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.

 

[FanFromMaine]

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.

I can’t find a KenPom for women. Does it exist?

 

[Twolf]

Rankings, seedings, and statistics are just like bikinis- they show a lot but they don’t show everything.

 

[Alydar]

The committee made it plain last season that in seeding the top 16 teams the key stat would be Tier 1 record. They use the entire season, not how a team is playing in February. As long as this is the system then UConn will never be a lock for a one seed unless they go undefeated.

And UConn fans shouldn't care. If we think the Huskies are the best then we shouldn't be concerned with seeding. Brag that we beat 3 one seeds to win the title. The men did that one year. Now the women have done it.

 

[Veteran]

The only seeding that matters is the final one the day after the championship game. The rest are basically just for entertainment value, and these days, for clicks. Yes, they're used for placement in the tournament, but no matter the seeding, somebody still has to win 6 games, and if they're good enough to win 6 games then the seeding doesn't really matter. Just ask our overall #7 seeded team if seedings mattered.

The fact that a 12th banner will soon be hanging in Gampel proves that seeding are basically just opinions. And everybody has probably heard the old saying about opinions. Of course, my comment is just an opinion, too, so the old saying also applies to me.