What a week for our OOC!

[NewBlood]

Texas beats undefeated 10# Vandy
Florida stabilizing (with wins over 18# GA, 21# TENN) and with a big one against Vandy coming up
Zona stays undefeated
BYU keeps climbing with their one loss being us
Illinois also climbing
Kansas beating undefeated #2 Iowa State

And we got another Quad 1 win on the road

Damn shame that MSU exhibition game was an exhibition

The path to a 1 seed in the East is in our hands

 

[RuffRuff]

Illinois' KP is like 4-5 spots ahead of us, as crazy as that sounds.

 

[AllHusky]

Thank you for the positive outlook, nice perspective amongst the sea of nitpickers!! Go Huskies.

 

[uconngb]

Texas beats undefeated 10# Vandy
Florida stabilizing (with wins over 18# GA, 21# TENN) and with a big one against Vandy coming up
Zona stays undefeated
BYU keeps climbing with their one loss being us
Illinois also climbing
Kansas beating undefeated #2 Iowa State

And we got another Quad 1 win on the road

Damn shame that MSU exhibition game was an exhibition

The path to a 1 seed in the East is in our hands

I think it's nice that you brought up all those other teams, but our path to a #1 seed doesn't rely one iota on anything any of those teams does for the rest of the year

 

[imno1]

Illinois' KP is like 4-5 spots ahead of us, as crazy as that sounds.

I prefer to be better on the court than on paper.

 

[freescooter]

All the computers in the world aren’t going to make us a 1 seed. For really top teams they look at wins not nonsense gobbledygook. If we take care of business and end the regular season with 1 or 2 losses we’ll be seeded#1. Those things only have an impact at the lower seeds/bubble.

 

[upstater]

All the computers in the world aren’t going to make us a 1 seed. For really top teams they look at wins not nonsense gobbledygook. If we take care of business and end the regular season with 1 or 2 losses we’ll be seeded#1. Those things only have an impact at the lower seeds/bubble.

One or two losses?!!

Last two years, the top seeds had 4 or 5 losses.

Exceptions were Duke and UConn with 3 losses.

North Carolina was the outlier with 7 losses.

 

[Ewekon]

The more I think about it ..... I want Duke in last men standing game for the title. There. I said it.

Doomed.

 

[WeAreUCONN]

The more I think about it ..... I want Duke in last men standing game for the title. There. I said it.

Doomed.

My dream matchup.

 

[BGesus4]

The more I think about it ..... I want Duke in last men standing game for the title. There. I said it.

Doomed.

They’ll never make it this year. They are seriously flawed. And if refs start calling offensive fouls on boozer they’ll be in real trouble.

 

[Drame]

Illinois' KP is like 4-5 spots ahead of us, as crazy as that sounds.

Ignore KP.. Dont know how his algo has us so low. I think he's still incorporating last year.. Torvik is better and has us at 3... Illinois at 6, Florida11, KU 12, BYU 18.

 

[WeAreUCONN]

Was thinking the same thing this week. That should improve our strength of schedule? Our sos is currently #7. Not too shabby.

 

[willie99]

Illinois' KP is like 4-5 spots ahead of us, as crazy as that sounds.

We only beat them by 13, and they play in a much tougher conference

They should be a one seed, because they only lost to ranked teams

Metrics baby, you gotta believe

 

[Waquoit]

By any rational school of thought we're #2. And I'm feeling like I felt about GTech if there's a rematch with Arizona. But these algorithms are man-made at their core and clearly do not give enough weight to beating top teams. How can UConn not be higher in these things? Look at who UConn beat and who they beat. Is it because the mid-teams we beat are slightly worse than the mid-teams others play? That doesn't make sense.

 

[Lafayette]

KP o-rating is pts per 100 possessions. Favors 3pt shooting teams that can make on volume.
KP also has a rating for offensive tempo which hurts uconn because it's possessions per 40 min and our offense is intricate and gets us less possessions than a fast break, no defense team.

Hence I am very down on using KenPom and prefer Bart Torvik and in general the NET is ok.

 

[Ricker]

Counts for nothing at all, but Love our East bracket as it exists today with Lunardi.
Vermont
8/9 winner of Iowa/Georgia
Sweet 16 4/5 is Mich St / Virginia
Elite 8 2 Purdue / 3 Vandy with Ky not a long shot as a 10 seed
I personally think Purdue would be literally an easy matchup for us. Smother the guards with size and they're done.
Any of the key teams could beat us but I would give us a 70% shot to win in any matchup in the bracket

I wouldn't be too interested in meeting Texas Tech, Houston, nor having return matchups with Florida, Kansas, BYU, or Illinois. Arkansas, Alabama, Louisville, and Tennessee have an 'A' game they don't often play, but could. These are all teams where my view of winning is more like 55% rather than 70%. None are in our projected Lunardi bracket

Admittedly I have yet to watch Nebraska, and only a few minutes of Vandy & Wisconsin, but only Vandy is in our path.

 

[Devland]

Illinois' KP is like 4-5 spots ahead of us, as crazy as that sounds.

The down Big East hurts our SOS. Ken Pom SOS includes the entire schedule. Even games not yet played. I found this out by looking into why our SOS was not higher after the OOC games.

 

[JustbrewitMan]

The down Big East hurts our SOS. Ken Pom SOS includes the entire schedule. Even games not yet played. I found this out by looking into why our SOS was not higher after the OOC games.

in the OOC phase, there are a ton of very lousy KP 200-360 teams who will have a high SOS because they are the buy-game punching bags for the top teams. As the season progresses and they play more of their lousy conference mates, they filter down out of the high SOS metric

 

[freescooter]

The more I read about these metrics the more bizarre they become. We get rewarded or penalized because a team we played in in November turns out to be better or worse now than when we played them. So to take a real life example, if you were calculating the metric after the 2024 season and we had played NC State in January when they were in the middle of losing 11 out of 14 games and were demonstrably a bad team we would get rewarded because after we played them the somehow got it together and won 11 in a row including several ranked ones. That’s insane. They were bad when you played them. Now I realize that is an extreme example and the metrics are meaningless except to gamblers in the tourney, but teams change over the course of the season all the time.

 

[auror]

KP o-rating is pts per 100 possessions. Favors 3pt shooting teams that can make on volume.
KP also has a rating for offensive tempo which hurts uconn because it's possessions per 40 min and our offense is intricate and gets us less possessions than a fast break, no defense team.

Hence I am very down on using KenPom and prefer Bart Torvik and in general the NET is ok.

Tempo isn't factored into the team rating. It's all per possession efficiency, so your tempo doesn't matter. He measures the tempo, but that's just used for score predictions and team/style description.

 

[auror]

The more I read about these metrics the more bizarre they become. We get rewarded or penalized because a team we played in in November turns out to be better or worse now than when we played them. So to take a real life example, if you were calculating the metric after the 2024 season and we had played NC State in January when they were in the middle of losing 11 out of 14 games and were demonstrably a bad team we would get rewarded because after we played them the somehow got it together and won 11 in a row including several ranked ones. That’s insane. They were bad when you played them. Now I realize that is an extreme example and the metrics are meaningless except to gamblers in the tourney, but teams change over the course of the season all the time.

Some metrics choose to weight recent games more to counter this potential team change a bit.

But on the other hand, for every team that meaningfully changes, there's another team that was always as good as they were, but were victims of shot variance or a tough schedule (see Florida). Florida was always good, even when they were losing games.

These models are extensively tested. If it was less predictive to recalculate based on new data, they wouldn't do it. So the problems you think are happening in the model are likely very small effects that affect a small minority of teams a year, especially once teams get to the end of their schedules and each game is like 1/30th of the rating.

 

[RuffRuff]

Some metrics choose to weight recent games more to counter this potential team change a bit.

But on the same hand, for every team that meaningfully changes, there's another team that was always as good as they were, but were victims of shot variance or a tough schedule (see Florida).

Are metrics have dropped fairly significantly across all major analytics over the last few games.

 

[noelle]

The more I read about these metrics the more bizarre they become. We get rewarded or penalized because a team we played in in November turns out to be better or worse now than when we played them. So to take a real life example, if you were calculating the metric after the 2024 season and we had played NC State in January when they were in the middle of losing 11 out of 14 games and were demonstrably a bad team we would get rewarded because after we played them the somehow got it together and won 11 in a row including several ranked ones. That’s insane. They were bad when you played them. Now I realize that is an extreme example and the metrics are meaningless except to gamblers in the tourney, but teams change over the course of the season all the time.

you are raising a legitimate concern and it's indeed a model assumption to treat it as backtest bayesian updating of team strength instead of an updating reality sort of thing but you also need to be incorporating information as the season goes on, otherwise the preseason weighing is too important. the way to incorporate that information is to update team strength as the season goes on.

 

[auror]

Are metrics have dropped fairly significantly across all major analytics over the last few games.

Yes, we haven't played very well. Our key shooters have had 4 bad games out of 5.

 

[auror]

Florida won at Vanderbilt btw. So another great win for our OOC teams.