• 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!

Goodbye RPI...Hello NET

Rchild will be devastated. Using a metric that includes wins and losses will not be good for Manning and the Deacs.
 
"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."

Both of these things are dumb.
 
...so beating Duke in November is given as much weight as beating them in late February. Also, going on a 10 game winning streak at the end of the year means nothing.
 
knowell said:
Rchild will be devastated. Using a metric that includes wins and losses will not be good for Manning and the Deacs.
Click to expand...

I’ve posted several times that I wish Kenpom had a version of his ranking that accounted for Wins and Losses. I don’t really care if that’s good for Manning or not.
 
Shooshmoo said:
"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."

Both of these things are dumb.
Click to expand...

deacsrus said:
...so beating Duke in November is given as much weight as beating them in late February. Also, going on a 10 game winning streak at the end of the year means nothing.
Click to expand...

The MOV thing is really stupid. The weighting all games equally regardless of date is not. The committee is still free to consider all of that stuff.
 
Should be 20-25 points if they wanna cap it somewhere. 10 is absolutely terrible. You can't count a game that is within 3 or 4 points down the stretch til one team pulls away on FTs and wins by 11 as the same outcome as a game in which one team is just dominant throughout and wins by 33. Awful.
 
Ayo said:
Should be 20-25 points if they wanna cap it somewhere. 10 is absolutely terrible. You can't count a game that is within 3 or 4 points down the stretch til one team pulls away on FTs and wins by 11 as the same outcome as a game in which one team is just dominant throughout and wins by 33. Awful.
Click to expand...

This. 25 seems about right. It captures that you completely dominated the other team without creating a hypothetical incentive to keep your walkons on the bench and run up this score. (This “incentive” is entirely subconscious and likely would have very minimal effect on game outcomes or rankings, but still.)
 
Ayo said:
Should be 20-25 points if they wanna cap it somewhere. 10 is absolutely terrible. You can't count a game that is within 3 or 4 points down the stretch til one team pulls away on FTs and wins by 11 as the same outcome as a game in which one team is just dominant throughout and wins by 33. Awful.
Click to expand...

had an old boss who told me about the college basketball game that cured him from gambling. Shockingly I found a report of it. I believe my old boss had Georgia +8. From his report, they trailed by 5 with the ball with 33 seconds left. That's when this happened
 
Wonder how much the C-USA scheme has to do with this change.
 
I'd be curious to know if the 10 point ceiling is backed by statistics or just a gut feel pick by the committee.

Sure, you occasionally have close games that push to 10 because of free throws or whatever, but you also have games that feature 20 point deficits until the last 5 minutes of garbage time when a team hits a few meaningless 3's to lose by 8 or 9. 10 seems low but 20 seems high. Even then, what are you really measuring? It's basketball - even in the NBA playoffs you have teams that trade blowouts and go to 7 games. The margins are nowhere close to as important as the win or loss while factoring in efficiency/location/schedule.

The whole idea that late games count more than others has always been ridiculous. Nothing's perfect, but on its face this seems like a huge improvement.
 
At least with NET, we'll have our highest rating ever this season regardless of record!
:eek:
 
DCDeac said:
I'd be curious to know if the 10 point ceiling is backed by statistics or just a gut feel pick by the committee.

Sure, you occasionally have close games that push to 10 because of free throws or whatever, but you also have games that feature 20 point deficits until the last 5 minutes of garbage time when a team hits a few meaningless 3's to lose by 8 or 9. 10 seems low but 20 seems high. Even then, what are you really measuring? It's basketball - even in the NBA playoffs you have teams that trade blowouts and go to 7 games. The margins are nowhere close to as important as the win or loss while factoring in efficiency/location/schedule.

The whole idea that late games count more than others has always been ridiculous. Nothing's perfect, but on its face this seems like a huge improvement.
Click to expand...

Yeah the fact that they are factoring in efficiency will bring those bigger margins in to some extent.
 
Well now when we go into Cameron and lose by 40 and get credited for a 10 point loss, or...something.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top