Top 25 talk

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

I have no issue with where NPU landed in this poll. I'm fine with the Vikes having to scratch and claw their way up the ladder.

One thing's for sure: Wednesday's game @ #16 Illinois Wesleyan and Saturday's home game against ORV Carroll will guarantee that the Vikings won't be able to rest upon their laurels.

I get your point, but I think NP has done more than teams ranked ahead.

Believe me, having been around for the bad old days of MC basketball, I'm thrilled that they're even conversationally relevant for this topic, and how good they've been over the past now several years.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I don't know what better way there is to back up than what I've done. I've looked at the results in the context of the national rankings, in the context of computer rankings, and in their own context (in terms of the consistently high margin of victory, regardless of opponent). I've voted in college and high school polls in the past and this is how I tend to do it. Strength of schedule matters a lot.

But you are also looking at the "context of national rankings" from the admitted, and clearly strong, bias of being a Marietta fan. Nothing against you or you being a fan, but that can and probably is slanting your point of view. I know if my alma mater was considered I would probably worry about giving them too much or too little credit as I try and balance the tint of my glasses along with my pride. I understand your passion and your claim to have voted in a number of polls, but your bias seems to have a lot of weight even if you have good data you are trying to use. Your "tone" and your approach isn't letting others see them.

To be honest, the only reason not to support them for #1 is anchoring bias -- the notion that an initial value influences the setting of future values, as in a negotiation -- or, something like this where changing opinion is required. I had this argument on baseball with regard to anchoring bias for teams that start their season earlier (they tend to be stickier even when northern teams start their seasons), but it never really went anywhere even though it's a very well-researched and accepted cognitive bias.

Speaking of tone - "anchoring bias." You start throwing things out there to blame or discredit voters, they, like me, start to tune you out. Heck, it is a fight just to read through every word you write when you speak down to people you disagree with.

The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. 

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

Hope the Pios take this as the slight that it is at this point, and stay hungry.

And this is a great example of my point. Voters are not on autopilot. If they were, we would get our polls back an hour after we send them out on Sunday evening... not a full 24 hours later when many of us have poured over the data to make decisions. Also... there is more to vote on than who is number one and where we are going to put your Marietta team.

Responsible voter... that is a joke of a statement, especially from someone who claims to have voted in other polls that I assume were for publication. Quit attacking said voters... you are dangerously close to the NJAC poster reference given earlier. Enjoy the season and the fact Marietta isn't being ignored. Plugging for first place votes and saying voters aren't being responsible could actually hurt your team - leaving negative thoughts with people. Hate to see the Pioneers lose a couple of games, the return on you will be pretty harsh from those on here that are known to have long memories (and it won't be me).

I have Marietta #2. Despite their wins, I think Babson is the better team. I think Babson has better talent on the court with their starting five than Marietta. No, that is NOT a slight at Edwards. It is a compliment to how many players on Babson's squad I think can take over a game at any one point. I also think Flannery is better than Edwards (different positions, I know) and has proven he can put his team on his back - and yes, that could backfire on them as well. And please, don't argue each and every player to me as to why they are better... I am just going to ignore it. I have seen Marietta in person. I will probably see them again. I know Babson well as well. I have my opinion as one of the 25 voters and you are not going to change my mind - especially with the approach you have given in here. Other factors will change my mind.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

[sac]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog.

[Mugsy]

Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

No correlation to NPU appearing on top 25 poll for the 1st time since 1999-00 season and appearing on page 666 of this board.   

[HOPEful]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog.

It's actually here...

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

[Gregory Sager]

Suh-weet! This is North Park's first appearance in the poll since week eight of the 1999-00 season. There was a lot of ugly basketball played by the Vikings between then and now, so this really feels like a payoff for a lot of hard work during Tom Slyder's tenure as head coach to climb back from basketball oblivion; in fact, the current NPU senior class went 4-21, 1-13 as freshmen.

Now to keep it going. The first test certainly won't be an easy one, as NPU has to travel to #16 Illinois Wesleyan the day after tomorrow.

No correlation to NPU appearing on top 25 poll for the 1st time since 1999-00 season and appearing on page 666 of this board.   

Leave it to a Wheaton guy to point that out.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3hoops.com/top25/men/2016-17/week2

Thats a link to the poll not your blog.

It's actually here...

http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

Sorry about that... had the wrong link in the paste-queue. Thanks, HOPEful for solving that glitch.

[HOPEful]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

Dave, I think my favorite part about your blog this week is the references to "the usual suspects". This is far and away my biggest problem with human polls. It seems to me that the traditional powers are always given (in my opinion) too much benifit of the doubt. Amherst still has 19 of the 25 first place votes. That isn't to say the Amherst isn't really good. But St. Lawrence is the only team the Lord Jeffs have played so far this season with a winning record. At this point in the season, I don't understand the arguement for ranking Amherst ahead of Marietta and Babson. If these teams were just Team A, Team B, and Team C, I wonder if those same voters wouldn't switch around their votes slightly.

I also recognize the flip side of this coin in that the traditional names are traditional names for a reason.

And Amherst plays Babson on Thursday, so next weeks #1 will either change or have a much stronger resume for being there...

[sac]

14 – Baldwin Wallace (Unchanged)
As with Tufts, my poll predicted Baldwin Wallace would lose to Hope, so I haven't moved them. That said, this is one of those teams you try and better understand despite not being from a group you know well. I nervously watch to see if the shoe will drop on the Yellow Jackets. Shamelessly, I hope they continue to have a great season.

BW and Hope have not played.  Hope played John Carroll last week.  BW lost to Marietta.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Got my blog out a little quicker this week: http://www.d3blogs.com/d3hoops/2016/12/06/daves-top-25-ballot-16-17-week-2/

Dave, I think my favorite part about your blog this week is the references to "the usual suspects". This is far and away my biggest problem with human polls. It seems to me that the traditional powers are always given (in my opinion) too much benifit of the doubt. Amherst still has 19 of the 25 first place votes. That isn't to say the Amherst isn't really good. But St. Lawrence is the only team the Lord Jeffs have played so far this season with a winning record. At this point in the season, I don't understand the arguement for ranking Amherst ahead of Marietta and Babson. If these teams were just Team A, Team B, and Team C, I wonder if those same voters wouldn't switch around their votes slightly.

I also recognize the flip side of this coin in that the traditional names are traditional names for a reason.

And Amherst plays Babson on Thursday, so next weeks #1 will either change or have a much stronger resume for being there...

Yeah - you can have this play out either way as you describe. Amherst got a lot of those first-place votes in the preseason and thus why even if Babson and Marietta have better resumes, pollsters aren't going to change. If I feel they are the number one team in the country, it is going to take something happening to that team usually for me to change my mind -i.e. the mentality. I have changed my first-place vote a very few number of times without that team having lost.

The usual suspects argument is something I have made in the past and why I have left teams off or removed teams. I have to be careful, though, not to then punish those types of teams when they may indeed be good.

14 – Baldwin Wallace (Unchanged)
As with Tufts, my poll predicted Baldwin Wallace would lose to Hope, so I haven't moved them. That said, this is one of those teams you try and better understand despite not being from a group you know well. I nervously watch to see if the shoe will drop on the Yellow Jackets. Shamelessly, I hope they continue to have a great season.

BW and Hope have not played.  Hope played John Carroll last week.  BW lost to Marietta.

SMH - sorry. Complete type/brain fart on my part. Not sure why I was thinking Hope. Will go in and fix now. Thanks for mentioning it.

[ElRetornodelEspencio]

I don't know what better way there is to back up than what I've done. I've looked at the results in the context of the national rankings, in the context of computer rankings, and in their own context (in terms of the consistently high margin of victory, regardless of opponent). I've voted in college and high school polls in the past and this is how I tend to do it. Strength of schedule matters a lot.

But you are also looking at the "context of national rankings" from the admitted, and clearly strong, bias of being a Marietta fan.

Nothing against you or you being a fan, but that can and probably is slanting your point of view. I know if my alma mater was considered I would probably worry about giving them too much or too little credit as I try and balance the tint of my glasses along with my pride. I understand your passion and your claim to have voted in a number of polls, but your bias seems to have a lot of weight even if you have good data you are trying to use. Your "tone" and your approach isn't letting others see them.

To be honest, the only reason not to support them for #1 is anchoring bias -- the notion that an initial value influences the setting of future values, as in a negotiation -- or, something like this where changing opinion is required. I had this argument on baseball with regard to anchoring bias for teams that start their season earlier (they tend to be stickier even when northern teams start their seasons), but it never really went anywhere even though it's a very well-researched and accepted cognitive bias.

Speaking of tone - "anchoring bias." You start throwing things out there to blame or discredit voters, they, like me, start to tune you out. Heck, it is a fight just to read through every word you write when you speak down to people you disagree with.

The new Top 25 is out. I'm sure this is going to lead to more interesting observations. 

http://d3hoops.com/top25/index

No real change. Voters on autopilot. No big surprise.

Thanks to Ryan for being the only responsible voter.

Hope the Pios take this as the slight that it is at this point, and stay hungry.

And this is a great example of my point. Voters are not on autopilot. If they were, we would get our polls back an hour after we send them out on Sunday evening... not a full 24 hours later when many of us have poured over the data to make decisions. Also... there is more to vote on than who is number one and where we are going to put your Marietta team.

Responsible voter... that is a joke of a statement, especially from someone who claims to have voted in other polls that I assume were for publication. Quit attacking said voters... you are dangerously close to the NJAC poster reference given earlier. Enjoy the season and the fact Marietta isn't being ignored. Plugging for first place votes and saying voters aren't being responsible could actually hurt your team - leaving negative thoughts with people. Hate to see the Pioneers lose a couple of games, the return on you will be pretty harsh from those on here that are known to have long memories (and it won't be me).

I have Marietta #2. Despite their wins, I think Babson is the better team. I think Babson has better talent on the court with their starting five than Marietta. No, that is NOT a slight at Edwards. It is a compliment to how many players on Babson's squad I think can take over a game at any one point. I also think Flannery is better than Edwards (different positions, I know) and has proven he can put his team on his back - and yes, that could backfire on them as well. And please, don't argue each and every player to me as to why they are better... I am just going to ignore it. I have seen Marietta in person. I will probably see them again. I know Babson well as well. I have my opinion as one of the 25 voters and you are not going to change my mind - especially with the approach you have given in here. Other factors will change my mind.

OK I really don't have a lot of time for this, but suffice to say that I disagree iwth a lot of this, especially the implication that I am speaking and acting out of bias rather than being data-driven.

Anchoring bias isn't just throwing things out there. It's a real thing and it absolutely happens in polling. There's been a lot of writing in behavioral economics and psychology about it. If I was younger I would be going for a PhD in this field. Really interesting stuff.

I often find it more interesting to read the works of people with whom i disagree (though the recent turn of one of our major political parties is really challenging that).

But what is most odious about your post is the implication that you or others would consider changing the way you vote based on a personal vendetta. If this was my poll I would kick you off it right now because that calls into question the integrity of the voting and the poll itself. That's really poor form. Even if you say you wouldn't do it, the fact that it occurs you suggests that you might, and that you would even bring it up and put the thought in someone's head would not be acceptable to me either.

I've voted in numerous AP polls and some nationwide non-AP ones, including in D3. I have never and would never even consider knocking a team down because I don't like them or someone associated with them. Even in 2011 when I was convinced that Marietta would be the team to beat when the rest of the world was riding Heidelberg, I still recognized that Heidelberg was the people's favorite because of what they had done the previous year. I ended up being right, but that's somewhat beside the point in this case. Of course I don't remember exactly where I ranked them, but I know I had Heidelberg ranked pretty high for most of the year. And no one that knows me needs to ask where I stand on them or Wooster.

Speaking of which, I've been on the house mike when Wooster was being presented with a regional championship and called out their names for all tournament and earned compliments from the SID for the professionalism with which I did it.

So yeah, I really don't appreciate either the implications of bias impacting what is a very unbiased defense (I mean seriously what is biased about being ranked like 20% higher than anyone else in Massey, or having won home, road and neutral against ranked teams in the first 6 games, or having won every game by I think it's 18+ points -- and that wasn't even one of the ranked teams; there's just absolutely nothing to pick on there), especially in the face of implying that voters (oh but not you of course  ) could decide to downgrade a team's ranking based on their opinion of someone.

[sac]

Personal messages may be the way to go now.

[Gregory Sager]

Yes, please.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Spence, for you to be SO invested in the polls SO early in the season IS getting tiresome.

You remind me of me eleven years ago.  I wasn't protesting the polling (IWU was unanimously #1), but giddiness overtook me and I started giving probabilities of IWU being an undefeated national champion (they finished third in the last season D3 still had a third-place game).  Looking back, I blush at how much people must have been put off by those posts.