- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 11,077
- Reaction Score
- 14,132
I have never heard of this guy. Supposedly he influences a lot of writers and when he updated his projections, people made a lot criticism. UConn at number 12.
It literally looks like he took a spreadsheet with a whole bunch of data points from past years. Inputted this into the ChatGPT context window. And, asked ChatGPT To come up with a ranking, records, etc.Garbage in, garbage out
Odd. If you sort by "Projected Effective Talent", UConn is #1 and in that they're +2.8 over second place. No bigger gap in the entire list.I have never heard of this guy. Supposedly he influences a lot of writers and when he updated his projections, people made a lot criticism. UConn at number 12.
I would bet some conference-related projected strength of schedule rating bring us down. People will never believe in the Big East.Odd. If you sort by "Projected Effective Talent", UConn is #1 and in that they're +2.8 over second place. No bigger gap in the entire list.
Add that talent to the best coaching staff in America and you... end up #12 ? Huh ?
I'm curious. You've been on here since 2011 and have almost 11,000 posts and you've never heard of Bart Torvik? Seems almost impossible. Do you know who Ken Pomeroy is? Similar type stuff. Metrics based projections. There seem to be more of these popping up but those are 2 that are popular and been around a long time.I have never heard of this guy. Supposedly he influences a lot of writers and when he updated his projections, people made a lot criticism. UConn at number 12.
I'm curious. You've been on here since 2011 and have almost 11,000 posts and you've never heard of Bart Torvik? Seems almost impossible. Do you know who Ken Pomeroy is? Similar type stuff. Metrics based projections. There seem to be more of these popping up but those are 2 that are popular and been around a long time.
This is spot on - I don’t think a Torvik formula can measure players that haven’t played all that much at the college level, or measure sum of all parts. His formula takes a lot historical data into account, fairly as what other realistic way is there to measure? UConn’s potential is as much art as science given their formula around development and next man up. Really not worth much right now.tried to find the model but don't see much of anything. i'd venture to guess that there's a lot of normalized noise in the usage patterns, and also a bifurcated model choice between recruits and returnees in that recruits are valued by expected value of a given recruit ranking, while returnees are evaluated on past college production.
this means that for a team that is reliant on returning freshmen who did not get much run last season/didn't produce much, they are being evaluated on that sample and not on their recruit rankings. this can be seen by this model giving uconn the highest "talent" but low production and minutes from those returnees.
this is just a case of uconn falling through the cracks of a model designed to approximate the normal college team in terms of progression and development. wouldn't worry too much about it.
So after your reply I was thinking well maybe he's not mentioned on here as much as I thought. So I searched for the word "Torvik" on here. It came up 155 separate times, not including this thread, in the last 12 months.Never heard of Bart. Kenpom is the standard, but surprisingly until I saw a YouTube post yesterday that was the first time Torvik ever registered.
So after your reply I was thinking well maybe he's not mentioned on here as much as I thought. So I searched for the word "Torvik" on here. It came up 155 sep
So after your reply I was thinking well maybe he's not mentioned on here as much as I thought. So I searched for the word "Torvik" on here. It came up 155 separate times, not including this thread, in the last 12 months.
That's all?Out of 400,000 posts.
That's all?
Curious, not fascinated. Carry on.I didn't know what's more strange, that I've never heard of Torvik or that you're so fascinated by that.