PDA

View Full Version : Week of 2/22/10 polls



rotogod00
02-22-2010, 12:07 PM
#5 in both the AP and ESPN/USA Today

Looks like it may take another loss from above, though, to get a #1 seed in the Tourney as there's a bit of a gap (132 pts in the AP) between them and #4 Syracuse.

We are up to 2nd in the RPI, though, passing Kentucky and trailing only Kansas

and btw, no other ACC team cracks the top 25 of either poll

HaveFunExpectToWin
02-22-2010, 12:20 PM
and btw, no other ACC team cracks the top 25 of either poll

Has this happened before? In the last 20+ years?

J_C_Steel
02-22-2010, 12:23 PM
Maryland's a darn good team. They should be in the top 25 next week.

Vincetaylor
02-22-2010, 12:23 PM
First time since 1977. The ACC is terrible this year despite what some people on this board say.

rotogod00
02-22-2010, 12:25 PM
Maryland's a darn good team. They should be in the top 25 next week.

and they're 28th in both polls. vtech is actually 27th in both

DeBlueDevil
02-22-2010, 12:26 PM
I disagree. I think the country in general isn't as strong as it has been in recent years. The only conference I think is totally head over heels better than the ACC is the Big East. But they've been the power for the past fews years. The Pac 10 is terrible and I'm not at all hugely impressed with the Big 12 and Big Ten. Just my opinion.

Bluedog
02-22-2010, 12:27 PM
How about the fact that the Mountain West has more ranked teams than the ACC and Pac 10 combined?! :eek: Same with the Atlantic 10.

camion
02-22-2010, 12:36 PM
It really helps the stronger teams in a conference if there are some patsies at the bottom to fatten your record with. The ACC doesn't really have any. NCSU, the worst ACC team is still dangerous and ranked in the top 80 (Sagarin and Pomeroy). If the bottom of the ACC just sucked more the conference would have more top 25 teams.

The non-human polls Sagarin (3,24,25,28,29,32) and Pomeroy (1,12,16,18,21,25) have numerous highly rated ACC representatives.

HaveFunExpectToWin
02-22-2010, 12:37 PM
First time since 1977. The ACC is terrible this year despite what some people on this board say.

Can we blame John Swofford for this? At least ACC football is awesome... oh wait.

DoubleDuke Dad
02-22-2010, 12:42 PM
It really helps the stronger teams in a conference if there are some patsies at the bottom to fatten your record with. The ACC doesn't really have any.

Aren't you forgetting about UNC? :D

camion
02-22-2010, 12:53 PM
Aren't you forgetting about UNC? :D

Thanks for reminding me. One big reason the ACC is viewed as sucky this year is UNC. If they were having a top ten year the conference would have two teams ranked in the single digits and a strong middle and bottom. It's all UNC's fault!!!... But I'm willing to live with that.


One more thing, the ACC is pretty good this year despite what some people on this board say.

GODUKEGO
02-22-2010, 12:59 PM
Here are the polls:
http://nmsn.foxsports.com/cbk/polls

I know, we should not look to far ahead but Syracuse plays Nova at home on Saturday. Purdue plays Michigan State at home on Sunday and Kentucky plays Tenn at Tenn on Saturday. We take care of business against Tulsa and UVA on Sunday, we might be able to move to #3 or #4 next Monday.

Kedsy
02-22-2010, 02:08 PM
Looks like it may take another loss from above, though, to get a #1 seed in the Tourney as there's a bit of a gap (132 pts in the AP) between them and #4 Syracuse.

The committee doesn't look at the polls when determining seeds, so being top four in the polls and getting a #1 seed are not related. They may end up being the same, but it would be a coincidence.

CDu
02-22-2010, 02:12 PM
The committee doesn't look at the polls when determining seeds, so being top four in the polls and getting a #1 seed are not related. They may end up being the same, but it would be a coincidence.

Well, it would be sort of a coincidence. The two are highly correlated (i.e., the best teams generally are also ranked the highest). But yeah, the exact order of the rankings are irrelevant. Being the #5-7 ranked team at season's end won't prevent us from being a #1 seed. Our resume will decide it.

But yeah, the weekly hemming and hawing about the polls is unnecessary. If we earn a #1 seed by season's end, we'll probably be ranked in the top-5 anyway.

hurleyfor3
02-22-2010, 03:28 PM
First time since 1977. The ACC is terrible this year despite what some people on this board say.

The ACC is certainly pretty thin at the top, but Maryland is not bad at all, and the league is positively teeming with NCAA 5-6-7 seeds. It won't be a three or four-bid year as some recent years have been.

Chitowndevil
02-22-2010, 04:05 PM
First time since 1977. The ACC is terrible this year despite what some people on this board say.

FWIW, the ACC is the #1 conference according to Pomeroy, the #2 (B12) according to Sagarin, #3 (B12, BE) in RPI, and is tied for 1st (B12, BE) with 7 teams currently in Joe Lunardi's Bracket(ology).

My own view is that this is the weakest the ACC has been in quite a while, but that is is hardly fair to call the ACC "terrible". A down year for the ACC is an above average year for most other conferences.

CDu
02-22-2010, 04:25 PM
FWIW, the ACC is the #1 conference according to Pomeroy, the #2 (B12) according to Sagarin, #3 (B12, BE) in RPI, and is tied for 1st (B12, BE) with 7 teams currently in Joe Lunardi's Bracket(ology).

My own view is that this is the weakest the ACC has been in quite a while, but that is is hardly fair to call the ACC "terrible". A down year for the ACC is an above average year for most other conferences.

It always comes back to how you define "strongest/weakest" conference.

In terms of top-tier teams, we're down moreso than in most recent years. Frequently, we have 2 top-10/15 teams and another top-25 team or two. So in that sense, we're not that strong, with only one team in the top-20 and nobody else really standing out as a sure-fire top-25 team.

In terms of depth of quality teams and/or percentage of teams that are quality, we're on a par with anybody. We have 7 teams that are in contention to make the tournament, and the other five teams are all in the top-third of D-1 teams. That can't be said for any of the other conferences.

Saratoga2
02-22-2010, 05:12 PM
We have two away games after Tulsa and one is against a good Maryland team. If we pass that hurdle, we still have to earn our way through the ACC tournament. It is a tall order to go through the next two weeks + and come out without another loss.

Realistically, the only team that we are likely to pass if we don't lose, is Purdue. If we do come out with a #1 seed, we still know this team is somewhat flawed, as are of course all the teams.

I am impressed and pleased by the year Duke is having and look forward to seeing what the guys can do.

JasonEvans
02-22-2010, 07:39 PM
More important than the human poll, Duke is now the #1 rated team in Ken Pomeroy's rankings. This is a very big deal because this season, for the first time (I think), the selection committee will bring Ken's rankings with them into the room.

So, the two sources (aside from actual game results) that the NCAA will us to seed the tournament will be the RPI and the KenPom ratings. Duke is #1 in the Pomeroy and #2 in the RPI. That would suggest that we have an excellent chance to get a #1 seed.

--Jason "worth noting, us and Kansas are a lot ahead of the other teams in the Pom rankings" Evans

JasonEvans
02-22-2010, 09:30 PM
Something that could be fun to track...

The Pomeroy ratings this morning-


Duke .9818
Kansas .9817
W Va .9643
Syrac .9638
Purdue .9620


I list these because it will be interesting to see how a couple games tonight affect things.

Kansas is playing Oklahoma, who is not highly regarded by KenPom being ranked #98. Kansas is at home and a prohibitive favorite in the game. How big a win will they need to get points and move ahead of Duke again?

WVa obviously just lost to UConn (the #43 team at .8912). How much will they lose from that loss?

With not a lot of other games on the national slate tonight, it will be interesting to see how these limited results affect things.

--Jason "tune in tomorrow for an update" Evans

pfrduke
02-22-2010, 09:48 PM
Something that could be fun to track...

The Pomeroy ratings this morning-


Duke .9818
Kansas .9817
W Va .9643
Syrac .9638
Purdue .9620


I list these because it will be interesting to see how a couple games tonight affect things.

Kansas is playing Oklahoma, who is not highly regarded by KenPom being ranked #98. Kansas is at home and a prohibitive favorite in the game. How big a win will they need to get points and move ahead of Duke again?

WVa obviously just lost to UConn (the #43 team at .8912). How much will they lose from that loss?

With not a lot of other games on the national slate tonight, it will be interesting to see how these limited results affect things.

--Jason "tune in tomorrow for an update" Evans

Well, Kansas is killing OU. Even with OU being ranked low, a 22-point victory ought to be enough to get a nudge back over Duke. WVA will very likely, I believe, fall below Syracuse, and possibly Purdue as well, but not by much.

Hermy-own
02-22-2010, 09:48 PM
More important than the human poll, Duke is now the #1 rated team in Ken Pomeroy's rankings. This is a very big deal because this season, for the first time (I think), the selection committee will bring Ken's rankings with them into the room.

So, the two sources (aside from actual game results) that the NCAA will us to seed the tournament will be the RPI and the KenPom ratings. Duke is #1 in the Pomeroy and #2 in the RPI. That would suggest that we have an excellent chance to get a #1 seed.

--Jason "worth noting, us and Kansas are a lot ahead of the other teams in the Pom rankings" Evans

I don't want to distract this thread from it's discussion which is the pursuit of a #1 seed - there are other threads for discussion of whether we deserve one. I just want to say that this is exactly the sort of statistic that makes me distrust Pomeroy. I think most people watching last night's game can agree that it was far from a good game, we shot way too many 3's, and that we showed lots of weaknesses. And suddenly we jump over Kansas to #1 in the Pomeroy rankings? Is there anyone who thinks we are actually the #1 team in the country? That doesn't make me have a lot of faith in the computer generate rankings.

M B Walker
02-22-2010, 09:55 PM
Aside from bragging rights, I'm not sure there's much of a difference between being the 4th #1 seed and the 1st #2 seed. By the S-curve we'd end up in the same bracket anyway.

And that would probably be out West. The four regional hosts are East (Syracuse), Midwest (St Louis), South (Houston), and West (Salt Lake). My first guess is Duke and Syracuse being slotted out West, with Duke playing a first/second round game in Buffalo. Or perhaps in the East, in a bracket with someone like Kentucky (which the NCAA would love), playing the first weekend in Jacksonville. Of those two, I think I'd prefer being matched up with Kentucky.

With no games anywhere in ACC country this year, the bracket will be at least as interesting as our seed.

pfrduke
02-22-2010, 09:58 PM
I don't want to distract this thread from it's discussion which is the pursuit of a #1 seed - there are other threads for discussion of whether we deserve one. I just want to say that this is exactly the sort of statistic that makes me distrust Pomeroy. I think most people watching last night's game can agree that it was far from a good game, we shot way too many 3's, and that we showed lots of weaknesses. And suddenly we jump over Kansas to #1 in the Pomeroy rankings? Is there anyone who thinks we are actually the #1 team in the country? That doesn't make me have a lot of faith in the computer generate rankings.

I'm not sure we're the best team in the country; I don't think we are, but I'm also not sure we're not. But I have two essentially unrelated comments in response.

First, don't put too much stock in one game. Did Kansas look like the number 1 team in the country when it barely beat Cornell at home, or when Colorado took it to overtime on the road?

Second, while we may not be the best team, I agree with Pomeroy's rankings in the following respect - we have played, on the aggregate, as well relative to our competition as any other team in the country, Kansas included. Duke has played 13 top-50 teams, gone 10-3 against them, and outscored them by a total of 155 points - an average of almost 12 points per game.

I know people keep waiting for the other shoe to drop with this team, and maybe it will. But I think may folks have greatly undersold the performance that this team has put in to date. We are, and have played like, a very good team.

DukeUsul
02-22-2010, 09:58 PM
Aside from bragging rights, I'm not sure there's much of a difference between being the 4th #1 seed and the 1st #2 seed. By the S-curve we'd end up in the same bracket anyway.


Oh but it would make a huge difference. It would determine jersey color! :D

Edit: talking specifically about a hypothetical Final 8 game.

pfrduke
02-22-2010, 09:59 PM
Aside from bragging rights, I'm not sure there's much of a difference between being the 4th #1 seed and the 1st #2 seed. By the S-curve we'd end up in the same bracket anyway.

And that would probably be out West. The four regional hosts are East (Syracuse), Midwest (St Louis), South (Houston), and West (Salt Lake). My first guess is Duke and Syracuse being slotted out West, with Duke playing a first/second round game in Buffalo. Or perhaps in the East, in a bracket with someone like Kentucky (which the NCAA would love), playing the first weekend in Jacksonville. Of those two, I think I'd prefer being matched up with Kentucky.

With no games anywhere in ACC country this year, the bracket will be at least as interesting as our seed.

I'd much rather play the 4/5 winner than the 3/6 winner, especially with teams like Georgetown, WVA, Texas (if they finish strong), and MSU showing up as potential three seeds.

Duvall
02-22-2010, 10:11 PM
I just want to say that this is exactly the sort of statistic that makes me distrust Pomeroy. I think most people watching last night's game can agree that it was far from a good game, we shot way too many 3's, and that we showed lots of weaknesses. And suddenly we jump over Kansas to #1 in the Pomeroy rankings?

Computer looks at results, not appearances. It may not have been a pretty win, but in the end Duke's offensive rebounding offset the poor shooting for a decent offensive performance, and Duke was credited with a strong defensive effort due to the fact that Virginia Tech didn't score much.

Kedsy
02-22-2010, 11:09 PM
Aside from bragging rights, I'm not sure there's much of a difference between being the 4th #1 seed and the 1st #2 seed. By the S-curve we'd end up in the same bracket anyway.

This has been discussed extensively in another thread, but #1 seeds make the Elite Eight at a rate 50% higher than #2 seeds. They make the Final Four twice as much as #2 seeds, and they win the championship almost 4x as much as #2 seeds. I don't know how much of that has to do with #1 seeds actually being better than #2s, and how much has to do with the easier road, but I don't need to know to say there's a lot more advantage to being a #1 seed than "bragging rights."

mike88
02-23-2010, 12:07 AM
I don't want to distract this thread from it's discussion which is the pursuit of a #1 seed - there are other threads for discussion of whether we deserve one. I just want to say that this is exactly the sort of statistic that makes me distrust Pomeroy. I think most people watching last night's game can agree that it was far from a good game, we shot way too many 3's, and that we showed lots of weaknesses. And suddenly we jump over Kansas to #1 in the Pomeroy rankings? Is there anyone who thinks we are actually the #1 team in the country? That doesn't make me have a lot of faith in the computer generate rankings.

IIRC, Va tech had the 6th best defense coming in to last night's game per Pomeroy- what you saw last night was the number 1 offense finding ways to overcome a very good defense- when we shoot poorly, it is not always because we have weaknesses, but also because the other teams have strengths. We have faced a lot of good defenses this year, and have had several games where the result looked a lot like last night (ugly % shooting, 12 point win)

AIRFORCEDUKIE
02-23-2010, 04:02 AM
I think if we either win out the regular season and make it to the finals of the acc we get a one seed. If we drop one more game in the regular season and then win the Acc tourney we will also get a one seed. I think a one seed will be the key to getting back to the elite eight and then having a shot at the final four. It would do wonders for our confidence to have one easy game, against a 16 seed and then a potentially easy game against an 8/9 seed. If you look at the last few years we struggled in the early rounds and I think it hurt our confidence in the bigger games. If we can get our young guys some confidence in the early rounds it would help a lot. Easiest way to do that is to be a one seed. I see Syracuse and Purdue dropping two more games before seeding time, maybe even Kentucky.

Airforcedukie.

JasonEvans
02-23-2010, 06:33 AM
Something that could be fun to track...

The Pomeroy ratings this morning-


Duke .9818
Kansas .9817
W Va .9643
Syrac .9638
Purdue .9620


I list these because it will be interesting to see how a couple games tonight affect things.

Kansas is playing Oklahoma, who is not highly regarded by KenPom being ranked #98. Kansas is at home and a prohibitive favorite in the game. How big a win will they need to get points and move ahead of Duke again?

WVa obviously just lost to UConn (the #43 team at .8912). How much will they lose from that loss?

With not a lot of other games on the national slate tonight, it will be interesting to see how these limited results affect things.

--Jason "tune in tomorrow for an update" Evans

So, here are today's numbers right next to yesterday's.

Today:
Duke .9818
Kansas .9799
Syracuse .9638
BYU .9618
Purdue .9617
W Va .9593


Yesterday:
Duke .9818
Kansas .9817
W Va .9643
Syrac .9638
Purdue .9620


So, Kansas' 13-point home victory over Oklahoma hurt them in the numbers to the tune of .0018 points. It maybe gives Duke a little bit of breathing room at the top. WVa's road loss to UConn did not hurt them all that much, reducing their Pom score by .0050 and knocking them from #3 to #6.

-Jason "well, that was an intersting little exercise" Evans

KyDevilinIL
02-23-2010, 07:27 AM
I'd much rather play the 4/5 winner than the 3/6 winner, especially with teams like Georgetown, WVA, Texas (if they finish strong), and MSU showing up as potential three seeds.

I'd say all of the teams you mentioned are going to land anywhere from a No. 3 to No. 5 seed, so Duke being a No. 1 or No. 2 seed, in my mind, still doesn't make much difference.

This tournament has the potential to be an absolute mess from a seeding and bracket-advancement standpoint. There's an enormous blob of very-good-to-decent teams out there, and the probable Nos. 1 and 2 seeds simply aren't so far ahead that they couldn't start losing games immediately.

It could be a wacky tourney. Which probably means it'll be straight chalk.

moonpie23
02-23-2010, 08:21 AM
i am going out on a limb here and predicting that we will have to play whatever team we have to play.....I can't seem to get into the mass speculation of WHO that team might be......

aside from UK, KU, Tx, Orange, Nova, Kstate, Purdue, g'town, OSU, and a few others, i'd say it's safe to predict we will have our hands full at some point.


i love watching you guys break it down tho.. :)

CrazieDUMB
02-23-2010, 08:34 AM
I don't want to distract this thread from it's discussion which is the pursuit of a #1 seed - there are other threads for discussion of whether we deserve one. I just want to say that this is exactly the sort of statistic that makes me distrust Pomeroy. I think most people watching last night's game can agree that it was far from a good game, we shot way too many 3's, and that we showed lots of weaknesses. And suddenly we jump over Kansas to #1 in the Pomeroy rankings? Is there anyone who thinks we are actually the #1 team in the country? That doesn't make me have a lot of faith in the computer generate rankings.

Often times when looking at these things you have to remember that your (well, at least for me) view of Duke is going to be a lot different from your view of other teams. For the casual fan, it usually means you think your team is better than it really is. For the people who watch every game, read every article and post on message boards, it can often be the opposite. Because we know this team so well, we know their limitations. At the same time, we also know our strengths and potential; thus, if someone doesn't live up to the best game they've had this year it looks like a disappointment.

Right now a lot of people are worried that Miles and Mason have disappeared, that while Z is a monster on the boards of late he's still not scoring too much, etc etc. Do you bring the same kind of critical eye when you watch Kansas or Kentucky play? I doubt it, simply because when you don't know a team as well you tend to notice spectacular plays more and subtle ineffieciencies less.

The wonderful thing about these computer polls is that they strip the game of bias. Of course it's not perfect, and to a degree numbers will never really be able to tell the full story; even with a perfect model, there's too much variation game to game. But these are the best rankings science has to offer, which IMO is better than any scout or human, no matter how much basketball they watch.

Memphis Devil
02-23-2010, 08:55 AM
IIRC, Va tech had the 6th best defense coming in to last night's game per Pomeroy- what you saw last night was the number 1 offense finding ways to overcome a very good defense- when we shoot poorly, it is not always because we have weaknesses, but also because the other teams have strengths. We have faced a lot of good defenses this year, and have had several games where the result looked a lot like last night (ugly % shooting, 12 point win)

Great point...all to often we (at least I know I do) watch Duke games and categorize it as either a good performance or a poor performance simply based on how the Duke players performed and completely ignoring the 12 guys wearing the other uniforms and the impact that they had on said perfromance.

Olympic Fan
02-23-2010, 09:46 AM
The four regional hosts are East (Syracuse), Midwest (St Louis), South (Houston), and West (Salt Lake). My first guess is Duke and Syracuse being slotted out West, with Duke playing a first/second round game in Buffalo.

Not going to get into this (we have other threads discussing this), except to say that with the NCAA's new geographical placement for first-second round games, Duke will almost certainly open in Jacksonville and not Buffalo.

Jason, looking ahead on Pomeroy, it will be interesting to see if Kansas can catch Duke overthe course of the regular season. They finish at Oklahoma State (47), Kansas State (11), and at Missouri (13). Duke closes out with Tulsa (76), at Virginia (108), at Maryland (34) and UNC (92).

I think there's a good chance that if both win out, Kansas will edge ahead going into the conference tournaments. Of course, if one or the other loses (as could happen), the other would be in good shape.

JasonEvans
02-23-2010, 09:49 AM
The wonderful thing about these computer polls is that they strip the game of bias. Of course it's not perfect, and to a degree numbers will never really be able to tell the full story; even with a perfect model, there's too much variation game to game. But these are the best rankings science has to offer, which IMO is better than any scout or human, no matter how much basketball they watch.

Well, let me correct you about one thing. I do not think the computers do a better job of evaluating teams better than humans. There are things beyond stats that go into evaluating a performance.

If a team has a big lead and goes into a coasting mode which allows the lead to dwindle, a stat-driven computer might see that as a close victory when the human observer saw a blowout that was not as close as the final score. A computer cannot differentiate from a basket made early in the game and one made under a pressure situation. There are a million ways our human ability to judge things like situations and momentum far outweigh a stat-only computer evaluation.

That said, computers have one huge, huge, huge advantage over humans... a computer can "watch" every single game in the country. No human can do that. When Ken Pomeroy or Jeff Sagarin plug in their data, the computers are weighing every single game played across the country. We are talking about more than ten thousand games (350 teams in Div 1 playing about 30 games each). The most passionate and dedicated college hoops fan watches maybe 100 complete games total. Even someone like Andy Katz, who gets paid handsomely to watch and analyze college hoops, probably watches no more than 300 games a year.

So, I would say that most of us who have watched every Duke game this season (and for many seasons) know Duke better than the computers do. Heck, many of us have probably seen enough games by some other ACC teams that we know those teams better than the computers. But, how many Kansas games have we watched? How many Syracuse games? Nova? Kentucky? Purdue? I'd be very surprised if any of us here have seen all of these teams play more than 3 or 4 times (I am talking about complete games, not catching the final 5 minutes of an interesting game). And, to take it a step further, how many of us really know much about the opponents Kansasy/Kentucky/Syracuse/Purdue were playing that day?

That Kentucky-Vandy game was great the other day, but it was the first time I've watched more than 3 minutes of Vandy basketball all year. Were they playing great or poorly or average? I can make a guess based on what I have heard and read about them but my objective analysis of the game is fundamentally lacking a ton of data.

Look, I am not saying the computers are to be 100% trusted over human observation. I agree that Duke probably is not the best team in the land, as KenPom suggests right now. But, when I am weighing how good teams are, I certainly include computer analysis along with my own observations and give it plenty of weight. I am betting that the selection committee will do the same thing.

--Jason "I am thrilled that the committee will have KenPom numbers with them in the room... I think it is very good for Duke!!" Evans

JasonEvans
02-23-2010, 09:52 AM
Jason, looking ahead on Pomeroy, it will be interesting to see if Kansas can catch Duke overthe course of the regular season. They finish at Oklahoma State (47), Kansas State (11), and at Missouri (13). Duke closes out with Tulsa (76), at Virginia (108), at Maryland (34) and UNC (92).

I think there's a good chance that if both win out, Kansas will edge ahead going into the conference tournaments. Of course, if one or the other loses (as could happen), the other would be in good shape.

Of course, there is who you play but there is also how well you play against that team. KenPom is not like the RPI where you get massive credit just for playing a tough opponent. Still, you are right that Kansas will have more chances to "impress" the computer than Duke will down the stretch.

I really want Duke to finish #1 in the KenPom. I think this will carry weight in the selection committee room and can be the thing that pushes us to a #1 seed over Purdue.

-Jason "just win baby-- win out and I am confident we will get that top seed" Evans

Chitowndevil
02-23-2010, 11:16 AM
I really want Duke to finish #1 in the KenPom. I think this will carry weight in the selection committee room and can be the thing that pushes us to a #1 seed over Purdue.


I dunno...


Ken Pomeroy's invaluable efficiency ratings are explicitly listed in the "resources" section of our committee materials, alongside Sagarain ratings and Jerry Palm's CollegeRPI.com. But they're listed last...

In other words, while the burgeoning tempo-free statistics movement has made major inroads in college basketball media, but it doesn't have much of a place in the committee room. Sad smiley face.

Link (http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/3753/first-day-notes-from-the-ncaas-mock-selection-committee)

JasonEvans
02-23-2010, 01:57 PM
I dunno...

Link (http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebasketballnation/post/_/id/3753/first-day-notes-from-the-ncaas-mock-selection-committee)

How can the mock selection committee know what the real selection committee will use?

Frankly, anything in the room that lists Duke at #1 or can be used as ammunition to make Duke a #1 seed is fine with me!!

--Jason "I have a feeling that one Duke or Purdue will make the choice clear over the next couple weeks" Evans

91_92_01_10_15
02-23-2010, 02:16 PM
Well, let me correct you about one thing. I do not think the computers do a better job of evaluating teams better than humans. There are things beyond stats that go into evaluating a performance.


What has been interesting to track lately, for me, is how closely Pomeroy's individual game predictions are matching the odds-makers'.

To me, that's a much better basis of comparison between humans' evaluations and his system's evaluations than comparing them with the polls.

FWIW, from my limited sample size, they seem to be correlating very closely. I am hopeful that this is a positive sign for Duke.

-bdbd
02-23-2010, 02:36 PM
-Jason "just win baby-- win out and I am confident we will get that top seed" Evans

That's the key everyone. Duke must WIN OUT. We do that and odds are fairly decent that we get a #1 seed. If we lose once, then it becomes difficult/unlikely to get a #1. Lose twice down the stretch and we pretty well assure ourselves of a 2 or 3 seed. (I think it likely that a couple of those teams ahead of us are yet to experience more losses down the stretch - KA, KY, Syr., Purdue, though I suspect KA or KY might be able to weather a stretch loss and remain at a #1 seed.)

One step at a time. Beat Tulsa, then UVA, then MD, then NC@CH. Then 3 ACCT games.

Do that and good things will happen.

BTW, I think that we want VPI to beat MD this weekend, as we have the tie-breaker with VPI in the ACC (if it came to that), right? Of course, who needs any extra reason to root against the Terps anyhow???!

-bdbd
02-23-2010, 04:07 PM
"Sweaty Gary" is up to his insecurity antics again. He is now decrying that his team is being slighted by the pollsters, saying "We should be in the Top-25." My personal opinion is this is just another cry for attention from Gary -- "Look at us, we're really good everybody." Whatever.

http://voices.washingtonpost.com/terrapins-insider/2010/02/gary_williams_we_should_be_ran.html?wpisrc=nl_spor ts

But since Gary is "sweating" the polls this week, I think he makes at least one good topical point: Is the ACC, after Duke and ignoring NC@CH (please!), better/deeper as a whole this year than it was last year and in the recent past? What do you think? As a group are they better or worse -- MD, VPI, UVA, Wake, Clemson, FSU, GT, Miami. While the press seems to (erroneously) evaluate conferences based on their top 2-3 teams, I think it is fairer to look at EVERYONE in the league, in total. And it is a reasonable argument - as the ACC could have as many as eight teams dancing...

BTW, that MD-Clemson matchup could be a good one. In fact, MD also has a tough one next weekend at VPI as well. Could be a make-or-break week in the ACC race for second place! :rolleyes:

weezie
02-23-2010, 04:21 PM
Is Gary more damp from sweating or crying?
All part of the job....he's a wiz at pleading for his teams after all the practice he's had over the years.
Duke's the best, whatevs on the rest.

AIRFORCEDUKIE
02-23-2010, 04:38 PM
Gary has a good point, Maryland should be ranked. However theres a few teams who can make that argument. It doesnt really matter though when it comes down to it. Rankings arent considered for the tournament. Im sure as long as they win they will be ranked next monday.

He had another good point about the league overall. I think the ACC is better this year as a whole. Even if NC is having a down year. Lanardi has 7 teams in the tourney as of now. Thats as many as any league will have.

Duke can silence all of this when they win the Championship this year. That would be two years in a row for the ACC.:D I guy can dream, can't he?


Airforcedukie

BlueintheFace
02-23-2010, 04:49 PM
They should be actually. Look at some of the teams in the 20-25 range.

Chitowndevil
02-23-2010, 05:09 PM
Yeah, I think Gary should just shut up about this. Maryland currently...

A) Has zero quality wins out of conference, and a home loss to William & Mary (which IS ranked in the RPI top 50, but still).
B) Has a total of three wins against top 50 RPI opponents, two of which came against Florida State (#40)
C) Has zero wins against teams currently ranked in the top 25 of the RPI, AP, Coaches' Poll.

Maryland is going to the in the NCAAs because they've beaten who they should beat - their worst loss was to RPI #56 Cincinnati. They've also beaten lesser teams by large margins, which is why their Pomeroy ranking (#12) is substantially higher than their RPI (#34). But just beating who you should beat is often not going to impress the pollsters.

[Somewhat Off-Topic: Actually, I think Maryland is a very good case in point why, as was discussed in another thread, somehow capping the impact of margin of victory is really important to rating teams. Maryland is #12 in the Pomeroy and #13 in Jeff Sagarin's Predictor rating largely because of huge margins of victory against Charleston Southern, New Hampshire, NC Greensboro, Longwood, etc. I would strongly disagree with anyone who claimed Maryland is the 12th or 13th best team in the country.]

CameronBornAndBred
02-23-2010, 06:14 PM
Maryland has more right to be ranked than Texas. Gary is correct.

jimsumner
02-23-2010, 06:15 PM
The idea that the ACC's second-place team in late February deserves to be nationally ranked hardly seems irrational.

But GW does do we-don't-get-no-respect as well as anyone.

77devil
02-23-2010, 06:22 PM
Wilbon and Le Batard on PTI today: Only one ACC team in the top 25, therefore the ACC is weak, and thus Duke must be overrated.

Never mind that the ACC is rated 1st, 2nd, and 3rd by Pomeroy, Sagarin, and the RPI, respectively. Why let a little data interfere with the bashing from Bristol.

Wander
02-23-2010, 06:25 PM
Eh, maybe. Re: Texas - Texas has less losses and is rated higher by both kenpom and the RPI.

In my ever so humble opinion, Maryland's 9-3 record breaks down into going 0-3 against the top 5 teams in the ACC and 9-0 against the bottom 7. That makes them fairly good, but Top 25? I'd probably put them in the 20-25 range off the top of my head, but it's not some great outrage.

WiJoe
02-23-2010, 06:36 PM
Wilbon and Le Batard on PTI today: Only one ACC team in the top 25, therefore the ACC is weak, and thus Duke must be overrated.

Never mind that the ACC is rated 1st, 2nd, and 3rd by Pomeroy, Sagarin, and the RPI, respectively. Why let a little data interfere with the bashing from Bristol.

I wouldn't get worked up over what either of those two idiots say. kornheiser would be worse. The three clueless.

DukeUsul
02-23-2010, 07:11 PM
MD is #12 in Pomeroy, #20 in Sagarin ... sounds to me like Gary makes a good point.

sagegrouse
02-23-2010, 07:16 PM
BTW, I think that we want VPI to beat MD this weekend, as we have the tie-breaker with VPI in the ACC (if it came to that), right? Of course, who needs any extra reason to root against the Terps anyhow???!

I think this is for each to decide. This is not a "undebatable proposition," as it would be if UNC were playing. This is the obvious implication when we say, "not our rival" about the Terps.

I would just as soon see Maryland win.

I hate the UMd fans more than any other in the conference -- even UNC's. But then I split my time between CO and DC, and don't get the full effect of Heeldom.

Offsetting my dislike of the College Park students is that I greatly prefer Gary to Seth. There are only three ACC coaches who have not adopted K's buttoned-down, all-business attitude (some self consciously [see Gaudio, Dino]): Gary, Seth and Ol' Roy. (Although occasionally Leonard Hamilton's rough edges show through.) I vastly prefer Gary to the other two. He is exactly who he is: an intense, "basketball is 100%" coach with a chip on his shoulder, despite having coached more college games than even Coach K. Seth is totally annoying -- Don Rickles without a shred of humor. Mere words cannot describe my feelings about Roy Williams.

I really like the Maryland players. Greivis is very good and, although he has an in-your-face attitude, is still a touch vulnerable. Also, he came out of a bad section of Caracas. This is not Chicago, NY or LA, but Caracas. Maryland doesn't seem to have any thugs on the team. Did anyone else notice when Adrian Bowie fould Nolan really hard, Nolan patted him on the shoulder? As many know, Nolan plays pick-up games in College Park when home during the summer.

The VT players are just tough guys who can't play basketball very well, except Delaney, who seems to be the second coming of Randolph childress.

It's a close call, but I would just as soon see the Terps win. We need to win the rest of our games anyway, so I'm not going to spas about a tie for first in the ACC.

sagegrouse

pfrduke
02-23-2010, 07:24 PM
BTW, I think that we want VPI to beat MD this weekend, as we have the tie-breaker with VPI in the ACC (if it came to that), right? Of course, who needs any extra reason to root against the Terps anyhow???!

We'd have any tie-breaker with Maryland, too, as long as Wake or Clemson finish ahead of Georgia Tech.

JasonEvans
02-23-2010, 09:08 PM
The VT players are just tough guys who can't play basketball very well, except Delaney, who seems to be the second coming of Randolph childress.

Wow, I had not seen this until you mentioned it, but I can seem some similarities. I think Delaney is more intense than Childress, though. Randolph was a bit of a quiet player who rarely showed emotion as his impossible shots were destroying you. Delaney is more fiery.

Other than that, I do see a lot of Childresses game in Delaney. Nice call!

http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_D36P1iWeXNs/SWu9uPpUUfI/AAAAAAAABrA/MZLnDCZU5qQ/s400/childress.jpg http://media.scout.com/media/image/63/637276.jpg

--Jason "damn, was Childress a stone-cold killer or what?" Evans

-bdbd
02-23-2010, 10:38 PM
The idea that the ACC's second-place team in late February deserves to be nationally ranked hardly seems irrational.

But GW does do we-don't-get-no-respect as well as anyone.

Yes. 'wasn't arguing against MD being in the top-25. Just am tired, living in the DC area, to see ole SG whining yet again about not getting enough respect. After enough times you just gotta roll your eyes. Hard to see K whining like that over such a debatable point. He'd be more likely to say, "We don't worry about that. We're focused on taking care of business ON the court. And the rest of it will take care of itself."

But I kinda agree with the proposal that the conference quality, overall, is somewhat better this year. It's just that the improvement is in the #3 - #9 slots primarily. But boy will the Big East, Big-10/11 and Pac10 fans howl if/when 2/3 of the ACC makes the tournament (even 7 would have that effect). In most other conferences there are several truly awful teams where the upper echelon can take several games "off." In the ACC? Well, the first place team lost to the LAST place team this year...


;)

theAlaskanBear
02-24-2010, 12:07 AM
Yes. 'wasn't arguing against MD being in the top-25. Just am tired, living in the DC area, to see ole SG whining yet again about not getting enough respect. After enough times you just gotta roll your eyes. Hard to see K whining like that over such a debatable point. He'd be more likely to say, "We don't worry about that. We're focused on taking care of business ON the court. And the rest of it will take care of itself."

But I kinda agree with the proposal that the conference quality, overall, is somewhat better this year. It's just that the improvement is in the #3 - #9 slots primarily. But boy will the Big East, Big-10/11 and Pac10 fans howl if/when 2/3 of the ACC makes the tournament (even 7 would have that effect). In most other conferences there are several truly awful teams where the upper echelon can take several games "off." In the ACC? Well, the first place team lost to the LAST place team this year...


;)

When ACC teams beat each other up in conference, its because they are a "weak" conference. When Big East teams beat each other up, its because they are a "great" conference and competitive!

Don't believe everything you hear from ESPN, they just spent 10 minutes on sportcenter today drooling over UCONN.

Take a team like West Virginia, who is ranked #7 simply as a product of playing in Big East. Their best win is at home against Pitt, but they have lost to every good team in the Big East already, and they still have to play at Villanova and Georgetown.

But Maryland, Wake, VT arent even in the top 25? Just because Carolina has fallen off a cliff, doesnt mean the rest of conference has done the same. Another reason to GTHC, GTH.

Jderf
02-24-2010, 01:45 AM
Random note, but for anyone who puts too much stock in the polls:

I kept wondering why (#22) Northern Iowa was ranked in the top 25 when their best win seems to be against Boston College (whose RPI is 105 right now according to CBS).

Their record was 14-3, but really? No wins against RPI top 100 opponents and they're in the polls?

Well now they've gone and lost to Evansville, so I feel better about myself and my dislike for the polls...

gw67
02-24-2010, 07:20 AM
I donít think that it is unreasonable to expect Maryland to be ranked in the top 25. They are currently in 2nd place with a 9-3 record (3-3 against other likely NCAAT and top RPI 50 teams); 12th in Pomeroy which is based not only on the teamís record and strength of opposition but how well they play; 18th in Sagarin which also takes into account a teamís record and strength of opposition as well as home vs. road and margin of victory (diminishing returns for lopsided wins); and 34th in RPI. Living in Northern Virginia, I have watched probably 80% of their games and based on my old eyes, this yearís Terps have, on the average, played better than they have for the past 4-5 years. I expect them to end up with 11 conference wins and a first round bye in the ACCT. They will probably get a 6-7 seed in the NCAAT depending on how well they do in the ACCT.

gw67