Massey Ratings

[FanFromMaine]

Massey Ratings for basketball have been posted although it looks like data are still being added.

It was interesting to me to watch Massey and Net at the end of last year as UConn exploded. My recollection is that neither system rated the Huskies #1 until after the final game.

 

[WiseWillie]

Although Massey and NET can provide a useful verification and a different perspective, most basketball junkies today according to those who know these things use KenPom as their primary analytical source. Sometimes a composite of all three averaged together can produce an overall balanced metric - although there is never a system used solely or in a composite that will be infallible which in some respects creates the uncertainty and is what keeps b-ball sports fans interested and forums like the Boneyard going.

 

[EricLA]

I will say this - according to the numbers THEY USED, UConn ended up a 2 seed, but it goes to show the metrics were awful. They need to fix that IMHO. There is NO REASON UConn should have been a 2 seed.

Again, I get that we got it based on the actual metrics and data they used, so I'm not disputing that, but it was flawed and wrong. They should use last season to rework the numbers and figure out how to improve their system.

 

[azfan]

Massey pre season

Grand Canyon 87

ASU 88

NAU 112

Kitties 43 (shocking but who knows about the new roster)

And.............

The fashionista's Mustangs 105

It'll be interesting to see how the seasons unfold for these schools

 

[Bone Dog]

Am I reading this right -- ND over UCLA? That seems strange.

 

[FanFromMaine]

The Massey data seems very incomplete.

 

[FanFromMaine]

I will say this - according to the numbers THEY USED, UConn ended up a 2 seed, but it goes to show the metrics were awful. They need to fix that IMHO. There is NO REASON UConn should have been a 2 seed.

Again, I get that we got it based on the actual metrics and data they used, so I'm not disputing that, but it was flawed and wrong. They should use last season to rework the numbers and figure out how to improve their system.

Last year the existing data took a big hit after the first South Carolina loss to UConn. I’m not a statistician but an outlier of that proportion must be very hard to integrate in the last part of the season.

 

[ucmiami2]

Massey Ratings for basketball have been posted although it looks like data are still being added.

It was interesting to me to watch Massey and Net at the end of last year as UConn exploded. My recollection is that neither system rated the Huskies #1 until after the final game.

Pretty sure Massey ratings require fresh games to change, and the ratings in the first month of the season are still reflecting some of the previous year's data.

 

[Dogdude]

Meh, polls are good for giggles and kicks...I'm not sure how any analysis could have kept up with UConn's stunning improvement in the final weeks of the season and the tournaments. Based on their mid-season results it would be perfectly understandable to not buy into their new energy, and think that their inconsistency would result in a crash and burn. We the faithful saw it happening. Maybe at the end of the season I'll check out what the polls say.

 

[GoChips20]

IMO there’s some ambiguity over when the previous year’s results are no longer considered though because Iowa was a top-10 Massey offense all last year despite averaging 74.4ppg (not a standout number and almost 20 points less than Clark’s senior season). Iowa was still a good team but I didn’t understand that rating at all.