Pool C

[Greek Tragedy]

I've been trying to figure that one out for awhile. Yes, Carthage's numbers are very good except for their winning percentage.  When does that matter???

Like I said with Hope. Solid numbers, great nonconference schedule, but they lost all the games.

Sooner or later winning percentage has to make a difference too.  What if Carthage was 12-12, do they get in with great RRO and SOS? I mean, we talk about that but we also talk about teams that only have one or two losses and say, "Hey, they beat (nearly) everyone they played..." Doesn't that count for anything anymore?

[Hugenerd]

Someones bubble just popped (could be the team they beat), MIT wins NEWMAC tourney.

[sac]

I've been trying to figure that one out for awhile. Yes, Carthage's numbers are very good except for their winning percentage.  When does that matter???

Like I said with Hope. Solid numbers, great nonconference schedule, but they lost all the games.

Sooner or later winning percentage has to make a difference too.  What if Carthage was 12-12, do they get in with great RRO and SOS? I mean, we talk about that but we also talk about teams that only have one or two losses and say, "Hey, they beat (nearly) everyone they played..." Doesn't that count for anything anymore?

This is where I think this conversation starts heading down the road of what does the criteria really identify.  The best teams?  Or the teams with the best criteria?

[KnightSlappy]

I've been trying to figure that one out for awhile. Yes, Carthage's numbers are very good except for their winning percentage.  When does that matter???

Like I said with Hope. Solid numbers, great nonconference schedule, but they lost all the games.

Sooner or later winning percentage has to make a difference too.  What if Carthage was 12-12, do they get in with great RRO and SOS? I mean, we talk about that but we also talk about teams that only have one or two losses and say, "Hey, they beat (nearly) everyone they played..." Doesn't that count for anything anymore?

If you're .500 and played your 25 games against the D3Hoops Top 25, you're probably, like, the 13th best team in the country.

[seinfeld]

KnightSlappy do this, KnightSlappy do that...

RG   ##   WP      bSOS    bRPI    NAT   Pool   D3      RRO   CONFER   TEAM
RG   ##   WP      bSOS    bRPI    NAT   Pool   D3      RRO   CONFER   TEAM
GL   01   0.923   0.543   0.638   005   A      24-2    7-2   NCAC     Wooster
GL   02   0.760   0.555   0.606   024   C      19-6    2-4   MIAA     Hope
GL   03   0.741   0.541   0.591   041   C      20-7    3-5   NCAC     Ohio Wesleyan
GL   04   0.750   0.530   0.585   048   C      21-7    3-6   NCAC     Wittenberg
GL   05   0.720   0.538   0.583   051   C      18-7    0-4   OAC      Marietta
GL   06   0.692   0.545   0.582   052   C      18-8    4-5   NCAC     DePauw
GL   07   0.692   0.542   0.579   057   A      18-8    1-2   OAC      Wilmington
gl   08   0.769   0.514   0.578   058   C      20-6    0-1   OAC      Mount Union
gl   09   0.800   0.501   0.575   062   C      20-5    1-0   PrAC     Bethany
gl   10   0.826   0.483   0.569   073   A      19-4    2-4   MIAA     Calvin
gl   11   0.852   0.466   0.563   080   A      23-4    1-0   AMCC     Penn State-Behrend
gl   12   0.792   0.483   0.560   085   A      19-5    1-1   PrAC     St. Vincent
gl   13   0.615   0.534   0.554   095   C      16-10   1-2   OAC      Ohio Northern
gl   14   0.621   0.519   0.545   116   C      18-11   1-3   OAC      John Carroll
gl   15   0.560   0.540   0.545   118   C      14-11   3-6   UAA      Case Western Reserve
gl   16   0.556   0.534   0.540   129   C      15-12   1-4   PrAC     Thomas More
gl   17   0.731   0.473   0.537   137   C      19-7    0-0   AMCC     Hilbert
gl   18   0.519   0.543   0.537   138   C      14-13   0-4   OAC      Baldwin Wallace
gl   19   0.462   0.543   0.523   168   C      12-14   1-3   OAC      Capital
gl   20   0.417   0.555   0.520   176   C      10-14   1-8   UAA      Carnegie Mellon

As always, thanks for doing this. I'm late to the party, so maybe this has been addressed already, but are they still doing "once ranked always ranked" or do you have to be in the final rankings to be counted as regionally ranked for the purposes of determining record vs. regionally ranked opponents? I'm just confused by Wooster's RRO. In the last data sheet, they were listed at just 5-1. But using the old formula, they should have been 6-2 at the last rankings, and now 8-2. They beat Wittenberg 3 times, OWU 2 times, DePauw, Marietta and Wheaton once each. That is eight wins. Their two regional losses are to OWU and DePauw.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Staten Island is in a world of trouble... Carthage will be at the table and the conversation will be interesting. I wouldn't be shocked if both got in... but I would be shocked if Staten Island were in over Carthage.

[David Collinge]

As always, thanks for doing this. I'm late to the party, so maybe this has been addressed already, but are they still doing "once ranked always ranked" or do you have to be in the final rankings to be counted as regionally ranked for the purposes of determining record vs. regionally ranked opponents? I'm just confused by Wooster's RRO. In the last data sheet, they were listed at just 5-1. But using the old formula, they should have been 6-2 at the last rankings, and now 8-2. They beat Wittenberg 3 times, OWU 2 times, DePauw, Marietta and Wheaton once each. That is eight wins. Their two regional losses are to OWU and DePauw.

I should defer to those who know better, but I think the once-ranked-always-ranked rule has gone the way of the dodo. Wooster's "missing" RRO is Marietta.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Yes, one-ranked, always-ranked no longer applies.  This makes it even more aggravating that we don't see the final rankings - can't even know vRRO except by guesswork.

[magicman]

Someones bubble just popped (could be the team they beat), MIT wins NEWMAC tourney.

Who is this masked man?

[bopol]

The more I look at it; the more I'm convinced that the last few picks will come down to ordering, as I think there is the potential for teams to get jammed up behind 8 loss teams that have worse resumes than Carthage and end up on the boards for a while.

In the Mid-Atlantic, I think Stevenson ends up ahead of Messiah and Dickinson and Stevenson has a worse overall resume than Carthage (easily compared).  Similarly, if DePauw ends up ahead of Wittenburg (and Bethany and Mount Union), then they jam up the boards similarly.

I think Staten Island gets picked at some point because they'll be on the board quite a while and I don't have a problem with that, but let's be clear that they played a soft, soft schedule.

Record vs. Top 50, Second 50 and everyone else D3 (Massey)

Staten Island (0-0, 3-2, 22-1)
Carthage (4-7, 5-1, 6-1)

I'd take Carthage given a choice.

BTW, I think Springfield is very fringe.  I've figuring the last 3 picks are coming down to Springfield, Wittenbuerg, Stevenson, DePauw, Dickinson and Messiah with Carthage and Staten Island in and St. Olaf out.  Order will matter in Mid Atlantic and Great Lakes.

[iwumichigander]

Yes, one-ranked, always-ranked no longer applies.  This makes it even more aggravating that we don't see the final rankings - can't even know vRRO except by guesswork.

Correct.  IMO, the 'once-ranked, always-ranked' seemed create some 'gamemanship' by the regional committee(s).  I thought the third round had a little of that this year. 

[CCHoopster]

The more I look at it; the more I'm convinced that the last few picks will come down to ordering, as I think there is the potential for teams to get jammed up behind 8 loss teams that have worse resumes than Carthage and end up on the boards for a while.

I agree with this.



In the Mid-Atlantic, I think Stevenson ends up ahead of Messiah and Dickinson and Stevenson has a worse overall resume than Carthage (easily compared).  Similarly, if DePauw ends up ahead of Wittenburg (and Bethany and Mount Union), then they jam up the boards similarly.

I think Staten Island gets picked at some point because they'll be on the board quite a while and I don't have a problem with that, but let's be clear that they played a soft, soft schedule.

Record vs. Top 50, Second 50 and everyone else D3 (Massey)

Staten Island (0-0, 3-2, 22-1)
Carthage (4-7, 5-1, 6-1)

I'd take Carthage given a choice.

BTW, I think Springfield is very fringe.  I've figuring the last 3 picks are coming down to Springfield, Wittenbuerg, Stevenson, DePauw, Dickinson and Messiah with Carthage and Staten Island in and St. Olaf out.  Order will matter in Mid Atlantic and Great Lakes.

For the Mid-Atlantic Wesley comes right off the board and then I think Stevenson is at the table next; although Stevenson vs Messiah shows Messiah having better numbers in 2 of 3 here.

Stevenson* (MACC) - .704/.531/4-3   Mid-Atlantic #5
Messiah* (MACC) - .760/.532/2-4   Mid-Atlantic #6

I think Stevenson gets to the table after Wesley (again you could argue about Messiah being ahead of them) and get picked late. Messiah gets to the table ahead of Dickinson and probably finishes sitting at the table leaving Dickinson wondering how they are not dancing at 21-6 and making it to the tournament.  Could be wrong but I think it may be like this.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The more I look at it; the more I'm convinced that the last few picks will come down to ordering, as I think there is the potential for teams to get jammed up behind 8 loss teams that have worse resumes than Carthage and end up on the boards for a while.

Always does... LOL

In the Mid-Atlantic, I think Stevenson ends up ahead of Messiah and Dickinson and Stevenson has a worse overall resume than Carthage (easily compared).  Similarly, if DePauw ends up ahead of Wittenburg (and Bethany and Mount Union), then they jam up the boards similarly.

I Carthage has a gaudy SOS, but their overall record isn't better than Stevenson's. Furthermore, it depends on who is regionally ranked at the end, because when looking at Stevenson's numbers that is where I had a ton of fluxuation. That all being said, Carthage versus Stevenson was one of those where diving further into the numbers gave me pause as to who would go next. Great cross-country look at things.

Also, between Stevenson, Dickinson and Messiah, who ever is in front with those three gets in. Whoever is second will be chewing on their nails... the third one doesn't get in.

And I agree with the Great Lakes... that could cause a problem if DePauw remains ahead of Wittenberg.

I think Staten Island gets picked at some point because they'll be on the board quite a while and I don't have a problem with that, but let's be clear that they played a soft, soft schedule.

I certainly can't disagree with this logic... their numbers are just so bad. I was imaging the same problem for Purchase had they not won the AQ. In their case, it would have to be for all 19 rounds and that is unreal if it happened!

Record vs. Top 50, Second 50 and everyone else D3 (Massey)

Staten Island (0-0, 3-2, 22-1)
Carthage (4-7, 5-1, 6-1)

I'd take Carthage given a choice.

Considering Massey isn't even used in the criteria... I think it is tough to make decisions and arguments based on that data. However, Carthage would get in over Staten Island I am quite sure.

BTW, I think Springfield is very fringe.  I've figuring the last 3 picks are coming down to Springfield, Wittenbuerg, Stevenson, DePauw, Dickinson and Messiah with Carthage and Staten Island in and St. Olaf out.  Order will matter in Mid Atlantic and Great Lakes.

Springfield is a blocker for the rest of the Northeast (though, WPI would be the first blocker). Order will matter in this region as much as the Great Lakes and Mid-Atlantic.

And remember eight teams, one from each region, sit at the table at a time. I doubt Stevenson, Dickinson, and Messiah will all see the table unless the third place team gets there in the final round or two.

And I have St. Olaf in midway through.

Yes, one-ranked, always-ranked no longer applies.  This makes it even more aggravating that we don't see the final rankings - can't even know vRRO except by guesswork.

Correct.  IMO, the 'once-ranked, always-ranked' seemed create some 'gamemanship' by the regional committee(s).  I thought the third round had a little of that this year. 

The gamesmanship wouldn't have much of an affect. The vRRO is there for the final regional rankings, but then the national committee will get another round of vRRO and readjust accordingly. So Week 3's data is the starting point, but not the finishing point.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

For the Mid-Atlantic Wesley comes right off the board and then I think Stevenson is at the table next; although Stevenson vs Messiah shows Messiah having better numbers in 2 of 3 here.

Stevenson* (MACC) - .704/.531/4-3   Mid-Atlantic #5
Messiah* (MACC) - .760/.532/2-4   Mid-Atlantic #6

I think Stevenson gets to the table after Wesley (again you could argue about Messiah being ahead of them) and get picked late. Messiah gets to the table ahead of Dickinson and probably finishes sitting at the table leaving Dickinson wondering how they are not dancing at 21-6 and making it to the tournament.  Could be wrong but I think it may be like this.

Stevenson is 2-0 versus Messiah head-to-head... I highly doubt that is ignored and Messiah jumps Stevenson especially since Messiah lost in the semis and Stevenson by a point in the championship.

Dickinson's problem is the conference was weak and didn't give them extra vRRO data.

[NEHoopsFan99]

What NEWMAC teams do you think will make the Pool C cut? WPI Springfield and Babson all lost and non-ranked MIT won