WAB (Wins Above Bubble)

[Leebo]

I thought WAB was a Torvik thing, not NET.

 

[auror]

I thought WAB was a Torvik thing, not NET.

It was popularized by a dude named Seth Burns, and Torvik incorporated it into his site a couple years back using his own model as the underlying team ratings (Burns was using KenPom I believe). The NCAA adopted it officially when they made a switch up of some of the other metrics on the site before last season. Sagarin retired, they added Torvik's T-Rank, then added WAB but derived from the NET to make it 3 predictive and 3 resume metrics on the sheets.

 

[Hogoff]

I don’t understand how you can have a tenth of a win but oh well

Shot in the dark…maybe some of the wins were against “above bubble” teams that weren’t the entire season.

 

[navery12]

I don’t understand how you can have a tenth of a win but oh well

For the same reason as if you have a 60% chance to win 3 games your expected record is 1.8-1.2 and not 3-0

 

[Austin316]

Wait so who determines % chance to win and up until when? Tip?

We had an 80% chance to win vs Arizona but are out 2 starters. Did our % change prior to tip without full strength? Probably not. I’m obviously being extremely biased here but maybe not… I think it’s an outlier factor to WAB that needs adjustment

 

[Leebo]

Wait so who determines % chance to win and up until when? Tip?

We had an 80% chance to win vs Arizona but are out 2 starters. Did our % change prior to tip without full strength? Probably not. I’m obviously being extremely biased here but maybe not… I think it’s an outlier factor to WAB that needs adjustment

For WAB, the percentage that matters is what an "average bubble team" would do against Arizona at home, not the specific team actually playing.

And if you think of the reverse, like say, all of Arizona's team got the flu on trip over and hardly any of their starters played, you'd still get the same credit for winning, or lose the same amount for losing. It doesn't track things like roster specifics.

 

[caw]

Check out the other metrics.

NET - 8
KP - 8

Those would suggest a low two seed. Our WAB and resume value are keeping us as the last one. Zero room for error. We should be Purdue fans today.

Ignoring the three more consensus number ones in Michigan/Zona/Duke, the other one seems most likely to come from the following four teams. And I'd say judging from the metrics below UConn and Houston are pretty neck and neck overall. They have more Q1 wins and a higher KP and NET but are lower on WAB/SOR and KPI. UConn also does have more Q2 wins, so it's not like UConn stacked wins against Q3/Q4. If it were today, I could easily see Houston getting the fourth one seed and UConn being put as the two in Duke's region. Right now, Illinois and ISU seem pretty far behind Houston and UConn.

UConn (22-2):
Q1 - 5-2
Q2 - 8-0
KP - 8
NET - 8
WAB - 4
SOR - 4
KPI - 4

Houston (22-2):
Q1 - 7-2
Q2 - 6-0
KP - 4
NET - 6
WAB - 6
SOR - 5
KPI - 5

Illinois (20-5)
Q1 - 6-4
Q2 - 4-1
KP - 6
NET - 4
WAB - 7
SOR - 10
KPI - 9

ISU (21-3):
Q1 - 5-3
Q2 - 9-1
KP - 7
NET - 5
WAB - 9
SOR - 9
KPI - 7

 

[RuffRuff]

For WAB, the percentage that matters is what an "average bubble team" would do against Arizona at home, not the specific team actually playing.

And if you think of the reverse, like say, all of Arizona's team got the flu on trip over and hardly any of their starters played, you'd still get the same credit for winning, or lose the same amount for losing. It doesn't track things like roster specifics.

Ignoring the three more consensus number ones in Michigan/Zona/Duke, the other one seems most likely to come from the following four teams. And I'd say judging from the metrics below UConn and Houston are pretty neck and neck overall. They have more Q1 wins and a higher KP and NET but are lower on WAB/SOR and KPI. UConn also does have more Q2 wins, so it's not like UConn stacked wins against Q3/Q4. If it were today, I could easily see Houston getting the fourth one seed and UConn being put as the two in Duke's region. Right now, Illinois and ISU seem pretty far behind Houston and UConn.

UConn (22-2):
Q1 - 5-2
Q2 - 8-0
KP - 8
NET - 8
WAB - 4
SOR - 4
KPI - 4

Houston (22-2):
Q1 - 7-2
Q2 - 6-0
KP - 4
NET - 6
WAB - 6
SOR - 5
KPI - 5

Illinois (20-5)
Q1 - 6-4
Q2 - 4-1
KP - 6
NET - 4
WAB - 7
SOR - 10
KPI - 9

ISU (21-3):
Q1 - 5-3
Q2 - 9-1
KP - 7
NET - 5
WAB - 9
SOR - 9
KPI - 7

Looks like a two horse race.

 

[ToolzieFan]

This is an interesting look at win quality and loss quality. I do think that if we win the rest of our regular season games, we should pretty clearly be a #1 seed.

 

[businesslawyer]

Looks like a two horse race.

You can’t just look at quad one wins. Everyone (but you) seems able to discern that at Kansas and Florida and Illinois on neutral courts are quad one ++++ wins when you’re comparing the best teams to each other. And the predictive metrics, because they care about margin, are far less important than the resume metrics.

If the tournament started tomorrow, we should easily be the choice over Houston. Of course, the tournament isn’t starting tomorrow. A good number of losses remains to occur among the top ten or so teams.

 

[auror]

This is an interesting look at win quality and loss quality. I do think that if we win the rest of our regular season games, we should pretty clearly be a #1 seed.

It's basically wins above bubble, but with Evan's rankings as the basis and separating out the plusses and the minuses.

 

[Tenspro2002]

Whether we get a #1 seed, at this point, depends entirely on whether they lean on resume metrics (i.e. did we win or lose games) or predictive metrics (i.e. margin of victory).

While the latter is useful for betting, I would hope that the sport still rewards Ws and Ls.

 

[RuffRuff]

You can’t just look at quad one wins. Everyone (but you) seems able to discern that at Kansas and Florida and Illinois on neutral courts are quad one ++++ wins when you’re comparing the best teams to each other. And the resume metrics, because they care about margin, are far less important than the resume metrics.

If the tournament started tomorrow, we should easily be the choice over Houston. Of course, the tournament isn’t starting tomorrow. A good number of losses remains to occur among the top ten or so teams.

Agree - we have too many quality OOC wins over them at the moment. It can definitely swing in their favor over the next month as they have good opponents coming.

 

[Lafayette]

WHAT - is this really a stat one or the so called metrics? Paralysis by analysis

Would just rename to AP top 10

 

[mbt0512]

If the choices were #1 in South with Houston as #2 or #2 in East with Duke as #1, is there an obvious preference given geographical disadvantage of former?

 

[BFieldHusky]

Updated 2/12 WAB:

1. Michigan 9.0
2. Arizona 8.2
3. Duke 8.1
4. UConn 8.0
5. Houston 7.0
6. Nebraska 6.3
7. Purdue 6.3
8. Illinois 5.7
9. Kansas 5.6
10. Michigan St. 5.4

 

[RuffRuff]

Updated 2/12 WAB:

1. Michigan 9.0
2. Arizona 8.2
3. Duke 8.1
4. UConn 8.0
5. Houston 7.0
6. Nebraska 6.3
7. Purdue 6.3
8. Illinois 5.7
9. Kansas 5.6
10. Michigan St. 5.4

Houston Schedule

KSU
@ISU
AZ
@KU
Col
Baylor
@Okie St

UConn Schedule

Gtown
Creighton
@Nova
StJ
SHU
@Marquette

Unless we implode, I cannot see anyone but Houston jumping us for the 1. Houston does have a pretty favorable schedule in that they are playing a variety of poor teams in the B12, along with ISU & KU at home. I can easily see them going 6-1 through that stretch. The question will be if we go 5-1, let's say lose to StJ or Nova, if we keep the 1. I think it would be tight. Our schedule is also highly favorable given 4 of those games are at home. We'll be favored in every one of those games, Houston should only be dogs @AZ.

 

[Nameless]

Houston Schedule

KSU
@ISU
AZ
@KU
Col
Baylor
@Okie St

UConn Schedule

Gtown
Creighton
@Nova
StJ
SHU
@Marquette

Unless we implode, I cannot see anyone but Houston jumping us for the 1. Houston does have a pretty favorable schedule in that they are playing a variety of poor teams in the B12, along with ISU & KU at home. I can easily see them going 6-1 through that stretch. The question will be if we go 5-1, let's say lose to StJ or Nova, if we keep the 1. I think it would be tight. Our schedule is also highly favorable given 4 of those games are at home. We'll be favored in every one of those games, Houston should only be dogs @AZ.

Think you made a mistake when analyzing. As you noted when laying out their schedule, they play ISU and KU on the road, not at home.

I've got them at 4-3 through that stretch, personally. They have had a really soft schedule thus far, with the 4 ranked teams they've played being Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas Tech and BYU. In those games they're only 2-2, losing to both Tech and Tennessee. Arkansas is a solid team but they're currently #21, I wouldn't consider them elite. As I noted in another thread BYU had lost 3 straight heading into their matchup and clearly has not been the same team they were at the start of the season. So I'm a little skeptical they beat either ISU or KU on the road, and I think Arizona at home will be just as much of a challenge. I can see them maybe winning one of those games but if they go 2-1 in those 3, I'll be shocked.

 

[RuffRuff]

Think you made a mistake when analyzing. As you noted when laying out their schedule, they play ISU and KU on the road, not at home.

I've got them at 4-3 through that stretch, personally. They have had a really soft schedule thus far, with the 4 ranked teams they've played being Tennessee, Arkansas, Texas Tech and BYU. In those games they're only 2-2, losing to both Tech and Tennessee. Arkansas is a solid team but they're currently #21, I wouldn't consider them elite. As I noted in another thread BYU had lost 3 straight heading into their matchup and clearly has not been the same team they were at the start of the season. So I'm a little skeptical they beat either ISU or KU on the road, and I think Arizona at home will be just as much of a challenge. I can see them maybe winning one of those games but if they go 2-1 in those 3, I'll be shocked.

Ah good catch, was going fast.

Idk - a couple of those losses were really early. They’ve improved. They seem to be taking care of business against lesser teams of late. 2 losses likely keeps us in a good spot with even one loss on our end. Them winning two of those three against top ten teams is where we’d have to worry.