Great Lakes Region

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

I have been meaning to ask that... keep forgetting... but I think initial rankings get down and then a double-iteration is done to fine tune them. OR they do the rankings and the national committee then uses the vRRO to adjust accordingly. I will try and get an answer.

To follow up... I have been told it looks like the national committee will make the necessary changes. So, the RACs will vote with the information they have in hand (including not having the vRRO the first week) and then the national committee will make adjustments per now having vRRO information.

[KnightSlappy]

It makes sense to discount a home game if you're going to "reward" an away game, it just has to be done in a way that makes sense. The multiplier should be such that it accurately represents the difference in playing at home and on the road.

Consider the following win probabilities per Massey:
IWU (75%) at Hope (25%)
IWU (81%) vs (neutral court) Hope (19%)
IWU (88% hosting Hope (12%)

Thomas More (17%) at Hope (83%)
Thomas More (22%) vs (neutral court) Hope (78%)
Thomas More (31%) hosting Hope (70%)

Proves sac's point, which probably everyone would agree with anyway. Any multiplier that makes Thomas More look like a tougher opponent than Illinois Wesleyan is totally out of whack. Hope is a solid favorite over Thomas More regardless of location and a solid underdog to Illinois Wesleyan regardless of location.

It's a limited set of two Hope opponents but we see similar differences in the win probability based on where the game is played. A better real-world set of multipliers looks to be 0.94/1.0/1.06 but a 0.9/1.0/1.1 would probably generally pass the sniff test while allowing for a little more penalty/reward for how a schedule is put together.

Nice work, but I don't agree with the bolded part, only because they're using W-L record as the sole determining factor of team quality. You're always going to have a team like Wheaton -- good but played a tough schedule -- looking questionable compared to a St. Vincent -- probably good, but playing a very easy schedule. Any system (with or without a multiplier) will have a hard time there.

[sac]

That's where OOWP would sort of correct it.  But I think with the multipliers being so extreme that correction isn't what it should be.

[sac]

A couple of important games in the region tonight, both with video links

Calvin at Hope 8pm http://new.livestream.com/calvin-college/events/2745282

Wittenberg at Ohio Wesleyan  7:30pm  http://stream.owu.edu/


also this one.....
Mt. Union at Baldwin Wallace......as of now is the only OAC game that hasn't been postponed to Thursday.

[sac]

Thiel 124  St. Vincent 121  4 overtimes

That result should have major ranking implications for next week as in St. Vincent shouldn't be in the top half of the GL rankings.


Medaille 70  PSU-Behrend 67

PSUB should also not be anywhere near the top half of the GL rankings.

[sac]

Wooster              16-2
St. Vincent           14-2
Hilbert                 17-3
Mt. Union            16-3
Wittenberg         16-4
Ohio Wesleyan   16-4
Bethany              16-4
PSU-Behrend       16-4
Marietta              15-4
Calvin                  12-4
Hope                   13-5
DePauw              13-5
-------------------------------- .700
LaRoche              12-6
Wilmington         12-6
John Carroll        14-7


Drop Trine and Albion who have too many losses to be viable Pool C candidates


Head-to-head match-ups this weekend:
none

[KnightSlappy]

Here's what I have through Thursday.

RG   ##   WP      wSOS    wRPI    NAT   D3      RRO   CONFER   TEAM
GL   01   0.889   0.538   0.626   012   16-2    0-0   NCAC     Wooster
GL   02   0.800   0.548   0.611   019   16-4    0-0   NCAC     Ohio Wesleyan
GL   03   0.722   0.572   0.610   022   13-5    0-0   MIAA     Hope
GL   04   0.789   0.541   0.603   029   15-4    0-0   OAC      Marietta
GL   05   0.722   0.560   0.600   031   13-5    0-0   NCAC     DePauw
GL   06   0.842   0.511   0.594   042   16-3    0-0   OAC      Mount Union
GL   07   0.800   0.508   0.581   050   16-4    0-0   PrAC     Bethany
gl   08   0.800   0.497   0.572   055   16-4    0-0   NCAC     Wittenberg
gl   09   0.667   0.540   0.572   057   12-6    0-0   OAC      Wilmington
gl   10   0.875   0.467   0.569   061   14-2    0-0   PrAC     St. Vincent
gl   11   0.800   0.469   0.551   091   16-4    0-0   AMCC     Penn State-Behrend
gl   12   0.500   0.563   0.547   098   10-10   0-0   NCAC     Denison
gl   13   0.650   0.512   0.546   100   13-7    0-0   OAC      John Carroll
gl   14   0.750   0.476   0.545   103   12-4    0-0   MIAA     Calvin
gl   15   0.550   0.541   0.543   107   11-9    0-0   OAC      Ohio Northern
gl   16   0.500   0.553   0.540   115   10-10   0-0   OAC      Baldwin Wallace
gl   17   0.450   0.562   0.534   127   9-11    0-0   OAC      Capital
gl   18   0.667   0.486   0.531   134   12-6    0-0   UAA      Case Western Reserve
gl   19   0.467   0.539   0.521   160   7-8     0-0   PrAC     Grove City
gl   20   0.529   0.517   0.520   164   9-8     0-0   UAA      Carnegie Mellon


My guess is that 'results versus regionally ranked opponents' will push Wittenberg ahead of Bethany. The rest of the top seven is plausible.

[sac]

Where's Hilbert on your chart?

[KnightSlappy]

Where's Hilbert on your chart?

#24 with the fifth-worst SOS in the country (and more or less tied for third worst). Of course, they wouldn't actually be that low if the GL ranked that many teams; they'd be ahead of the sub-.500 teams and most of the sub-.600 teams because that's how they do these things (i.e. rather arbitrarily).

[sac]

Calculating OOWP for Hope

Hope should consider leaving the MIAA for the CCIW or the NCAA should just use RPI.  Great lesson in why its so important your conference plays good teams and does well in out of conference play. 

Also maddening that you as a coach have no control over that whatsoever.

[northb]

Calculating OOWP for Hope

Hope should consider leaving the MIAA for the CCIW or the NCAA should just use RPI.  Great lesson in why its so important your conference plays good teams and does well in out of conference play. 

Also maddening that you as a coach have no control over that whatsoever.

Not going to happen in our lifetimes

[KnightSlappy]

Calculating OOWP for Hope

Hope should consider leaving the MIAA for the CCIW or the NCAA should just use RPI.  Great lesson in why its so important your conference plays good teams and does well in out of conference play. 

Also maddening that you as a coach have no control over that whatsoever.

To me, the takeaway is that OOWP doesn't matter all that much. Or perhaps not so much that as you want to play "good teams" as you want to play fair teams with good records.

UW-Stevens Point plays in the WIAC and doesn't typically shy away from tough non-conference games.

OWP: .602, OOWP: .549, SOS: .584

Hope played a tough non-conference schedule but plays in what is a very weak league this year.

OWP: .608, OOWP: .500, SOS: .572

UWSP has one of the best OOWP in the country, and Hope only an average one, but UWSP only comes out .012 ahead in the SOS calc. That's not nothing, but one could overcome that gap (in terms of RPI) with just one extra win in a 27 game schedule.

[sac]

OWP: .608, OOWP: .500, SOS: .572

I have .521 for OOWP

[KnightSlappy]

Where's Hilbert on your chart?

Also for Hilbert, their wins versus Houghton and Alfred State don't count for primary criteria purposes because they're within their first two years of provisional status.

[KnightSlappy]

OWP: .608, OOWP: .500, SOS: .572

I have .521 for OOWP

My sheet has this, the (HAM) weighted column averages to .500:

OOWP    wOOWP   Game
0.587   0.734   at UW-Whitewater •
0.614   0.768   at UW-Stevens Point •
0.625   0.625   at Wheaton (Ill.) •
0.605   0.605   at Carthage •
0.518   0.388   vs. Lake Forest •
0.541   0.406   vs. Illinois Wesleyan •
0.523   0.523   vs. Centre •
0.542   0.677   at Thomas More •
0.549   0.411   vs. Edgewood •
0.382   0.286   vs. Trine * •
0.444   0.555   at Calvin * •
0.423   0.529   at Albion * •
0.478   0.359   vs. Olivet * •
0.546   0.682   at Alma * •
0.436   0.327   vs. Adrian * •
0.382   0.477   at Trine * •
0.422   0.316   vs. Kalamazoo * •
0.444   0.333   vs. Calvin * •


What isn't clear to me is if the OOWP is calculated using each opponent's weighted OWP, or raw OWP.