|
|
Post by huskyvolley on Sept 27, 2022 12:13:35 GMT -5
Has anyone noticed that Pablo ranks Washington at #5? lol
|
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 27, 2022 12:20:51 GMT -5
Just came across these stats reported today by someone in the recent thread "Who is Passing": Out of power 5 + top 25 ranked non-P5s, the best passing outsides are: Kubik (Nebraska): 2.40 (239 receptions) Shemanova (Syracuse): 2.38 (308 receptions) Nuneviller (Oregon): 2.35 (196 receptions) Robinson (Utah): 2.35 (136 receptions) Hoffman (Washington): 2.29 (310 receptions)Also, note that Hoffman has been served more times than anyone else in the top 5 and she's had more receptions than any of the top 5 passing liberos. No need to convince us Washington fans that Hoffman is a superior 6 rotation player. Its all the idiots across the country that don’t know what they are talking about. People who think one trick flashy attackers like Skyler Fields are actually better…. And they aren’t….. at least not right now. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 27, 2022 13:15:14 GMT -5
Has anyone noticed that Pablo ranks Washington at #5? lol Pablo has Arkansas at 18 and Pepperdine as 25, so those aren't such bad losses. Still, it does seem high. Their best pablo win is the away win over Arkansas. Maybe pablo just likes the Husky point differentials? Pablo's number 6 team is a 5-5 Ohio State, but Ohio State's five losses are to #1, #1, #4, #11, #3. |
|
|
|
Post by alwayslearning on Sept 27, 2022 13:39:38 GMT -5
Right now I'd say a #5 ranking deserves a LOL. That said, I like the recent trajectory of the team.
|
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Sept 27, 2022 13:51:06 GMT -5
I think Washington is the best team in the Pac-12 and #5 for the top Pac-12 team does not sound crazy.
|
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Sept 27, 2022 13:56:41 GMT -5
Right now I'd say a #5 ranking deserves a LOL. That said, I like the recent trajectory of the team. So you are not a supporter of Pablo as a ranking tool? More an rpi type? Or avca/vt poll guy? Or maybe Massey who ranks Washington 6 but a pwr rank of 5. Seems most of the good ranking formulas have washington 5. Looks like maybe your personal bias at work here?! |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 27, 2022 14:02:01 GMT -5
Right now I'd say a #5 ranking deserves a LOL. That said, I like the recent trajectory of the team. So you are not a supporter of Pablo as a ranking tool? More an rpi type? Or avca/vt poll guy? Or maybe Massey who ranks Washington 6 but a pwr rank of 5. Seems most of the good ranking formulas have washington 5. Looks like maybe your personal bias at work here?! I am more comfortable with pablo than Massey, but if Massey has them at #6 that certainly indicates that both tools are seeing the same thing. Probably point differentials. |
|
|
|
Post by huskyvolley on Sept 27, 2022 14:15:58 GMT -5
Right now I'd say a #5 ranking deserves a LOL. That said, I like the recent trajectory of the team. So you are not a supporter of Pablo as a ranking tool? More an rpi type? Or avca/vt poll guy? Or maybe Massey who ranks Washington 6 but a pwr rank of 5. Seems most of the good ranking formulas have washington 5. Looks like maybe your personal bias at work here?! There are a lot of reasons to question UW at #5 and there is nothing to do with personal bias. For example, Washington has lost to #18 Arkansas and #25 Pepperdine and the best win is against #18 Arkansas Stanford's 4 losses were against #1 Texas, #2 Louisville, #7 Oregon, and #14 PSU, best wins are #3 Nebraska and #13 Minnesota so Stanford has better wins than Washington and better losses ( in terms of losing to higher ranked teams), but Stanford is ranked #16.. it's really about criteria and perspectives, and questioning polls isn't really a bad thing. No polls is perfect. |
|
|
|
Post by dodger on Sept 27, 2022 14:30:36 GMT -5
So you are not a supporter of Pablo as a ranking tool? More an rpi type? Or avca/vt poll guy? Or maybe Massey who ranks Washington 6 but a pwr rank of 5. Seems most of the good ranking formulas have washington 5. Looks like maybe your personal bias at work here?! There are a lot of reasons to question UW at #5 and there is nothing to do with personal bias. For example, Washington has lost to #18 Arkansas and #25 Pepperdine and the best win is against #18 Arkansas Stanford's 4 losses were against #1 Texas, #2 Louisville, #7 Oregon, and #14 PSU, best wins are #3 Nebraska and #13 Minnesota so Stanford has better wins than Washington and better losses ( in terms of losing to higher ranked teams), but Stanford is ranked #16.. it's really about criteria and perspectives, and questioning polls isn't really a bad thing. No polls is perfect. Massey and Pablo are not polls: your quoting ranks on who beat who based on the polls i am saying that the tools based on criteria without bias are maybe more reliable but certainly not infallible . I give more validity to pablo and massey than the polls: data is limited at this time so future will give us better predictors but laughing at pablo who has a high degree of reliability may not be a good course of debate |
|
|
|
Post by ay2013 on Sept 27, 2022 14:33:09 GMT -5
I think Pablo still has last years' ratings mixed in.
|
|
|
|
Post by alwayslearning on Sept 27, 2022 15:02:24 GMT -5
Right now I'd say a #5 ranking deserves a LOL. That said, I like the recent trajectory of the team. So you are not a supporter of Pablo as a ranking tool? More an rpi type? Or avca/vt poll guy? Or maybe Massey who ranks Washington 6 but a pwr rank of 5. Seems most of the good ranking formulas have washington 5. Looks like maybe your personal bias at work here?! I would readily admit to personal bias. No one is immune. I look at all these things (Pablo, Massey, RPI, polls) but at the end of the day what I really know best is this UW Husky team in 2022 because that's what I care most about and that's what I've spent the most time watching. And it's just my personal observations and opinion, but I don't think the Huskies look like a top 5 team -- yet. The offense has been clicking recently and I think they are a lot closer to being an elite offensive team. Defense -- not so much. Cook apparently believes that he needs to see a lot of growth from 3-4 players during the remainder of the season to reach that elite level (I'm just repeating what the announcers said during the UCLA match). Bush and Summers were specifically mentioned, but I'm guessing it could apply to almost anyone other than Powell, Hoffman, and Grote. And I think the bulk of that improvement needs to occur on defense, e.g., with blocking by Summers (not trying to pick on Summers, just using it as an example). Floor defense and digging is nowhere near a truly elite level now, certainly not on any consistent basis. Just my opinions, infused with plenty of personal bias. |
|
|
|
Post by mikegarrison on Sept 27, 2022 15:29:12 GMT -5
I think Pablo still has last years' ratings mixed in. Unlikely. And I don't think Massey does that. |
|
pnwvb
Sophomore
Posts: 184 
|
Post by pnwvb on Sept 28, 2022 23:02:09 GMT -5
Lol so I’m sure MN being upset by NW helps our RPI.. seems like Cook’s scheduling wasn’t as terrible as previously mentioned
|
|
|
|
Post by volleynerd on Sept 28, 2022 23:22:23 GMT -5
Lol so I’m sure MN being upset by NW helps our RPI.. seems like Cook’s scheduling wasn’t as terrible as previously mentioned 6 in the unofficial RPI with an SOS of 8 |
|
|
|
Post by alwayslearning on Sept 29, 2022 11:03:13 GMT -5
Lol so I’m sure MN being upset by NW helps our RPI.. seems like Cook’s scheduling wasn’t as terrible as previously mentioned Better to be lucky than good (sometimes). |
|
