MBB: Southern California Intercollegiate Athletic Conference

[scandihoovian]

I know I'm being something of persistent hair splitter - but I am still trying to figure out why Alvernia would necessarily be in a stronger position than CLU at this point.  In looking at their schedule it does not appear that their losses have come at the hands of top notch opponents - and I am also trying to figure out who they've beaten to give them a signature win.  So to use Pat's phrasing, I guess I'm just curious as to why their wins counteract their losses more than CLU's.

On another note, tomorrow night should be a much more exciting evening of basketball than last Saturday.  CMS has a chance (at home) to make an impact on the conference race, and as Bob already pointed out, Redlands is in a more or less must win situation at CLU. It will be fun to watch events unfold...

[Pat Coleman]

Pat, you may only get one ballot, but I am sure your campaigning carries weight...

I don't campaign.

[Pat Coleman]

I know I'm being something of persistent hair splitter - but I am still trying to figure out why Alvernia would necessarily be in a stronger position than CLU at this point. 

Because the front page story is talking about NCAA selection. That's based on regional records, as always.

Alvernia is 16-2 in-region and Cal Lutheran is 8-5.

I hope there's not another attempt to parse things coming from you. This is getting tiresome.

[David Collinge]

I know I'm being something of persistent hair splitter - but I am still trying to figure out why Alvernia would necessarily be in a stronger position than CLU at this point.  In looking at their schedule it does not appear that their losses have come at the hands of top notch opponents - and I am also trying to figure out who they've beaten to give them a signature win.  So to use Pat's phrasing, I guess I'm just curious as to why their wins counteract their losses more than CLU's.

You're using language of poll voting ("signature win," "losses at the hands of top notch opponents"), but the Alvernia discussion revolves around their Pool C chances which does not (directly) consider these things.  Alvernia has an in-region win percentage of .889, while CLU's is just .615.  As this is one of the five primary selection criteria, Alvernia has a significant leg up on CLU if it ever came down to a decision between them for a Pool C bid.  I don't know how their QoWIs stack up, but the disparity in the regional win % suggests that Alvernia's QoWI is probably also higher than CLU's. 

By contrast, the poll voters would never do something as idiotic as to compare Alvernia's record against Mid-Atlantic teams to CLU's record against Western teams and hope to find any useful signs there.  Instead they look at things like "signature wins;" Alvernia's best win is probably (ho-hum) Baldwin-Wallace, and CLU's is (yawn) Redlands, so that may help explain why neither team is getting a sniff at the poll.

[sciacguru]

DC...

Thanks for taking the 1 minute to simply explain the discussion at hand.  I hope it did not fatique you in any way.

[scandihoovian]

Pat-

I am just a guy who's trying to understand the big picture, and I appreciate replies such as David's which broaden my understanding, and hopefully the understanding of others on this board.

[Pat Coleman]

I guess I'm amazed that after so many years of the same playoff system, there is still such misunderstanding of it. It's not like you guys are new to the site.

[diehardfan]

I'll try and make this into a proper table when I get the chance....

team	W-L	.Pct	QOWI
UW-Stevens Point (WIAC)	17-1	.944	11.667
St. Thomas (MIAC)	20-2	.909	10.364
St. John's (MIAC)	17-2	.895	10.211
Whitworth (NWC)	16-2	.889	10.167
Occidental (SCIAC)	9-2	.818	10.182
Redlands (SCIAC)	9-2	.818	09.455
Puget Sound (NWC)	13-3	.813	09.625
UW-Oshkosh (WIAC)	15-4	.789	10.158
Loras (IIAC)	13-4	.765	09.706
Coe (IIAC)	14-5	.737	09.737
Lewis & Clark (NWC)	11-4	.733	09.214
Bethel (MIAC)	14-6	.700	08.800

               
(This table courtesy of GS. You're welcome, April. )

My Projected West Rankings:

1)   Stevens Point
2)   St Thomas
3)   St Johns
4)   Whitworth
5)   Occidental
6)   Oshkosh
7)   Puget Sound

The next one: Redlands

Sorry guys, you QOWI really stinks!

[Gregory Sager]

I know it might be an issue of regional strength and the number of pool C bids available in the west

You're several years out of date with regard to the way Pool C bids are distributed, 'hoovian. There aren't a fixed number per region anymore; Pool C bids are distributed on a national basis. The West Region could get a dozen of them, or none at all. It's all up to the individual teams under consideration in terms of how they match up in the five primary criteria with the other Pool C candidates across the country. Also, regional strength does not enter into the picture at all. In the eyes of the selection committee, all regions are created equal -- even though the Posting Up consensus is that there are definitely strong and weak regions within D3.

[scandihoovian]

Thanks again to all of you who have posted.  I think I'm starting to get a better grip on things.  I apologize for not having a stronger understanding of the system, I guess it's because until last year it was clear you pretty much had to win the SCIAC to get a berth.

I have a quick question as it relates to QOWI - is it the same formula as football (and do out of region games count)?  I've noticed that Pat has posted some QOWI top 100's on the Pool C board and even if CLU is at 9.2 (which is from my own rough calculation based on the fb formula) that doesn't necessarily put the Kingsmen high up on the list.

And thanks Diehard, for crunching the QOWI's  - just in trying to calculate CLU's I realized how much work that is 

[David Collinge]

Basically, QoWI is calculated as follows:
* Regional games only
* Each win is worth 8 points
* Each road or neutral game is worth 1 point
* You get points based on the regional win % of your opponents as follows:
   > Win % .667 or higher=6 points
   > Win % .500 or higher=4 points
   > Win % .333 of higher=2 points
   > Win % below .333=0 points
* Total up the points and divide by number of regional games

Whether that is the same as football I don't know, or care.  The formula is expressed somewhat differently in the Handbook and in this site's FAQ section (expressed in terms of home/road win/loss over opponent with win % of X = N points), but for me, this is the easiest way to think of it.

And no, 9.2 is not terribly good.

[scandihoovian]

Thanks for the explanation, David.

I've got it, and promise I'll do my best to take over as the "QOWI educator of first resort" on the SCIAC board 

[diehardfan]

I have a quick question as it relates to QOWI - is it the same formula as football (and do out of region games count)?  I've noticed that Pat has posted some QOWI top 100's on the Pool C board and even if CLU is at 9.2 (which is from my own rough calculation based on the fb formula) that doesn't necessarily put the Kingsmen high up on the list.

And thanks Diehard, for crunching the QOWI's  - just in trying to calculate CLU's I realized how much work that is 

The answer to your question is in the FAQs... well, David already answered. Pat sure puts a lot of great stuff on this site. 

It wouldn't take me too long to crunch CLUs if you want me to.... I've probably already got the point values of most of the games they played on the BIG spreadsheet I made last night when doing that spreadsheet.

And yes, it took me forever. Last night at around 1am I was thinking... uhm, why am I doing this again? And why am I doing this many teams again?  And why am I not doing this for the region my alma mater is actually in??? As I was packing for my business trip today at like 3am I felt pretty silly. When I got to work this morning I felt like I was dying. But I was really just tired. The funny part about it is that my eyes were extra sensitive to light... I probably looked like I had a hangover. I think it's time to establish PUA.*

I think it will become clear when the regional rankings are published how much it would have helped the SCIAC teams to play more regional games this year. It's hard to compete win percentage wise when you have the same number of losses (no matter how few) and half the regional wins as Point or the MIAC schools. I understand why you do the things you do.... I just guarantee it will hurt you, and it's a shame, cause I sure would LOVE to be able to see a sectional.  8)

*Posting Up Anonymous

[Pat Coleman]

I apologize that the QOWI calculation setup is not complete and available that we have used in the past here. Since we no longer keep schedule and results in-house, we have to get new software written to do the calculations.

[diehardfan]

I apologize that the QOWI calculation setup is not complete and available that we have used in the past here. Since we no longer keep schedule and results in-house, we have to get new software written to do the calculations.

Well, get on that!  Just kidding!!!!