We are Spoiled

[Tonyc]

Ive been watching scores of other games and I really dont see top teams beating teams by 35+ or shooting over 55%. Yeah I know other conferences have more top teams but look at top teams playing non top 25 teams. Look at the top 8 teams (1 & 2 seeds in NCAAs) and see how many struggle against teams ranked out of the top 10. UConn struggled against @ Tenn and that was before Azzi and Griff were looking healthy. The Big East has UConn and Creighton ranked in the top 25.

Last nites game @ Seton Hall was a 42 pt win. We had 5 players with double digits and shot over 63% from the floor, over 31% from trey and over 83% from the line. Thats pretty good against any team. Is Seton Hall not as good as some of the teams in the power conferences that are ranked lower then 5 in their conference? Meanwhile you look at other teams over the past week or so and you dont see blowouts. UConn does it because they have an abundance of shooters and scorers. The Big East doesn't have as many top teams as other conferences but UConn continues to put up big numbers, that other teams dont. The reason is UConn has Azzi healthy and Griff on the way. Now we wait for Morgan and Ice who seem to be a few weeks away.

Our win @ SC has opened a lot of eyes. I feel the media and some fans felt that UConn wasn't what they were and is beatable. Well they were until the SC game where UConn showed, on the road, what a healthy UConn team can do. The @SC game sent a message to WCBB. UConn looked scary good. People I feel were not paying attention to UConn. Many thinking of UConn as a has been. UConn is Back.

Last nite @ Seton Hall we won big by 42pts. We didnt look like we did @ SC. The biggest reason imo was so many moving screens especially in the first half. That took away from our flow and allowed Seton Hall to stay close. Im not blaming the refs for the calls. Im blaming the moving screens which is something that has been happening imo a little to much. When UConn made adjustments in the second half it was another blowout. With that said we are a very explosive team and can score a lot of points in a very short time. No other team is doing that.

The one finishing touch we need is an effective big. That big appears to be Jana. This is her first full season so it has been a little up and down. We saw what she is capable of @ SC. We saw what Ash was capable of when she hit something like 10 bombs in a row and now Ash is a steady threat. Kinda makes me think that Jana could be only a few games away from being a more consistent force that we need on the inside.

I still feel we are not gettin the respect I think we should. I guess we need a few more blowouts under our belt to make more fans and media to believe in UConn. The @ SC game was the start. It opened a lot of eyes. Now the next few games will help as I feel we will become more of a force. Our confidence is back. We need to keep improving and avoid injuries and we will win it all.

 

[Centerstream]

Who is not giving UConn enough respect, the AP Poll? Well, some voters there definitely show team favoritism/bias. Nothing is going to change that.
Massey has us as #3, behind SoCar and Texas. Now I realize that these ratings are based on season long analytics but we have to remember that humans created the algorithms. Humans decided which conferences are the strongest.
Nolan's NET ratings has UConn #1, followed by SoCar and Texas.
And we must remember that the Selection Committee is made of humans, using their own criteria (analytics) based upon the same factors, except Won/Loss records, created by humans.
But I agree that we are spoiled. Why? Because of our reputation in the NCAA Tournament. Our streak of Final Four appearances is phenomenal and can't be ignored. Our total number of FF appearances is phenomenal. What team has the most consecutive FF appearances now? I am guessing 4 by SoCar.
I like being spoiled.

 

[MooseJaw]

Any team no matter how good is beatable, it may not happen, but it is possible. How many unbeaten teams still exist in WCBB this season? How many thought USC would steamroll through this season hoisting another banner?
UConn stunned WCBB with the total drubbing of Dawns team, they are no where as bad as the score suggest, nor are we anywhere as good as the score suggest, per the season. Up until that game we didn't have wow games this season. We now have opened eyes and gained the respect some want. Personally, I don't give a fig if anyone else gives our Huskies the respect they deserve. More fun to shock the opposition with a beatdown, as USC found out.
We are not without respect as much as others are just tired of UConn being at the top of the food chain. Tony made some great points, said what a lot here on the BY feel and rightly so. We made a huge statement in the USC game, now we have to continue to back it up. Thanks Tony, Go Huskies. And yes we are spoiled, not a bad thing in my mind, consider the alternative.

 

[The deacon]

Any team no matter how good is beatable, it may not happen, but it is possible. How many unbeaten teams still exist in WCBB this season? How many thought USC would steamroll through this season hoisting another banner?
UConn stunned WCBB with the total drubbing of Dawns team, they are no where as bad as the score suggest, nor are we anywhere as good as the score suggest, per the season. Up until that game we didn't have wow games this season. We now have opened eyes and gained the respect some want. Personally, I don't give a fig if anyone else gives our Huskies the respect they deserve. More fun to shock the opposition with a beatdown, as USC found out.
We are not without respect as much as others are just tired of UConn being at the top of the food chain. Tony made some great points, said what a lot here on the BY feel and rightly so. We made a huge statement in the USC game, now we have to continue to back it up. Thanks Tony, Go Huskies. And yes we are spoiled, not a bad thing in my mind, consider the alternative.

Quick reminder, Moosejaw, the Huskies lost to USC (Southern Cal) in December... beat SC (South Carolina) last weekend.

 

[Plebe]

Massey has us as #3, behind SoCar and Texas. Now I realize that these ratings are based on season long analytics but we have to remember that humans created the algorithms. Humans decided which conferences are the strongest.

How exactly are the “algorithms” designed with conference bias in mind? I don't think it works that way.

What about the algorithm for the NET that has us currently at #1? Have we discovered that the humans behind the NET's algorithm design are biased toward the Big East?! Huge news if true.

 

[DefenseBB]

Who is not giving UConn enough respect, the AP Poll? Well, some voters there definitely show team favoritism/bias. Nothing is going to change that.
Massey has us as #3, behind SoCar and Texas. Now I realize that these ratings are based on season long analytics but we have to remember that humans created the algorithms. Humans decided which conferences are the strongest.
Nolan's NET ratings has UConn #1, followed by SoCar and Texas.
And we must remember that the Selection Committee is made of humans, using their own criteria (analytics) based upon the same factors, except Won/Loss records, created by humans.
But I agree that we are spoiled. Why? Because of our reputation in the NCAA Tournament. Our streak of Final Four appearances is phenomenal and can't be ignored. Our total number of FF appearances is phenomenal. What team has the most consecutive FF appearances now? I am guessing 4 by SoCar.
I like being spoiled.

Huh? What are you trying to convey? Let’s clarify a few items -NET is an NCAA created tool that WarrenNolan references and this NET is listed on the NCAA home page as well as WarrenNolan. Again, it is a “tool” that humans would use, similar to a carpenter selecting a hammer. To rank the teams (or build a house) you dont just use a hammer. The algorithm Uses multiple inputs, home/road game, recent stat components of points per game, defensive points allowed and then the recent relative school ranking for Quad rankings along with many other derived inputs. It becomes complex without CONFERENCE or SCHOOL bias. To assert bias in the algorithm is just poor logic. How humans use that day can certainly be construed as poor or biased but the NET tool itself is not biased. It also is just one input of data that the humans utilize. It is NOT an all encompassing stat as too many posters on this forum think it is.
Please stop with the “conspiracy theories” as they only show ignorance. UConn is in as strong a position to win an NcAAT as we have been since 2017.

The team needs to show consistent effort and improved front court play.
The rankings of a 1 or 2 seed really won’t matter.

 

[Centerstream]

How exactly are the “algorithms” designed with conference bias in mind? I don't think it works that way.

What about the algorithm for the NET that has us currently at #1? Have we discovered that the humans behind the NET's algorithm design are biased toward the Big East?! Huge news if true.

For example...some of the analytics use Strength of Schedule in their algorithms. Humans decided which conference is the strongest, the second strongest, etcetera. How did they determine this? At the start of every season, every team is 0-0, yet someone decided that the SEC (for example) is the strongest conference going forward.

 

[Plebe]

For example...some of the analytics use Strength of Schedule in their algorithms. Humans decided which conference is the strongest, the second strongest, etcetera. How did they determine this? At the start of every season, every team is 0-0, yet someone decided that the SEC (for example) is the strongest conference going forward.

Again, I'm afraid it doesn't work this way. Algorithms don't work that way. No one is making these “behind the green curtain” decisions to rig the numbers.

 

[maxw]

The capability of a team (or an individual) is not a definite number but a random variable with a distribution. Think of a team’s ability as a normal distribution with a mean and a variance. When two teams play, their relative distributions determine the likelihood of each team winning. There’s always a chance (however infinitesimal) that the lower rated team will win. One way to minimize chance is to have a best of 3, 7, 100, etc. to determine the best team.

ELO ratings use a probabilistic approach like this but it’s also subject to the initial assumptions and will get better as the season progresses.

The best teams don’t always win single elimination tournaments like the NCAAs. We have all seen our own men’s teams win the tournament coming out of nowhere in 2011 and 2014, while our other powerhouse teams from the 90s failed to reach the final four.

There is some luck involved in sports like college basketball, shooting is a probabilistic act (kinda like hitting in baseball) and some days your shots don’t fall and the other team might shoot the lights out.

Let’s hope we have a good run and play positively like we did against South Carolina.

Many of you (by many, I mean no one) have sent me DMs asking to explain the probabilistic method I mentioned above.

The chart below shows the probability densities of blue and orange teams; x-axis is the rating, and the y-axis is the probability of that team having that rating on any given night. The blue team has a higher average performance rating than the orange team (mean=15 vs. 8 for orange) but is a little more erratic (standard deviation=4 vs. 3 for orange). For example, the blue team will have a probability of ~0.1 of playing with a performance rating of 15, while the orange team has a probability of ~0.01.

The team with higher performance rating will win the game.

The probability of blue having a higher performance rating (and winning the game) is true for all x-values to the right of the green line, about 80.5%. Conversely, the orange team has ~20% chance of winning the game.

If the contest was a best of 5, the chances of orange team winning the series will diminish to 0.7%.

I'm probably not explaining this well, but you get the idea.

 

[MilfordHusky]

Looking at some national stats:

Tied for 8th in winning percentage, 89.3%.

1st in scoring margin, 29.0 ppg.

1st in FG percentage, 50.8%.

11th in FG percentage defense, 35.5%.

6th in 3-point percentage, 38.17%.

3rd in TOs per game, 11.0.

3rd in assists per game, 21.3.

1st in A/TO ratio, 1.94.

Impressive!

 

[fomalhaut]

We're spoiled because a quarter-century of unparalleled excellence entitles us to be.

 

[msf22b]

Spot on Tony!

 

[MSGRET]

For example...some of the analytics use Strength of Schedule in their algorithms. Humans decided which conference is the strongest, the second strongest, etcetera. How did they determine this? At the start of every season, every team is 0-0, yet someone decided that the SEC (for example) is the strongest conference going forward.

Massey uses last year's stats until the 10th game of the season, then everything is current. He has UConn as #3 in today's ratings. They are #2 in the power rating, offense is #7 while the defense is #2.

 

[MooseJaw]

Quick reminder, Moosejaw, the Huskies lost to USC (Southern Cal) in December... beat SC (South Carolina) last weekend.

Yes, that just backs up my post. Any team at any time. We are beatable, but if our entire lineup is available, I'll take our chance in any game. Can we go down, you bet, however I wouldn't bet against us. Just like I picked the Huskies to beat USC.

 

[Puppy Love]

Massey uses last year's stats until the 10th game of the season, then everything is current. He has UConn as #3 in today's ratings. They are #2 in the power rating, offense is #7 while the defense is #2.

Massey still has SC as number one. There’s no universe in which that could be a correct assessment. I said earlier in the year that Masseys algorithm needs to be updated. I think the rapid changes in the game (coaching changes, transfer portal, other factors) have made some of the traditional models much less accurate.

 

[Rowdy831]

I don't agree that any team on any night is beatable. I think that in the whole country you might have 10 teams capable of beating any team on any night. After that I don't buy into the theory and I don't recall an average team beating a great team in the tournament, ever. I don't think that is going to change this year and maybe ever.

In the women's game parity is really 10-15 teams and I don't know if that will change in the next 5-10 years. When you look at the quality of players even at the pro level you have a handful of great players and a bunch of average professional players that are completely interchangable. I don't know why that is but it is.

 

[Just.A.Fan]

Look, the reality IS ... the Big East is weak! That's not news! So, until this past weekend, we couldn't beat the top teams on our schedule outside of our conference. We knew that once this team had everyone healthy, and everyone got comfortable playing together, and with some individual improvements here and there, we were going to be a force to be reckoned with. We proved it last weekend against So. Carolina. Are we that much better than Dawn's team. Probably not. We shocked them. I'm sure they felt they would win easily, especially playing at home. Are we the #1 team in the land? Our record to date would indicate otherwise. However, we most certainly could be the best team in the land. We now just have to prove it by not losing another game the rest of the way. I think we can do it. We have a deep talented bench, we can score with anyone, and we play great team defense.

 

[RockyMTblue2]

I'm a firm believer in Spoiled as a Husky Fan and we have had a drought that I want to see end. It's not my fault, it's not yours. It's Geno's fault and I want more spoiling which involves confetti.

 

[Puppy Love]

I don't agree that any team on any night is beatable. I think that in the whole country you might have 10 teams capable of beating any team on any night. After that I don't buy into the theory and I don't recall an average team beating a great team in the tournament, ever. I don't think that is going to change this year and maybe ever.

In the women's game parity is really 10-15 teams and I don't know if that will change in the next 5-10 years. When you look at the quality of players even at the pro level you have a handful of great players and a bunch of average professional players that are completely interchangable. I don't know why that is but it is.

Just for the sake of argument, I consider Louisville beating Baylor in the tournament to be an average team beating a great team. It does happen. Louisville was a five seed with a 27 and 8 record and Baylor was the overall number one. Louisville 82-81 Baylor (Mar 31, 2013) Game Recap - ESPN

 

[BobbyJ]

I don't agree that any team on any night is beatable. I think that in the whole country you might have 10 teams capable of beating any team on any night. After that I don't buy into the theory and I don't recall an average team beating a great team in the tournament, ever. I don't think that is going to change this year and maybe ever.

In the women's game parity is really 10-15 teams and I don't know if that will change in the next 5-10 years. When you look at the quality of players even at the pro level you have a handful of great players and a bunch of average professional players that are completely interchangable. I don't know why that is but it is.

Sorry to see that you missed the greatest upset in WCBB history that involved Sarah Strong's mother, Allison Feaster.

1998 Harvard vs. Stanford women's basketball game - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

 

[Centerstream]

Again, I'm afraid it doesn't work this way. Algorithms don't work that way. No one is making these “behind the green curtain” decisions to rig the numbers.

I do know how algorithms work and you are completely missing my point.
And I never said anything about rigging the numbers.
I give up.

 

[Forego]

Harvard seems to have a propensity for upsetting overwhelming favorites. Remember the 1968 Yale - Harvard football game? I can still visualize the headline: Harvard beats Yale 29-29.

 

[Centerstream]

Please stop with the “conspiracy theories” as they only show ignorance. UConn is in as strong a position to win an NcAAT as we have been since 2017.

Whatever.
I never said anything about conspiracy theories but thank you for calling me ignorant. AMF.

 

[packwrap]

Sorry to see that you missed the greatest upset in WCBB history that involved Sarah Strong's mother, Allison Feaster.

1998 Harvard vs. Stanford women's basketball game - Wikipedia

en.wikipedia.org

The question in average vs top team is 'how do you define average'. When Harvard beat Stanford it was Ivy League champ beating Stanford with injured star.

Is the Ivy League Champ average? Would 4/5 in Ivy League be average? Is average #150 out of 300 ncaa D1 teams?

A Stewie UConn team played flat and almost lost at Tulane, Tulane! A streaking UConn team lost to St. Johns.

Syracuse made a recent ncaa championship game and Louisville beat Baylor. Iowa beat a very good undefeated SC team.

Conclusion, any team has a microscopic chance to win. The average NCAA team ranked #140-#180 in D1 is, however, not going to beat a magnificent 7 team this year.

A tournament team, ranked in top 68? A league champion full of srs and grads and shooters is still unlikely to beat a top 7 team...
...but someone like a Louisville, Utah, or Creighton, who we might refer to as 'average' is capable of upsetting a top 7 team. These teams really are not average though, they are in top 10% of ncaa d1!

I might even wager that only 6 of our magnificent 7 make the elite 8. I just wish I was smart enough to pick which one gets upset.