RPI | Page 5 | The Boneyard

RPI

Status
Not open for further replies.
tzznandrew said:
The winning percentage and opponent's winning percentage are what matter. Provided you keep the same opponents, the second (and third) sections don't change.

And UConn's RPI would ultimately be the same if it beat Maryland, Syracuse, Gonzaga, and Temple and instead lost to the four worst teams we played (provided they were at the same venue) since it would not change our winning percentage.
Expand ...
O.K. got it. That is pretty stupid isn't it?

I think people get too caught up in the importance of the RPI of their team. I don't think the tournament selection committee looks at a team's RPI for whether they are selected for the NCAA Tournament and their seeding. What they use the RPI for is to gauge the quality of the teams you beat and lost to (mostly beat). So they're looking at the RPI of the teams you played and how good were the wins. Obviously by the nature of the calculation if you have a lot of wins and beat high RPI teams your own RPI is going to be high. But you're getting into the NCAA Tournament based on who you played and beat and not your RPI ranking.
 
Sure that's too high. But they're 82 in KenPom and 97 in Sagarin, so it isn't like they are just some crappy team.
Corny2Amida said:
I think we would all agree that the RPI has serious flaws when 13-6 William and Mary is ranked #36...
Expand ...
 
tzznandrew said:
Sure that's too high. But they're 82 in KenPom and 97 in Sagarin, so it isn't like they are just some crappy team.
Expand ...
W & M not a crappy team but jeeze....they have 1 win @ NC State but otherwise just CAA wins & 2 really bad losses.

They get credit for playing & losing some good OOC games....perfect example how flawed Rpi is.
 
RPI 48 Kenpom 21 BPI 27. Now we're talking! I hate the RPI because is so easily to manipulate. It seems the Atlantic 10 has it down but if we can get a seating of 6 or 7, I would be pumped.
 
.-.
Lost a top 50 win, Michigan dropped to 55. RPI 48, SOS 64, 1-2 top 50 and 4-6 top 100. (ESPN) 5/8 games left are top 75.
 
We said in the beginning of the year that most of our opportunities would be early, and that proved to be true. Sadly, we didn't capitalize.

Beat Syracuse and we have a shot at Texas A&M (17).

Beat Maryland.

That turned out to be it, aside from Texas (a win that keeps giving).

Other opponents (OSU, Georgetown) didn't live up to what we hoped for, and really SMU (10) is our only shot for more Top 25 wins.

That said, if we keep winning, we'll be in good shape in RPI, KenPom, etc.
 
4in16 said:
Lost a top 50 win, Michigan dropped to 55. RPI 48, SOS 64, 1-2 top 50 and 4-6 top 100. (ESPN) 5/8 games left are top 75.
Expand ...

Only 1 Top 50 win could be a problem. Contrast that to P5 teams around our position in the RPI who get a Top 50 game just about every week and will end up with 5-6 of those wins (e.g. Syracuse already has 5, Alabama 3, Washington 3, FSU 3).

We may only have 2 more opportunities and we have to win at least one of them.

Our overall profile seems to be more impressive than is implied by the RPI, and hopefully the Committee will look a little deeper. That said, expecting them to give an AAC team the benefit of the doubt would take an awful lot of faith.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
Only 1 Top 50 win could be a problem. Contrast that to P5 teams around our position in the RPI who get a Top 50 game just about every week and will end up with 5-6 of those wins (e.g. Syracuse already has 5, Alabama 3, Washington 3, FSU 3).

We may only have 2 more opportunities and we have to win at least one of them.

Our overall profile seems to be more impressive than is implied by the RPI, and hopefully the Committee will look a little deeper. That said, expecting them to give an AAC team the benefit of the doubt would take an awful lot of faith.
Expand ...
If we can't get at least 1 win vs. SMU and we drop a few more down the stretch, I start to worry.
 
tzznandrew said:
We said in the beginning of the year that most of our opportunities would be early, and that proved to be true. Sadly, we didn't capitalize.

Beat Syracuse and we have a shot at Texas A&M (17).

Beat Maryland.

That turned out to be it, aside from Texas (a win that keeps giving).

Other opponents (OSU, Georgetown) didn't live up to what we hoped for, and really SMU (10) is our only shot for more Top 25 wins.

That said, if we keep winning, we'll be in good shape in RPI, KenPom, etc.
Expand ...

And yet, if Temple and Cincy ended properly, UConn would be 19-4 and ranked right now.
 
.-.
I only go by BPI, which has UConn 24th, 27 spots ahead of Providence.
 
Waquoit said:
I only go by BPI, which has UConn 24th, 27 spots ahead of Providence.
Expand ...

There aren't many non-RPI metrics that don't have us ahead of Providence. We're also 28 spots ahead of them in kenpom.
 
HuskyBballFan said:
There aren't many non-RPI metrics that don't have us ahead of Providence. We're also 28 spots ahead of them in kenpom.
Expand ...

We're 24 ahead in Sagarin, 29 in SRS. We're definitely better than Providence.
 
CallMeBruce said:
We're 24 ahead in Sagarin, 29 in SRS. We're definitely better than Providence.
Expand ...
By every measure other than RPI, Providence is in dangerous territory. Wonder if they could miss out altogether.
 
.-.
aceboon said:
the power of ESPN
Expand ...
All major composite ranking metrics were used to select the outcomes of the 2012-2015 NCAA Tournaments. The BPI had the most successful percentage of correct picks, something around 75%. RPI had around 71% if I remember correctly.

ESPN won't release its BPI formula, but in those 4 years (heavy with a lot of low seed upsets) it was relatively accurate.
 
CTBasketball said:
All major composite ranking metrics were used to select the outcomes of the 2012-2015 NCAA Tournaments. The BPI had the most successful percentage of correct picks, something around 75%. RPI had around 71% if I remember correctly.

ESPN won't release its BPI formula, but in those 4 years (heavy with a lot of low seed upsets) it was relatively accurate.
Expand ...
From my understanding the selection committee does not use BPI as a metric tool for the selection process, they do use kenpom and other metrics outside of the RPI tho. Hey if people like the number that's cool, but it really shouldn't be lumped in with all of the other stuff if the committee itself really doesn't care about it.
 
We need to take advantage of our home against SMU. Sounds like a broken record but last night Duke beating Louisville at home allows them to bounce back in, and every week they have an opportunity against a ranked team should they lose. We all knew this going in to the season, and the sad part is that every year being front loaded is the same, Groundhog Day. 3-4 consistently ranked teams in the AAC solves all problems. The RPI is maddening because there will be teams with many losses some bad that will get low seeds.
 
@jibsey I don't know why everyone is beating up on Duke so much right now. They aren't a great team, but every ranking that is being used here to say UConn is good shows them being even better. KenPom 13, Sagarin 11, BPI 9. Duke needed that win for confidence, but in no way needed it to get back into the tourney field. I would expect a pretty decent seed for them come March.
 
aceboon said:
From my understanding the selection committee does not use BPI as a metric tool for the selection process, they do use kenpom and other metrics outside of the RPI tho. Hey if people like the number that's cool, but it really shouldn't be lumped in with all of the other stuff if the committee itself really doesn't care about it.
Expand ...
Ironically, kenpom is not very good. So I guess it shouldn't surprise me that the NCAA uses it. I'm not saying it is RPI awful. It just isn't very good. Sagarin is better and, for those who want more than just one or two numbers to look at, Mike Greefield does a great job at teamrankings.com. In fact, let's look at those numbers, as of today:

Rating Value Rank Conf Rank
Predictive Rating 14.6 #22 #2
Home Rating 13.4 #30 #3
Away Rating 19.7 #4 #1
Neutral Rating 13.3 #34 #3
Home Advantage 0.3 #257 #7
Strength Of Schedule 6.3 #41 #2
Future SOS 9.3 #47 #2
Season SOS 7.1 #39 #1
SOS - Basic 2.0 #81 #5
In-Conf SOS 5.8 #81 #6
Non-Conf SOS 6.6 #14 #1
Last 5 Rating 19.0 #8 #1
Last 10 Rating 13.8 #31 #1
In-Conf Rating 13.6 #32 #2
Non-Conf Rating 16.1 #22 #3
Luck Rating -1.1 #262 #7
Consistency Rating 10.0 #170 #6
Vs. 1-25 Rating 9.1 #68 #5
Vs. 26-50 Rating 16.5 #24 #3
Vs. 51-100 Rating 14.1 #31 #1
Vs. 101-200 Rating 21.1 #8 #1
Vs. 201+ Rating 14.2 #34 #3
First Half Rating 7.1 #33 #2
Second Half Rating 7.9 #18 #2

The two things that jump out are our crappy defense of home court and our crappy play against Top 25 teams. This team has to win the home games they should win and they HAVE to beat a Top 25 team. The only one left is SMU. I guess one could look at our "luck" rating as bad too. That is just our inability to win close games. That isn't good either and has to change.
 
DSpice said:
@jibsey I don't know why everyone is beating up on Duke so much right now. They aren't a great team, but every ranking that is being used here to say UConn is good shows them being even better. KenPom 13, Sagarin 11, BPI 9. Duke needed that win for confidence, but in no way needed it to get back into the tourney field. I would expect a pretty decent seed for them come March.
Expand ...
Until last night, who had they beaten? Indiana in November.

They still only have 1 Top 25 win. And 3 of their Top 100 wins are because mid-majors are overperforming (Buffalo, Yale, LB State).

Until Louisville, they had beaten very few teams of note.
 
.-.
DSpice said:
@jibsey I don't know why everyone is beating up on Duke so much right now. They aren't a great team, but every ranking that is being used here to say UConn is good shows them being even better. KenPom 13, Sagarin 11, BPI 9. Duke needed that win for confidence, but in no way needed it to get back into the tourney field. I would expect a pretty .decent seed for them come March.
Expand ...
No, I meant bouncing in and out of the top 25. They get a ranked opponent every other game it seems. Us not so much.
 
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/bubblewatch

"Connecticut [17-6 (7-3), RPI: 47, SOS: 70] Do wins over UCF, Memphis and East Carolina get the Bubble Watch's blood pumping? No. Not usually, anyway. When they are handled with the type of dominant verve UConn displayed in its past three games -- two of which were on the road, and which came by a combined margin of 64 points -- our proverbial ears perk up. This is why per-possession statistics can be so helpful, after all: They highlight the nuance and detail of wins. The RPI algorithm won't be so impressed. It's also wrong. The rate of return on a win at Texas is skyrocketing, sure, but the best sign for the Huskies -- who are still 4-6 against the top 100 -- is the really good basketball they happen to be playing."
 
Just took a quick look at Lundari's projected at larges (12 seeds or better). Out of those 48 teams, there are a collective 2 losses to teams with a current RPI higher than 250. Arkansas Little rock owns 1 (1 of their 2 losses on the season) and San Diego State owns the other (they lost to San Diego).

With that stat in hand, I'd like to now see what a cut tail RPI looks like at 250. Where all teams Ranked 250 or higher are set to 250 capped and see how that re-orders the rankings. I don't know how to do this in mass. Any statisticians on the board?

In case you were wondering, the at large field has 5 collective losses from 200-250 (3 of them by Monmouth) and 6 from 150-200.
 
What RPI does the committee use? When you look at different RPI links I see us at 51, 46, basically all in the 40-50 range but do we know which one they use?
 
lange10 said:
What RPI does the committee use? When you look at different RPI links I see us at 51, 46, basically all in the 40-50 range but do we know which one they use?
Expand ...
They switch on a case by case basis to ensure matchups which are most likely to keep credit $ in the coffers of the conferences represented by the committee. This is a loose representation of reality though, the RPI is mostly just a 2-3 seed range guideline that goes way out the window in the room to protect the above. They'll bring it out selectively to poke holes in an otherwise strong resume (like ours this year) but dismiss it for teams who played a really hard road schedule (power bias).
 
250? 150 would be more useful tool. You have to be pretty bad to be sub 150 and any win by a tourney team over a sub 150 should be worthless.
 
.-.
Status
Not open for further replies.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,184
Messages
4,556,015
Members
10,441
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom