• 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!

Worst Team in ACC History? Wake 2012 might challenge Wake 2011

After this year, which team will be remembered as worst in ACC history?

  • Total voters
    77
  • Poll closed .
This is like during the tournament when kenpom predicts Kentucky has a 70% chance to win and they lose he gets flamed on twitter. Because 70% = 100%.
 
Last edited:
Fans see high numbers for their team and say OMG WE'RE GONNA WIN because a lot of the time when they're talking to each other they're confident that they will win and say "95% shot we win" and to them that = 100%
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Team A:

Record: 30-3
Close Games (5 points or less): 13-1
Blowouts (20+): 7

Team B:

Record: 28-4
Close Games (5 points or less): 5-4
Blowouts (20+): 16

Who are you taking?
Click to expand...

completely impossible to make any sort of intelligent pick.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Cool I'll take Team B everytime barring the SOS being absurdly apart from each other.
Click to expand...


There are teams in the kenpom top 20 right now with SOS absurdly apart from each other.

And team B's profile kind of suggests that they might have played an easy schedule.

Like a Memphis some years or a really good mid-major team.
 
Alright so let's assume that the SOS is similar (within 50 spots).

The following breakdown has occurred between the two teams:

Team A:

33 games:
7 games (20+ point victories)
12 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
14 games (between +5 and -5)

This means that they played 14 games which they should on average be around 7-7, which would have placed their record on average at 24-9.

Team B:

32 games:
16 games (20+ point victories)
7 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
9 games (between -5 and +5)

So Team B has blown out exactly half their opponents, had 7 games which were in a reasonable margin, and 9 games which were close. They went 5-4 in these games (an average record) and if they played a similar schedule to Team A had 9 more games where they blew the opponent out.

Obviously matchups would need to be taken into account, but Team B by most metrics would be a far superior team based on a season long body of work rather than your record in 13 or 14 close games providing a much smaller sample size.
 
ChrisL68 said:
There are teams in the kenpom top 20 right now with SOS absurdly apart from each other.
Click to expand...

Agreed which is why he adjusts for strength of schedule and for the purposes of this hypothetical I said they were equivalent.

I don't think either team would be favored to win this matchup on a neutral court in a tournament setting by more than 60-65% but this is a pretty extreme difference IMO.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Alright so let's assume that the SOS is similar (within 50 spots).

The following breakdown has occurred between the two teams:

Team A:

33 games:
7 games (20+ point victories)
12 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
14 games (between +5 and -5)

This means that they played 14 games which they should on average be around 7-7, which would have placed their record on average at 24-9.

Team B:

32 games:
16 games (20+ point victories)
7 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
9 games (between -5 and +5)

So Team B has blown out exactly half their opponents, had 7 games which were in a reasonable margin, and 9 games which were close. They went 5-4 in these games (an average record) and if they played a similar schedule to Team A had 9 more games where they blew the opponent out.

Obviously matchups would need to be taken into account, but Team B by most metrics would be a far superior team based on a season long body of work rather than your record in 13 or 14 close games providing a much smaller sample size.
Click to expand...

sorry blind number are a ridiculous question to ask.

also

12 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
14 games (between +5 and -5)"

This is not reasonable either it coudl be they won 11 games 20+ ands lost once by 7

OR it could be they won 7 games by 20+ and lost 5 games by 6+.

There's a huge spread. that number tells nothing.
 
I still fail to completely understand why you guys are taking it as a given that a team with 8 games finishing between a 5 point win and a 5 points loss should be 4-4.


You know that "it" factor that nobody can never truly describe, but that they can see it with their own eyes? Sometimes something as abstract as that can help explain why a team goes an absurd 13-1 in close games.
 
deacvision7 said:
I still fail to completely understand why you guys are taking it as a given that a team with 8 games finishing between a 5 point win and a 5 points loss should be 4-4.


You know that "it" factor that nobody can never truly describe, but that they can see it with their own eyes? Sometimes something as abstract as that can help explain why a team goes an absurd 13-1 in close games.
Click to expand...

Childress was lucky.

Also, Romo is unlucky. Just kidding. /flame
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Team A:

Record: 30-3
Close Games (5 points or less): 13-1
Blowouts (20+): 7

Team B:

Record: 28-4
Close Games (5 points or less): 5-4
Blowouts (20+): 16

Who are you taking?
Click to expand...

Team A all day. Team B probably isn't going to blow out a 30-3 team, so I'll take my chances with the team who has shown they can win close games.
 
deacvision7 said:
I still fail to completely understand why you guys are taking it as a given that a team with 8 games finishing between a 5 point win and a 5 points loss should be 4-4.
Click to expand...

Because as the number of games a team plays closer than 5 points increases, the record would be expected to asymptote towards a .500 record.
 
deacvision7 said:
I still fail to completely understand why you guys are taking it as a given that a team with 8 games finishing between a 5 point win and a 5 points loss should be 4-4.


You know that "it" factor that nobody can never truly describe, but that they can see it with their own eyes? Sometimes something as abstract as that can help explain why a team goes an absurd 13-1 in close games.
Click to expand...

Sounds anecdotal. Must be rejected.
 
Wakeforest22890 said:
Because as the number of games a team plays closer than 5 points increases, the record would be expected to asymptote towards a .500 record.
Click to expand...

#s how about the uselessnes of this?

"12 games (between winning by 20, and losing by 6+)
14 games (between +5 and -5)"

This is not reasonable either it coudl be they won 11 games 20+ ands lost once by 7

OR it could be they won 7 games by 20+ and lost 5 games by 6+.
 
So with their win over Klempsun, BC is already better than our team from last year.

End Thread
 
BillBrasky said:
So with their win over Klempsun, BC is already better than our team from last year.

End Thread
Click to expand...

No, our win over Iowa was a better win than Clemson per the kenpom ratings. That win made them very comparable at the same point in the season.

First 16 Games of the Season:

2011 Wake
W-L: 7-9
Best Wins: 80, 231, 232
Worst Losses: 297, 263, 205

2012 BC
W-L: 6-10
Best Wins: 98, 164, 244
Worst Losses: 252, 231, 215

kenpom rankings
 
If they get a second conference win, with 14 games remaining, then they will surpass us. Its gonna happen.
 
BillBrasky said:
If they get a second conference win, with 14 games remaining, then they will surpass us. Its gonna happen.
Click to expand...

Probably against us in Boston next weekend at noon. Both teams will be coming off a Thursday night road game in NC. It might be the worst played game ever.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top