• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

The Way Too Early KenPom Report

They are still expected to finish 8-10 in the conference. Kind of like Wake in their heavy front schedule.
 
Related, below is the current ACC SOS of each conference team (per KP of course), which might help shed some light on the conference rankings at present:

1. Georgia Tech
2. Clemson
3. FSU
4. Pittsburgh
5. Notre Dame
6. Louisville
7. Boston College
8. Miami
9. Wake
10. Virginia Tech
11. Virginia
12. Duke
13. Syracuse
14. UNC
15. N.C. State

Some observations are that Pitt and FSU will almost certainly finish towards the top based on how their "play teams twice" schedule breaks down. BC will likely finish towards the top as well because they have the drawback of not being able to play themselves, and are presently the only ACC team not ranked in the top 100. State's schedule gets brutal so they either need to turn things around or it's going to be an absolute disaster of a season - currently projected to finish 16-15 overall (5-13 ACC).
 
Last edited:
Is that in conference SOS?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
 
I know many factors go into KP's "thrill score" for his fan match list of each day, but I see Duke @ Wake is by far the #1 game for Saturday. Funny considering that Kansas goes to Kentucky that day & also that Wake is getting the 3:00 ESPN3/ACC network slot.
 
daaberry said:
I know many factors go into KP's "thrill score" for his fan match list of each day, but I see Duke @ Wake is by far the #1 game for Saturday. Funny considering that Kansas goes to Kentucky that day & also that Wake is getting the 3:00 ESPN3/ACC network slot.
Click to expand...

I guess because ours is supposed to be really close, because Kansas and Kentucky both have pretty good offenses and high tempo.
 
Wake now a 10-seed in Lunardi's bracketology, on the list of the "last four byes" avoiding the play-in game

Other ACC teams - UNC (2-seed), Florida State (2-seed), Louisville (3-seed), UVA (4-seed), Notre Dame (4-seed), Duke (5-seed), VaTech (9-seed), Miami (11-seed, also on last four byes), Pitt (12-seed, in one of the play-in games)

Clemson is the first team out, NC State in the 8th team out.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Related, below is the current ACC SOS of each conference team (per KP of course), which might help shed some light on the conference rankings at present:

1. Georgia Tech
2. Clemson
3. FSU
4. Pittsburgh
5. Notre Dame
6. Louisville
7. Boston College
8. Miami
9. Wake
10. Virginia Tech
11. Virginia
12. Duke
13. Syracuse
14. UNC
15. N.C. State

Some observations are that Pitt and FSU will almost certainly finish towards the top based on how their "play teams twice" schedule breaks down. BC will likely finish towards the top as well because they have the drawback of not being able to play themselves, and are presently the only ACC team not ranked in the top 100. State's schedule gets brutal so they either need to turn things around or it's going to be an absolute disaster of a season - currently projected to finish 16-15 overall (5-13 ACC).
Click to expand...

Do you know why Duke, UVA and UNC will almost always be at the bottom of an ACC SOS list? It's kinda basic...They don't play themselves.
 
RJKarl said:
Do you know why Duke, UVA and UNC will almost always be at the bottom of an ACC SOS list? It's kinda basic...They don't play themselves.
Click to expand...

Well also, Duke and UNC play each other twice late in every year for tv purposes, so that's a big reason too.
 
Does KP create his offense efficiency the same today as he did 10+ years ago?

For example Wake's offense this year is ranked 11th with 120.6

Our 2005 team was #1 in the country in offense with 120.2

It seems unlikely that there are over 10 teams in the country now that are a more efficient offense than Skip's 05 Wake team. That team seems to be very similar to this year's UCLA team who is #1 in offense, but #116 in defense. 2005 Wake finished at #96 in defense.
 
I think he has made some changes across the board each year so it's weighted differently.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
I think he has made some changes across the board each year so it's weighted differently.
Click to expand...

When he makes changes doesn't he go back and apply those to previous years?

I'm pretty sure he does because my memory is that the 04 offense was actually a little better and closer to 124. That's no longer the case though.
 
daaberry said:
Does KP create his offense efficiency the same today as he did 10+ years ago?

For example Wake's offense this year is ranked 11th with 120.6

Our 2005 team was #1 in the country in offense with 120.2

It seems unlikely that there are over 10 teams in the country now that are a more efficient offense than Skip's 05 Wake team. That team seems to be very similar to this year's UCLA team who is #1 in offense, but #116 in defense. 2005 Wake finished at #96 in defense.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure if they're the same scale or not. The adjusted offensive efficiency is how many points per possession that team would score against the "average" defense. I think the average defense is determined on a year-by-year basis and not some objective "average defense," but I have no idea really and can't find the answer right off.
 
Last edited:
daaberry said:
Does KP create his offense efficiency the same today as he did 10+ years ago?

For example Wake's offense this year is ranked 11th with 120.6

Our 2005 team was #1 in the country in offense with 120.2

It seems unlikely that there are over 10 teams in the country now that are a more efficient offense than Skip's 05 Wake team. That team seems to be very similar to this year's UCLA team who is #1 in offense, but #116 in defense. 2005 Wake finished at #96 in defense.
Click to expand...
Adjusted Offensive Efficiency (AdjO) has the same definition – Adjusted offensive efficiency – An estimate of the offensive efficiency (points scored per 100 possessions) a team would have against the average D-I defense.

I think the reason why offensive efficiency ratings are higher now is because of rule changes that were designed to help the offense in college basketball. Harder for teams to clog the middle and use their hands on defense. Also, teams shoot the 3 better than ever now.
 
Losing our way to prosperity... Up a slot to 32 after last night's game.
 
I don't have much a problem with advanced stats and models like Kenpom, but you would think there would be some way to account for a team being ranked in the 30's without actually beating a single top 50 team. Eventually you should luck into at least one win if you really are that good relative to your peers, right?
 
Pretty sure luck is what he uses to balance things out a bit but someone who follows Kenpom more closely can correct me if wrong. Wake Forest is 270 in luck. Isn't th luck rating why Wake never got too high in Kenpom last year? Because he predicted that we would fall back to the median after pulling out a couple very close games at the beginning of the year?
 
kenpom has Miami at #39. Also the worst loss of the season is to #42, which plays a role. it's rare to have a team in the 30s without having beaten a higher ranked team. it's also rare to play 25ish games and not lose to a much worse team. worst game of the season was UNCG win.
 
Luck has nothing to do with the KenPom overall rating, it's the "margin of error" so to speak between a team's win/loss record and their KenPom rating. If you're 14-10 like Wake and you won all 14 games by 30 and lost all 10 games by one point you'd likely be the "unluckiest" team in the country. As in, you are more likely to have won more than zero of those ten games. On the flip side if you're 14-10 and lost all 10 games by 30 and won all 14 by one, you'd likely be the "luckiest" because the "average" team who has those results would have far more losses than 10.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top