|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 28, 2023 11:07:44 GMT -5
Pretty simply, either RPI works or it doesn't. It should be very easy to go back over previous years and look for all the tourney matches were there is disagreement between RPI, KPI, figstats, Pablo, Massey, etc, and see which was the best predictor. I think we know RPI isn't great - but, I still think just using a predictive measure could be problematic. I remember when Stanford beat USC both times in the PAC-12 but USC won in the tournament, then, USC beat Cal both times in the PAC-12 but lost in the tournament... I still don't mind the way NET does it. Your own ranking doesn't matter, but how you perform against others matters. That way the results are still the most important. If you aren't going with a predictive model, then you have some very interesting and difficult philosophical questions to answer in determining what you consider important and tournament worthy. For instance, why in the world would you take a seventh, eighth and ninth team from a conference before the second team from another conference? |
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Nov 28, 2023 11:08:40 GMT -5
Pretty simply, either RPI works or it doesn't. It should be very easy to go back over previous years and look for all the tourney matches were there is disagreement between RPI, KPI, figstats, Pablo, Massey, etc, and see which was the best predictor. I think we know RPI isn't great - but, I still think just using a predictive measure could be problematic. I remember when Stanford beat USC both times in the PAC-12 but USC won in the tournament, then, USC beat Cal both times in the PAC-12 but lost in the tournament... I still don't mind the way NET does it. Your own ranking doesn't matter, but how you perform against others matters. That way the results are still the most important. I agree on NET. I'm sure it could be tweaked to be better at the margins, but I like the approach it takes where your ranking doesn't matter to you but it does matter to your opponents and vice versa. I also like that it acknowledges that winning on the road is tougher than winning at home. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,219 
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 28, 2023 11:21:23 GMT -5
I think we know RPI isn't great - but, I still think just using a predictive measure could be problematic. I remember when Stanford beat USC both times in the PAC-12 but USC won in the tournament, then, USC beat Cal both times in the PAC-12 but lost in the tournament... I still don't mind the way NET does it. Your own ranking doesn't matter, but how you perform against others matters. That way the results are still the most important. If you aren't going with a predictive model, then you have some very interesting and difficult philosophical questions to answer in determining what you consider important and tournament worthy. For instance, why in the world would you take a seventh, eighth and ninth team from a conference before the second team from another conference? Possibly they have H2H wins over that 2nd team from another conference! Things like that do happen. |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 28, 2023 11:54:25 GMT -5
If you aren't going with a predictive model, then you have some very interesting and difficult philosophical questions to answer in determining what you consider important and tournament worthy. For instance, why in the world would you take a seventh, eighth and ninth team from a conference before the second team from another conference? Possibly they have H2H wins over that 2nd team from another conference! Things like that do happen. Yes, but we are already throwing out "insignificant" wins and losses left and right. USC beat Washington State, @purdue and Arizona State, but the committee obviously thought those were less important than losing to California, Colorado, UCLA and Rice. On the other hand, they didn't seem to penalize Purdue at all for losing to USC at home. |
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 28, 2023 12:14:31 GMT -5
If you aren't going with a predictive model, then you have some very interesting and difficult philosophical questions to answer in determining what you consider important and tournament worthy. For instance, why in the world would you take a seventh, eighth and ninth team from a conference before the second team from another conference? Possibly they have H2H wins over that 2nd team from another conference! Things like that do happen. Speaking of head to head, here is a case I am sure you know very well (rankings are all RPI): Team A's worst losses: 78, 69, 61, 55, 49 Team A's best wins: 12, 13, 23 Team B's worst losses: 101, 77, 73, 53 Team B's best wins: 5, 7, 14, 21 Team A beat Team B H2H at Team B Team A beat 101, Team B lost to 101 What is important in this case? These two teams were seeded nowhere near each other. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,219
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 28, 2023 13:20:29 GMT -5
Possibly they have H2H wins over that 2nd team from another conference! Things like that do happen. Speaking of head to head, here is a case I am sure you know very well (rankings are all RPI): Team A's worst losses: 78, 69, 61, 55, 49 Team A's best wins: 12, 13, 23 Team B's worst losses: 101, 77, 73, 53 Team B's best wins: 5, 7, 14, 21 Team A beat Team B H2H at Team B Team A beat 101, Team B lost to 101 What is important in this case? These two teams were seeded nowhere near each other. I think you missed a common opponent in there (Mich St). Team B made sense to me though. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,219
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 28, 2023 13:27:30 GMT -5
Looks like the Sun Belt should win ~1 match by VT predictions. I’m gonna put my money on Coastal for the 1. Then Texas State, then JMU. I just haven’t been thrilled with JMU’s level of play lately.
If Soboleski is OK, South Alabama stands a chance.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 28, 2023 13:37:23 GMT -5
Speaking of head to head, here is a case I am sure you know very well (rankings are all RPI): Team A's worst losses: 78, 69, 61, 55, 49 Team A's best wins: 12, 13, 23 Team B's worst losses: 101, 77, 73, 53 Team B's best wins: 5, 7, 14, 21 Team A beat Team B H2H at Team B Team A beat 101, Team B lost to 101 What is important in this case? These two teams were seeded nowhere near each other. I think you missed a common opponent in there (Mich St). Team B made sense to me though. Mich St was not a common opponent. No other common opponents that I know of. |
|
trojansc
Legend
All-VolleyTalk 1st Team (2023, 2022, 2021, 2020, 2019, 2018, 2017), All-VolleyTalk 2nd Team (2016), 2021, 2019 Fantasy League Champion, 2020 Fantasy League Runner Up, 2022 2nd Runner Up
Posts: 31,219
|
Post by trojansc on Nov 28, 2023 18:44:11 GMT -5
|
|
|
|
Post by bbg95 on Nov 28, 2023 19:38:46 GMT -5
Dude was celebrating as if South Alabama had just won its fourth straight NCAA Tournament match to advance to the Final Four. |
|
|
|
Post by volleyball303 on Nov 28, 2023 20:58:52 GMT -5
Speaking of head to head, here is a case I am sure you know very well (rankings are all RPI): Team A's worst losses: 78, 69, 61, 55, 49 Team A's best wins: 12, 13, 23 Team B's worst losses: 101, 77, 73, 53 Team B's best wins: 5, 7, 14, 21 Team A beat Team B H2H at Team B Team A beat 101, Team B lost to 101 What is important in this case? These two teams were seeded nowhere near each other. I think you missed a common opponent in there (Mich St). Team B made sense to me though. I don’t know either team but I think team A has the better résumé. |
|
|
|
Post by trianglevolleyball on Nov 28, 2023 22:21:11 GMT -5
I'm seeing wins over TCU and Houston on these teams combined resumes... have any of them played a good, consistent team and come out on top? These squads just don't have the talent, it's looking rough for them. I don't care to look at their Pablos but I'd imagine it's a 10-20 lower rating than their RPIs?
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 28, 2023 23:07:01 GMT -5
I think you missed a common opponent in there (Mich St). Team B made sense to me though. I don’t know either team but I think team A has the better résumé. Team B is hosting a sub-regional and has the third easiest draw of any sub-regional (according to Pablo). Team A is one of the last seeds, at #29, and has the 44th "easiest" draw of any sub-regional (per Pablo). |
|
|
|
Post by jackson5vb on Nov 29, 2023 1:01:18 GMT -5
If it came down to a single elimination tourney, include all 4 sun belt teams plus ucla, st johns, nc state, Indiana, Duke, plus any other bigger school Bubble team, and sun belt teams probably won't even win a game.
|
|
|
|
Post by oldnewbie on Nov 29, 2023 1:32:27 GMT -5
If it came down to a single elimination tourney, include all 4 sun belt teams plus ucla, st johns, nc state, Indiana, Duke, plus any other bigger school Bubble team, and sun belt teams probably won't even win a game. Let's not %*$# foot around. 128 teams, double elimination! Edit: You seriously can't say pu$$yfoot here?  |
|
