• 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!

PSU Hoops - National Media Sees Chambers as Possible Manning Replacement

Penn State has the same number of wins over top 11 teams as they do losses to teams outside the top 85.

KP's Top 85....I've shown you why the Big 10 is grossly overrated. They rarely beat anyone other than each other that is good.

3-12 in conference is all you need to know. Losing close games is still losing.
 
There's no "error". They lost the damn games. Excuses don't make shots or win games.

For the last time, KenPom is a predictive system where wins and losses don't matter - it's looking at how a team can be expected to perform moving forward based on how they have previously played.

Under your theory, a team that went 30-0 against the bottom 30 teams in the country and won them all by one point is automatically better than a team who went 15-15 against the top 30 teams in the country with wins coming by 30 points and losses all coming by one point.
 
Ohio State waxed Cincy early in the season when the Buckeyes were playing well and Woods was looking like all Big-Ten. Close losses probably help Ken-Pom rating.
 
KP's Top 85....I've shown you why the Big 10 is grossly overrated. They rarely beat anyone other than each other that is good.

3-12 in conference is all you need to know. Losing close games is still losing.

If you truly believe this you should be making a killing off Vegas then. Bet heavily against Penn State the rest of the year and the Big 10 in the NCAAT.
 
For the last time, KenPom is a predictive system where wins and losses don't matter - it's looking at how a team can be expected to perform moving forward based on how they have previously played.

Under your theory, a team that went 30-0 against the bottom 30 teams in the country and won them all by one point is automatically better than a team who went 15-15 against the top 30 teams in the country with wins coming by 30 points and losses all coming by one point.

But the B10 didn't beat OOC Top 30 teams. Overwhelmingly they lost to them OOC.

What's most predictive is that PSU will lose and lose close games. That's biggest stat they have.

BTW, you couldn't be more wrong about "my theory". That's a load of crap you are using to rationalize a huge flaw in KP just like all the years you tried to defend the concept that the hot hand doesn't exist.
 
If you truly believe this you should be making a killing off Vegas then. Bet heavily against Penn State the rest of the year and the Big 10 in the NCAAT.

You can't actually think PSU will make the NCAAT, can you?
 
But the B10 didn't beat OOC Top 30 teams. Overwhelmingly they lost to them OOC.

What's most predictive is that PSU will lose and lose close games. That's biggest stat they have.

BTW, you couldn't be more wrong about "my theory". That's a load of crap you are using to rationalize a huge flaw in KP just like all the years you tried to defend the concept that the hot hand doesn't exist.

Just admit you don't know what you're talking about. You don't know what KenPom does, you've never attempted to understand it, you don't listen when people explain it and then you rant about things that are addressed within the methodology itself.

And of course I don't think Penn State will make the NCAAT, they only have ten wins. That's never been the question or point at all.
 
It's not as if Kenpom is an outlier. Besides RPI, which was ditched for a reason, all of the objective attempts at ranking teams think PSU is "better" than what it's win/loss record might suggest.
 
I understand a lot more than you give me credit for, but I disagree with it and have shown you why. But you are a member of his cult.
 
FWIW, by my count the Big 10 and ACC have the following wins against top 30 teams:

Big 10: 31 wins out of 153 total OOC games (they play a 20 game conference schedule) = 20.2% of their OOC games are top 30 wins
ACC: 35 wins out of 191 total OOC games = 18.3% of their OOC games are top 30 wins

So for the point that the Big 10 doesn't have any good OOC wins comparatively (to other major conferences) and that the Big 10 is a circular self-fulfilling OOC prophecy, I think that's likely false as well - since obviously the OOC games and SOS therein have nothing to do with the SOS of the Big 10 for these purposes.
 
Last edited:
I understand a lot more than you give me credit for, but I disagree with it and have shown you why. But you are a member of his cult.

No you don't seem to understand. You just asked if I thought Penn State was an NCAAT team when I've said repeatedly that KenPom is a predictive measure whereas we all know the NCAAT is based - at least partially - on record.

And there is nothing statistically predictive at all about "losing close games" other than you're more likely to continue to play close games if you keep playing teams in the SOS range that you've been playing.
 
Ohio State waxed Cincy early in the season when the Buckeyes were playing well and Woods was looking like all Big-Ten. Close losses probably help Ken-Pom rating.

Nebraska was a different team before they lost one of their better players too. And Tim Miles' shittyness set in
 
Standing behind these MILLENNIAL kempon stat frauds like how Numbers and others kept defending the gibberish that there is NO such thing as the hot hand in basketball.
 
And there's no such thing as a hot hand...

Of course shooters can go on a "hot streak" and shoot above their average for a limited period of time, no one denies that. But it's meaningless to try to predict when a "hot hand" will start, end or how long it will last, since it's random. So it's not a useful stat to try to measure or rely on.
 
I just think the big10 is overrated as a conference. They have 6 bad teams. The top 3 teams are the only good ones, and they can't match the top 3 from the ACC or the Big12.

I would be interested in seeing your list of the top 3 teams in the Big 12, because the top of that conference just screams "a whole lot of mediocre" this year. I certainly trust Michigan and Michigan State over anyone at the top of the Big 12 right now, especially with the injury/player issues Kansas has suffered.
 
One salient point here is that it's entirely plausible that Wake could show drastic improvement next year with a new and competent coach without necessarily winning a bunch more games. Fortunately that will be clear in the advanced stats for those who care to understand them. And if that's the case we can expect the wins to eventually come (or a bunch of close losses I guess :/).
 
Wins count more than "good losses".

But the opponent and margin matters, right? I think even you'd hopefully agree that blowout wins over crappy teams like Houston Baptist, etc. combined with close losses to teams like Duke are more indicative of a good team than close wins over minnows and blowout losses to the good teams, even if the result is the same number of wins, yes?
 
Here's the end of it. A 20% win percentage is a THEORY. A 40% three point shooting is from ACTUAL events.

In THEORY Wake would beat PSU about 20% of the time. It's a FACT that Players DOES hit 40% of his shots.

But the hot hand doesn't exist.
 
Back
Top