• 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!

2017-18 Men's College Basketball Thread (NWT)

"NET rankings will be publicly available beginning in late November or early December, and updated daily through Selection Sunday, and then again after the NCAA tournament."

Sounds like there will still be a qualitative factor, but this might make Selection Sunday a little less drama.
 
Also important:

"The system won't give more weight to games late in the season, instead omitting game date and order from the data. It also caps the winning margin at 10 points to discourage teams from running up the score."


Hm
 
NCAA replacing RPI with something called the NCAA Evaluation Tool as the primary measure for teams under consideration for the NCAAT:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...4445390/ncaa-announces-new-ranking-system-rpi

Will want to see more detail, but this is a huge improvement. This seems to capture some of the qualitative aspects of a basketball season that Kenpom lacks. I’m a fan of including game results and am fine with giving more weight to quality wins and capping MOV depending on how all of that is weighted. Capping MOV at 10 is stupid.
 
I look forward to hearing what my basketball ratings savior, Mr. Kenneth Pomeroy, has to say on the matter.

I know he was one of the people they brought in when they were looking at making this change.
 
I look forward to hearing what my basketball ratings savior, Mr. Kenneth Pomeroy, has to say on the matter.

I know he was one of the people they brought in when they were looking at making this change.

I think that most of the statheads appreciate that developing a predictive model is a slightly different enterprise than developing an evaluative model and that the NCAA selection committee is doing the latter. Would still be interested to hear their thoughts on how well this will do the latter.
 
Bennett has proven himself to be a top tier regular season coach and an underachiever in the post season.

Actually, Bennett's post season issues haven't been related to coaching. It's more of an infirmary sort of thing. The only year the squad has been remotely healthy throughout its run in the NCAAT was 2016. Admittedly, the team choked the Elite Eight game to Syracuse that year, but... In fact, I still think it somewhat miraculous that they won a game in the 2017 tournament without Wilkins. Before you place a bet on Virginia, check first to see who is wearing a cast or missing an appendix.
 
If you are a consensus top 5-10 team, losing one player shouldn’t cause you to tank every time the NCAA tourney comes around. His style of play will continue to lead to early exits and inferior teams beating UVA in one game sample sizes.
 
The article actually seemed very fair and accurate.

Cliff Notes: Essentially Wake basketball sucks. Wake basketball may suck slightly less or it may suck just as badly as last year. Either way Wake basketball is going to still suck this year.
 
Holy shit that is a terrible article with numerous factual errors and just all-around terrible takes.

Having said that, I agree that we'll be better than last season (largely because it'd be hard to be worse).
Besides the last sentence of "if Manning sucks, why run Bz off?" and sticking Melo in the starting lineup, what didn't you like? The part about Wake usually being a bunch of scrappy guys who turn into better players than expected, rather than top 25 talent players?
 
Last edited:
The article actually seemed very fair and accurate.

Cliff Notes: Essentially Wake basketball sucks. Wake basketball may suck slightly less or it may suck just as badly as last year. Either way Wake basketball is going to still suck this year.

Sounds pretty factual to me.
 
Besides the last sentence of "if Manning sucks, why run Bz off?" and sticking Melo in the starting lineup, what didn't you like? The part about Wake usually being a bunch of scrappy guys who turn into better players than expected, rather than top 25 talent players?

First off, I misread the part on Wilbekin/Moore... I thought the author said that Wilbekin was a marginal NBA prospect when he was referring to Moore. That's my fault.

Beyond that...
"Sarrs" 2x
"Wright is the son of former Clemson star big man Sharone Wright who’s also a Top 100 player."
"Rod Griffith"

I don't disagree w/ the broader point of Manning needing to connect with the team and push them to play a more cohesive brand of basketball... I just the specific player commentary isn't very accurate. Lumping Eggleston and Brown together seems silly, for example. The whole thing just reads like a 4th grade book report where you wonder if the guy actually read the book, or just read the CliffsNotes.
 
The generous whitewashing of the Bz era was pretty bad.

Other than that, if we want better takes from an opposing fan base writer we need to play well enough for others to pay attention.
 
Back
Top