I know KenPom probably sees a difference but once you get outside the top 150 the outcome of games likely isn't that much in question
KenPom analysis
6,363 Views |
57 Replies |
Last: 6 yr ago by Hop
There probably isn't much of a difference in the probably outcome of the game, especially for a really good team, but there definitely is in the caliber of opponent.
It likely wouldn't matter much for us, since we're probably a top 20 team, but it would matter for a team in the middle to low end of a major conference.
If your question is "how does our schedule compare to other top 20 teams" though there are some other good ones out there. Kentucky, for example, plays Kansas, Louisville, Virginia Tech, UCLA and @West Virginia.
But we'll have to see where the teams shake out before we can say for sure who's schedule is really the toughest. Sometimes schedules that look difficult end up not really being that hard (kind of like ours in 2015-16) and ones that look easy can end up more difficult than expected.
It likely wouldn't matter much for us, since we're probably a top 20 team, but it would matter for a team in the middle to low end of a major conference.
If your question is "how does our schedule compare to other top 20 teams" though there are some other good ones out there. Kentucky, for example, plays Kansas, Louisville, Virginia Tech, UCLA and @West Virginia.
But we'll have to see where the teams shake out before we can say for sure who's schedule is really the toughest. Sometimes schedules that look difficult end up not really being that hard (kind of like ours in 2015-16) and ones that look easy can end up more difficult than expected.
Things could certainly play out differently, right now ours looks the hardest among ranked teams.
Will be very interesting to see where we are after 8 games (Ariz being the 8th game).
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,331
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
In non-conference hoops, the quality of schedule is on the number of top 100 teams you play, not whether you play No. 181 versus No. 269. I'm with GE on this one. The committee on selection Sunday looks at quality wins, not overall SOS.
I am so sick and tired of how GROSSLY UNDERRATED he his based off the media and pre/post-season awards in the SEC!! Admon is one of those gifted players that may not win you a lot of games, but you be damned if he were to every lose you one. He's an all-around player that can ultimately play almost every 1-3 spot. He a good one and I will hate to see the day he leaves. Hands down one of my favorite players over the years besides Caruso and T. Davis.
Your 3 favorite Aggie hoops players of all time are Caruso, Gilder, and Tyler Davis?
This thread is called "KenPom Analysis," and I was explaining how KenPom's SOS numbers work and how our playing a few absolutely atrocious teams could keep our NCSOS from being ranked as high as most people probably think it will.Hop said:
In non-conference hoops, the quality of schedule is on the number of top 100 teams you play, not whether you play No. 181 versus No. 269. I'm with GE on this one. The committee on selection Sunday looks at quality wins, not overall SOS.
I wasn't talking, at all, about what the committee looks at.
But if you're looking at Non-Conference strength of schedule rankings, it very much does matter if you're playing No. 181 vs No. 269.
expresswrittenconsent
Joined:
Nov 11, 2017
Posts:
8,285
How long do you want to ignore this user?
GE said:
Does KenPom rank non-conference strength of schedule? I was just running through the schedules of some of the other top teams and am hard pressed to find another team that is clearly more difficult than ours.
This doesn't isolate just non-conference, but it does have us with the #5 overall hardest schedule moving forward
https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/ranking/future-sos-by-other
1. OU
2. Baylor
3. Texas
4. Kansas
5. A&M
6. Kentucky
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,331
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
That's fine. Feel free to spend your work day fidgeting through numbers that really don't matter a whole lot. I'll spend my work day looking at the games that do matter when the committee looks at A&M's resume' in March.bobinator said:This thread is called "KenPom Analysis," and I was explaining how KenPom's SOS numbers work and how our playing a few absolutely atrocious teams could keep our NCSOS from being ranked as high as most people probably think it will.Hop said:
In non-conference hoops, the quality of schedule is on the number of top 100 teams you play, not whether you play No. 181 versus No. 269. I'm with GE on this one. The committee on selection Sunday looks at quality wins, not overall SOS.
I wasn't talking, at all, about what the committee looks at.
But if you're looking at Non-Conference strength of schedule rankings, it very much does matter if you're playing No. 181 vs No. 269.
This entire thread is about KenPom rankings, if you don't care about numbers that don't matter on selection sunday, why did you click on it? Just to talk crap to people that do want to talk about it?
bobinator said:
This entire thread is about KenPom rankings, if you don't care about numbers that don't matter on selection sunday, why did you click on it? Just to talk crap to people that do want to talk about it?
YOU JUST GOT SANDHOPPED!
BOOM!
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,331
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
Because it's part of my job responsibilities. GE brought up that quality of wins is more relevant than KenPom. I agreed. You were using the KenPom as a basis for discussing who has the more difficult schedule, and that is a poor way to look at strength of schedule because operationally it doesn't matter one ounce whether you beat an over-matched No. 190 team by 20 points or the No. 278 team by 20 points. There is no difference on the court...just on some computer screen using some useless algorithm generated by some statistics guy at a dead-end job pretending to be a basketball expert.bobinator said:
This entire thread is about KenPom rankings, if you don't care about numbers that don't matter on selection sunday, why did you click on it? Just to talk crap to people that do want to talk about it?
I'm pretty sure Ken Pomeroy is doing pretty well for himself these days. He has his site, he writes for The Athletic also, and a lot of other people in the media reference his stats also. Even some coaches have mentioned his stuff before.
The fact that you completely dismiss one of the most referenced college basketball analysts is mind blowing.
The fact that you completely dismiss one of the most referenced college basketball analysts is mind blowing.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,331
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
I dismissed that anybody who has an ounce of basketball knowledge would somehow spend their time discussing his strength of schedule algorithm which is nothing more than a calculated statistic that in NO way properly projects or represents a relevant measure of schedule strength.bobinator said:
I'm pretty sure Ken Pomeroy is doing pretty well for himself these days. He has his site, he writes for The Athletic also, and a lot of other people in the media reference his stats also. Even some coaches have mentioned his stuff before.
The fact that you completely dismiss one of the most referenced college basketball analysts is mind blowing.
It blows my mind that someone apparently sees no difference in the variance between Hofstra and Texas Southern (hypothetical example a difference of No. 270 and No. 230), and say Oklahoma State and Kansas (hypothetical example a difference of No. 43 and No. 3).
KenPOm stats can be valid in many other measures....just not this one.
This is a great "old man yells at clouds" postHop said:I dismissed that anybody who has an ounce of basketball knowledge would somehow spend their time discussing his strength of schedule algorithm which is nothing more than a calculated statistic that in NO way properly projects or represents a relevant measure of schedule strength.bobinator said:
I'm pretty sure Ken Pomeroy is doing pretty well for himself these days. He has his site, he writes for The Athletic also, and a lot of other people in the media reference his stats also. Even some coaches have mentioned his stuff before.
The fact that you completely dismiss one of the most referenced college basketball analysts is mind blowing.
It blows my mind that someone apparently sees no difference in the variance between Hofstra and Texas Southern (hypothetical example a difference of No. 270 and No. 230), and say Oklahoma State and Kansas (hypothetical example a difference of No. 43 and No. 3).
KenPOm stats can be valid in many other measures....just not this one.
I don't think anyone said any of those things that you said blows your mind.
That's also not how his Non-Conference Strength of Schedule is calculated. There's an entire page dedicated to how he comes up with it, but since I'm sure you don't care to read it, it goes by the teams' offensive and defensive ratings, not their overall rankings.
It takes into account the relative quality of the teams themselves, so it does 'know' that there's a bigger difference between Kansas and Oklahoma State than between Hofstra and Texas Southern.
It's early in the season, but the difference in adjusted EM between #1 Villanova and #40 Vandy is about 11. From #200, you have to go all the way to #324 to get a difference of 11.
That's also not how his Non-Conference Strength of Schedule is calculated. There's an entire page dedicated to how he comes up with it, but since I'm sure you don't care to read it, it goes by the teams' offensive and defensive ratings, not their overall rankings.
It takes into account the relative quality of the teams themselves, so it does 'know' that there's a bigger difference between Kansas and Oklahoma State than between Hofstra and Texas Southern.
It's early in the season, but the difference in adjusted EM between #1 Villanova and #40 Vandy is about 11. From #200, you have to go all the way to #324 to get a difference of 11.
Rest you 2. Rest
For knowing each other personally Hop and Bob sure do tend to get in petty disputes pretty often.
We get into them in person also. I really just like debating things so I like a good nuanced debate about almost anything, I just get annoyed because Hop likes parachuting in mid-thread and debating points that nobody was arguing about. It's like if you're having a debate over what makes the sky blue and Hop jumps in mid conversation to say the sky is overrated and the ground is much better to talk about.
gound/sky analogy has me rolling
No, I was talking more so over since the Turgeon era. Can't forget BJ Holmes, Donald Sloan, and Kris Middleton.
Hop
Joined:
Oct 10, 1999
Posts:
67,331
User Profile
Private Message
How long do you want to ignore this user?
Staff
AG
bobinator said:
We get into them in person also. I really just like debating things so I like a good nuanced debate about almost anything, I just get annoyed because Hop likes parachuting in mid-thread and debating points that nobody was arguing about. It's like if you're having a debate over what makes the sky blue and Hop jumps in mid conversation to say the sky is overrated and the ground is much better to talk about.
Except in this case GE had made the point about quality wins and I said I agreed with him. So I didn't "parachute in" and bring up something out of the blue. That was a natural evolution to that discussion. Bobinator and I just like to joust occasionally on the basketball boards. We actually watch many road games together with the same watching crew, so it's all good despite his inaccurate description of my interaction on this thread.
rca21978
ATM Softball - the lady dancing in the stands and the backstory
in Billy Liucci's TexAgs Premium
14