MBB Nerd Polls 2024-25

Question about Quad wins. Does the “Quad” get counted at the time of the game or based on the end of the season ranking?
End of season
I mean, if you did not base it on full season performance, how would you even begin to quantify early season games? What quadrant would you assign the Maine game? Miami was a top 40 team through their first couple games of the year... should a team that beat them then get credit for a high quality win?
 
I mean, if you did not base it on full season performance, how would you even begin to quantify early season games? What quadrant would you assign the Maine game? Miami was a top 40 team through their first couple games of the year... should a team that beat them then get credit for a high quality win?
I was just asking out of forgetfulness. However teams get better or worse due to practice or injury so beating a team early in the year and then they improve may not have been a win against a quad 1 team at the time. So it’s not perfect and we need to do the tallying of wins at the end.
 
I was just asking out of forgetfulness. However teams get better or worse due to practice or injury so beating a team early in the year and then they improve may not have been a win against a quad 1 team at the time. So it’s not perfect and we need to do the tallying of wins at the end.
Alas, no system is perfect.
 
I mean, if you did not base it on full season performance, how would you even begin to quantify early season games? What quadrant would you assign the Maine game? Miami was a top 40 team through their first couple games of the year... should a team that beat them then get credit for a high quality win?
It’s not that bad a question. Beating Auburn pre-Broome injury means a lot more than post-injury.

But yeah, hopefully over the course of a season it’s balanced out.
 
Will Warren points out how many great teams there are this year, including Duke:

"With an average Net Rating of +34.11, this current group of top five teams (Auburn, Duke, Houston, Iowa State, Tennessee) blows any other I can find on record out of the water. The same almost goes for 6-10, with an average Net Rating of +27.45, the highest at this point of the season since 1999. As a whole, the top 50 averages a Net Rating of +22.01, which smokes the previous February 1-or-earlier record of +20.49 in 2009. At face value, we are trending towards the highest-quality, toughest NCAA Tournament in at least 30 years."

Here's a link where you can read more, but much of the content is paywalled. https://statsbywill.substack.com/p/the-2025-ncaa-tournament-field-could
 
Will Warren points out how many great teams there are this year, including Duke:

"With an average Net Rating of +34.11, this current group of top five teams (Auburn, Duke, Houston, Iowa State, Tennessee) blows any other I can find on record out of the water. The same almost goes for 6-10, with an average Net Rating of +27.45, the highest at this point of the season since 1999. As a whole, the top 50 averages a Net Rating of +22.01, which smokes the previous February 1-or-earlier record of +20.49 in 2009. At face value, we are trending towards the highest-quality, toughest NCAA Tournament in at least 30 years."

Here's a link where you can read more, but much of the content is paywalled. https://statsbywill.substack.com/p/the-2025-ncaa-tournament-field-could
Is it possible that the league is just more top heavy than ever before? With all the player movement, maybe the top talent is now stockpiled on the top ten or so teams. Seems like this could be a trend that continues in the coming years unless some kind of change is made.
 
Is it possible that the league is just more top heavy than ever before? With all the player movement, maybe the top talent is now stockpiled on the top ten or so teams. Seems like this could be a trend that continues in the coming years unless some kind of change is made.
I think that's another way of saying the same thing. The top teams are better, relative to the field, because the talent is more concentrated at the top. With NIL, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, at least for now.
 
I think that's another way of saying the same thing. The top teams are better, relative to the field, because the talent is more concentrated at the top. With NIL, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer, at least for now.
Not all of the expected top teams and big spenders are performing at the top. Some spent their money wiser than others. Take Arkansas as an example of this.
 
#2 offense and #2 defense in KenPom as of Friday, Jan 17, 2025.
I haven't bothered to download all the pre-tourney files, but here are the teams that were Top Five in both Adjusted Offensive and Defensive Efficiency (I'll call them Top 5 x 2 teams) in the end-of-season rankings for Duke since '97 (with NCAA Tournament Outcome):

2002: #1 Off/#1 Def (Sweet 16)
1998: #3 Off/#1 Def (Elite 8)
1999: #3 Off/#3 Def (National Runner-Up)
2001: #2 Off/#3 Def (National Champs)
2004: #2 Off/#3 Def (Final Four)
2010: #1 Off/#5 Def (National Champs)

And here are the Top Five x 2 teams not named Duke over the same time period:

2008 Kansas: #2 Off/#1 Def (National Champs)
2000 Michigan State: #2 Off/#4 Def (National Champs)
2019 Virginia: #2 Off/#5 Def (National Champs)
2005 North Carolina: #2 Off/#5 Def (National Champs)
2005 Illinois: #3 Off/#4 Def (National Runner-Up)
2007 North Carolina: #3 Off/#4 Def (Elite 8)
2016 Villanova: #3 Off/#5 Def (National Champs)
2024 UConn: #1 Off/#4 Def (National Champs)
1997 Kentucky: #5 Off/#1 Def (National Runner-Up)
1997 Kansas: #4 Off/#5 Def (Sweet 16)
2001 Michigan State: #4 Off/#5 Def (Final Four)
2003 Kentucky: #5 Off/#4 Def (Elite 8)

Seems like good company.
 
I haven't bothered to download all the pre-tourney files...
If you ever successfully download the pre-tourney files for 1997, 1998, 1999, or 2000, please let me know. When I download those, all I've get are completely blank spreadsheets. (Though 2001 pre-tourney works for me.)

FWIW, pre-tourney rankings for the years you've listed were:

2002: #1 Off/#2 Def (Sweet 16)
1998: don't know (Elite Eight)
1999: don't know (National Runner-up)
2001: #2 Off/#2 Def (National Champs)
2004: #3 Off/#3 Def (Final Four)
2010: #4 Off/#5 Def (National Champs)

So, at least in the four seasons for which I have pre-t rankings, they all were still top 5 on both O and D.

Also FWIW, in 2019, our pre-tournament KP rankings were #6 off/#6 def (Elite Eight)
 
Did we actually lose points in Bart Torvik's rankings after the BC game? We covered his spread but he only gives us a 93 in game ranking which is quite low.

Kinda odd
 
Did we actually lost points in Bart Torvik's rankings after the BC game? We covered his spread but he only gives us a 93 in game ranking which is quite low.

Kinda odd
The Vegas spread accounts for Brown being out; nerd polls don't.

-jk
 
Back
Top