MBB Nerd Polls 2024-25
- Thread starter DavidBenAkiva
- Start date
BandAlum83
Member
What struck me is that 2010 & 2015 both had clunkers at a score of 48, if I’m reading correctly. That makes me conclude that clunkers in the first half of the season aren’t predictive of final success.
Or stated another way, there doesn’t seem to be a correlation between clunker count and success.
Or stated another way, there doesn’t seem to be a correlation between clunker count and success.
mph
Well-known member
I can’t speak to other places, but yes, he’s the frontrunner on kenpom. It’s Coop, then a large gap to Broome, then another large gap to everyone else.
I think this was mentioned elsewhere but Coop’s kenpom rating is currently the 2nd highest since Pomeroy started POTY rankings (in 2010, I believe). Number 1 all-time is Frank Kaminski. Kenpom POTY methodology is explained here.
Last edited:
AGDukesky
Member
So your saying Broome prevented it from being a clean sweep?!
SkyBrickey
Member
Puke #3 in KP behind Auburn and Houston after that wild win. Next game.
House P
Member
Copied from the NC State post-game thread
It appears that the adjusted offensive and defensive ratings CDu reports in the post-game threads are taken from Torvik's site. Earlier in this thread, we discussed how Torvik adjusts his ratings to a) incorporate average margin and b) ignore everything that happens after the lead is considered 100% safe.
This game was unusual in many ways. One of those was that the final score, a 10 point win, doesn't really reflect how close the game was. Here's have Torvik's ratings would change if he used the final score only.
The lead wasn't 100% safe until State missed a shot with 14 seconds left and Duke grabbed the rebound, so that particular adjustment didn't have much impact.
However, incorporating average margin (State +1.2) appears to make a significant difference. If I did the math correctly, Torvik treats the game as if this score was 70-66. For this particular game, that seems a more accurate representation than the final margin (which included Duke outscoring State 4-0 after the game turned into a foul shooting contest).
It appears that the adjusted offensive and defensive ratings CDu reports in the post-game threads are taken from Torvik's site. Earlier in this thread, we discussed how Torvik adjusts his ratings to a) incorporate average margin and b) ignore everything that happens after the lead is considered 100% safe.
This game was unusual in many ways. One of those was that the final score, a 10 point win, doesn't really reflect how close the game was. Here's have Torvik's ratings would change if he used the final score only.
| Metric | Torvik | Equivalent to | Final Score Only | Equivalent to |
| oRtg | 107.5 | #152 | 111.9 | #80 |
| dRtg | 97.1 | #37 | 92.8 | #10 |
| GameScore | 76 | #81 | 90 | #30 |
The lead wasn't 100% safe until State missed a shot with 14 seconds left and Duke grabbed the rebound, so that particular adjustment didn't have much impact.
However, incorporating average margin (State +1.2) appears to make a significant difference. If I did the math correctly, Torvik treats the game as if this score was 70-66. For this particular game, that seems a more accurate representation than the final margin (which included Duke outscoring State 4-0 after the game turned into a foul shooting contest).
MChambers
Member
Excellent explanation.
JasonEvans
Host, The Duke Basketball Roundup
Ok, I have a serious question...
What planet is Seth Davis on?!?!
A few weeks ago I happened to read a column on his Hoop Thoughts website where he listed the top candidates for Coach of the Year. Jon Scheyer's name was nowhere to be found. Since then, ESPN, CBS, and other folks have chimed in on the mid-year COY contenders and everyone have Jon as one of the two or three top names on their lists.
Today, Seth checks in with a column on some blue bloods in NCAA tourney danger. He cites two in particular... North Carolina and Gonzaga.
The Heels are a no-brainer. Of course they are in trouble. In fact, after the loss to Pitt they sit at #42 in the NET with just a 1-8 record in Q1 games. Most would say they are on the wrong side of the bubble right now.
But Gonzaga?!?! They are just 2-5 in Q1 games, not great but not terrible. But they have a NET ranking of #11 and stand at #10 in Kenpom. There is no precedent for a team ranked like that in the advanced metrics to miss the tourney. It would take a couple bad losses for them to get down to bubble territory. I'm not saying they are a mortal lock to make the tourney, but they are nowhere close to the troubled territory that Carolina finds themselves in.
Seth is looking for clicks more than thinking about his content... that's a bad sign.
What planet is Seth Davis on?!?!
A few weeks ago I happened to read a column on his Hoop Thoughts website where he listed the top candidates for Coach of the Year. Jon Scheyer's name was nowhere to be found. Since then, ESPN, CBS, and other folks have chimed in on the mid-year COY contenders and everyone have Jon as one of the two or three top names on their lists.
Today, Seth checks in with a column on some blue bloods in NCAA tourney danger. He cites two in particular... North Carolina and Gonzaga.
The Heels are a no-brainer. Of course they are in trouble. In fact, after the loss to Pitt they sit at #42 in the NET with just a 1-8 record in Q1 games. Most would say they are on the wrong side of the bubble right now.
But Gonzaga?!?! They are just 2-5 in Q1 games, not great but not terrible. But they have a NET ranking of #11 and stand at #10 in Kenpom. There is no precedent for a team ranked like that in the advanced metrics to miss the tourney. It would take a couple bad losses for them to get down to bubble territory. I'm not saying they are a mortal lock to make the tourney, but they are nowhere close to the troubled territory that Carolina finds themselves in.
Seth is looking for clicks more than thinking about his content... that's a bad sign.
DavidBenAkiva
Member
The green juice has spoiled and is poisoning his mind
I have always found him to be kind of a dummy. He doesn't have any real insight on anything. He says things just because they're "hot takes" and they usually are anti-Duke for whatever messed up psychological reason applies to him. In any event, he's really of very little value and your example here is typical.
MChambers
Member
Evan Miya criticizes the NET quadrant and suggests an alternative:
blog.evanmiya.com
Abolish the Quadrant System (And Use Win Quality Instead)
Introducing a new resume metric that makes understanding wins and losses easier
blog.evanmiya.com
SkyBrickey
Member
This is almost identical to the Torvik Wins Above Bubble (WAB) metric that the selection committee will have on its stat sheet for the first time this year.Evan Miya criticizes the NET quadrant and suggests an alternative:
Abolish the Quadrant System (And Use Win Quality Instead)
Introducing a new resume metric that makes understanding wins and losses easier
Basically both metrics are taking the good win, bad loss concept of the cumbersome quadrant system and calculating that as a numberical value.
This gives Duke, for example, more credit for its Q1 win over Auburn than its Q1 win over Wake Forest.
SkyBrickey
Member
We jumped almost a full point on KP. +36.60
#3 offense and #4 defense
#3 offense and #4 defense
g111m1c
Member
Very close to being #2 in both.
bluedevilsenergy
Member
Auburn drop below a 130 offensive rating on KP for the first time in a while I think. They were very poor against Arkansas and probably should have lost.
SkyBrickey
Member
Arkansas had a 1 point lead with 3:06 to play.
bluedevilsenergy
Member
And then proceeded to shoot themselves in the foot for the next 7 minutes. Brazile pretty much handed Auburn the game between his own-goal tip-in in the mid-second half that killed the Hogs' momentum and swatting a rebound out of his own teammate's hands with 30 seconds left down 3. Shoutout to Ivisic as well for going 0-9 from 3 as a 45% shooter on the season. Those two were Auburn's best players tonight.