Top 25 talk

[Hugenerd]

Congrats to MIT for the #8 ranking.  I believe that this is the highest ranking ever for a NEWMAC team in the d3hoops.com rankings (Clark was as high as #10 in the early 2000s and WPI was as high as #9 in the 05-06 season).

[nescac1]

Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point.  Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009.  Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC? 

[Hugenerd]

Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point.  Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009.  Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC? 

For that matter, how is EMU ranked below Whitewater.  Whitewater has two d3 losses, one to the current #18 ranked team and the other to an unranked team (this is essentially the same thing WashU has done).  Meanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams.  The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road).   EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

[dc_has_been]

I didn't realize how difficult it is to really rank the top 25 out of 400 teams!!!  There are a lot of teams out there with 1-2 losses and are only getting few a votes.  You really have no other choice to give some teams the benefit of the doubt based upon their past seasons.  An example would be Amherst.  They have 3 losses which 2 come from teams with records of 8-5 & 7-8, but since 2003 (what d3hoops shows) they have been fairly dominant.  Same goes for Wooster except two losses come from teams 10-5 & two against ranked opponents.
EMU is currently ranked 7th & started not even receiving votes.  I know a lot would like to see them higher because of who've they beat, but they have made remarkable movement up the chart.  If they continue to take care of business they will be a top 5 in no time.

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Still don't see how EMU, a team with no D-3 losses, and two big-time wins, including a blow-out win over RMC, is ranked below RMC and Wash U., the latter of which has looked VERY shaky the last few weeks and seems to be coasting on reputation / past years' successes alone at this point.  Not saying that Wash U. shouldn't be a top ten team, but four seems a little high for a team that hasn't looked really good since 2009.  Really, though, how can EMU not be in the top three after destroying RMC? 

I agree with you that EMU should be higher.  I do see where the voters are coming from.  They take the poll pretty seriously and don't like to bump teams until they're positive its no fluke.  Moving up so far from #18 is a big deal and the result of the drubbing of RMC.

EMU didn't play anyone of note in the non-conference season, they also have only one good road win (over a VWC team they're also not sure about).

The d3hoops.com voters also seem to treat the poll as a season long process - they understand that only the final poll really matters and are willing to make a team (especially one bursting on the scene from no where) build a case for a high ranking.  Frankly I appreciate that more than the d1 polls which vault teams unnecessarily high on one good performance.

We know that deserving teams almost always make it to their rightful place in due time.

[Ralph Turner]

I didn't realize how difficult it is to really rank the top 25 out of 400 teams!!!  There are a lot of teams out there with 1-2 losses and are only getting few a votes.  You really have no other choice to give some teams the benefit of the doubt based upon their past seasons.  An example would be Amherst.  They have 3 losses which 2 come from teams with records of 8-5 & 7-8, but since 2003 (what d3hoops shows) they have been fairly dominant.  Same goes for Wooster except two losses come from teams 10-5 & two against ranked opponents.
EMU is currently ranked 7th & started not even receiving votes.  I know a lot would like to see them higher because of who've they beat, but they have made remarkable movement up the chart.  If they continue to take care of business they will be a top 5 in no time.

Let me extend a personal invitation to join us on the Posters' Poll, if you are not already participating.   

I think that the Posters' Poll allows us to discuss most of the same questions that are facing the voters in a less formal fashion.  It takes about 30 minutes of review to sit down and compile something and 60-90 minutes to agonize over the last 2-3 places. 

The responses definitely make for interesting reading.

[dc_has_been]

Thanks Ralph will do!

[gordonmann]

Meanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams.  The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road).   EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

I came to the same conclusion yesterday in filling out my ballot.  It looks weird to have EMU slotted No. 3 but that's where I have them for now given the wins over Va Wes and RMC.

That being said, I'm not completely discounting the Southern Virginia loss.  Southern Virginia is 5-1 against Division III teams with an overtime loss at Christopher Newport.  CNU may not be an easy place to play but Lynchburg (7-8), York (NY) (12-5) and Wesley (9-6) all managed to win there.  Southern Virginia beat Wesley, which is okay but not in the Top 50, by five on a neutral court.  And Southern Virginia's margin of victory at home against EMU (13) is almost the same as it was against 6-11 Shenandoah (14).  

Sometimes there isn't enough information to evaluate a loss to a non-D3 team.  In this case, I feel comfortable treating the SVA loss as if EMU lost to someone in the 20-40 range of Division III.

[Hugenerd]

Meanwhile, EMU has no d3 losses and has wins over the current #3 and #12 teams.  The current order of EMU vs. Williams also doesnt make sense: EMU beat RMU by 23 and Williams lost to them (albeit on the road).   EMU is a legit #3 in the country right now, until they prove otherwise.

I came to the same conclusion yesterday in filling out my ballot.  It looks weird to have EMU slotted No. 3 but that's where I have them for now given the wins over Va Wes and RMC.

That being said, I'm not completely discounting the Southern Virginia loss.  Southern Virginia is 5-1 against Division III teams with an overtime loss at Christopher Newport.  CNU may not be an easy place to play but Lynchburg (7-8), York (NY) (12-5) and Wesley (9-6) all managed to win there.  Southern Virginia beat Wesley, which is okay but not in the Top 50, by five on a neutral court.  And Southern Virginia's margin of victory at home against EMU (13) is almost the same as it was against 6-11 Shenandoah (14).  

Sometimes there isn't enough information to evaluate a loss to a non-D3 team.  In this case, I feel comfortable treating the SVA loss as if EMU lost to someone in the 20-40 range of Division III.

I cant argue witht that analysis.  On the other hand, point differentials can be misleading sometimes also, with fouling at the end of a close game sometimes pushing one or two posession games into double digits and conversely a 20+ point lead can sometimes be cut into the teens in garbage time. 

As a non-NE region voter, what are your thoughts on Williams, MIT, and Middlebury?

[Ralph Turner]

Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year	Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10	138
2008-09	226
2007-08	258
2006-07	318
2005-06	271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

[Mr. Ypsi]

Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year	Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10	138
2008-09	226
2007-08	258
2006-07	318
2005-06	271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

[gordonmann]

Hugenerd:

I don't represent the NE in the Top 25, but I have roots there.  I graduated from Trinity (Conn.) in 2000 and follow that conference closely even though I can't get to the games there.  When I first started working with this site directly after graduation, I would've told you the top 3 teams in the region were whomever the top three teams in the NESCAC were (with Brandies considered as a different category).  I don't think that's the case any more, though clearly Amherst and Williams have at times during this decade distinguished themselves at a higher level than any other teams.

Now that I've disclosed my roots, here's my take on those three teams:

* Williams is 5th in the Top 25 and I have them 7th.  I like their margins of victory against teams they "should've beaten."  I like the showing at Randolph-Macon which is a tough place to play.  The Amherst win is meaningful, but it was on their own home court and I don't have Amherst on my ballot anymore.

* MIT is 8th in the Top 25 and 13th on my ballot.  I held out on adding them to my ballot until a couple weeks ago and didn't have them in the Top 20 until this week.  The win over WPI was nice but WPI also lost to Thomas (yes, I know they are 9-2) and Wheaton (Mass.).  There isn't a win on MIT's schedule that makes me say, "Yep.  This is a legit Top 15 team."  But they've done everything I could expect so I have slotted there any way for now.

* Middlebury is 10th in the Top 25 and 16th on my ballot.  I've had the Panthers lower than the poll all year.  Like MIT, I don't see a win on their schedule that validates a Top 10 ranking to me.  Beating Plattsburgh impressed me but then the Cardinals lost two more right after that and Middlebury lost to Colby-Sawyer.  Last year I had Middlebury pretty high all year, which may have been the product of a NESCAC bias.  Maybe I'm overcompensating for that this year, but I'm just not sold on the Panthers yet.

[gordonmann]

Ypsi and Ralph:

Only speaking for myself, I haven't had any problem picking 25 teams that seem worthy of that ranking.  The biggest problem is picking the teams who are 7-10.  My personal interpretation is that those are teams who should challenge the Top 5 on the road, potentially beat them at home, usually beat teams ranked 15-25 at home or away and handle all teams outside the poll without more than one or two slip ups all year.  Williams falls in that category so they are No. 7 on my ballot.

[Ralph Turner]

Here is another interesting development in the Top 25 this season.

I have listed the number of votes that were not given to the 25 teams in the Top 25 for Week #7 for the last 5 seasons.

Year	Votes not given to the 25 in the Top 25
2009-10	138
2008-09	226
2007-08	258
2006-07	318
2005-06	271

I think that the voters don't think that there are 25 teams that deserve to be in the Top 25.

(Corrections to the back-of-the-napkin math are appreciated.)

I'd interpret it just the reverse - that the voters have reached a rough consensus on who the top 25 are.

+1!  (I gave you the Karma upon your posting of the Posters' Poll)    Thanks for running it.

Valid point.

The previous low "non-25" ballot total was in week #13 of 2009 when there were 151 votes given to 15 teams beyond the Top 25.

[Hugenerd]

Gordon:

I am sure you have looked at these numbers, and I agree with your analysis, but the Massey and OWP/OOWP numbers show that MIT has had a tougher schedule than either Williams or Middlebury.  I know that that is in part because Williams has played some really bad teams (and blown them out accordingly), which is out weighing the top of their schedule, but I thought it was worth pointing out.

Thanks for your input, it is insightful to learn how the voters rank teams.