Great Lakes Region

[sac]

Who and where are the nearest NCAC teams?

[David Collinge]

Who and where are the nearest NCAC teams?

Notes:

• Wooster comes in ranked #11 in the GL, top in the NCAC.

Hiram is 5-2, and I'd guess they're running second to Wooster.  Wittenberg is 3-2 in region, but their OWP is probably fairly low and getting lower tonight when they take on Otterbein.  Nobody else is really worth mentioning.

[KnightSlappy]

Here's the NCAC breakdown, again through (most of) monday's games.

Reg.   Rank   Team         WP      OWP     OOWP     RPI    Natl  CON Pool      Reg   OVR   Conf.
GL     11     Wooster      .6667   .5490   .5529   .5794   86    1   A         6-3   6-4   NCAC
GL     15     Hiram        .7143   .4783   .5559   .5567   117   2   C   077   5-2   5-3   NCAC
GL     16     Wittenberg   .6000   .5882   .4441   .5551   119   3   C   079   3-2   6-2   NCAC
GL     19     Allegheny    .4000   .5556   .5314   .5106   193   4   C   147   2-3   4-3   NCAC
GL     22     Wabash       .5000   .5094   .4771   .4990   214   5   C   167   4-4   4-5   NCAC
GL     29     Denison      .2500   .5370   .4867   .4527   282   6   C   227   2-6   2-7   NCAC
GL     32     Ohio Wesleyan.2000   .5172   .4913   .4314   306   7   C   247   1-4   2-5   NCAC
GL     33     Kenyon       .2857   .4348   .5413   .4242   317   8   C   257   2-5   3-6   NCAC
GL     36     Earlham      .3750   .3774   .4466   .3941   343   9   C   282   3-5   3-7   NCAC
GL     37     Oberlin      .5000   .2791   .5066   .3912   347   10  C   286   4-4   4-5   NCAC

[David Collinge]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

[KnightSlappy]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

Witt's OWP dropped to 0.500 after the Otterbein game.

I'm astounded that Wooster can stay in the Top 25 and Anderson still is outside looking in. What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't? ...besides lose more games.

[Hugenerd]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

Witt's OWP dropped to 0.500 after the Otterbein game.

I'm astounded that Wooster can stay in the Top 25 and Anderson still is outside looking in. What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't? ...besides losing more games.

Its all about that preseason ranking.  If you are not receiving votes before the season starts, you really need to convince voters to start voting for you (ie, Wilmington).  Conversely, if people think you are top 25 material, it takes them a while to drop you out.  With that said, Wooster will definitely drop out in next weeks rankings, but remember that the current poll (which was released last week), does not take into account their last loss.

[KnightSlappy]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

Witt's OWP dropped to 0.500 after the Otterbein game.

I'm astounded that Wooster can stay in the Top 25 and Anderson still is outside looking in. What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't? ...besides losing more games.

Its all about that preseason ranking.  If you are not receiving votes before the season starts, you really need to convince voters to start voting for you (ie, Wilmington).  Conversely, if people think you are top 25 material, it takes them a while to drop you out.  With that said, Wooster will definitely drop out in next weeks rankings, but remember that the current poll (which was released last week), does not take into account their last loss.

I understand that the last loss is not counted, but even without it, they'd done nothing to deserve double the votes of Anderson.

[Hugenerd]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

Witt's OWP dropped to 0.500 after the Otterbein game.

I'm astounded that Wooster can stay in the Top 25 and Anderson still is outside looking in. What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't? ...besides losing more games.

Its all about that preseason ranking.  If you are not receiving votes before the season starts, you really need to convince voters to start voting for you (ie, Wilmington).  Conversely, if people think you are top 25 material, it takes them a while to drop you out.  With that said, Wooster will definitely drop out in next weeks rankings, but remember that the current poll (which was released last week), does not take into account their last loss.

I understand that the last loss is not counted, but even without it, they'd done nothing to deserve double the votes of Anderson.

I agree with you, but that is just human nature.  People have a tendency to think that they are correct in their assessments and resist admitting they are wrong about it until proven without a doubt.  If Wooster had not been ranked in the top 10 in the preseason, there is no way they would be receiving any votes right now, but because they started out way up there, there are still those voters who are having trouble dropping them from their ballot.  Unfortunately, this is how these things go.  Voters will be quick to reward Wooster if they win some games and they are slow to punish them if they lose games, especially if the teams they lose to are perceived to be strong, only because the initial perception of Wooster is that they should be a top 10 team.  Same things goes for F&M. They have two losses to unranked teams and only have beaten two teams with winning records and neither of those teams are ranked any longer now that St. Mary's is out of the rankings, yet F&M is still ranked #14.  You could probably make this argument for a bunch of teams.  It just comes down to the fact that people are resistant to change their opinions because most people are inherently stubborn.  Additionally, most voters dont look at the whole body of work of a team, they instead only look at the last week's results when adjusting the previous week's rankings.  This is silly in my opinion because, especially this early in the season, you dont really know who is good and who isnt.  So a win that may not have looked impressive in week 1 may be impressive now.  Or a loss to what you thought was a good team may be understandable, but if that team is 2-7 right now, that is a bad loss. 

[ScotsFan]

Thanks, KS.  Witt's OWP is a lot higher than I thought; I was not thinking of Anderson's sterling 8-1 regional record.  However, when tonight's game vs. Otterbein (1-9 in region) gets factored in, it won't help the Tigers any.

Witt's OWP dropped to 0.500 after the Otterbein game.

I'm astounded that Wooster can stay in the Top 25 and Anderson still is outside looking in. What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't? ...besides lose more games.

What has Wooster done that Anderson hasn't?  Oh, I don't know.  How about playing 3 teams that are or were ranked in the top FIVE in the d3hoops.com top 25 poll with the possiblity of adding the #1 team in all of the land to that list 5 days after X-mas.  Anderson has played ONE ranked team and guess what?  They lost that game!  Hypothetically speaking, how do you think Anderson would fare facing Wooster's gauntlet of a non-conference schedule and vice versa with Wooster having Anderson's relatively light schedule?  Considering that 4 of Anderson's 8 wins have come against teams with a combined SIX wins, my guess would be Anderson's record would look a lot more like Wooster's and Wooster's would look a lot more like Anderson's...

As I've said on the top 25 board, Wooster has had 2 losses that were sort of head scratchers.  Their season opening loss at Albion and their blowout loss at home to #2 UST.  Outside of that, Wooster was very much in both of their losses on the road to then #2 JCU and current #5 R-MC.  At JCU the score was tied with under 2 minutes to go and at R-MC, Wooster was tied and had the ball with a chance to take the lead with just over a minute to go.

So, I would say that Wooster, while their record may not indicate it, is not that far off from living up to their pre-season top 10 ranking.  Had they been able to finish those games at JCU and at R-MC, we wouldn't be having this conversation.  And I think the voters have been taking Wooster's losses to very good competition into account.  And while I agree that they will indeed drop out of the next poll when it is released, if they somehow upset the #1 team in the country the week after Christmas, does that warrant their return?

Personally, I'm not all that concerned about Wooster being ranked at this point of the season.  I knew that this opening 2 months of the season was going to be very difficult on the Scots as it has proven to be.  But, while the record has sufferred, I think the learning experiences gained from playing almost every team ranked in the top 5 of the current poll will prove to be very valuable as this team moves forward into conference play and then on into post-season play!  Anderson may look better on paper when comparing their record against the Scots now, but my money would be on Wooster if they happen to cross each other's paths come February in the Dance...

[KnightSlappy]

I have a hard time giving teams credit for playing a tough schedule if they don't win any of the tough games. I won't count it against Wooster, but I can't credit them for it either.

I am searching Woo's schedule and I can't find a game that says "that was a really good win."

Anderson beat Platteville (@ Platteville), which seems better than any of Wooster's wins, and Wooster lost to Albion, which is worse than Anderson's (lone) loss to ranked Augustana.

I am not trying to argue that Anderson is far and away a better team (I expect Wooster to fare much better by the end of the season), I just find it hard to accept that their comparative resumes lead Wooster to receive more than twice the votes Anderson got.

[ScotsFan]

I am not trying to argue that Anderson is far and away a better team (I expect Wooster to fare much better by the end of the season), I just find it hard to accept that their comparative resumes lead Wooster to receive more than twice the votes Anderson got.

As hungered pointed out, that's the nature of the beast when you have Wooster who was in the pre-season top 10 and Anderson who wasn't even a blip on anybody's radar.  And when you factor in that Wooster has been more than competitive in their last 2 games vs. highly ranked opponents, I think voters tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.  Do you think that if Wooster's losses were all along the same lines as their loss at Albion that they would still find themselves in the top 25 or even receiving votes?  I highly doubt it.

You may not like to give teams credit for playing a tough schedule even if they don't win any games, but that's just your own opinion.  You also can't punish a ranked team for having a tough schedule and not winning any of those tough games vs. other higher ranked opponents in the same way you punish ranked teams for losing to unranked opponents.  And I think that has been the case with the voters and how they look at Wooster.  They are not going to punish Wooster for being more than competitive on the road in losses to teams ranked above them in top 5 the same way they might punish Wooster for their loss at Albion.  IMO, you take away that Albion loss and Wooster is probably solidly in the top 20 right now.  IMO, that one loss has hurt Wooster more than their other 3 losses combined in the eyes of the voters...

[KnightSlappy]

I am not trying to argue that Anderson is far and away a better team (I expect Wooster to fare much better by the end of the season), I just find it hard to accept that their comparative resumes lead Wooster to receive more than twice the votes Anderson got.

As hungered pointed out, that's the nature of the beast when you have Wooster who was in the pre-season top 10 and Anderson who wasn't even a blip on anybody's radar.  And when you factor in that Wooster has been more than competitive in their last 2 games vs. highly ranked opponents, I think voters tend to give them the benefit of the doubt.  Do you think that if Wooster's losses were all along the same lines as their loss at Albion that they would still find themselves in the top 25 or even receiving votes?  I highly doubt it.

You may not like to give teams credit for playing a tough schedule even if they don't win any games, but that's just your own opinion.  You also can't punish a ranked team for having a tough schedule and not winning any of those tough games vs. other higher ranked opponents in the same way you punish ranked teams for losing to unranked opponents.  And I think that has been the case with the voters and how they look at Wooster.  They are not going to punish Wooster for being more than competitive on the road in losses to teams ranked above them in top 5 the same way they might punish Wooster for their loss at Albion.  IMO, you take away that Albion loss and Wooster is probably solidly in the top 20 right now.  IMO, that one loss has hurt Wooster more than their other 3 losses combined in the eyes of the voters...

The R-MC loss was after the vote so you can't factor that one in, so they were "in" one of those games and "not in" the other. Albion is a good team, but they aren't a top team, and they should be beaten by a Top 25 team.

But it's not just losing to #2 or #11 or @Albion, it's the combination of all of those things. You can't lose all of your tough games (like Wooster has so far) and still be ranked in the top 25 just because you "played a tough schedule." At some point you need a signature win (and I'm sure Wooster will get one) to combat the losses.

I think it's a shame that Preseason biases are still weighing so heavily in the Top 25 rankings.

[ziggy]

I think it's a shame that Preseason biases are still weighing so heavily in the Top 25 rankings.

While the point has merit you can't realistically expect a d3 basketball poll to rise above the same prevailing problem in the FBS polls.

[ScotsFan]

I think it's a shame that Preseason biases are still weighing so heavily in the Top 25 rankings.

Well, I think you just hit the prevailing problem.  It's called 'preseason polls'.  I've argued with friends forever that preseason polls in FBS should be done away with altogether until a playoff system is implemented.  My opinion is that a first poll should not be unveiled until at least 3-4 weeks of the season have passed.  Basketball preseason polls aren't as difficult to overcome because of the number of games and the length of the season plus the fact that there is that little thing called the NCAA tournament that makes up for that... 

But, that's not the way we have it, so we have to make due with what we have.  And furthermore, I think the w's and l's have a good way of working themselves out after the first couple of months to allow the pollsters (who, BTW, do a very good job at putting this poll together  ) to get a pretty good gauge of who may have been a bit over-rated and who may have been overlooked.  Personally, I felt that Wooster may have been a bit too high at #9 to start the season, but I wasn't going to question the experts who vote in the poll.    I mean, they were unranked to end last season, so to jump all the way to #9 was a bit high IMO.  But, I still feel, even though they are on their way out of the top 25 due to the difficulty of their non-conference schedule, that they are most definitely a top-25 caliber team with the ability to make some noise if they are fortunate enough to make it to the dance thanks in very large part most definitely to that difficult non-conference schedule!

[Hugenerd]

I think it's a shame that Preseason biases are still weighing so heavily in the Top 25 rankings.

Well, I think you just hit the prevailing problem.  It's called 'preseason polls'.  I've argued with friends forever that preseason polls in FBS should be done away with altogether until a playoff system is implemented.  My opinion is that a first poll should not be unveiled until at least 3-4 weeks of the season have passed.  Basketball preseason polls aren't as difficult to overcome because of the number of games and the length of the season plus the fact that there is that little thing called the NCAA tournament that makes up for that... 

But, that's not the way we have it, so we have to make due with what we have.  And furthermore, I think the w's and l's have a good way of working themselves out after the first couple of months to allow the pollsters (who, BTW, do a very good job at putting this poll together  ) to get a pretty good gauge of who may have been a bit over-rated and who may have been overlooked.  Personally, I felt that Wooster may have been a bit too high at #9 to start the season, but I wasn't going to question the experts who vote in the poll.    I mean, they were unranked to end last season, so to jump all the way to #9 was a bit high IMO.  But, I still feel, even though they are on their way out of the top 25 due to the difficulty of their non-conference schedule, that they are most definitely a top-25 caliber team with the ability to make some noise if they are fortunate enough to make it to the dance thanks in very large part most definitely to that difficult non-conference schedule!

Well if the committee looks at some RPI like numbers, then Wooster should be ranked pretty high because of their strength of schedule (that is if their conference slate doesnt drop them down too much), but they still need to work on that first criteria, which is W's.