Page 6 of 7 FirstFirst ... 4567 LastLast
Results 76 to 90 of 93
  1. #76

    Default

    Plus the Gophers had some luck in this recent win streak. I don’t think they’re nearly as good a team as people want to believe, but I’m very open to being proven wrong.


  2. #77

    Default

    http://www.ncaa.org/about/resources/...101-selections

    Just a reminder of the NCAA selection criteria (historically, no matter where they put the emphasis, RPI tends to track the committees selections):


    In no specific priority order, the committee considers the following criteria in the selections process:

    Availability of talent.
    Bad losses.
    Common opponents.
    Competitive in losses.
    Conference record.
    Early competition versus late competition.
    Head to head.
    Nonconference record.
    Overall record.
    Regional rankings.
    Strength of schedule.
    RPI.
    Significant wins.
    Strength of conference


    The committee members are:

    Rhonda Lundin Bennett Division I Women’s Basketball Committee chair and senior associate athletics director/senior woman administrator, University of Nevada, Reno
    Ceal Barry, deputy athletics director, University of Colorado, Boulder
    Ken Bothof, director of athletics, Northern Kentucky University
    DeJuena Chizer, senior associate athletics director/SWA, University of Houston
    Leslie Claybrook, assistant commissioner, Southeastern Conference
    Nina King, senior deputy director of athletics, Duke University
    Tamica Smith Jones, director of athletics, University of California, Riverside
    Teresa Phillips, director of athletics, Tennessee State University
    Deborah Richardson, senior associate commissioner, Atlantic 10 Conference
    Diane C. Turnham, senior associate athletics director, Middle Tennessee State University

  3. #78

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignatius L Hoops View Post
    ... Just a reminder of the NCAA selection criteria (historically, no matter where they put the emphasis, RPI tends to track the committees selections): ...
    Thanks for the link, Iggy. It's nice to know that there is some sort of standard that they're supposed to judge to.

    And I know the committee members probably put in a lot of work putting together formal portfolios for the different teams.

    My two fears about this process are as follows:

    (1) If it's true that "historically, no matter where they put the emphasis, RPI tends to track the Committees selections" then that makes me worry that in spite of a laundry list of 14 criteria that they're supposed to consider (only one of which is RPI), in practice they might get a little lazy and mostly just consider RPI. Otherwise, the correlation between RPI and actual selections would be hard to explain. Because there's a wide variation among RPI of the candidates, partly due to wide variations in SoS, so that one would not expect a good correlation fit among selections - unless, that is, they mostly just use RPI rank to determine selections, plus a tiny bit of tweaking via the other factors. [It doesn't tell them that they have to use any specific mixture of those criteria.]

    (2) I worry that the Committee might utilize RPI alone as some sort of pre-screening criterion - in other words, you first have to make it through the solely RPI-based pre-screening cutoff threshold before they will even go ahead and start to consider the other 13 factors, and indeed build a profile for that team.

    When you think about it, one could not fault them much for setting an absolute max threshold of 100 or so, as an absolute RPI cutoff. Look at the following RPIs of the bottom 3 Big-Ten teams:

    RPI Team (Record)
    136 Penn State (3-11)
    184 Wisconsin (3-11)
    191 Illinois (2-13)

    None of these teams has won more than 3 Big-Ten games. They're not going to win a championship - so just cut them out with an RPI low-pass filter - nobody objects to that.

    Seeing the non-performance of those three, though, one might be tempted to say that it would be a no-brainer to simply set an RPI low-pass filter at 100. Surely no decent B1G team would have an RPI rank of #100, would they.

    You would be wrong. The Gophers are a credible team with (now) a 6-game win streak (in spite of some bad losses earlier). But I would argue that the Committee ought to at least look at the Gophers (in spite of a bad Illinois loss, for instance).

    But here's where the Gophers stand right now (which is only 3 games from the end of the main season) ...

    RPI Team (Record)
    101 Minnesota (8-7)

    An RPI low-pass filter would simply lop them off from any NCAA consideration.

    And rightfully so if we don't get any more wins.

    But this is a very weird and almost once-in-a-century tsunami of events surrounding the Gophers current situation.

    First of all, we have several serious problems that make our RPI doubly bad. The first problem is legit, that string of B1G losses, and we need to get several wins to offset those, for sure. The second problem is that we have a new coach, but she had no control over the schedule, which was largely set by the departing coach. Sure, maybe we could have stiffed some of those teams on their game at the last minute, but that would have been gauche at a minimum, and potentially lawsuits at a max. The third related problem is then that the former coach had an almost macabre desire to play ridiculously weak NC teams - the cupcakes, as we call them. As pointed out, we not only got stuck with a schedule that we wouldn't have wanted (if we had anything to say about it), but the schedule we got stuck with is probably the worst/most-cupcake NC schedule that any B1G team has competed against, over the entire course of history of the Big Ten.

    Then you add to that the obscure mathematical/statistical features of the RPI (which is not suited to being a measure of good basketball quality, but more suited to measuring strength of a team's schedule, since 3/4 of the stat is just SoS-related).

    So we already made ourselves a bubble-caliber team on our own doing. But then the RPI stat takes that, and compounds it by making the RPI statistic to be worsened so much, that it's over 100 (101), when any reasonable metric would have us at 40-ish.

    So if the committee just discards us onto the trash heap without even considering us, only due to the conjectured 100 RPI cutoff, then we got a bad deal. Since we're really a 40-ish bubble team, we should have at least been considered. 40 is less than 100, last time I checked. The distorted mathematics of the RPI transforms what should have been a 40-ish ranking into a 101 ranking.

    Granted, we need a few wins to make that 40-ish bubble rating more like a 30-ish rating, even if they were literally consider us a 40.

    But again compounding matters is that even after we get a conjectured 3 more good wins, so that our true-valued rating ought to be 30-ish, the RPI is still going to call us 80-ish. The extra padding of +50 ranking slots comes from the bad luck of getting stuck with a horrible cupcake SoS that we didn't ask for, plus the unfortunate mal-design of the RPI metric to begin with.

    So even if they use a seemingly quite reasonable 80-RPI low-pass filter, we might not even make that cut, in spite of potentially getting 3 more wins. 3 more wins might make us into a should-be-rated 30th place team, but instead, when RPI gets done turning data into garbage, you end up with an 80th ranked RPI. If the Committee sets a low-pass RPI filter at 80, then we might be done. Unless we perform even more miraculously (and say, win out the regular season).

    Plus there were some earlier comment on the order of, it's never or hardly ever happened that a team got into the playoffs with an RPI over 60.

    So the bad deal is that the Lady Gophers got hit by a tsunami of compound problems, some of their own making, but most just circumstances beyond their control (for instance, if there are any Statistics majors among the Gopher team, they probably weren't even born yet when the RPI got mal-designed, so they did not have the option to go to that meeting of statistical idiots who designed RPI, and tell them what a bunch of retards they were being).
    Last edited by CutDownTheNet; 02-20-2019 at 03:26 PM.

  4. #79

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Ignatius L Hoops View Post
    It's not just the non-conference schedule. The conference losses (and schedule) are also a major drag on Minnesota's RPI. Minnesota's only top 50 RPI conference win is Rutgers. We've played and lost to Iowa, Michigan and Michigan State (Indiana's RPI rose above 50 with the loss to Rutgers.

    Yes, the next three games could improve the conference ranking. But, currently, four of our 15 games were against Penn State (3-11), Illinois (a 2-13 loss) and Wisconsin (twice at 3-11). Other than Rutgers the only conference teams with winning record that we've defeated are 8-7 (Northwestern and Purdue). In a ranking system that only cares about wins and losses that doesn't move the needle.
    The problem is surely half of our own making due to the string of B1G losses - the hole we're now trying to dig our way out of.

    Very good point too, that we kinda had some bad luck in who we drew to play in-conference. We get to play Wisconsin twice? Nice short bus ride, but seriously, that don't help our SoS any. And Illinois? - Then we add insult to injury by losing that one too. That was the biggest ouch. We get to play MSU a second time, so maybe that helps - but we better win against MSU - it's almost a must-win game, and MSU is not a pushover.

    So our work is cut out for us.

  5. #80

    Default

    There's no question RPI plays a key role on who's in and who's out. Many of the other criteria help set seedings for the ins and decide the bubble burst for the outs. Flawed as RPI is, it's the only criteria examining the whole field in relation to each other. It's the only non-anecdotal criteria.

    Two years ago Michigan was famously left out of the NCAA's. I think the RPI "Team Sheet" was the major factor. Michigan had a 46 RPI and a 101 SOS-generally solid credentials for a power 5 conference team. The Wolverines were 11-5 in conference and 28-9 overall. They lost to Michigan State in the first round of the B1G tournament.

    But, the RPI details were not good. Six of their B1G wins were against the truly terrible PSU, Rutgers, Wisconsin and Illinois. All four of those teams had RPI's 196 and over. At the opposite end of the spectrum, Michigan had no RPI top 50 wins. They played 3 teams ranked in the top 25 and 3 teams ranked 26-50. They lost all six. It seemed logical to me actually; but certainly not to the Wolverines.

    This season, Minnesota's poor B1G start eliminated the buffer or popped the bubble. Take your pick. As Lindsay said, the team underachieved. Wins are the only antidote.

  6. #81

    Default

    Purely by RPI, after yesterday's games, here's how the B1G shakes out:

    In the NCAA
    9 Iowa
    14 Maryland
    25 Rutgers
    43 Michigan

    On the Bubble
    47 Michigan State
    48 Indiana

    Out
    73 Purdue
    78 Ohio State
    82 Nebraska
    101 Minnesota
    117 Northwestern
    131 Penn State
    184 Wisconsin
    196 Illinois

  7. #82

    Default

    Indiana only went up 6 spots after beating Iowa whos got a higher rpi than maryland. Gophers only chance of a tourney birth is most likely to win the big ten tourney.

  8. #83

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by whalenfan View Post
    Indiana only went up 6 spots after beating Iowa whos got a higher rpi than maryland. Gophers only chance of a tourney birth is most likely to win the big ten tourney.
    Yes, winning the B1G Tourney is pretty much the only path to the NCAAs at this point - although that doesn’t minimize the importance of winning the Rutgers and Michigan State games as prep for the B1G.

    We have so many games on the books at this point that one game doesn’t move the needle much.

    Our RPI didn’t budge from #101 after the Maryland game, although our SoS Rank advanced to #143 from a recent #149.

    Since RPI is mostly a measure of SoS, we gained enough of a bump in RPI just from playing Maryland, such that that bump perfectly offset the small decrement we got from losing. Of course, we had them all but beat, so if we’d just been able to play 50 more seconds of basketball, then instead of the small decrement from losing, we would have gotten a small increment from winning.

    By some estimation calculations that would make my brain hurt to try to explain, I can make a very approximate guess that a win at Maryland would have moved the RPI needle to about #90 instead of the current #101.

    Of course, Rutgers and Michigan State do not have the RPI rating that Maryland has, so although just playing them will give us an RPI bump - not as big a one as playing Maryland did.

    RealtimeRPI Gamer, who still predicts that we lose to Rutgers but win at home against MSU, now predicts a final (pre-B1G-tourney) RPI of #92 and SoS of #116.

    The SoS won’t budge much from #116. [Unless Arkansas Pine Bluff and Coppin State win out the rest of their seasons.]

    If we want to realize the RPI #92, then we are allowed to lose to Rutgers but need to beat MSU. If we beat Rutgers as well as MSU then we could garner an 85ish RPI.

    That could have been 75ish by playing 50 more seconds of basketball in Maryland. A #85 RPI is not going to impress the Committee.

  9. #84

    Default

    https://extra.ncaa.org/solutions/rpi...%202-24-19.pdf

    RPI with SOS and conference record through games of 2-24-19. Yes, it will change after a rather full slate of important games tonight.

    7 Iowa 9 (12-4)
    13 Maryland 83 (13-3)
    26 Rutgers 26 (10-5)
    39 Michigan State 52 (8-8)
    44 Michigan 67 (10-7)

    49 Indiana 42 (7-9)

    71 Purdue 43 (8-8)
    75 Ohio State 32 (9-7)
    79 Nebraska 23 (8-8)
    106 Minnesota 189 (8-8)
    117 Northwestern 102 (8-8)
    126 Penn State 27 (5-11)
    181 Wisconsin 156 (4-11)
    210 Illinois 109 (2-15)

  10. #85

    Default

    NCAA RPI through games of 3 March including SOS and B1G record.

    Ins:
    9 Iowa 14 (15-4)
    14 Maryland 91 (15-3)
    25 Rutgers 28 (13-5)

    Nervous:
    41 Michigan State 52 (9-9)
    44 Michigan 82 (11-7)

    Bubble:
    49 Indiana 47 (8-10)

    Outs:
    82 Nebraska 22 (9-9)
    85 Ohio State 32 (10-8)
    87 Purdue 37 (8-10)
    97 Minnesota 161 (9-9)
    109 Northwestern 89 (9-9)
    145 Penn State 27 (5-13)
    191 Wisconsin 143 (4-14)
    211 Illinois 99 (2-16)

  11. #86

    Default

    Here’s to hoping Minnesota knocks Indiana out of the tournament (in Charlie Creme’s mind. They’re already out in my mind) and they hurt the seedings of the other teams locked into the tournament.

  12. #87

    Default

    Does anybody with the more insider information know anything about not having a holiday tournament this year? Was it because they blew the budget on the Italy trip? I’m sure Italy was a great experience for the players, but not having a holiday tournament probably contributed to the Gopher poor SOS. Holiday tournaments usually have your better teams. Any insight?

    In any case, even though the team likely takes a step back next year with the loss of four seniors, I’m looking forward to a more challenging off season schedule.

  13. #88

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shades View Post
    Does anybody with the more insider information know anything about not having a holiday tournament this year? Was it because they blew the budget on the Italy trip? Iím sure Italy was a great experience for the players, but not having a holiday tournament probably contributed to the Gopher poor SOS. Holiday tournaments usually have your better teams. Any insight?

    In any case, even though the team likely takes a step back next year with the loss of four seniors, Iím looking forward to a more challenging off season schedule.
    I dont believe it had anything to do with the budget. The visiting and playing overseas is planned every 4 years.
    I believe Stollings had already set the schedule during the holidays and they still have to honor playing away unless they buy back those games.
    So it could be another year before they can go to holiday tournaments.
    I hope they can get out of playing Arkansas pine bluff and Cornell

    Sent from my SM-G930V using Tapatalk

  14. #89

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Shades View Post
    Here’s to hoping Minnesota knocks Indiana out of the tournament (in Charlie Creme’s mind. They’re already out in my mind) and they hurt the seedings of the other teams locked into the tournament.
    Charlie still has Indiana In, in the Last Four In group. They should be Out already to my way of thinking, since they’re 8-10 in the Big Ten, and you shouldn’t be in the NCAAs if you can’t beat half of your peers in your conference. Gophers went 9-9 and just barely beat half their peers.

    With about equal offense stats and 5 points better defense, hopefully we parley that onto a victory on Thursday, moving them to 8-11. At 1.5 games below even, I don’t think Charlie can cling on to the Indiana myth.

    With them out, that makes room for the Gophers if we win the B1G Tourney. Or looking at it another way, if we do win the B1G, and the Committee most likely doesn’t want to go to 7 Big Ten teams, then in that case Indiana is Out for sure.
    Last edited by CutDownTheNet; 03-04-2019 at 05:33 PM.

  15. #90

    Default

    NCAA RPI with SOS through Sunday's B1G tournament. The B1G is close to having eight teams with above 100 RPI.

    INS:
    7 Iowa 7
    14 Maryland 70
    28 Rutgers 28
    42 Michigan State 46 (6-5 versus RPI top 50; Best RPI wins: Oregon, Iowa, Maryland, Rutgers, Michigan and Indiana)

    NERVOUS
    45 Michigan 46 (4-10 versus RPI top 50; Best RPI wins: Iowa, Rutgers, Missouri, Indiana)

    BUBBLE:
    46 Indiana (5-6 versus RPI top 50: Best RPI wins: Iowa, UCLA, South Dakota, Michigan State and Michigan)

    OUTS:
    91 Purdue 49
    94 Nebraska 24
    102 Ohio State 38
    108 Minnesota 171 (4-6 versus RPI top 50; Best RPI wins: Syracuse, Rutgers, Michigan State, Indiana)
    116 Northwestern 85
    141 Texas Tech 52 (0-9 versus RPI top 50)
    146 Penn State 35
    184 Wisconsin 163
    225 Illinois 109

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •