Ken Pom

[JTG]

Even though I am an auditor by trade, I seldom look at KenPom. All that stuff makes my head hurt. But I was listening to a radio program today, and the commentator mentioned that KenPom was the most accurate at NCAA predictions. My questions is, even with our recent swoon, we are still #27. I thought we'd be somewhere in the 50s. Did the Big East do such a phenomenal job OCC that schedule strength is making the conference look marvelous? Our schedule strength is listed at 18th. All that being said, I hope KenPom is correct.

[Juice]

Even though I am an auditor by trade, I seldom look at KenPom. All that stuff makes my head hurt. But I was listening to a radio program today, and the commentator mentioned that KenPom was the most accurate at NCAA predictions. My questions is, even with our recent swoon, we are still #27. I thought we'd be somewhere in the 50s. Did the Big East do such a phenomenal job OCC that schedule strength is making the conference look marvelous? Our schedule strength is listed at 18th. All that being said, I hope KenPom is correct.

It's not all scheduling. It takes into account efficiency on offense and defense, tempo, the other team, etc.

[mid major]

Yeah but still. We are a 7th seed in KenPom. After the SJU loss we sat pretty in the rpi at 29. Then we lose to Nova at home and our rpi tanked at 44. There seem to be some discrepancy within all these sites. I still can't believe Lunardi has us solidly in. Although he did say last year we were in if we win our first game against MU in MSG. He was right but we also ended up in the play in game. I still can't believe the 4th best team in the BE was not better than the 5th best team in the A10. I'm not crazy about being part of the play in game again.

[Juice]

Yeah but still. We are a 7th seed in KenPom. After the SJU loss we sat pretty in the rpi at 29. Then we lose to Nova at home and our rpi tanked at 44. There seem to be some discrepancy within all these sites. I still can't believe Lunardi has us solidly in. Although he did say last year we were in if we win our first game against MU in MSG. He was right but we also ended up in the play in game. I still can't believe the 4th best team in the BE was not better than the 5th best team in the A10. I'm not crazy about being part of the play in game again.

No duh. RPI only takes into account who you beat and who they've beaten. KenPom takes into account many more factors like how many points did you score, how many did you give up, in how many possessions, etc.

[Drew]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Kenpom uses past performance as part of his ranking. So if a team has been good in years prior, they get a boost. Which seems like pretty bad practice to me.

[mid major]

No duh. RPI only takes into account who you beat and who they've beaten. KenPom takes into account many more factors like how many points did you score, how many did you give up, in how many possessions, etc.

Go easy. I'm starting to get this. So a couple of weeks ago Dayton completely shits the bed against Dookane and their rpi went from 33 to 37. I ain't good but I'm sure slow.

[XUFan09]

Correct me if I am wrong, but Kenpom uses past performance as part of his ranking. So if a team has been good in years prior, they get a boost. Which seems like pretty bad practice to me.
Only in the beginning of the season, when the sample size is too small. He takes into account the value of returning players and the value of recruits to set up a preseason ranking. Then, as the season progresses, he slowly weans the system off its preseason predictions until it's removed completely in December or January.

[RoseyMuskie]

09 - How much does the "luck" factor come into play? I'm under the impression X's ratings are being boosted because our wins are blowouts, and losses are tight.

[XUFan09]

09 - How much does the "luck" factor come into play? I'm under the impression X's ratings are being boosted because our wins are blowouts, and losses are tight.
Correct, it's pretty straightforward math in general (with just the technical details possibly being tricky). Obviously, Pomeroy can't account for the subjective aspects of individual close games, so "luck" rankings have to be taken with a grain of salt, but it does play a more significant role than a lot of fans appreciate.

I know a lot of fans like to trot out the tired line, "Good teams win close games." Interestingly, I've read studies on close-game scenarios that show a much higher correlation with experience than with team quality. Jay Wright actually commented on this in the post game press conference, that the Xavier players needed more experience playing together to perform well down the stretch. I don't know how good Xavier will be next season, but I think it's safe to say that between (likely) better luck and more experience, the close-game record will be MUCH better. It would be nice if that started at the end of this season, though...

[MuskieFN]

Xavier is #28 in the Sagarin Ratings and #30 in the ESPN BPI. All are available to the selection committee too.

[Juice]

Correct, it's pretty straightforward math in general (with just the technical details possibly being tricky). Obviously, Pomeroy can't account for the subjective aspects of individual close games, so "luck" rankings have to be taken with a grain of salt, but it does play a more significant role than a lot of fans appreciate.

I know a lot of fans like to trot out the tired line, "Good teams win close games." Interestingly, I've read studies on close-game scenarios that show a much higher correlation with experience than with team quality. Jay Wright actually commented on this in the post game press conference, that the Xavier players needed more experience playing together to perform well down the stretch. I don't know how good Xavier will be next season, but I think it's safe to say that between (likely) better luck and more experience, the close-game record will be MUCH better. It would be nice if that started at the end of this season, though...

Much how run differential in MLB can separate two teams with similar records but differing run differentials or be predictive of whether a team is supposed to regress or improve the next season

[WCWIII]

The thing about RPI rank is that it is relative. There are big jumps (10 spots) when we lost at home, in part, because losses at home count as 1.4 losses in the RPI formula and part because there are a bunch of teams with similar RPI's. rpiforecast (http://www.rpiforecast.com/teams/ct/Xavier.html)now runs simulations with conference games included taking into account the exact formula and all the possibilities of all the other teams as well. As most of could guess, I'm nervous if we finish with 19 wins (not Dayton again) and not so if we get 20 wins or more.

Final Record W-L pctg. Expected RPI Probability
22-12 64.71% 20.3 6.92%
21-13 61.76% 28.5 15.54%
20-13 60.61% 40.6 14.33%
19-13 59.38% 52.8 35.07%
20-14 58.82% 36.3 5.34%
19-14 57.58% 49.3 6.56%
18-14 56.25% 63.6 16.23%

[xcellentx]

The thing to remember is that none of these rankings are in a vacuum. It isn't just about what one team does on one night, but what every team does the whole season. Teams will rise and fall based on how the teams around them do as well as how the teams that impact the SOS of those teams do as well. A bad loss may not hurt a team so much if other teams they have played get good wins and the teams around them don't improve their resumes. I think RPI is generally more useful when used in blocks of teams (top 25, top 50, top 100, 200+, etc) than it ever is to say that the 35th team is better than the 40th team.

[gladdenguy]

Final Record W-L pctg. Expected RPI Probability
22-12 64.71% 20.3 6.92%
21-13 61.76% 28.5 15.54%
20-13 60.61% 40.6 14.33%
19-13 59.38% 52.8 35.07%
20-14 58.82% 36.3 5.34%
19-14 57.58% 49.3 6.56%
18-14 56.25% 63.6 16.23%

Looking at those numbers it is amazing that if we win Saturday and lose our first round tourney game our RPI will be higher than it would even if we lost Saturday and won 2 games in the tourney. Wow.