At-large picture

[BeachbytheBay]

using Massey ratings

Criteria. Best Win, Top 10 record, added top 10-15 record, Projected SOS, Projected W-L rounded to 1/2 to end of regular season
RPI top 9 is consistent, after that it gets some bizaare ratings

a note about criteria. the NCAA uses this bizarre 'teams under consideration' which is silly, since the inclusion or exclusion of one team can have enormous swings in the comparisons. it's so subjective. the other is the raw records. for example Beach and Hawaii. if one looks at the home record, Beach has the edge in 'raw' home reocrd, yet in context Beach has Ball State and Loyola as best home wins. Hwaii has UCLA & Beach wins. conversely if one looks at 'raw' away records, Hawaii has the 'edge' being undefeated. yet again looking more closely, Beach has a far tougher away SOS/schedule, and has beat PSU & Hawaii, while Hawaii has only the Stanford wins. so context when looking at simplistic W-L records will be interesting.

the top 5, top 10, top 15 records will hopefully carry the most weight along with SOS and scheduling

no team is a 'lock' ...yet. one thing about this year is that if there are 3 conference upsets (teams not named Beach, Hawaii, UCLA, Penn State) wining those 3 conferences, then only 2 of the top 4 teams get in. so that means to be a 'lock' a team would have to be guaranteed to finish in the top 2, with adding a loss to their record in their conference tournament. with UCLA's two wins over yet another top 5 team GCU, they are pretty close, the question is could Hawaii or Penn State jump a UCLA team? it's not clear, with UCLA still potentionally having 4 losses. would a 4 loss UCLA get in over a 4 loss Penn State or 3 loss Hawaii? that would be really tough, given UCLA's stellar resume. I think it's safe to say if UCLA goes into MPSF tourney with no more losses, then they are in, nobody will have a better resume (particularly scheduling and SOS) than UCLA with 3 losses. Frankly if it actually comes down to a 4 loss PSU, 3 loss Hawaii, & 4 loss UCLA, the committee will have maybe their worst decision they've ever had to make. I wouldn't even want to guess how they'd split hairs on that one. Similarly if it comes to a 4 loss Penn State, 3 loss Hawaii, & 4 loss Beach, that's about just a s bad, and also means neither Beach or Hawaii has won the BWCT.

Hawaii, Penn State, & Beach are right now in a virtual 'tie' in terms of the next at-large. PSU & Hawaii have the UCLA wins, while Beach has the superior SOS & road wins, being the only team to beat Hawaii & PSU on the road.

the next tier for a potential 'final' at-large is GCU, BYU, Irvine. just way too many scenarios - and those 3 pretty much need to win their Conf tournament at this point to get in. a 7 or 8 loss BYU/Irvine aren't gonna jump 4 or 5 loss teams from the top 4. GCU's issue will be their lower SOS and horrendously lopsided home schedule, two things the NCAA committees typically don't like when examining the nitty gritty. particularly 19 of 27 matches played at home, that was a huge scheduling mistake for GCU. GCU has the record edge, but if they don't get to the MPSF finals, they'll be on shaky ground. Hawaii has faced similar issues and does again this year, the difference is Hawaii has the wins over Beach and UCLA. GCU has.....nada.

the conference tournaments are gonna be critical, especially with GCU could potentially lose any at-large edge to BYU with losing to BYU on a neutral court combined if Irvine moves up with wins over Hawaii & Beach on the road.

MPSF:
UCLA: BW: Beach away(3), 9-2, 11-15, 5-0 SOS =1, 26-3. UCLA with away win over Beach, 2x over GCU, 1x over Irvine, 1 neutral over PSU

GCU: BW: Irvine home (6), 6-3, 10-15, 2-0, SOS = 13 22-5. GCU with only the 1 away win over Pepperdine

BYU: BYU is out, the only way to get in as an at-large is no conference upsets, & then getting to the MPSF finals. beating GCU in the MPSF semi-finals will counter the two road losses to GCU.



Big West:
Hawaii: BW: UCLA, home(1), 6-2, 10-15, 4-0, SOS =11, 25-3
Beach: BW: Hawaii away (2), 4-3, 10-15, 4-0, SOS=4, 19-4

Irvine is likely out barring winning the BWCT. 6 losses right now, with 4 matches left vs. Beach/Hawaii. & potentiall SIX matches against those teams in the next 3 weeks, they are one team that could make a lot of chaos with all these upcoming matches with Hawaii and Beach in the coming weeks. They will finish with the #1 SOS, gonna be a massive next two weeks


EIVA:

Penn State: BW: UCLA home (1), 4-2, 10-15, 3-1 SOS =12, 24-3

Charleston is keeping itself relevant in the at-large discussion. not only that they are a RPI gold mine matchfor PSU coming up. it's plausible they could beat PSU @ PSU, still have to beat Princeton twice first.


MIVA:

Winner of the MIVA, which who knows between Loyola, Ohio State, Ball State, Lindenwood, PFW ....will get the #6 seed unless there are conference upsets

the other note is RPI vs. Massey. UCSB is not rated well in RPI, but is in Massey. Concordia interestingly is rated higher in RPI but not Massey. a bit odd, given both teams poor records


if the tourney was today, BASED ON RESUMES TO DATE and favorites winning the conference tournament,

how they'd be seeded if the tournament was held today and favorites won the conference tournament, Hawaii, Beach, & Penn State are all really really close in overall metrics. The MIVA winner could jump to #5 depending on how things play out

#1) UCLA (2 matches left vs. Pepp)
#2) Hawaii (2 matches left at home vs. Irvine)
#3) Long Beach State (2 matches left vs. Irvine)
#4) Penn State (2 matches left vs.RPI gold-mine Charleston)
#5) GCU (2 matches left at Stanford)
#6) Loyola (or MIA conf tourney winner).
#7) Conf Carolina

right now as it stands, here are the 'difficulties' facing a committee

all of Hawaii's top 10 matches will have been in Hawaii (aside from the BWCT) - so how will they weigh that? the BWCT will have a huge impact on seeding

Grand Canyon, a really huge challenge for a committee to evaluate this year. they will have played 19 of 27 matches at home, that's a massive disparity, made worse by playing almost all of their quality matches (UCLA/Irvine/BYU) at home this year.


After UCLA, it's really hard to discern due to comparing the quality home/road wins and SOS factoring.


how will the committee assess the differences in the SOS (UCLA, Beach, Irvine top 5) vs. Hawaii, Penn State, GCU (11-13)?


the MPSF, BWCT, & EIVA tournies will have a huge impact on final at-larges and seedings, given how close teams are paired.

any of the top 4 teams could still end up as the #1 seed, even with UCLA in the drivers seat

[2020hindsight]

Lost me at “using Massey…”

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 11:58:20 GMT -5 2020hindsight said:

Lost me at “using Massey…”

why? it's close enough to RPI, there are some marked differences, but in terms of sorting out the records it's not that big of a deal really


will RPI 'penalize' some teams vs. Massey? yes, notably the Big West teams get penalized the most. it's not all that big of a deal though


it's interesting to look at Massey because it's statistically superior vs. RPI and without bias that RPI has

and yeah I get that RPI data will be used, but again it's not it's going to change the results all that significantly



and yeah, RPI sucks and should be shelved, but that's another story

[BeachbytheBay]

also, here is RPI at last week, will be very interesting to see where CUI ends up this week. CUI @ #9 is simply a absolute joke. I suspect they are including the NAI results which would grossly inflate CUI's RPI.

if they are actually using RPI, including the the NAIA teams, it's something they should really consider. Especially for CUI since opponents account for 50% of RPI, it would be a huge factor in inflating their RPI. If you look at the RPI data, look at the far right, specifically the # of teams non D1D2 for CUI, Charleston, and GCU that will 'distort' the number.

www.ncaa.com/rankings/volleyball-men/nc/nc-mens-volleyball-rpi

Massey:
masseyratings.com/cmvol/ncaa-d1/ratings

[pelagius]

Apr 2, 2023 13:28:54 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

also, here is RPI at last week, will be very interesting to see where CUI ends up this week. CUI @ #9 is simply a absolute joke. I suspect they are including the NAI results which would grossly inflate CUI's RPI.

No, I don't think the NCAA is including NAIA in the RPI calc. It's more of what you said at the beginning of your post, RPI is quite  flawed. CUI is a team that exposes a flaw. In an RPI (without bonuses), 50% of the rating comes from your opponent's winning percentage. CUI aggregate opponent's winning percentage is just higher than any other team by quite a bit. I did this quickly but I think it's correct (although this includes games up through yesterday ... still it won't be that different than last week's RPI calc for opponent's winning percentage):


                   team  win  loss   oppw/l  oppw/lpct
0                    CUI    4    13   292-96       0.75
1       UC Santa Barbara    4    15  286-135       0.68
2           UC San Diego    4    14  267-148       0.64
3                   CSUN    7    10  231-134       0.63
4                   NJIT    8    14  298-186       0.62
5    Southern California    7    13  274-175       0.61
6                   UCLA   23     2  341-218       0.61
7           George Mason   10    12  296-191       0.61
8              Princeton   10    11  280-183       0.60
9                 Quincy    5    15  285-187       0.60
10            Pepperdine   13    10  309-203       0.60
11            Lindenwood    9    11  283-192       0.60
12             McKendree    6    13  267-182       0.59
13              Stanford    9    10  260-179       0.59
14                   BYU   16     6  290-203       0.59
15              Ohio St.   17     9  349-246       0.59
16              Penn St.   20     3  302-218       0.58
17        Long Beach St.   16     3  249-181       0.58
18               Harvard    7    13  249-186       0.57
19              Ball St.   16     8  310-239       0.56
20          Grand Canyon   19     4  293-230       0.56
21                Hawaii   22     2  307-241       0.56
22             UC Irvine   16     6  283-223       0.56
23     Purdue Fort Wayne   15    10  320-254       0.56
24      Central St. (OH)    9    13  225-179       0.56


[HawaiiVB]

Apr 2, 2023 12:03:10 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

Apr 2, 2023 11:58:20 GMT -5 2020hindsight said:

Lost me at “using Massey…”

why? it's close enough to RPI, there are some marked differences, but in terms of sorting out the records it's not that big of a deal really


will RPI 'penalize' some teams vs. Massey? yes, notably the Big West teams get penalized the most. it's not all that big of a deal though


it's interesting to look at Massey because it's statistically superior vs. RPI and without bias that RPI has

and yeah I get that RPI data will be used, but again it's not it's going to change the results all that significantly



and yeah, RPI sucks and should be shelved, but that's another story

According to the NCAA guidelines, Massey is not a named metric source, RPI, w-l record, SOS (which doesn't officially consider the home vs away issue), intangibles (those factors, such as opinions from the committee, last champion, etc.)

[raian13]

I can’t believe you still consider GCU for an at-large.
Their losses were to Pepperdine, x2 UCLA, and freakin CUI.

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 15:59:49 GMT -5 raian13 said:

I can’t believe you still consider GCU for an at-large.
Their losses were to Pepperdine, x2 UCLA, and freakin CUI.

of course GCU would be considered for an at-large, at least the final one. there are two at-larges, so certainly fare favorably compared to UCI or BYU or possible Charleston or Loyola.

doesn't mean they are the leading candidate for 1st at-large

if the tournament was held today, and PSU, Hawaii, UCLA were auto-bids, GCU would 100% get the 2nd at-large

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 15:19:08 GMT -5 HawaiiVB said:

Apr 2, 2023 12:03:10 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

why? it's close enough to RPI, there are some marked differences, but in terms of sorting out the records it's not that big of a deal really


will RPI 'penalize' some teams vs. Massey? yes, notably the Big West teams get penalized the most. it's not all that big of a deal though


it's interesting to look at Massey because it's statistically superior vs. RPI and without bias that RPI has

and yeah I get that RPI data will be used, but again it's not it's going to change the results all that significantly



and yeah, RPI sucks and should be shelved, but that's another story

According to the NCAA guidelines, Massey is not a named metric source, RPI, w-l record, SOS (which doesn't officially consider the home vs away issue), intangibles (those factors, such as opinions from the committee, last champion, etc.)

last champion is no more a factor than is Massey, it's not even an intangible and never has been

true, Massey is not an official metric, and I've not said it is

I've pointed out differences in Massey vs. RPI, precisely as it relates to a discussion of selection that can equally be applied to RPI data

and yes, the committee can, should, and has considered the schedules of home and away. not with an absolute RPI value, but with RPI data

in the context of looking at home/away records, yes the committee can look in depth, as they should and have in the past, at W-L records vs. top 5/10/15 teams. & nothing precludes them from putting 'blinders on' in terms of the depth of data from RPI they look at. committees have developed some level of improvement. still is there the potential for 'bias' given the construction of the committee? I mean if the committee were to see CUI as #9 in RPI and just accept in their 'analysis' that CUI represents that good of team, well then they aren't applying much evaluation whatsoever.

if PSU, UCLA, and either Hawaii or Long Beach all win the auto-bids, well then the committee's work gets a lot easier

if PSU & UCLA don't win their auto-bid, then their task is likely to be a lot more difficult

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 14:29:11 GMT -5 pelagius said:

Apr 2, 2023 13:28:54 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

also, here is RPI at last week, will be very interesting to see where CUI ends up this week. CUI @ #9 is simply a absolute joke. I suspect they are including the NAI results which would grossly inflate CUI's RPI.

No, I don't think the NCAA is including NAIA in the RPI calc. It's more of what you said at the beginning of your post, RPI is quite  flawed. CUI is a team that exposes a flaw. In an RPI (without bonuses), 50% of the rating comes from your opponent's winning percentage. CUI aggregate opponent's winning percentage is just higher than any other team by quite a bit. I did this quickly but I think it's correct (although this includes games up through yesterday ... still it won't be that different than last week's RPI calc for opponent's winning percentage):


                   team  win  loss   oppw/l  oppw/lpct
0                    CUI    4    13   292-96       0.75
1       UC Santa Barbara    4    15  286-135       0.68
2           UC San Diego    4    14  267-148       0.64
3                   CSUN    7    10  231-134       0.63
4                   NJIT    8    14  298-186       0.62
5    Southern California    7    13  274-175       0.61
6                   UCLA   23     2  341-218       0.61
7           George Mason   10    12  296-191       0.61
8              Princeton   10    11  280-183       0.60
9                 Quincy    5    15  285-187       0.60
10            Pepperdine   13    10  309-203       0.60
11            Lindenwood    9    11  283-192       0.60
12             McKendree    6    13  267-182       0.59
13              Stanford    9    10  260-179       0.59
14                   BYU   16     6  290-203       0.59
15              Ohio St.   17     9  349-246       0.59
16              Penn St.   20     3  302-218       0.58
17        Long Beach St.   16     3  249-181       0.58
18               Harvard    7    13  249-186       0.57
19              Ball St.   16     8  310-239       0.56
20          Grand Canyon   19     4  293-230       0.56
21                Hawaii   22     2  307-241       0.56
22             UC Irvine   16     6  283-223       0.56
23     Purdue Fort Wayne   15    10  320-254       0.56
24      Central St. (OH)    9    13  225-179       0.56


what is so bizaare about the Opponents W-L data you have is that it makes the releative position of CUI & UCSB even more perplexing, they have the top 2 opponents %, both have poor records, yet CUI was #9 last week and UCSB #26. that is just too far a separation, so something must be off quite a bi. it just doesn't make sense they would be so far apart. and because CUI has played so many more NAIA teams than UCSB, their SOS can't be any better than UCSB in reality. It's why Massey is so much better. the SOS are much better evaluated, and games against NAIA teams factor in but get factored in much better. It's also interesting that Irvine is #21 in opponents W-L. now the next couple of weeks Irvine's RPI is going to go up quite a bit playing Beach & Hawaii.

[pelagius]

Apr 2, 2023 17:45:52 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

what is so bizaare about the Opponents W-L data you have is that it makes the releative position of CUI & UCSB even more perplexing, they have the top 2 opponents %, both have poor records, yet CUI was #9 last week and UCSB #26. that is just too far a separation, so something must be off quite a bi.

Not really. The difference is not between 1 and 2; it's between 0.75 and 0.68. In RPI terms that's a pretty big difference. And it was bigger last week: 0.78 and 0.64 (this is a huge difference). UCSB playing Hawai'i closed the gap some. Relatively speaking CUI and UCSB will be closer this week in the RPI.

[Timeless]

CUI moved down to #13 in RPI. UCSB stays the same at #26.

CUI is #1 in opponents win % and #10 in opponents/opponents win %.

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 17:59:04 GMT -5 pelagius said:

Apr 2, 2023 17:45:52 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

what is so bizaare about the Opponents W-L data you have is that it makes the releative position of CUI & UCSB even more perplexing, they have the top 2 opponents %, both have poor records, yet CUI was #9 last week and UCSB #26. that is just too far a separation, so something must be off quite a bi.

Not really. The difference is not between 1 and 2; it's between 0.75 and 0.68. In RPI terms that's a pretty big difference. And it was bigger last week: 0.78 and 0.64 (this is a huge difference). UCSB playing Hawai'i closed the gap some. Relatively speaking CUI and UCSB will be closer this week in the RPI.

does the CUI data include the NAIA matches? those would be a huge component to the opp winning % if so. I'm guess just more astounded if it doesn't, without crunching the numbers. where do you get the raw RPI data. the NCAA site doesn't ahve it?.

[pelagius]

Apr 2, 2023 18:09:17 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

does the CUI data include the NAIA matches? those would be a huge component to the opp winning % if so. I'm just more astounded if it doesn't.

No, I excluded all the NAIA matches.

[BeachbytheBay]

Apr 2, 2023 18:12:42 GMT -5 pelagius said:

Apr 2, 2023 18:09:17 GMT -5 BeachbytheBay said:

does the CUI data include the NAIA matches? those would be a huge component to the opp winning % if so. I'm just more astounded if it doesn't.

No, I excluded all the NAIA matches.

well, given they played Loyola, Irvine 2x, and Hawaii 2x; it makes sense for that. & I guess the NAIA matches reduce the number of matches so that'll also skew the opp winning % higher.

Pepp & USC will lower that some more, so it'll be interesting to see if they pick up wins vs. those two.