WBB: Landmark Conference

[Rofrog]

One other thing I see they have Hope with 4 1st place votes.I see where someone said well the kings,Wilkes,Marywoods of the world are not that great well did you see hope schedule really they played a team 5-1and Calvin 6-4 then they play like finladia.St Mary's etc so they really dont have a Schedule that is great.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Gordon thanks for the explanation on the poll.I just wish I can see the top 25 from the beginning because I thought Scranton had more first place votes than the top two and why did it drop if that was the case.I thought Scranton had 9 first place vote or was I wrong?

You can see each poll at the top of the current poll: https://www.d3hoops.com/top25/women/2019-20/week3

Go to the top of the page and you will see the Preseason and Week 1, 2, etc. at the top.

Scranton had 8 first place votes in the preseason, dropped to 4 in the first in-season poll (2 1/2 weeks after the season "officially" began), and then increased to 6 first places votes.

Voters are allowed to change their minds and change who they think not only who the #1 team is in the country, but all 25 slots. I have changed my first place vote in a poll despite a team not losing. I felt another team was playing better than the one I had in the top slot. It happens.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

One other thing I see they have Hope with 4 1st place votes.I see where someone said well the kings,Wilkes,Marywoods of the world are not that great well did you see hope schedule really they played a team 5-1and Calvin 6-4 then they play like finladia.St Mary's etc so they really dont have a Schedule that is great.

And Scranton has two more first place votes, 35 more points, and sits two slots above Hope. Overall the voters feel Scranton is better no matter what schedules are being argued about. You are trying to argue Hope's schedule isn't great as a "so what" to the Scranton schedule argument (by someone) ... when Scranton is well above Hope. I get the argument if the positions were flipped, but not in this case.

[Roundball999]

Statistically Hope has played 63rd toughest schedule so far this season, in the middle of the pack for other top ranked teams but not that strong a schedule.  Scranton's schedule to date has been 125th. 

[ronk]

Statistically Hope has played 63rd toughest schedule so far this season, in the middle of the pack for other top ranked teams but not that strong a schedule.  Scranton's schedule to date has been 125th.

So, how is that toughest schedule computed? the NCAA SOS formula? won/loss record of opponents? otherwise, it would seem to be a chicken and egg thing - how to initially rank any 1 team in a schedule of opponents.

[Roundball999]

Statistically Hope has played 63rd toughest schedule so far this season, in the middle of the pack for other top ranked teams but not that strong a schedule.  Scranton's schedule to date has been 125th.

So, how is that toughest schedule computed? the NCAA SOS formula? won/loss record of opponents? otherwise, it would seem to be a chicken and egg thing - how to initially rank any 1 team in a schedule of opponents.

In this case I was referring to Massey data and algorithms.  We all know that system is far from perfect but at least its based only on data and fact rather than opinion and emotion.  I view it as just another talking point, just as the polls are only talking points.  In both cases the "accuracy" is very weak this time of the year.    Fortunately we have a tournament where it will all play out.

[Rofrog]

Thanks Dave for the info on the top 25.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Statistically Hope has played 63rd toughest schedule so far this season, in the middle of the pack for other top ranked teams but not that strong a schedule.  Scranton's schedule to date has been 125th.

So, how is that toughest schedule computed? the NCAA SOS formula? won/loss record of opponents? otherwise, it would seem to be a chicken and egg thing - how to initially rank any 1 team in a schedule of opponents.

You seem to assume that schedule is the only thing voters are looking at. It is one component and not one I tend to look at in the preseason (outside of what kind of top teams might they face, but that still won't necessarily sway my vote). Once the season begins and we see how teams are playing, then we consider their schedules. We also consider when they might have some dumb luck and a team we all thought would be pretty good (Salem State men) ends up not being for a variety of reasons. However, Scranton has always scheduled rather easy teams in their immediate area. There are good and bad reasons for that, but it is going to be part of the conversation when it comes to: is an undefeated team really that good or a product of their schedule. I can't tell you how many times I look at an undefeated team, see they have played nothing but below .500 squads (or worse) and immediately decided I needed to wait on them for my poll or moving further up my poll. There is an argument that anyone that is half decent could go undefeated with a sub-par schedule.

As already mentioned, the SOS conversation here is clearly Massey based. I don't look at Massey this time of year. I don't think the data is solid enough to consider. Bob Quillman mentioned on Hoopsville Monday night that Massey admits the data isn't that great until about the 10th game (when last year's info is finally overcome). I think it is later, especially on the men's side, when the influence of a DIII playing a DI (despite it being an exhibition more times than not for DIII) is overcome. I also think Massey has a bias for whatever reason that favors more of the central part of the country (this could be that they play D1s more often, but I am not sure; it is over my head in terms of stuff I try and understand).

I personally look at a schedule and do the basics: what is the record of the opposition and what does that mean. I tend to know what those numbers mean and who the teams are. I think most of our voters have a similar appreciation. I will take a peak at Massey in mid-January just to see if I am mis-understanding or not appreciating something fully. But I also don't take the NCAA SOS and use that as a metric for a team. I don't think that is the entire picture when it comes to schedules and how strong or weak they may be.

There are only 25 slots for 440+ schools in Division III women's basketball. We are talking about ranking just 5.65% of the division. That compares to 7.2% in Division I. It isn't that easy to get into the Top 25. That means pollsters have to really dive deep and think hard about their selections.

We (Pat and Gordon primarily) do our darnedest to make sure our pollsters are ones who will take it seriously (unlike D1 coaches polls where a lot of head coaches let their assistants handle that "job"). Unless there are glaring reasons, we also don't like to interfere or tell them what they can or can't do, use, think about, etc. when putting their ballots together. The pollsters also are pretty fairly spread out and representative of DIII. That means they all see the division from different perspectives and not all think or see the same as others. We show that pretty well on Hoopsville Sunday nights as well, usually.

I do know that fans like to question and second-guess things, that's fine. I am just always amazed how myopic the thinking is sometimes.

[Rofrog]

Dave I dont think it is only Scranton that plays easy teams in there immediate region.Me personally wish they get rid of that cross county(Kings,Wilkes)nothing against them teams.I would love to see Scranton,Amherst home away.We use to play Messiah that stopped,Cabrini that stopped.I think it is hard to get teams to come to Scranton just like it is probably like that at Amherst,Tufts,Hope etc

[Rofrog]

Yes sorry was side tracked 3 year old!But Dave it is not just Scranton that does that it is everyone!I just wanted to make that clear.

[saratoga]

Dave:

I don't think Tim & I were second guessing anyone, it was more to your comment regarding "questioning" things related to the poll.

Certainly not myopic when we're asking why schools such as Albright & Miseri (both undefeated & we don't have a horse in that race) are not receiving a single vote when other schools with 2, 3 & even 4 losses are.

By the way, if you can say Scranton's win at Desales was really not that big of a deal, then how do you view the Amherst defeat at home to a 4 loss Emmanuel team?

I'm sure Amherst will rebound from that (pun intended) without much difficulty but it still makes me wonder how teams with multiple losses against average teams continue to get votes while other teams meeting every challenge against similar squads get zip.

Beyond that, the only poll I truly care about is the final NCAA Regional one.

In the meantime, poll away...some will be happy, some not so much but the questions that come with each weekly update shouldn't be viewed as an annoyance, it simply means you have some readers paying attention.

When the questions stop, you may be wishing for the good old days.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Dave I dont think it is only Scranton that plays easy teams in there immediate region.Me personally wish they get rid of that cross county(Kings,Wilkes)nothing against them teams.I would love to see Scranton,Amherst home away.We use to play Messiah that stopped,Cabrini that stopped.I think it is hard to get teams to come to Scranton just like it is probably like that at Amherst,Tufts,Hope etc

I am quite positive that if Scranton called Amherst and wanted to set-up and home and home, GP will say yes before the request is fully complete ... or if emailed, he would be replying yes before reading the entire email. I've had him on Hoopsville several times in the last few years and he's talked rather openly about struggling to get teams to play the Mammoths - thus why they are at the D3hoops.com Classic a third time in a row. (I know we wanted Scranton and Amherst to play at the D3hoops.com Classic this season, but something came up that precluded that from happening; I just don't remember what, though it could have been that Scranton/DeSales was an already scheduled game and that plus travel plans may have been the reason ... but I can't remember.)

And Scranton may need to play a few more games on the road than just at Scranton to entice schools to start coming to Scranton in return. I can't speak, though, for why series against Messiah and others have disappeared.

Dave:

I don't think Tim & I were second guessing anyone, it was more to your comment regarding "questioning" things related to the poll.

Certainly not myopic when we're asking why schools such as Albright & Miseri (both undefeated & we don't have a horse in that race) are not receiving a single vote when other schools with 2, 3 & even 4 losses are.

By the way, if you can say Scranton's win at Desales was really not that big of a deal, then how do you view the Amherst defeat at home to a 4 loss Emmanuel team?

I'm sure Amherst will rebound from that (pun intended) without much difficulty but it still makes me wonder how teams with multiple losses against average teams continue to get votes while other teams meeting every challenge against similar squads get zip.

Beyond that, the only poll I truly care about is the final NCAA Regional one.

In the meantime, poll away...some will be happy, some not so much but the questions that come with each weekly update shouldn't be viewed as an annoyance, it simply means you have some readers paying attention.

When the questions stop, you may be wishing for the good old days.

I don't remember saying Scranton's win over DeSales wasn't a big deal. I believe what I was saying was it depends on who the voter is and how they have the teams ranked in their individuals ballots - as Gordon showed. So, if a voter has DeSales say 15-25, then it doesn't read to them as a win over a #9 team in the country at the time. They may not react as aggressively as a voter who has DeSales (clearly) in the Top 10. That voter(s) is likely to move Scranton either more aggressively upward OR they move DeSales down more aggressively ... again, based on how they interrupt that result based on their ballot. When a team is higher up, it is harder to be more aggressive with a team in a upward way. Easier to lower a team in those cases. But I am speculating how voters are possibly reacting without have any idea how they are voting - other than Gordon who has expressed specifically what his voting meant.

As for Amherst losing to Emmanuel - first, it's an apples to oranges comparison (Scranton winning; Amherst losing). Second, you are welcome to see how many points Scranton lost (outside of ALL of their 1st place votes) from one week to the other to show you how significant the voters shifted them. However, the Mammoths are still considered a top tier program (with Scranton, notice), so there is only going to be so far they fall on a first-time loss in a season especially to a pretty well established team like Emmanuel. No matter how many losses the Saints have, they are coached by Division III women's basketball all-time winningest coach. That isn't a fluke as Scranton fans would know.

BTW - if you didn't care about the D3hoops or WBCA polls, I'm surprised you have made so many comments about them. You ask a lot about the polls to then say you don't care about them - or that the only one you do care about is the Regional ones (which aren't polls; they are rankings ... difference is that NCAA/Division III mandates what metrics teams are to be measured by where as polls don't have those requirements).

I don't find the questions annoying. I find that sometimes the lack of interest in seeing outside of a narrow perspective exists. One will never understand a polls impact or how teams are slotted if only looking at it from one team's perspective. To best understand them and the movements, one has to look at not only a few other teams, but the entire 25 teams ranked in the poll, those not ranked in the poll including those not receiving votes. The same goes with regional rankings as well.

Gordon, myself, and sometimes Pat and Ryan will continue to always provide a national perspective. I just find it interesting when we provide those perspectives and they are either ignored or even told we are wrong. Please don't get me wrong, many don't take that approach, but we have been down this road before about the polls and rankings. There is a lot more going on than just what happens to Scranton or Amherst.

Trust me, I get it because I am answering the same questions every year about many things. But that is expected with a sport where fans come and go every few years on the very least. I just know many of you have been around far longer.

[saratoga]

Dave:

For the 50th. time, I'm not arguing one single thing for Scranton & your polls.

*I don't care if you rank the Lady Royal's 1st. or 21st. Just apply equal amounts of analytical data and common sense. Then, go do your polling.

*I do care that the voters get out of their comfort levels, do a little research & watch games of teams making some minor noise so they can see these schools first hand and distribute their votes more equitably.

*The schools I've advocated for (Albright & Miseri) have nothing in the world to do with the school & team I follow, so my myopic tendencies have been checked at the door. This is about making sure the folks you're asking to put this together are doing their homework.

*While your Top 25 is nice to check out, the Regional Rankings are all I truly care about as they will determine who is probably in the tournament & most importantly, who is hosting.

*There is a ton of basketball between Week 3 polling & the first Regional Ranking, inclusive of...injuries & illness, academic worries & transfers.
Let's see where we're at in February, till then, keep looking at all the kids & their respective schools playing this great game and if that's getting done, then the polls will be reflective.

[Rofrog]

Dave what are you talking about Scranton needs to play more road games then just at Scranton.Dude Scranton plays more away games then home games.So please dont say Scranton plays alot of home games that is so false!I understand we are humans and yes there is bias in everyone even voters but that is okay and I saw it in a post just a couple days ago that I know is a voter!!!!But like i said we are humans and that is okay you will always have that in everyone and every polls rather that be basketball,football etc.They always lean toward the recognized teams it is done in D1,2,3!This is not a jab at you but we know it is true!!!

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Dave what are you talking about Scranton needs to play more road games then just at Scranton.Dude Scranton plays more away games then home games.So please dont say Scranton plays alot of home games that is so false!I understand we are humans and yes there is bias in everyone even voters but that is okay and I saw it in a post just a couple days ago that I know is a voter!!!!But like i said we are humans and that is okay you will always have that in everyone and every polls rather that be basketball,football etc.They always lean toward the recognized teams it is done in D1,2,3!This is not a jab at you but we know it is true!!!

I am not saying they play too many home games. Not in the least. I'm saying that sometimes a way to entice a new (or former) team to play a new home-and-home series is to go on the road first. That's all I'm saying. Don't try and read in between lines or figure I'm saying something other than what I am. Just read my words. Sometimes a way to get a new team, especially a good one, to play another is to agree to go on the road to that team first. That is ALL I am saying.

And yes, voters like myself have indicated that sometimes when it comes down to a known versus an unknown that the known gets more weight. That isn't a hidden bias. But I don't think that is in play here. Scranton and Tufts are pretty well known. They both lost a key player; they both lost their head coach. All and all the voters know quite a lot about both teams, so the "known versus unknown" really isn't in play.

saratoga - I responded to a comment you made

"By the way, if you can say Scranton's win at Desales was really not that big of a deal, then how do you view the Amherst defeat at home to a 4 loss Emmanuel team?"

... I then had some additional thoughts in general including my surprise for you to saying one thing

"Beyond that, the only poll I truly care about is the final NCAA Regional one."

but then arguing you don't care.

You proved that you do care also by saying you want voters to get out of their comfort zone (if you look at teams being voted for and those new ones like UW-Platteville who have been in the poll this year, you will see they do get out of their comfort zone, do research.) ... though I do wonder ... how many teams do you watch around the country?

But more importantly ... if you make a comment on here and someone like myself has a different perspective or argument, it is going to be said. You can't than get mad at the person responding to your comments. I'm sorry if you don't like it or you insist on having the last word (a fault of mine I do try and do better with), but if you really aren't arguing about the poll ... stop posting comments about it and not expecting someone to respond with something different. This isn't an echo chamber.

And trust me ... to your last comment ... voters are doing just that. If voters weren't doing their jobs and we (Gordon on the women's side) thought they weren't voting respectively or with good effort ... they wouldn't be voting.