PDA

View Full Version : Pomeroy Projections on Feb. 14



MChambers
02-14-2010, 12:31 PM
Interesting to see how Pomeroy projects the ACC regular season playing out:

Duke 13-3
WF 11-5
MD 11-5
VT 10-6
FSU 9-7
Clemson 8-8
GT 8-8
VA 7-9
Miami 5-11
BC 5-11
UNC 5-11
NCSU 4-12

(Sorry, don't do tables.) It's very interesting that Clemson and Georgia Tech are projected to finish 8-8, which is below what I would have expected before the season. Also interesting that the teams are not projected to be as bunched in the middle with 8-8 and 7-9 records as I would have thought.

Finally, seven teams are in the top 25 in defense, but only two on offense. UNC has the most balanced team, 63 on offense and 62 on defense.

http://kenpom.com/conf.php?c=ACC

uncwdevil
02-14-2010, 12:35 PM
Interesting to see how Pomeroy projects the ACC regular season playing out:

Duke 13-3
WF 11-5
MD 11-5
VT 10-6
FSU 9-7
Clemson 8-8
GT 8-8
VA 7-9
Miami 5-11
BC 5-11
UNC 5-11
NCSU 4-12

(Sorry, don't do tables.) It's very interesting that Clemson and Georgia Tech are projected to finish 8-8, which is below what I would have expected before the season. Also interesting that the teams are not projected to be as bunched in the middle with 8-8 and 7-9 records as I would have thought.

Finally, seven teams are in the top 25 in defense, but only two on offense. UNC has the most balanced team, 63 on offense and 62 on defense.
http://kenpom.com/conf.php?c=ACC

That's like how I tell my friends that I have the most balanced golf game, since I slice every drive into the woods and 3-putt every green.

MChambers
02-14-2010, 12:41 PM
That's like how I tell my friends that I have the most balanced golf game, since I slice every drive into the woods and 3-putt every green.

I couldn't find an emoticon for tongue in cheek.

I guess it means that Ol' Roy is doing an equally good job on both ends of the floor.

JStuart
02-14-2010, 01:04 PM
Does this mean UNC could play in the Les Robinson Invitational game Thursday in the ACC Tournament?

ChrisP
02-14-2010, 01:11 PM
Does this mean UNC could play in the Les Robinson Invitational game Thursday in the ACC Tournament?

I've seen the "Les Robinson" game mentioned several times recently with regard to UNC's wonderfully awful season and maybe people are just having a bit of fun at the 'holes expense but...there is no longer a "play in game". Since the powers that be decided, in their infinite wisdom, that the conference should be expanded to 12 teams, what we get is the bottom 8 teams playing on the first day (Thurs) of the ACC Tourney and the top 4 teams getting a bye until the real first round on Friday. I actually forgot that myself so...I looked it up on the ACC's website.

Bottom line, UNC's having to play that first day won't be nearly as embarrassing as it might if they were one of only two teams competing. Sad, but true :p

roywhite
02-14-2010, 01:11 PM
Does this mean UNC could play in the Les Robinson Invitational game Thursday in the ACC Tournament?

Well, there are 4 games on ACC Tournament Thursday with the 12-team league.

As of now, UNC could play in one of the evening games, #7 vs #10, or #6 vs #11. Actually, it's too early to tell where they will end up in the standings, but playing on Thursday in the ACC Tournament is likely.

jipops
02-14-2010, 02:02 PM
Anyone have an idea to the historical accuracies of the pomeroy projections?

CDu
02-14-2010, 02:06 PM
Does this mean UNC could play in the Les Robinson Invitational game Thursday in the ACC Tournament?

Well, only the top-4 teams avoid playing on Thursday. So the odds are pretty good that they'll be playing that day. And there's no longer a game between the last two teams in the conference.

As for the likelihood of UNC playing on Thursday, it's darn near 100% at this point. The most ACC wins that UNC can get is 9. Five teams already have 6 ACC wins, and three teams already have 7 wins. It's very unlikely that UNC will win out, and it's fairly likely that at least three other teams will reach 9-7 along with Duke.

JasonEvans
02-14-2010, 02:27 PM
Anyone have an idea to the historical accuracies of the pomeroy projections?

Well, seeing as the projections get adjusted throughout the season (based on the most up-to-date game results), I would imagine the projections are not all that reliable in December but are really, really accurate around the first week of March.

--Jason "He has had us at 14-2 or 13-3 pretty much since early January" Evans

airowe
02-14-2010, 02:56 PM
Who do you guys think our last loss will be, if Pomeroy is correct?

I've been saying all along we're going to lose to Maryland in College Park...

uncwdevil
02-14-2010, 03:13 PM
Anyone have an idea to the historical accuracies of the pomeroy projections?

The team that has won the title since 2004 has always been in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense at the end of the year (post-tourney).

Duke is currently #1 in offense and #12 in defense. Kansas is currently the only other team in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense. They are #2 in offense and #3 in defense.

It would be interesting to see what prior year ratings looked like at the beginning of March before the championship teams went on their runs.

mike88
02-14-2010, 03:19 PM
I have become a real believer in Pomeroy's statistical methods. It was hard to see how Duke was going to finish 13-3 right after the NCSU loss, but we are in a position to get there now. We have to take care of business this week by beating Miami on the road and VaTech at home; then (after Tulsa) we have UVa on the road, Maryland on the road and UNC at home. I don't see UNC beating us, but I could see us losing to either UVa (playing for the NCAA bid) or Maryland (playing for revenge and seeding).

Some other observations from Pomeroy: We have the highest offensive rating in the country, so I am surprised about how many posters are calling for changes in our offense- I would say we should just keep on doing exactly what we have done this year. It is interesting, too, that our opponents have one of the highest collective defensive ratings, which may account for why our offense has looked disjointed at times.

To increase our chances of winning out (!), the most important thing for Duke to do is continue to play defense at a high level. In our losses (at least G-town, Wisc, and NCSU), it was our inability to stop the other team that made the difference. Our defensive rating (now 13th) has improved over the past few games. We are not really too far behind Kansas for the overall #1 rating per Pomeroy. Of course, predictive indices are not perfect, and while they improve with more data, they are also better at predicting aggregate events (like the rest of the ACC regular season) rather than single games (will we beat team x).

MChambers
02-14-2010, 03:39 PM
The team that has won the title since 2004 has always been in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense at the end of the year (post-tourney).

Duke is currently #1 in offense and #12 in defense. Kansas is currently the only other team in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense. They are #2 in offense and #3 in defense.

It would be interesting to see what prior year ratings looked like at the beginning of March before the championship teams went on their runs.

Although Duke's offense has been rated highly all year, the defense has fluctuated quite a bit, and was in the 20s after the Georgetown game. It's interesting how quickly it can change.

CDu
02-14-2010, 03:47 PM
The team that has won the title since 2004 has always been in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense at the end of the year (post-tourney).

Duke is currently #1 in offense and #12 in defense. Kansas is currently the only other team in the top 5 in offense and top 15 in defense. They are #2 in offense and #3 in defense.

It would be interesting to see what prior year ratings looked like at the beginning of March before the championship teams went on their runs.

Well, except for last year, in which UNC ended up #16 in defense. It's also important to note that we've finished in the top-15 in both offense and defense in all but two of those years.

But yeah, it's been relatively reflective of tournament success (as predictive as can be given the single-elimination format).

MChambers
02-14-2010, 04:15 PM
This year, it seems that it is Duke's defense that is more key than the offense, in that Duke's 4 losses have come in its 5 worst defensive efficiency games. (The other bad defensive game was St. Johns.)

Duke has survived some bad offensive games (UNC, UConn, ASU, @Clemson).

If Brian's and Mason's offensive games continue to improve, maybe we'll have a better chance of winning a game with relatively weak defense, but I'd prefer not to take that chance. I'd like to see the defense continue to improve.

sagegrouse
02-14-2010, 08:10 PM
Interesting to see how Pomeroy projects the ACC regular season playing out:



Duke 13-3
WF 11-5
MD 11-5
VT 10-6
FSU 9-7
Clemson 8-8
GT 8-8
VA 7-9
Miami 5-11
BC 5-11
UNC 5-11
NCSU 4-12


(Sorry, don't do tables.)

But the Grouse does....

COYS
02-14-2010, 08:58 PM
I have become a real believer in Pomeroy's statistical methods. It was hard to see how Duke was going to finish 13-3 right after the NCSU loss, but we are in a position to get there now. We have to take care of business this week by beating Miami on the road and VaTech at home; then (after Tulsa) we have UVa on the road, Maryland on the road and UNC at home. I don't see UNC beating us, but I could see us losing to either UVa (playing for the NCAA bid) or Maryland (playing for revenge and seeding).

Some other observations from Pomeroy: We have the highest offensive rating in the country, so I am surprised about how many posters are calling for changes in our offense- I would say we should just keep on doing exactly what we have done this year. It is interesting, too, that our opponents have one of the highest collective defensive ratings, which may account for why our offense has looked disjointed at times.

To increase our chances of winning out (!), the most important thing for Duke to do is continue to play defense at a high level. In our losses (at least G-town, Wisc, and NCSU), it was our inability to stop the other team that made the difference. Our defensive rating (now 13th) has improved over the past few games. We are not really too far behind Kansas for the overall #1 rating per Pomeroy. Of course, predictive indices are not perfect, and while they improve with more data, they are also better at predicting aggregate events (like the rest of the ACC regular season) rather than single games (will we beat team x).

One thing I would be very interested to see from Pomeroy is conference efficiency statistics. I know you can go through the game plan and manually calculate each team's stats for conference games, but I think it would help give us a sense of which teams are playing well in conference and which teams have really padded their stats with weak out of conference games. Of course, it would be even better if you could manually exclude games. Last year, Memphis was number one going into the tourney, if I remember, but that was largely due to their ridiculous defensive efficiency rating which was the result of a weaker than normal C USA schedule. Home and road sortable stats would also be awesome. But hey, I'll take them as is for free any day.

pfrduke
02-14-2010, 11:17 PM
One thing I would be very interested to see from Pomeroy is conference efficiency statistics. I know you can go through the game plan and manually calculate each team's stats for conference games, but I think it would help give us a sense of which teams are playing well in conference and which teams have really padded their stats with weak out of conference games. Of course, it would be even better if you could manually exclude games. Last year, Memphis was number one going into the tourney, if I remember, but that was largely due to their ridiculous defensive efficiency rating which was the result of a weaker than normal C USA schedule. Home and road sortable stats would also be awesome. But hey, I'll take them as is for free any day.

Here's the season to date in the ACC:


ORTG
1 Duke 110.55
2 Maryland 107.73
3 Wake Forest 101.55
4 Virginia 101.35
5 Boston College 100.72
6 Virginia Tech 99.80
7 Georgia Tech 99.01
8 Miami 98.60
9 North Carolina 98.25
10 NC State 97.44
11 Florida State 97.30
12 Clemson 96.29

DRTG
1 Duke 94.04
2 Virginia Tech 94.40
3 Clemson 94.83
4 Virginia 95.54
5 Maryland 96.91
6 Wake Forest 98.22
7 Georgia Tech 100.16
8 Florida State 100.67
9 North Carolina 104.69
10 NC State 108.67
11 Miami 109.40
12 Boston College 109.74

E Margin
1 Duke 16.51
2 Maryland 10.81
3 Virginia 5.81
4 Virginia Tech 5.39
5 Wake Forest 3.34
6 Clemson 1.46
7 Georgia Tech -1.15
8 Florida State -3.37
9 North Carolina -6.43
10 Boston College -9.02
11 Miami -10.81
12 NC State -11.23

pfrduke
02-14-2010, 11:18 PM
One thing I would be very interested to see from Pomeroy is conference efficiency statistics. I know you can go through the game plan and manually calculate each team's stats for conference games, but I think it would help give us a sense of which teams are playing well in conference and which teams have really padded their stats with weak out of conference games. Of course, it would be even better if you could manually exclude games. Last year, Memphis was number one going into the tourney, if I remember, but that was largely due to their ridiculous defensive efficiency rating which was the result of a weaker than normal C USA schedule. Home and road sortable stats would also be awesome. But hey, I'll take them as is for free any day.

Also, if you if you check Basketball Prospectus every Tuesday for the "Tuesday Truths," they go through the conference-only performances for the top 10 or so conferences.

COYS
02-14-2010, 11:26 PM
Also, if you if you check Basketball Prospectus every Tuesday for the "Tuesday Truths," they go through the conference-only performances for the top 10 or so conferences.

Thank you very much. I check the blog irregularly and had seen that a couple of times but did not realize that it is a weekly update.

MChambers
02-15-2010, 07:59 AM
Here's the season to date in the ACC:


ORTG
1 Duke 110.55
2 Maryland 107.73
3 Wake Forest 101.55
4 Virginia 101.35
5 Boston College 100.72
6 Virginia Tech 99.80
7 Georgia Tech 99.01
8 Miami 98.60
9 North Carolina 98.25
10 NC State 97.44
11 Florida State 97.30
12 Clemson 96.29

DRTG
1 Duke 94.04
2 Virginia Tech 94.40
3 Clemson 94.83
4 Virginia 95.54
5 Maryland 96.91
6 Wake Forest 98.22
7 Georgia Tech 100.16
8 Florida State 100.67
9 North Carolina 104.69
10 NC State 108.67
11 Miami 109.40
12 Boston College 109.74

E Margin
1 Duke 16.51
2 Maryland 10.81
3 Virginia 5.81
4 Virginia Tech 5.39
5 Wake Forest 3.34
6 Clemson 1.46
7 Georgia Tech -1.15
8 Florida State -3.37
9 North Carolina -6.43
10 Boston College -9.02
11 Miami -10.81
12 NC State -11.23


UNC is again well-balanced, ranking 9th in both categories. I can understand UNC's offensive trouble, not having much outside shooting or very experienced guards, but I can't really understand the defensive troubles, at least from a talent standpoint.

pfrduke
02-15-2010, 10:56 AM
UNC is again well-balanced, ranking 9th in both categories. I can understand UNC's offensive trouble, not having much outside shooting or very experienced guards, but I can't really understand the defensive troubles, at least from a talent standpoint.

Their biggest problem on defense is not forcing turnovers. Every ACC opponent except one (Virginia, who shot lights out), has turned it over less often than once in every five trips, and the Heels are down at the bottom of the conference in opponent turnover percentage in ACC play. They've also struggled a bit on the defensive glass - 5 of 10 opponents have rebounded more than 35% of their own misses (including us at 44%!). Those two put together mean both more shots at the basket for opponents and fewer easy opportunities for the Heels (because they don't get as many run-outs from turnovers and defensive rebounds).