Top 25 talk

[AndOne]

One thing I really thought stunk about the national tournament last year was that a team which had lost 4 of its last 5 games before the tournament began got to host not one, but two games to begin the tournament. They also hosted the conference tourney prior to the start of the national tourney, and couldn't even win a first round conference tourney game on their own home floor. The 1st round conference tourney loss was their 4th loss in 5 games.  As a reward for this stellar finish, the national selection committee rewarded them with the first two games at home, while the team that finished 2nd in the conference regular season and then won the conference tourney was sent on a seven hour bus ride for their 1st round game. Sorry, but this doesn't make sense to me. Makes me think someone at the school had an in with a member of the committee. 

AndOne, suggesting that Augustana was a higher seed than North Central because someone "had an in" with a tournament committee member is silly.  Come on.

The Division III Tournament seeding process is spelled out very clearly in the handbook.  Timing of losses is not a factor that is weighed at all.  On selection day, Augustana's QOWI and in-region winning % were both better than North Central's.  See here:

http://www.d3sports.com/post/index.php?topic=2910.180

1-10
Amherst     12.160     24-1
Lawrence    11.682    22-0
Worcester Polytech    11.250    20-3
Mississippi College    11.154    25-1
Tufts    11.000    20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher    11.000    22-1
Lincoln    10.688    12-4  Pool B
Wittenberg    10.652    20-3
Gordon    10.560    22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon    10.550    16-4

11-20
Virginia Wesleyan    10.481    24-3
Augustana    10.478    19-4 Pool C
Cortland State    10.440    22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.)    10.400    22-3 Pool C
Transylvania    10.370    23-4
Trinity (Texas)    10.316    16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater    10.304    18-5
William Paterson    10.240    19-6
Hope    10.211    17-2
North Central    10.095    16-5

That is why Augie was the higher seed.

TQ-----

Of course I was being silly when I mentioned someone having an "in" with the committee! 

HOWEVER, if QOWI and in-region winning % are the determining factors, North Central's were above those of St. Thomas. Soooooooo----why did NCC get screwed by being the team that had to take the 7 hour bus ride? It seems St. Thomas should have been the one making the trip! Or am I missing something?

Life is never fair, but by the placement NC rec'd it sure looks like it didn't do them much good to beat conference champ Augie by 25 when Augie beat them by only 6, to beat the team that eventually finished 3rd in the nation 2 out of 3, and to win the conference tourney. For that their reward was a 7 hour bus ride. I know I'm crying in my beer, and we can't change the past. Maybe the core of the problem is the perception that, by its assignment, the NCAA Selection Committee just didn't seem to value NC's accomplishments. Ok--the bitch session is over.    Sorry.

P.S. I hope no team receives this kind of treatment this year--if thats possible. But, as I think many here would agree, there is no shortage of mental deficiency at the NCAA!

[Pat Coleman]

St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.

[Greek Tragedy]

Even as a Pointer fan, I'm surprised that the dawgs jumped from #5 to #1 after seeing then #7 Ohio Northern beat then #1 Wooster on their home court, #6 Wittenberg and a "just out of the top 25" La Crosse team.

And obviously the pollsters knew that St. Thomas' All-American didn't play by dropping them only one spot after losing to La Crosse at home.

[fpc85]

The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

I think that's a really fair poll.  While Amherst might complain about dropping, they actually picked up a few points and all three teams at the top are neck and neck.

Whitworth is probably the team that can cry no respect at this point.  They've been quite impressive early on and have yet to lose.

[Ralph Turner]

The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

Amherst gained 6 more first place votes and 7 votes total, after a very unimpressive win over a team that my alma mater (McMurry) beat by 13 earlier in the month.

I think that Amherst held its ground very nicely.

[PrideSportBBallGuy]

Believe it or not. I won't say much about Greensboro not getting one vote.  I think they should, but the pollsters spoke.  Although I would say I totally disagree with CNU getting 4 votes after going 2-2.  I still don't understand how they got votes in the first place.  I think Guilford is very underated team.  I am sure since they beat AU that that probably would have pushed Guilford into the polls. Even still I will say I am a little disappointed Greensboro didn't get a vote.  I am sure somebody can tell me, because I don't have the time to figure out how many teams with at least 9 wins didn't get votes and how many teams with at least 3 losses got votes.

Of the 3 teams that got #1 votes my number 1 team is Ohio Northern.

[David Collinge]

Amherst gained 6 more first place votes and 7 votes total, [...]

That suggests to me that the Amherst believers (who had them in 2nd last week) are still believers, and the rest are not convinced.

I'm surprised, considering how many times I posted that Amherst would end up as #1 with 15-17 1st place votes.  Just goes to show that one can obsess over every detail of the poll for 7+ years and still not have a clue...

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

My #1 team coming into the season was Ohio Northern and I'll stick with them for a while, but the Point is looking pretty good at times this year.  If they can get consistent by February, they could do it again.

[ScotsFan]

The selection speaks volumes. After reading and commenting the last week, I am dissappointed but not surprised.

Yes it does.  It speaks volumes for playing some tough competition in the nonconference portion of your schedule which Amherst didn't come close to doing. 

Let's look at the opponent's combined winning percentage of the teams in the top 3:

UW-SP's opponents have a combined winning percentage of 0.568.  They also have wins over the current #12, #18, #21 and #25 teams in the d3hoops poll and they are undefeated against d3 competition.

ONU's opponents have an even better combined winning percentage of 0.634 and they have wins vs. the current #4, #7 and #25 teams, but they did suffer what now looks like a very uncharacteristic loss to previously ranked B-W.

And then there's Amherst whose opponents have a stellar combined winning percentage of 0.425?!  Only 2 of their 9 opponents have above 0.500 records?!  Oh and they have beaten the current #21 team in the poll (the only ranked opponent they have faced).

I think it's pretty clear as to why Amherst hasn't gained the confidence of many of the pollsters when you compare those #'s listed above.  Besides, why are you complaining?  We all know that Amherst will breeze through the rest of their schedule, garner the #1 seed out of the Northeast Region, get one of the byes again, as well as get picked to host another sectional and breeze their way to Salem in one of the easiest brackets in the tournament.  Why should you get all worked up about that???

[Ralph Turner]

I copied this from the NESCAC board where I responded to a disheartened Amherst poster.

There's been a fair amount of discussion about this in the multi-regional boards, where there's a topic devoted to the Top 25 poll.

Here are some enlightening numbers:

Team A: Record of opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Team B: Record of opponents played to date: 70-32, .686
Team C: Record of opponents played to date: 65-49, .570

That's all the games the opponents have played against teams other than the one we're ranking (you can add nine or ten losses and one or zero wins if you like).

Or this list:
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 35-40, .466
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 63-26, .707
Record of D-III opponents played to date: 54-27, .667

A is Amherst. B is Ohio Northern. C is UW-Stevens Point.

Walzy, from the other side of the country, let me re-frame this question!

(Can you not analyze the respect that Amherst is getting?)

Donald Trump has just come to you and said,  "You are my apprentice.  Look at these 3 companies in the "D3widget market".  They can all be purchased for the same share price.  Here are current performance data showing relative domination in their markets.  Now the market is national and it is still early.  You can look at the relative performances of their recent competition.

"I want to buy only one.  How do you rank them?  And why?"

[cardinalpride]

St. Thomas had a 20-5 in-region winning region, however, which is actually better ... go figure ... than a 16-5 regional record.

Remember that these first-round single games are essentially 8-9 games -- the difference between the two teams is going to be minor. But the differences are usually visible if you get the facts right.

Pat, wouldn't you agree an 8-9 game should be played on a neutral site?  Not have one team travel over 300 miles to play a road game in the 1st round.

[PrideSportBBallGuy]

If they can get consistent by February, they could do it again.

That is my problem sometimes with the poll.  I never once thought Virginia Wesleyan was the number #1 team preseason.  They had a very good run at the end of last year, winning alot of close games en route to that title.  There are a lot of what-if's I know, but that is just my opinion.  Sometimes it doesn't matter how well you play until post-season comes along.  

I thought Flordia winning the d-1 national championship was a team that put up good games down the stretch.  I thought they had better teams in the past that should have won.  I know in most peoples office polls Flordia wasn't a team they had winning it all, because they never seem to play consistent enough in March.  Losing first round games in the past.

Scotsfan-
thanks for that post.  That makes my power rankings for the top 3 look even better.
I will have to share that with my USASouth friends.

[Ralph Turner]

The President:  "Okay D3 fans, let's call this meeting to order.  We have a quorum.

"The motion made by ScotsFan reads:

Whereas Amherst fans are getting their feelings hurt, and

Whereas Amherst is undefeated, and

Whereas Amherst really does not like Williams,

We hereby move that Amherst is the unanimous #1 (all 625 votes) for the remaining weeks of the regular season and shall be seeded to defend that ranking by playing their first round games in the NCAA playoffs in Wooster's Timken Gymnasium and then sent to Wisconsin for the Sectionals.

All in favor, say Aye!"

[Titan Q]

There has been a lot of discussion this week about the poll, records, strength of schedules, etc..  My take is that if strength of schedule is not factored into the D3hoops.com Top 25 equation, we'd end up with a poll that looks like the Quality of Wins Index list. 

Here is the final QOWI - with in-region winning % also listed - from last year, heading into the tourney. 

Amherst     12.160     24-1
Lawrence    11.682    22-0
Worcester Polytech    11.250    20-3
Mississippi College    11.154    25-1
Tufts    11.000    20-5 Pool C
St. John Fisher    11.000    22-1
Lincoln    10.688    12-4  Pool B
Wittenberg    10.652    20-3
Gordon    10.560    22-3 Pool C
Carnegie Mellon    10.550    16-4
Virginia Wesleyan    10.481    24-3
Augustana    10.478    19-4 Pool C
Cortland State    10.440    22-3 Pool C
York (Pa.)    10.400    22-3 Pool C
Transylvania    10.370    23-4
Trinity (Texas)    10.316    16-3 Pool C
UW-Whitewater    10.304    18-5
William Paterson    10.240    19-6
Hope    10.211    17-2
North Central    10.095    16-5         
Bates    10.091    16-6 (not selected)
Carroll    10.087    19-4 Pool C
Ursinus    10.080    20-5
Baldwin-Wallace    10.077    22-4
Washington U.    10.050    14-6 (not selected)
Wooster    10.042    21-3 Pool C
Carleton    10.000    18-5 Pool C
St. Thomas    9.960    20-5
Baruch    9.958    21-3 Pool C
Alvernia    9.958    21-3
Illinois Wesleyan    9.952    15-6 Pool C

----------
Final Four scores:

Wittenberg 64
Amherst 60
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa7.htm


Virginia Wesleyan 81
IWU 79
http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ncaa5.htm


IWU 71
Amherst 68
http://www.iwu.edu/~iwunews/sports/mbb2006/ncaa6.htm


Virginia Wesleyan 59
Wittenberg 56
http://www4.wittenberg.edu/news/athletics/mbasketball/statistics/05-06statistics/ncaa8.htm
----------

Amherst played Wittenberg and IWU tough, but the gap between, say, IWU and Amherst certainly wasn't what the QOWI would indicate.  The D3hoops.com voters try their best to factor everything in to create a poll that accurately reflects how teams stack up.  It usually ends up being very accurate.