Great Lakes Region

[ScotsFan]

Sac,

Thanks for posting those efficiency numbers.  If you don't mind me asking, how did you come up with those numbers?  Is there some sort of formula?

[sac]

Points divided by possessions x 100

possessions = FGA-OR+TO+(FTA x 0.475)




For defense you just use your opponents stats.

[ScotsFan]

Thanks.

[wally_wabash]

I wasn't aware of anybody out there tracking possession data for D-III...or are you crunching those numbers yourself, sac?  If so, bravo.  Points per 100 possessions are far more meaningful than absolute scoring offense and defense numbers....even without a SOS adjustment.  Great info here. 

[calvin_grad]

Points divided by possessions x 100

possessions = FGA-OR+TO+(FTA x .0475)

For defense you just use your opponents stats.

Correction, sac.

possessions = FGA-OR+TO+(FTA x 0.475)

[sac]

Correction, sac.

possessions = FGA-OR+TO+(FTA x 0.475)

That's correct thanks, just misplaced the decimal.

I wasn't aware of anybody out there tracking possession data for D-III...or are you crunching those numbers yourself, sac?  If so, bravo.  Points per 100 possessions are far more meaningful than absolute scoring offense and defense numbers....even without a SOS adjustment.  Great info here. 

No one tracks this data that I know.  I've used the formula on the MIAA for many years, yesterday I did the MIAA and the GL region teams.....so yeah I did it myself.

[sac]

Here are the scores involving "ranked" GL teams that lost

Wittenberg 55 Wabash 54
Hope 70 Adrian 63

Medaille 60 PSU-Behrend 53.~~
Behrend had won this matchup 66-62 in December.


Everyone else won their midweek game

[ziggy]

Here are the scores involving "ranked" GL teams that lost

Wittenberg 55 Wabash 54
Hope 70 Adrian 63

Medaille 60 PSU-Behrend 53.~~
Behrend had won this matchup 66-62 in December.


Everyone else won their midweek game

To give a bit of a peek behind the curtain, Adrian actually saw their RPI rise with the loss because it added Hope's WP*1.4 to their SOS. The addition of the multiplier is having a tremendous impact on SOS variability.

[sac]

First column overall record/second column in-region record

1. Wooster 18-0 15-0
--------------------------------------1.000
--------------------------------------.900
2. Hope  12-5  8-1
3. Wabash  15-2  14-2
3. Penn St.-Behrend  14-2  14-2
5. Marietta 16-2  13-2
6. Thiel 12-5  10-2
--------------------------------------.800
7. Wittenberg  12-5   10-3
8. Calvin 9-9  6-2
9. Bethany 12-5 12-5
--------------------------------------.700

10. Capital 11-5  9-5
10. John Carroll 12-5  9-5
12. Adrian 9-7 5-3
13. Albion 9-7  6-4
--------------------------------------.600




Last week's key games, winners in bold

1-19 Adrian at Hope
1-19  Wabash at Wittenberg

1-22  Wittenberg at Wooster
1-22  Capital at John Carroll
1-22 Hope at Albion



Next week's key games

1-26  Albion at Calvin

1-29  Hope at Calvin

[sac]

Last night scores, involving 'ranked' losing teams

Calvin 81 Albion 50
OWU 87 Wabash 76


Albion's C chances are likely dead, and Wabash's took a big hit last night.

[ziggy]

Last night scores, involving 'ranked' losing teams

Calvin 81 Albion 50
OWU 87 Wabash 76


Albion's C chances are likely dead, and Wabash's took a big hit last night.

I would still say that Wabash is ok for the time being. Randolph-Macon will be a win against a regionally ranked opponent and their winning percentage is still very strong. The hardest part about prognosticating a tournament field is predicting how the committee will weight WP versus SOS. If the example of Anderson last year taught us anything, it is that Wabash's WP north of .800 should look very good to the people in power.

[KnightSlappy]

I'm interested to see what will happen with Adrian and John Carroll.

They both should be under 0.700 for the next rankings, but they'll have really strong (near .600) SOS.

Or a team like Marietta. Could be near 0.850 in the WP, but only about 0.430 in the SOS. And it's even more extreme with PSU-Behrend.

[KnightSlappy]

Candidates to be ranked: (removed Capital and Albion).

Records are OVR - REG

Wooster – 19-0 – 16-0
--------------------------------- 1.000
Hope – 13-5 – 9-1
--------------------------------- 0.900
Penn State-Behrend – 15-2 – 15-2
Marietta – 16-2 – 13-2
Wabash – 15-3 – 14-3
--------------------------------- 0.800
Wittenberg – 13-5 – 11-3
Calvin – 10-8 – 7-2
Thiel – 12-5 – 9-3
Bethany – 13-5 – 13-5
--------------------------------- 0.700
John Carroll – 13-5 – 11-5
Adrian – 10-7 – 5-3

[KnightSlappy]

So there's my list of 11, but only 6 will be ranked come next week.

Bethany probably has the worst chance. Lower WP, and average-ish sos of .510 and 0-3 versus the other teams on the list (Wooster, Thiel, and John Carroll).

Wooster and Hope will be ranked.

I think Thiel and Wabash will be ranked.

PSU-Behrend has a difficult game with La Roche on Saturday. I'll say win and ranked (committee seems to love large win percentages, and loss and unranked.

Calvin might follow the same win = ranked, loss = unranked formula.

Wittenberg probably needs a Calvin loss to get ranked.

Marietta doesn't look all that good unless Maryville and John Carroll can end up ranked.

Still no idea what to make of John Carroll and Adrian probably both long shots for the first rankings at this point, although the SOS numbers do look good. Adrian benefits if Calvin is ranked, but if Calvin is ranked, then there's fewer spots for them to fit in.

[sac]

Last night scores, involving 'ranked' losing teams

Calvin 81 Albion 50
OWU 87 Wabash 76


Albion's C chances are likely dead, and Wabash's took a big hit last night.

I would still say that Wabash is ok for the time being. Randolph-Macon will be a win against a regionally ranked opponent and their winning percentage is still very strong. The hardest part about prognosticating a tournament field is predicting how the committee will weight WP versus SOS. If the example of Anderson last year taught us anything, it is that Wabash's WP north of .800 should look very good to the people in power.

I think I was probably mentally taking into account that Wabash has to play Witt and @ Wooster again.

Being a C candidate of course means losing in your tournament, should Wabash lose both to Witt and Woo again, they are looking at 6 losses in-region which is firmly a bubble team and their SOS as I recall isn't very good.


Bottom line for Wabash is they need to beat either Witt or Wooster to be a serious C team in all likelihood.