44. Xavier (21-9)
45. Michigan (16-14)
46. Central Florida (22-10)
47. Appalachian State (26-4)
48. Michigan State (18-13)
49. VCU (18-10)
50. Butler (23-7)
51. California (16-14)
52. Tulsa (22-8)
53. UNC Wilmington (23-7)
54. Northwestern (18-13)
55. Arkansas-Little Rock (22-8)
56. Santa Clara (21-10)
57. Long Beach State (22-8)
58. New Mexico (21-10)
59. Ohio State (17-15)
60. Virginia (18-13)
61. Alabama (21-11)
62. Wyoming (23-8)
63. Louisiana-Lafayette (25-7)
64. Baylor (15-16)
65. Illinois State (20-9)
66. Northern Iowa (20-10)
67. TCU (17-15)
68. Missouri State (20-10)
69. Harvard (18-5)
70. Miami-FL (16-13)
71. West Virginia (17-13)
72. American (25-5)
73. Northeastern (21-9)
74. Washington State (13-19)
75. North Texas (22-8)
76. Rice (20-10)
77. Missouri (19-14)
78. UNLV (23-10)
79. Auburn (16-14)
80. Pacific (19-12)
81. Wisconsin-Milwaukee (17-11)
82. Western Michigan (22-9)
83. Dayton (23-9)
84. Georgia (16-14)
85. Oregon State (11-20)
86. Mississippi (21-11)
87. Valparaiso (25-5)
88. Texas-San Antonio (16-11)
89. College of Charleston (20-11)
90. Utah State (17-12)
91. Iowa (13-18)
92. Radford (20-9)
93. New Mexico State (19-8)
94. Arkansas (14-17)
95. George Washington (18-10)
96. Clemson (18-14)
97. Texas State (20-12)
98. LSU (12-15)
99. Northern Arizona (21-6)
100. Ball State (17-12)
|
|
|
|
Post by chipNdink on Sept 14, 2014 21:30:27 GMT -5
All right! Let's count our chickens before they hatch and see what the regionals would be like with this:
At ISU:
1. Stanford vs 16. Texas A&M
8. North Carolina vs 9. Florida
At Minnesota:
2. Texas vs 15. Colorado St.
7. Wisconsin vs 10. Penn St.
At Washington:
3. Washington vs 14. Kansas
6. Oregon vs 11. Nebraska
At. Louisville:
4. Florida St. vs 13. BYU
5. USC vs. 12. Kentucky
Looks good to me. Buy your tickets now!
|
|
|
|
Post by c4ndlelight on Sept 14, 2014 21:38:34 GMT -5
All right! Let's count our chickens before they hatch and see what the regionals would be like with this: At ISU: 1. Stanford vs 16. Texas A&M 8. North Carolina vs 9. Florida At Minnesota: 2. Texas vs 15. Colorado St. 7. Wisconsin vs 10. Penn St. At Washington: 3. Washington vs 14. Kansas 6. Oregon vs 11. Nebraska At. Louisville: 4. Florida St. vs 13. BYU 5. USC vs. 12. Kentucky Looks good to me. Buy your tickets now! Mick is very happy with this. Minneapolis would be brutral. But once again, just to put math in perspective, this is very, very reliable in the context of it having a great similarity to what the final output will be. That does not mean any single output should be considered reliable. Certainly not enough to attach a single seed to a team. |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 14, 2014 21:57:35 GMT -5
9 Pac-12 teams safely in, and two top seeds? I like it  . though I have a hard time not seeing the Big 10 champion as a top seed, though it has happened to the Pac-12 in off Pac-12 years. |
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Sept 14, 2014 22:04:28 GMT -5
well, we can all just save a lot of time and money.
just cancel the rest of the season and hold the playoffs now
|
|
|
|
Post by BeachbytheBay on Sept 14, 2014 22:11:07 GMT -5
after the first 15-16 (who I'd agree are likely in) there's gonna be a lot of shifting - wouldn't surprise to see a dozen or so of these teams move down / up 20-30 spots before all is said and done.
and it gets more sketchy after 50 or so
you look at a team like Northern Arizona (99) who is undefeated, but who I seriously doubt will win the Big Sky.
and Pac-12 teams like Oregon State & Wazzou look very competitive in non-conference, and this sort of rating just shows them getting their butts kicked in the Pac-12 - however it wouldn't surprise if they pull some big upsets in conference
|
|
|
|
Post by macroman on Sept 14, 2014 22:22:55 GMT -5
Ok so I admit that I'm confused. We're using RPI to extrapolate results for the remainder of the season? Why bother to play or go to the games, lest just computer model everything.
|
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 14, 2014 23:13:01 GMT -5
Ok so I admit that I'm confused. We're using RPI to extrapolate results for the remainder of the season? Why bother to play or go to the games, lest just computer model everything. I think he is using pablo to predict the results, then calculating what the RPI would be. It's no different than what is done in many other sports, where people try to predict outcomes. Baseball Prospectus, for instance, publishes a daily "postseason probability" prediction that takes into account the remaining schedules and predicts the odds that a given team will find its way into the playoffs. If you aren't interested in this, then don't bother to look at it. mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/probability.jsp?ymd=20140914 |
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on Sept 14, 2014 23:22:56 GMT -5
7 ACC teams with a chance at the postseason. Seems a bit high, and a couple will drop out, but Pitt, LVille, UNC, Duke and FSU seems like a good set of teams to represent in the tourney.
|
|
|
|
Post by alpacaone on Sept 15, 2014 7:06:50 GMT -5
Ok so I admit that I'm confused. We're using RPI to extrapolate results for the remainder of the season? Why bother to play or go to the games, lest just computer model everything. I think he is using pablo to predict the results, then calculating what the RPI would be. It's no different than what is done in many other sports, where people try to predict outcomes. Baseball Prospectus, for instance, publishes a daily "postseason probability" prediction that takes into account the remaining schedules and predicts the odds that a given team will find its way into the playoffs. If you aren't interested in this, then don't bother to look at it. mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/probability.jsp?ymd=20140914Baseball became a lot easier for me to see post season probability when I understood that every team wins 60 and every team loses 60, making getting to the post season all about those other 42 games. |
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,381
|
Post by bluepenquin on Sept 15, 2014 8:02:59 GMT -5
Ok so I admit that I'm confused. We're using RPI to extrapolate results for the remainder of the season? Why bother to play or go to the games, lest just computer model everything. I think he is using pablo to predict the results, then calculating what the RPI would be. It's no different than what is done in many other sports, where people try to predict outcomes. Baseball Prospectus, for instance, publishes a daily "postseason probability" prediction that takes into account the remaining schedules and predicts the odds that a given team will find its way into the playoffs. If you aren't interested in this, then don't bother to look at it. mlb.mlb.com/mlb/standings/probability.jsp?ymd=20140914My model is no way as robust as either Baseball Prospectus or Fangraphs. My intention is not to project wins and losses for teams, but project what record will be needed for a team to have an RPI good enough to get a seed (or get into the conversation). Specifically, I want to know what Kansas, Minnesota, Arizaona State, Colorado State, Purdue, etc... need to do in order to have an RPI in the range needed to get a seed. Whether Utah goes 12-8 or 8-12 in confernce will most likely have little or no impact on the rest of the teams final RPI. I have thought about making this a final record projection excercise. To do this right, I think one would have to take the win probabilty for each remaining game based on Pablo. This is different than just giving a win to the team that Pablo favors. For example, Texas is (or may be) favored to win the rest of their games according to Pablo, yet also using Pablo their win probabilty will be less than 25-0. I tried to make quick estimates and came up with Texas ending up 23-2. Also, to do this properly (like Fangraphs), wins are carried out to decimals - which makes the optics look a little messy. |
|
|
|
Post by dorothymantooth on Sept 15, 2014 8:18:51 GMT -5
Would love to see where Texas two losses and PSU's three losses are going to come from.
|
|
bluepenquin
Hall of Fame
4-Time VolleyTalk Poster of the Year (2019, 2018, 2017, 2016), All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017, 2016)
Posts: 12,381
|
Post by bluepenquin on Sept 15, 2014 9:27:36 GMT -5
after the first 15-16 (who I'd agree are likely in) there's gonna be a lot of shifting - wouldn't surprise to see a dozen or so of these teams move down / up 20-30 spots before all is said and done. and it gets more sketchy after 50 or so you look at a team like Northern Arizona (99) who is undefeated, but who I seriously doubt will win the Big Sky. and Pac-12 teams like Oregon State & Wazzou look very competitive in non-conference, and this sort of rating just shows them getting their butts kicked in the Pac-12 - however it wouldn't surprise if they pull some big upsets in conference There will be a lot of movement throughout this entire list. The top of the list will move because team's records will be different than what I have. Teams in the middle will also change for the same reason - and the differences are so small that smaller changes in the RPI shedule will impact their final RPI ranking. There will probably be more than and a dozen teams moving 20-30 spots. As for Northern Arizona - I 'projected' a 12-4 conference record, which was 3rd or 4th place in the Big Sky. This is based on their ranking among the Big Sky teams according to Pablo. I know virtually nothing about the Big Sky - so I pretty much relied completely on Pablo. Their schedule stinks compared to the rest of the top of the conference - but that 9-0 start is going to have a pretty big impact on their RPI. |
|
|
|
Post by volleylover26 on Sept 15, 2014 9:40:34 GMT -5
When is the first RPI published?
|
|
|
|
Post by Wiswell on Sept 15, 2014 9:59:07 GMT -5
Would love to see where Texas two losses and PSU's three losses are going to come from. Moreover, Wisconsin could go 0-3 in the next 10 days. So they would only lose one more Big Ten match? Of course, if they beat PSU, then PSU has only two more losses. |
|
. though I have a hard time not seeing the Big 10 champion as a top seed, though it has happened to the Pac-12 in off Pac-12 years.
