First 2017-18 kenpom rankings out

Cayman

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 26, 2010
Messages
4,382
Reaction score
1,133
Points
113
Big Ten rankings:

#10 Michigan State
#17 Purdue
#18 Northwestern
#31 Wisconsin
#32 Michigan
#36 Minnesota
#40 Penn State
#41 Maryland
#54 Iowa
#65 Indiana
#78 Ohio State
#98 Nebraska
#104 Illinois
#125 Rutgers

https://kenpom.com/
 

Big Ten rankings:

#10 Michigan State
#17 Purdue
#18 Northwestern
#31 Wisconsin
#32 Michigan
#36 Minnesota
#40 Penn State
#41 Maryland
#54 Iowa
#65 Indiana
#78 Ohio State
#98 Nebraska
#104 Illinois
#125 Rutgers

https://kenpom.com/

So this is basically a strength of schedule ranking at this point?
 

So this is basically a strength of schedule ranking at this point?

No, I do not think so.

We finished around 40 last year (MTSU was right by us). I think our issue in these is 3 point shooting hurting efficiency.

It’s not really an exact science projecting Wisconsin. I’m not exactly sure how freshmen are projected because there will be a high margin of error for wisconsin.
 

No, I do not think so.

We finished around 40 last year (MTSU was right by us). I think our issue in these is 3 point shooting hurting efficiency.

It’s not really an exact science projecting Wisconsin. I’m not exactly sure how freshmen are projected because there will be a high margin of error for wisconsin.

I think I saw someone on Reddit say that top-25-ish freshmen are factored into the preseason ranking, which probably helps explain Kentucky at #2. Wisconsin has a good 2017 class, but I'm not sure any of them are good enough to boost their kenpom rating in the preseason.
 

As a comparison, with last year's final KenPom rankings

Final 2016-17 rank in parentheses
#10 Michigan State (40)
#17 Purdue (19)
#18 Northwestern (38)
#31 Wisconsin (21)
#32 Michigan (20)
#36 Minnesota (37)
#40 Penn State (87)
#41 Maryland (46)
#54 Iowa (71)
#65 Indiana (44)
#78 Ohio State (73)
#98 Nebraska (107)
#104 Illinois (66)
#125 Rutgers (135)

Differential from Last Season to 2017-18 Preseason
Penn State (+47)
Michigan State (+30)
Northwestern (+20)
Iowa (+17)
Rutgers (+10)
Nebraska (+9)
Maryland (+5)
Purdue (+2)
Minnesota (+1)
Ohio State (-5)
Wisconsin (-10)
Michigan (-12)
Indiana (-21)
Illinois (-38)
 


I think I saw someone on Reddit say that top-25-ish freshmen are factored into the preseason ranking, which probably helps explain Kentucky at #2. Wisconsin has a good 2017 class, but I'm not sure any of them are good enough to boost their kenpom rating in the preseason.

Fair enough. Then I think almost all of their rating is on Happ and just assumed efficiency from the rest of their team.
 



More KenPom Stuff: Gophers pegged for 5th-place tie in Big 10

KenPom projects Gophers to go 20-11, 10-8 and tied for 5th in the Big 10. Broken down in conference play it's 1-0 at neutral site (OSU), 7-1 at Williams Arena, and 2-7 on the road.

Projected losses are:
@ Providence
vs. Alabama
@ Arkansas
@ Northwestern
@ Penn State
@ Maryland
@ Iowa
@ Michigan
Michigan State
@ Wisconsin
@ Purdue

Overall Game Most Likely to Win: Alabama A&M (99.9% chance to win)

Big 10 Game Most Likely to Win: Rutgers (89% chance to win)

Non-Conference Game Most Likely to Lose: @ Providence (68% chance to lose)

Big 10 Games Most Likely to Lose: @ Northwestern & @ Purdue (70% chance to lose)

Projected Big 10 & Overall Records
1 Michigan State (23-6, 13-5)

2 Purdue (21-8, 12-6)

T3 Northwestern (21-9, 11-7)
Wisconsin (20-10, 11-7)

T5 Michigan (19-10, 10-8)
Minnesota (20-11, 10-8)
Penn State (21-9, 10-8)

T8 Maryland (19-11, 9-9)
Iowa (18-11, 9-9)

10 Indiana (16-14, 8-10)

11 Ohio State (15-14, 7-11)

12 Nebraska (13-16, 6-12)

T13 Illinois (15-16, 5-13)
Rutgers (15-16, 5-13)

Projected Home Court Advantage
Iowa +4
Michigan State +4

Nebraska +3.8

Maryland +3.7
Ohio State +3.7
Purdue +3.7

Indiana +3.5
Penn State +3.5
Rutgers +3.5

Michigan +3.3
Minnesota +3.3
Wisconsin +3.3

Illinois +3.1
Northwestern +3.1
 



I always thought kenpom was garbage, and this is further evidence.

His system and others literally are right in line with Vegas, which needs to be accurate to not topple over. It’s a useful system.

Thankfully for us, any data scientist will tell you that early season or experiment projections like this with a high degree of uncertainty (new players, different season, etc) are far from exact. The Gophers could easily rise in this.
 

His system and others literally are right in line with Vegas, which needs to be accurate to not topple over. It’s a useful system.

Thankfully for us, any data scientist will tell you that early season or experiment projections like this with a high degree of uncertainty (new players, different season, etc) are far from exact. The Gophers could easily rise in this.

I'm not much of a betting man, but I'd eagerly take the over on 10 conference wins (as well as only 2 conference road wins).
 

I'm not much of a betting man, but I'd eagerly take the over on 10 conference wins (as well as only 2 conference road wins).

We seem to be a bit better than all of the metrics last year and this year. I’d take the over but I’m not shooting the messenger on KenPom, Sagarin, etc is all. We seem to have the experienced players to get it done. I think the concern yet again is 3-point shooting which hurts offensive efficiency a lot. We try to replace it by getting to the line. We’ll see.
 




His system and others literally are right in line with Vegas, which needs to be accurate to not topple over. It’s a useful system.

Thankfully for us, any data scientist will tell you that early season or experiment projections like this with a high degree of uncertainty (new players, different season, etc) are far from exact. The Gophers could easily rise in this.

Ok, if “garbage” is too strong, let’s just say it does not align with what knowledgeable basketball observers would deem to be a team’s relative rank (and specifically ours). If his model says weak 3 pt shooting will help drag us down to 36th in the country, then his model is flawed. Maybe flawed in projecting our shooting, maybe flawed in placing too much emphasis on the 3, maybe both, but it’s flawed.
 

We seem to be a bit better than all of the metrics last year and this year. I’d take the over but I’m not shooting the messenger on KenPom, Sagarin, etc is all. We seem to have the experienced players to get it done. I think the concern yet again is 3-point shooting which hurts offensive efficiency a lot. We try to replace it by getting to the line. We’ll see.

The Marquette guy that was on the site a few years ago always cited “metrics” and it bugged me. There’s something about simply watching and understanding the game that is not necessarily captured in statistics.
 

Ok, if “garbage” is too strong, let’s just say it does not align with what knowledgeable basketball observers would deem to be a team’s relative rank (and specifically ours). If his model says weak 3 pt shooting will help drag us down to 36th in the country, then his model is flawed. Maybe flawed in projecting our shooting, maybe flawed in placing too much emphasis on the 3, maybe both, but it’s flawed.

His model said that MTSU was as good or better than the Gophs last year.

I think anyone like him would admit that the casual observer can point out some inaccuracies, but his system is good to have. If you think otherwise, go make money betting on us to cover the spread in the first handful of games this year. It absolutely could be wrong. We were obviously quite low to open last season.

Both practices can coexist. We have a talented roster with most everyone coming back. We also take some bad shots and don’t hit many from deep. That would suggest a “decent” offensive efficiency paired with a good defense as he’s got captured. If he’s off by just a little bit in his projections, we’re in the top 20. There’s very little margin/difference between 36 and 15.

We were a 5 seed last year because of RPI, which a lot of people think is outdated.
 




Top Bottom