Great Lakes Region

[Happy Calvin Guy]

If Calvin had beaten Wheaton and Carthage, this discussion would be exactly the same. Calvin would be 24-1, probably ranked in the top 2 or 3 teams in the nation in both D3hoops and Massey Ratings, yet still ranked #6 in Great Lakes region and still unsure if we could land a Pool C bid under the current system in the event of a loss in the conference tourney. 

Also, why do the NCAA regional rankings start when they do?  Why not earlier in the season? Why not later? This has a profound impact.  If they started earlier, Adrian would likely have been ranked at some point.  That would have a ripple effect for Calvin and Hope, which would probably be ranked higher in later polls due to having played and beaten Adrian.  Calvin would then sport a 3-1 record vs "regionally ranked opponents" and the whole discussion is different.  Also, if the rankings were only done at the end of the season, other teams would not be receiving "credit" for having beaten an opponent who snuck in to an earlier regional ranking, thus opening the door for Calvin and Hope.  Seems like this year, the NCAA regional rankings started at precisely the wrong time for Calvin (and Hope). 

Such arbitrary rules that have little to do with how good a team actually is, but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

[Pat Coleman]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

The regional rankings come out as they do for two reasons from everything multiple people tell me:

- The data earlier in the year is more flawed since we have only run through the conference maybe once (or just starting the second time) and the smaller number of games gives a wider variance in the SOS numbers.
- Too early and teams that probably don't deserve to be regionally ranked in the grand scheme of things would be ranked because their SOS numbers might be more gaudy then they would turn out to be later in the year - or even two weeks later.

I am sure there are more details I am forgetting... but it is a question I am pretty sure I have asked committee chairs over the years on Hoopsville - and if I haven't, I have asked in person or on phone calls and just thought I did it on Hoopsville.

[wally_wabash]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

Calvin won their league, did it impressively, and lost but one single in-region game out of 19.  Probably 20 before getting into the make or break MIAA tournament title game against Hope (probably).  Are we really saying that 18-2 or 19-2 isn't good enough to make it?  Because given the way at-large selection works and where Calvin sits in the rankings BEFORE the hypothetical loss that would put them into Pool C, I think the possibility of this team not being part of the tournament is very real.  Which would be embarrassing for the selection committee.  The Knights have done plenty to be in without having to sweat out everybody else's league tournament. 

[ziggy]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

Calvin won their league, did it impressively, and lost but one single in-region game out of 19.  Probably 20 before getting into the make or break MIAA tournament title game against Hope (probably).  Are we really saying that 18-2 or 19-2 isn't good enough to make it?  Because given the way at-large selection works and where Calvin sits in the rankings BEFORE the hypothetical loss that would put them into Pool C, I think the possibility of this team not being part of the tournament is very real.  Which would be embarrassing for the selection committee.  The Knights have done plenty to be in without having to sweat out everybody else's league tournament.

The turnaround to this is to say that the MIAA chooses how to award the AQ and have chosen to do so through a tournament rather than the conference regular season.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

...and there's the trump card played by anyone who ever wanted to end this discussion.  Using that logic, why even bother designing a good Pool C methodology? Why even have a Pool C? 

[wally_wabash]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

Calvin won their league, did it impressively, and lost but one single in-region game out of 19.  Probably 20 before getting into the make or break MIAA tournament title game against Hope (probably).  Are we really saying that 18-2 or 19-2 isn't good enough to make it?  Because given the way at-large selection works and where Calvin sits in the rankings BEFORE the hypothetical loss that would put them into Pool C, I think the possibility of this team not being part of the tournament is very real.  Which would be embarrassing for the selection committee.  The Knights have done plenty to be in without having to sweat out everybody else's league tournament.

The turnaround to this is to say that the MIAA chooses how to award the AQ and have chosen to do so through a tournament rather than the conference regular season.

Right, but unfortunately and for reasons that don't exist anywhere near a base of logic, every single conference (with one or two exceptions) has decided to let two or three games in February trump 25 games from mid-November through Valentine's Day.  It's senseless and the people that run the leagues are all smart enough to know better, but we keep on doing it because, well, that's just the way we do it. 

So we have a universe where league tournaments offer a prize that it is not proportional to the accomplishment.  The discussion here is how to best handle those who get put out by the league tournaments, and it doesn't seem like we're handling Calvin's case in a way that makes sense. 

[Pat Coleman]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

...and there's the trump card played by anyone who ever wanted to end this discussion.  Using that logic, why even bother designing a good Pool C methodology? Why even have a Pool C?

Well, honestly, playing the "these kids work hard" card ought to be followed by the "AQ" card.

Agreed that the committee is not valuing Calvin's resume the way we'd like but nobody ever wants to leave their fate in the hands of a committee anyway.

[KnightSlappy]

In football, where the limited number of games means we have a bunch of teams with similar/identical records, it does often work out that way. I'm not sure it's been that cut-and-dried in basketball, though.

A couple of final-public rankings from this region in past years:

2012
1 Hope 16-0 24-1
2 Wittenberg 18-4 20-5
3 Wooster 19-4 21-4
4 Ohio Wesleyan 18-6 19-6
5 Bethany 21-2 22-3
6 John Carroll 15-6 18-6

2011
1 Wooster 23-2 26-2
2 Marietta 22-3 25-3
3 Hope 18-2 22-6
4 Penn State-Behrend 23-3 23-4
5 Wittenberg 16-6 19-8
6 Wabash 19-6 20-6

2010 (this is the selection ranking, the one year they published it)
1. Wooster 23-4 23-5
2. Hope 16-3 21-7
3. Wilmington (Ohio) 20-6 21-7
4. John Carroll 18-6 20-6
5. Calvin 15-4 19-9
6. Wittenberg 17-7 21-7

2009
1. John Carroll 20-4 18-3
2. Capital 22-3 20-3
3. Carnegie Mellon 18-6 14-5
5. Wooster 19-6 18-4
4. Calvin 17-7 12-2
6. Ohio Wesleyan 17-7 16-6

2008 (back when I used to go back and insert OWP and OOWP)
1. Hope    21-3    15-2    .508    .494
2. Capital    21-4    20-4    .528    .524
3. Wooster    22-3    15-2    .484    .490
4. Heidelberg    20-5    18-4    .519    .521
5. Penn State-Behrend    21-4    19-3    .466    .492
6. Albion    18-5    14-3    .476    .496

2007
1. Lake Erie 23-2 19-1
2. Wooster 22-3 17-2
3. John Carroll 17-8 16-6
4. Hope 21-3 14-3
5. Ohio Northern 19-6 14-6
6. Wittenberg 21-4 16-4

I don't think there's a pattern that suggests winning percentage is a stronger primary criterion than the rest.

We're dealing with a small sample size and only one of the primary criteria and there are many factors -- so this is not proof of anything -- but here's a plot of WP vs. GL Rank from the historical data above (blue) and then this year (red). (Click to embiggen).



and we can run that through our supercomputer...

ENHANCE!



Some of the winning percentages either (1) don't quite line up with their typical ranges or are (2) on the extreme end.

[Happy Calvin Guy]

... but yet have everything to do with postseason dreams for a bunch of hardworking 20 year olds.

... whom all control their own destiny, just like everyone in an AQ conference does every season.

...and there's the trump card played by anyone who ever wanted to end this discussion.  Using that logic, why even bother designing a good Pool C methodology? Why even have a Pool C?

Well, honestly, playing the "these kids work hard" card ought to be followed by the "AQ" card.

Agreed that the committee is not valuing Calvin's resume the way we'd like but nobody ever wants to leave their fate in the hands of a committee anyway.

Sorry.  hardworking deserving.  I never meant to imply that hard work alone merits a tournament bid.  The task is to accurately identify what does.

[sac]

We need an 80 team tournament, problem solved.

[David Collinge]

We need an 80 team tournament, problem solved.

I look forward to the day the tournament is big enough to spawn a "Bard Got Screwed" thread.

[Gregory Sager]

We need an 80 team tournament, problem solved.

I look forward to the day the tournament is big enough to spawn a "Bard Got Screwed" thread.

If it's Bard we'd be talking about, it'd probably be a "Bard Eram Fututum" thread.

[sac]

Thursday's Semi Finals

MIAA......links at  http://www.miaa.org/landing/index
#4 Adrian at #1 Calvin
#3 Trine at #2 Hope

OAC  ........links on the schedule pages
#4 Mt. Union at #1 Capital      http://www.capital.edu/mens-basketball-schedule/
#3 Wilmington at #2 Marietta     http://pioneers.marietta.edu/schedule.aspx?path=mbball

PAC -  (reseeds)
#6 Wash & Jeff at #1 St. Vincent            http://athletics.stvincent.edu/schedule.aspx?path=mbball
#4 Thiel at #2 Thomas More          http://www.tmcsaints.com/sports/mbkb/2012-13/schedule

[wally_wabash]

And the hits keep coming...Calvin being the lone GL team to get shipped out of the tidy little GL subquadrant not only doesn't get to host, but if they survive the Haute, then they get to go to Wisconsin and then either St. Thomas or Wheaton if they get that far.  Blech.  I don't know, maybe they would get to host Wheaton, but I wouldn't count on it. 

As for the rest of the region, they get their own little knockout tournament on the other side of the bracket.  Looks like Wooster came out smelling like roses with their first couple of games, but I wouldn't necessarily run them out to the regional semis just yet.  Wooster wasn't particularly great in their last two games and are a little vulnerable I believe. 

OWU probably has a roadie out to Virginia if they want to make the regional semis and that trip won't be easy at all.  If they do get out to Hampden Sydney for a game, they'll need a little more of that Marsh madness that they got on Saturday to advance. 

Good luck everybody...it's a tough field out there.