Hawaii 2021

[practicesafesets]

Jun 8, 2021 0:39:54 GMT -5 WahineFan44 said:

trojansc who runs the bracketology can attest that if Fairfield is a RPI boost for Hawaii. 

Of course YOU can't attest lol  

[WahineFan44]

Jun 8, 2021 0:50:10 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Jun 8, 2021 0:39:54 GMT -5 WahineFan44 said:

trojansc who runs the bracketology can attest that if Fairfield is a RPI boost for Hawaii. 

Of course YOU can't attest lol  

Not sure if you know how to read or not but I literally told you why they are a RPI goldmine but if you choose to ignore it that’s on you.

[trojansc]

Jun 8, 2021 0:30:43 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Fairfield went into the 2019 tournament selection with a 108 team RPI. Whereas Texas A&M had a 21-7 record and a team RPI of 15. San Diego had 21-5 record with a team RPI of 25. Washington had a record of 24-6 and a team RPI of 9. 

A WCC or PAC12 foe seems much better than Fairfield and more seems to go into the RPI than W/L. People seem to roll in here with just opinions, little evidence.

There are many things you have to take into account here. 50% of your RPI value does come from your opponents W-L record, that's huge. 25% is your record (so you obviously want to win, but you have to balance that with not beating up on teams with poor W-L records) the other 25% is your opponent's opponent's record. The part where a team like Fairfield 'hurts' is their Opponents Opponents record. Fairfield's S.O.S is (most likely) going to be atrocious, as it was in 2019. But, their great W-L record will easily outweigh that and makes them worthy to schedule since you will probably beat them.

That's the other key with Fairfield - the likeliness of losing that match is low. So, not only are they good for RPI, but they are practically a guaranteed win. The worst team to schedule is a team that is not only bad for RPI, but a team that has the potential to beat you. WCC teams are usually NOT benefitted by RPI (a lot of this has to do with geographical issues re: RPI, and I unfortunately think it could be even worse in 2021). In 2019, 7/10 WCC teams were sub-100 in RPI. 

A good example of this is Portland in 2018. Hawaii scheduled Portland. Portland finished #93 in the RPI, 18-12 record. While that's not an atrocious team to schedule, they don't give you a 'significant win' even if you beat them. To make matters worse? Hawaii lost that game. WCC teams not named San Diego and BYU are risky to schedule. Pepperdine is probably a good scheduling decision for this upcoming year, but after that, I would be leery of the WCC teams.

Texas A&M was a whole different team in 2019 -- they had Hollan Hans. They were not great this past season, including losing twice to Mississippi State.

You do want to schedule Top 25 and Top 50 teams, so yes, scheduling PAC teams is a good idea. You don't want to schedule the bottom tier power conference teams though, those teams can really wreck you. Not only will they have a bad RPI, but they are still probably better than Fairfield, so you risk taking a loss and losing any RPI value.

Temple in 2019 managed to put together a Top 50 ranked RPI non-conference schedule without actually scheduling *any* Top 50 RPI team. How did they do that? They managed to schedule a bunch of east coast cupcakes (i.e Fairfield) and they beat most of those teams. Those teams had crappy RPI's but very very good W/L %.s That's a lot easier to do for a team like Temple than a team like Saint Mary's, thus RPI's flaws and making good WCC teams unbeneficial for RPI and risky to schedule.     

[practicesafesets]

Jun 8, 2021 0:59:16 GMT -5 WahineFan44 said:

Jun 8, 2021 0:50:10 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Of course YOU can't attest lol  

Not sure if you know how to read or not but I literally told you why they are a RPI goldmine but if you choose to ignore it that’s on you.

I'm responding directly to your posts. Of course I can read. Your reading comprehension and semantics are clearly off lol. Do you know what a goldmine is?

[practicesafesets]

Jun 8, 2021 1:05:13 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Jun 8, 2021 0:30:43 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Fairfield went into the 2019 tournament selection with a 108 team RPI. Whereas Texas A&M had a 21-7 record and a team RPI of 15. San Diego had 21-5 record with a team RPI of 25. Washington had a record of 24-6 and a team RPI of 9. 

A WCC or PAC12 foe seems much better than Fairfield and more seems to go into the RPI than W/L. People seem to roll in here with just opinions, little evidence.

There are many things you have to take into account here. 50% of your RPI value does come from your opponents W-L record, that's huge. 25% is your record (so you obviously want to win, but you have to balance that with not beating up on teams with poor W-L records) the other 25% is your opponent's opponent's record. The part where a team like Fairfield 'hurts' is their Opponents Opponents record. Fairfield's S.O.S is (most likely) going to be atrocious, as it was in 2019. But, their great W-L record will easily outweigh that and makes them worthy to schedule since you will probably beat them.

That's the other key with Fairfield - the likeliness of losing that match is low. So, not only are they good for RPI, but they are practically a guaranteed win. The worst team to schedule is a team that is not only bad for RPI, but a team that has the potential to beat you. WCC teams are usually NOT benefitted by RPI (a lot of this has to do with geographical issues re: RPI, and I unfortunately think it could be even worse in 2021). In 2019, 7/10 WCC teams were sub-100 in RPI. 

A good example of this is Portland in 2018. Hawaii scheduled Portland. Portland finished #93 in the RPI, 18-12 record. While that's not an atrocious team to schedule, they don't give you a 'significant win' even if you beat them. To make matters worse? Hawaii lost that game. WCC teams not named San Diego and BYU are risky to schedule. Pepperdine is probably a good scheduling decision for this upcoming year, but after that, I would be leery of the WCC teams.

Texas A&M was a whole different team in 2019 -- they had Hollan Hans. They were not great this past season, including losing twice to Mississippi State.

You do want to schedule Top 25 and Top 50 teams, so yes, scheduling PAC teams is a good idea. You don't want to schedule the bottom tier power conference teams though, those teams can really wreck you. Not only will they have a bad RPI, but they are still probably better than Fairfield, so you risk taking a loss and losing any RPI value.

Temple in 2019 managed to put together a Top 50 ranked RPI non-conference schedule without actually scheduling *any* Top 50 RPI team. How did they do that? They managed to schedule a bunch of east coast cupcakes (i.e Fairfield) and they beat most of those teams. Those teams had crappy RPI's but very very good W/L %.s That's a lot easier to do for a team like Temple than a team like Saint Mary's, thus RPI's flaws and making good WCC teams unbeneficial for RPI and risky to schedule.     

Thank you for the perspective. It sounds like what you're saying is that this a gamble and it hinges on how much a team is willing to risk in a loss for a gain. I say no risk no reward, Hawaii might as well use all the talent they have (Hopefully no injuries). Is Temple relevant? Did they even make the tournament?

[WahineFan44]

Jun 8, 2021 1:07:21 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Jun 8, 2021 0:59:16 GMT -5 WahineFan44 said:

Not sure if you know how to read or not but I literally told you why they are a RPI goldmine but if you choose to ignore it that’s on you.

I'm responding directly to your posts. Of course I can read. Your reading comprehension and semantics are clearly off lol. Do you know what a goldmine is?

These numbers aren’t accurate but this is just for the gyst of it

Team A. Goes 10-20 From the pac 12
Their opponents miraculously go 400-100
Their opponents opponents go 300-200
Ending rpi-72

Team b
Goes 24-6
Opponents unfortunately go 100-400
And their opponents opponents go 300-200
RPI 120

For Hawaii we beat both.

Team A we get a good boost in our last category opponents opponents win percentage 25 percent and a win 25 percent. But we TANK for opponents win percentage, which is 50

Team b. We get a win 25 percent and a good 50 percent boost in the opponents win percentage
Small tank in opponents opponents, but not enough to offset the 50 percent.

Team a from the pac
Team b is from the Maac

Team A will have a better RPI cause THEIR opponents opponents is good. THEY get that 50
But that’s only 25 for us

Team b is the opposite
They tank cause Their opponents opponents 50 percent
But that’s only 25 percent for us
We get the boost of 50 for THEIR record.

You get small bonuses for ranked wins in RPI, but not enough to negate .

So yes team B for the most part is better, and a better RPI than playing the cellar dwellers of the Pac.

Scheduling pac 12 teams is nice, as if you beat the top, you can that RPI bonus, but farfield isn’t chopped liver. And that was my entire point

[c4ndlelight]

The thing is a team's W-L is worth twice as much as their SOS, and their W-L can have a very wide range (literally, winless .000 to perfect 1.000). Even a "terrible" SOS is only going to be like .40, while the very best is only .60. A single opponents SOS isn't going to make much difference at all, and it's for a very minor amount, while getting a team from a small conference with more wins will make a big difference.

The math works out that you're WAY better off playing a 25-5 MAAC team over an 18-12 WCC team, even if the WCC team has a higher RPI at the end of the day.

[roy]

One other factor is that a team doesn't want to schedule too many opponents from the same conference. Let's say Hawaii schedules 3 tournaments with a Pac12 team in each. Those 3 teams will play each other in conference with one winning and one losing each match. For Hawaii, this means that one opponent's winning percent goes up, while the other goes down, which hurts your opponent's winning percent. As noted, your opponents winning percent accounts for 50% of your RPI, so scheduling teams that will pick up a lot of wins from other conferences will help.

[trojansc]

Jun 8, 2021 1:24:07 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Thank you for the perspective. It sounds like what you're saying is that this a gamble and it hinges on how much a team is willing to risk in a loss for a gain. I say no risk no reward, Hawaii might as well use all the talent they have (Hopefully no injuries). Is Temple relevant? Did they even make the tournament?

It's not as easy as no risk no reward - you need balance. Scheduling the very best teams are low risk with very high reward. BYU and San Diego aren't going to hurt your RPI - and there is a massive upside if you win that game. So yes, schedule Washington, UCLA, etc. like Hawaii normally does. But mix in Farifield -- it's practically a guaranteed win - and even if they are slightly worse, they will still be a Top team in the MAAC with a good enough W/L record (even 20-10 instead of 25-5 is going to be much better than scheduling a 15-15 SEC team that could actually still beat you).

No, Temple isn't relevant, they are just an example of a team who shows how the RPI system isn't just about scheduling the top ranked teams and how scheduling the 57th team is not better than scheduling the 110th RPI team. That's the other part of this equation. You don't really want to schedule 'exclusively' cupcakes because that means you won't have any significant wins if we're talking about terms of an at-large bid. You want to mix in T50 teams that give you a chance to say we beat X team in the non-conference.

So for this example, I think Marquette is a very good choice. They will likely end up with a great RPI, but they aren't a team where Hawaii will be a massive underdog. It's a winnable match, at home, with a team who is RPI beneficial. Fairfield is the other very good choice, Hawaii should win and reap RPI benefits.

The question mark for me is Texas A&M. They are the clear higher risk of the 3. They might not have a great record, not make the tournament, but still have enough talent to pull an upset over Hawaii. Not great for RPI, and a loss, so, it's risky.

[practicesafesets]

Jun 8, 2021 1:59:07 GMT -5 trojansc said:

Jun 8, 2021 1:24:07 GMT -5 practicesafesets said:

Thank you for the perspective. It sounds like what you're saying is that this a gamble and it hinges on how much a team is willing to risk in a loss for a gain. I say no risk no reward, Hawaii might as well use all the talent they have (Hopefully no injuries). Is Temple relevant? Did they even make the tournament?

It's not as easy as no risk no reward - you need balance. Scheduling the very best teams are low risk with very high reward. BYU and San Diego aren't going to hurt your RPI - and there is a massive upside if you win that game. So yes, schedule Washington, UCLA, etc. like Hawaii normally does. But mix in Farifield -- it's practically a guaranteed win - and even if they are slightly worse, they will still be a Top team in the MAAC with a good enough W/L record (even 20-10 instead of 25-5 is going to be much better than scheduling a 15-15 SEC team that could actually still beat you).

No, Temple isn't relevant, they are just an example of a team who shows how the RPI system isn't just about scheduling the top ranked teams and how scheduling the 57th team is not better than scheduling the 110th RPI team. That's the other part of this equation. You don't really want to schedule 'exclusively' cupcakes because that means you won't have any significant wins if we're talking about terms of an at-large bid. You want to mix in T50 teams that give you a chance to say we beat X team in the non-conference.

So for this example, I think Marquette is a very good choice. They will likely end up with a great RPI, but they aren't a team where Hawaii will be a massive underdog. It's a winnable match, at home, with a team who is RPI beneficial. Fairfield is the other very good choice, Hawaii should win and reap RPI benefits.

The question mark for me is Texas A&M. They are the clear higher risk of the 3. They might not have a great record, not make the tournament, but still have enough talent to pull an upset over Hawaii. Not great for RPI, and a loss, so, it's risky.

Yea, a lower power 5 team isn't ideal. I obviously want to see Hawaii win but I also want to see good competition.

[trojansc]

Jun 8, 2021 1:27:03 GMT -5 c4ndlelight said:

The thing is a team's W-L is worth twice as much as their SOS, and their W-L can have a very wide range (literally, winless .000 to perfect 1.000). Even a "terrible" SOS is only going to be like .40, while the very best is only .60. A single opponents SOS isn't going to make much difference at all, and it's for a very minor amount, while getting a team from a small conference with more wins will make a big difference.

The math works out that you're WAY better off playing a 25-5 MAAC team over an 18-12 WCC team, even if the WCC team has a higher RPI at the end of the day.

Correct.

Those MAAC teams aren't going to beat you, either. There's some east coast teams with very good records that *could* potentially beat you in an upset, maybe like an American, Samford, Colgate, etc. I'd rather take Fairfield than one of those teams.

[DiggUH]

All of the information gained from reading these above posts shines a new light on this particular tournament for me. I'm looking forward to it even more now knowing that the 'Bows have much to gain from it.

[babybacksets]

Anyone have any idea how the end of the club season is going/went for the non-foreign recruits??

[2left]

I think a good balance of genuinely strong teams in addition to lesser “RPI-boosters” like Fairfield is necessary when you are a cusp team - either on the cusp of being invited or the cusp of hosting. The subjective judgments of the powers that be often seem to disfavor Hawaii.

[Timeless]

Ram needs to game the system to her advantage. I'm glad she's not making the same mistake Shoji did.