Top 25 talk

[Pat Coleman]

What concerns me is how geographical (and scheduling) proximity to the WIAC affects everyone in the area. Is Gustavus as good as Massey has them listed? I can't imagine. Without having time to dig back into Massey's listing, that was one that jumped out at me as a symptom of the problem this year, and it's been consistently that way in past years. MIAC and MWC schools seem to get floated up by the WIAC's proverbial rising tide.

[sac]

Its been my observation that year in and year out the WIAC has some of the highest offensive and defensive efficiencies in D3.  Its simply a higher level of competency.

If Massey has anything in its algorithm that is offensive or defensive efficiency based that is likely the reason WIAC teams seem to be so highly rated so often.




In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough.  One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

I counted 10 games vs the WIAC, out of 55 for the MIAC.  So almost 20% of their non-conference games.  Compare that to the CCIW, I counted 4 out of 88 games, or the MWC, 7 out of 70 or 10%.

[Titan Q]

Here is another computer poll FWIW...


http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

[Titan Q]

In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough.  One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

Good point.  

I check Massey every Monday morning as I'm working on my D3hoops.com Top 25 ballot...just to catch teams I might be missing, or teams I might be too high or too low on.  It seems like there are usually 1 or 2 MIAC teams that float way up Massey that really make me shake my head.  I end up digging into their resume and conclude that I can't make a Top 25 case for them.  Maybe the WIAC connection is the reason?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Yes - Frostburg is in the Mid-Atlantic... keep forgetting the NCAA "fixed" that as it were.

As for the rivalries thought... I know teams that are sub-par play up for a game against a rival, especially if they are nationally ranked. As a voter, if I see a win by that sub-par team and understand that it was a rivalry game... I take that into account. Massey just breaks down the numbers and will either push the sub-par team up for that type of win or push the top team down because of the loss. I understand that the loss probably had other things going on then just numbers.

That goes for injuries... Massey doesn't know if a team had a returning star from an injury and is actually better with him back... they also don't know if a team just suffered an injury to a key player and aren't as good without him (i.e. MIT - not sure where Massey ever had them ranked, just using the example).

I agree that looking at Massey allows pollsters to spot what they might be missing, but I am not going to make it a major criteria for me when determining a Top 25 ballot. There are too many other intangiables and opinions and facts that I work with to make that choice.

I am proud to say that usually my Top 25 is reasonably close to what the ultimate Top 25 is which makes me feel I have a good read for teams - of course there are teams in my poll that aren't on the list and visa versa. That being said, I do have Brandeis in my poll... and probably shouldn't. :-)

[Dark Knight]

I've always found Massey to be interesting but a little too Wisconsin-centric for my tastes. I like a good WIAC school as much, if not even a little more than the rest of them, but Massey is too high on Wisconsin and anyone whose schedule touches a WIAC team for my tastes.

I'd be very interested to hear why you think this. Do you have some game results that suggest that Massey is systematically overrating the WIAC teams?

My own theory is that the appearance that Massey is overrating these teams results from a difference in the intent and method of polls like the d3hoops.com poll and Massey's rating.

Pollsters have a hard time handling strength of schedule and as a result are loathe to give a high ranking to a team with several losses and a difficult schedule.

Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

In any case, it's is easy enough to test whether Massey is overrating WIAC teams -- simply look at how WIAC teams do vs. teams from other conferences compared to how Massey expected them to do.

Checking out Stevens Point, for example, shows that their performance against non-WIAC teams compared to Massey's expectation looks like this: -5 -1 +26 +12 +11 +1. In other words, on average, Stevens Point did better against non-WIAC teams than Massey expected.

If anything Massey's algorithm would seem to underestimate their rating because of the tough conference they play in. Of course, that's only one sample.

[Dark Knight]

In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough.  One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

Good point.  

I check Massey every Monday morning as I'm working on my D3hoops.com Top 25 ballot...just to catch teams I might be missing, or teams I might be too high or too low on.  It seems like there are usually 1 or 2 MIAC teams that float way up Massey that really make me shake my head.  I end up digging into their resume and conclude that I can't make a Top 25 case for them.  Maybe the WIAC connection is the reason?

This does make sense to me. Massey computes conference strength only after team powers have been computed, but conference teams get very tightly tied together because of all the games they play against each other. So whatever boosts one team boosts the whole conference, and the behavior is almost like Massey is paying attention to conference strength.

If a conference is very insular and has only a few games against non-conference teams, there will be a lot of variability in Massey's estimate of the strength of the conference as a whole. So the whole conference could be rated too high or too low. (I'd look for something like 20-30 games between conference teams and non-conference teams to have a good estimate of conference strength.)

I've seen this effect during the NCAA tournament. Whatever team wins the national championship gets a boost in Massey power, naturally enough--they just won 5 or 6 games against highly rated teams. But all the other teams in the conference get a boost too, though smaller.

I could imagine that if a team does really well in conference after non-conference games have ended, and other teams in conference get worse, this would give the team an artificially big boost in Massey power.

[frodotwo]

Here is another computer poll FWIW...


http://talismanred.com/ratings/hoops/

This poll also lists the WIAC as the top conference. Perhaps they play quality competition and are rewarded for it. Although the lesser teams playing the likes of Silver Lake, St. Scholastica, Northland and Marian seems to indicate they are riding the coattails of the better teams that schedule agressively, and rewards them for playing these better teams twice. 

[Hugenerd]

Its been my observation that year in and year out the WIAC has some of the highest offensive and defensive efficiencies in D3.  Its simply a higher level of competency.

If Massey has anything in its algorithm that is offensive or defensive efficiency based that is likely the reason WIAC teams seem to be so highly rated so often.




In the MIAC's case, its a big conference that has very few games out of conference compared to others, so the variance just isn't high enough.  One game vs the WIAC will affect its conference more than 1 game from say, the CCIW or MWC.

I counted 10 games vs the WIAC, out of 55 for the MIAC.  So almost 20% of their non-conference games.  Compare that to the CCIW, I counted 4 out of 88 games, or the MWC, 7 out of 70 or 10%.

Not the case, quoted from the official Massey Ratings website (same rating system is used for basketball, football, etc.): "Only the score, venue, and date of each game are used to calculate the Massey ratings. Stats such as rushing yards, rebounds, or field-goal percentage are not included. Nor are game conditions such as weather, crowd noise, day/night, or grass/artificial turf. Overtime games are not treated any differently. Finally, neither injuries nor psychological factors like motivation are considered. While none of these are analyzed explicitly, they may be implicitly manifested through the game scores. "

Further: "A team's Offense power rating essentially measures the ability to score points. This does not distinguish how points are scored, so good defensive play that leads to scoring will be reflected in the Offense rating. In general, the offensive rating can be interpretted as the number of points a team would be expected to score against an average defense.
Similarly, a team's Defense power rating reflects the ability to prevent its opponent from scoring. An average defense will be rated at zero. Positive or negative defensive ratings would respectively lower or raise the opponent's expected score accordingly."

Home court advantage is taken into account, however: "Each team's home advantage is estimated based on the difference in performance when at home and on the road. Ratings and schedule strength both depend on where the games are played. "

[John Gleich]

This poll also lists the WIAC as the top conference.

That's not surprising, given the non-conference dominance.

[Dark Knight]

Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

Pollster test:

How would the following two game results affect your ranking of a top-25 team?

A) Lost a game by 5 that they should have won by 5

B) Won a game by 2 that they should have won by 12

They are about equivalent in their effect on Massey power, used to predict future game results...

[Hugenerd]

Also, pollsters may be more inclined simply to rate a team highly for having a good record. It seems to me that there is a psychological inclination to treat the rank as a reward for winning more games, not an as an estimate of which team is more likely to win future games.

Pollster test:

How would the following two game results affect your ranking of a top-25 team?

A) Lost a game by 5 that they should have won by 5

B) Won a game by 2 that they should have won by 12

They are about equivalent in their effect on Massey power, used to predict future game results...

I'm not an expert here, but the answer seems obvious.  Also, although these numbers wont affect a teams Massey power rating that much, it will affect the overall rating.  Again, from the official Massey website: "In contrast to the overall rating, the Power is a better measure of potential and is less concerned with actual wins-losses."

[wooscotsfan]

Final: #1 Wooster 88  Allegheny 56

Wooster gets the easy home win with balanced scoring.  Ian Franks led Wooster with 13 points.  Next game is at home vs. Wittenberg on Saturday.

[wooscotsfan]

Final:  Wittenberg 55  #7 Wabash 54

Wittenberg gets the home win by upsetting #7 Wabash.  Wittenberg is now 12-4, 7-0 NCAC with the big conference showdown on Saturday vs. Wooster (8-0 NCAC).  Wabash is now 14-2, 6-2 NCAC.

[John Gleich]

#12 Stevens Point 92 - Eau Claire 37

This was a laugher from the start... EC only made 2 baskets in the first half in their way to a 45-13 deficit at half time.