Monday NCAA RPI 2019-2020

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63

NCAA RPI for B1G teams through games of 8 December 2019. They haven't issued the Nitty-Gritty Sheet yet so I'll add Strength of Schedule later.

10 Northwestern (7-1)
12 Ohio State (6-3)
19 Indiana (8-1)
24 Rutgers (8-1)
25 Purdue (7-2)
26 Iowa (6-2)
39 Michigan (8-1)
42 Maryland (8-2)
55 Wisconsin (6-3)
59 Minnesota (7-1)
81 Nebraska (8-1)
100 Michigan State (6-2)
155 Illinois (6-2)
272 Penn State (5-4)
 

thatjanelpick

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
498
Reaction score
10
Points
18
Ironic that Notre Dame, typically scheduled as an RPI boost, is dragging down the RPIs of Michigan State, Minnesota and Michigan.
 

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63
Gopher opponent's RPI thus far:

2 Missouri State (8-1)
76 Arizona State (7-2)
79 Notre Dame (5-6)
124 Montana State (4-3)
176 Milwaukee (3-6)
255 Vermont (4-6)
260 American (2-6)
315 Bryant (1-8)
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
Gopher opponent's RPI thus far:

2 Missouri State (8-1)
76 Arizona State (7-2)
79 Notre Dame (5-6)
124 Montana State (4-3)
176 Milwaukee (3-6)
255 Vermont (4-6)
260 American (2-6)
315 Bryant (1-8)
This emphasizes a couple things:

Missouri State is a better team than most thought, going into the season. Note that only one team has beat them so far. They're currently 2nd in RPI (although they'll float down a bit during their league season). Thus we get an RPI boost just from playing them. Not sure, but I conjecture that our RPI boost from playing them might exceed our RPI drop from losing to them. Also (speaking only of hypotheticals, here), it's comforting to know that we probably could have easily been the second team to have beat a #2 RPI team, if only we hadn't let them get away with the trick of completely focusing (early-game) on getting T. Bello into serious foul trouble, to get her on the bench early and often.

Arizona State, Notre Dame and Montana State are pretty good wins for us. Notre Dame (especially) will go to a better RPI later in the season (I'm pretty sure), even though all three of these are, technically speaking, dragging down our SoS right now.

At an RPI of 260 currently, American is a drag on our SoS, but that's OK - we learned a lot by playing them. We (hopefully) learned what a game-killer it can be not do defend properly against the back-cut. We learned how scary it can be to have Pitts in foul trouble most of the game. We also learned we can conceivably grunt out a win, even without Pitts, but at the same time we learned how much easier this is to do with Pitts coming back in for the final few minutes. Also, American is rumored to ultimately be a leader within their league, so hopefully their RPI will be getting better later in the season, and thus less of a drag on our SoS.
 

tripledouble

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2016
Messages
673
Reaction score
16
Points
18
I got tired of listening to myself complain about last year's soft non-conference schedule. This year's schedule has been better and I applaud the Gophers for that. That being said, I hope they continue to upgrade next year. The tournament in the Bahamas should certainly help with that. The non-conference schedule is a major factor when NCAA tourney selection time rolls around, especially for bubble teams. IMO, whoever set up last year's NC schedule should have lost their job, unless they were instructed to do so. And it should be pointed out that this schedule wasn't Whalen's doing...probably more on the previous coaching regime. I'm a huge fan of Whalen, but as she moves forward with this program, it's going to be incumbent on her to routinely make the NCAA tourney, and a tough NC schedule is imperative to accomplish that.
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28

NCAA RPI for B1G teams through games of 8 December 2019. They haven't issued the Nitty-Gritty Sheet yet so I'll add Strength of Schedule later.

10 Northwestern (7-1)
12 Ohio State (6-3)
19 Indiana (8-1)
24 Rutgers (8-1)
25 Purdue (7-2)
26 Iowa (6-2)
39 Michigan (8-1)
42 Maryland (8-2)
55 Wisconsin (6-3)
59 Minnesota (7-1)
81 Nebraska (8-1)
100 Michigan State (6-2)
155 Illinois (6-2)
272 Penn State (5-4)
Update: This post has been updated with the correct data, and the comments suitably updated. The initial post mistakenly used data from the Warren Nolan website for last-year’s season.

Iggy, I'll let you fill in the SoS later from NCAA data, but I want to contrast the above current (after game 8) RPIs to the projected end-of-season RPIs. For this I'll use Warren Nolan data. Some of us (including me) are liking that website better than RealtimeRPI and even better than the official NCAA RPI website. For one thing, Warren Nolan has Nitty Gritty sheets and Team Sheets and the whole nine yards. It also might update even earlier Monday morning than the proper NCAA site (two samples show that Gopher data doesn't show up at NCAA until 10 AM-ish). Importantly, I'm not sure how much I trust the supposedly official NCAA RPI site anymore. I found five of our players missing from the NCAA individual statistics website, so how much confidence does that give me that even their won/loss data is correct, or up-to-date (other teams may report their weekend results even later than Minnesota does). Also, in the past RealtimeRPI has been shown to be prone to errors.

Importantly for this post, the end-of-season projections that the RealtimeRPI Gamer algorithm produces have been shown to be, well, let's just say wackier than they need be early in the season (where, admittedly, a bit of wackiness is expected). But the end-of-season RPI projection algorithm used by Warren Nolan seems to be, well, let's just say quite a bit less wacky than Gamer.

Projected End of Season RPIs and Charlie Creme Bracketology

RPI Team W-L (Conf W-L) SoS Charlie
#5 Maryland 27-2 (18-0) 18 #13-16
#7 Indiana 27-3 (16-2) 15 #9-12
#11 Missouri State 25-4 (16-2) 43 #17-20
#23 Rutgers 25-4 (15-3) 72 #25-28
#24 Northwestern 23-6 (13-5) 42 #37-40
#33 Michigan State 21-8 (12-6) 47 #25-28
#47 Minnesota 20-9 (10-8) 39 #21-24
#57 Michigan 19-10 (10-8) 40 #21-24
#70 Iowa 16-13 (8-10) 22 #33-36
#77 Ohio State 13-16 (6-12) 7 #41-44
#84 Nebraska 18-11 (8-10) 57 #45-48
#95 Purdue 15-15 (6-12) 25 #29-32
#170 Notre Dame 9-21 (4-14) 19 out
#182 Wisconsin 10-19 (2-16) 36 out
#217 Illinois 9-20 (1-17) 55 out
#219 Penn State 7-22 (1-17) 48 out

Charlie Creme’s currently projected brackets (on right) are a range, scaled to 64 teams, from his 1-16 in-region ratings. Note that he projects Notre Dame (with projected RPI #170) to be out for the first time ever (probably). Also out are Penn State, Illinois and Wisconsin (but you’d expect that with projected end-of-season RPIs of #219, #217 and #182.

But looking at the mid-range of teams from Minnesota to Purdue, we see that Charlie currently has all those teams in; whereas by their Nolan-projected RPIs you’d expect Minnesota and Michigan at least to be on the bubble, and the set {Iowa, Ohio State, Nebraska, Purdue} to most likely be out. What gives?

Well, Charlie’s predictions are most likely more accurate, so perhaps that means that Warren Nolan’s RPI projections are excessively low-ball.

If you believed those estimated end-of-season RPIs and set a hard cutoff at #64, then {Iowa, Ohio State, Nebraska, Purdue} would miss out on the Big Dance. Warren Nolan would have 7 Big-Ten teams in (a more typical number), whereas Charlie Creme currently thinks that the Big Ten is so good this year that 11 of its 14 teams deserve to go to the tournament.

What do I mean by “hard cutoff”? Well, we know that the NCAA Selection Committee does consider other factors besides RPI, but let’s do a thought experiment in which we pretend that the committee only looks at RPI using a fixed dividing line between in and out (just to see the impact of RPI, since RPI is indeed a major factor). In that case, the hard cutoff would be closer to 48 than the naive 64 that I cited above. That’s due to the effect of automatic bids. Using Charlie’s current bracket as an exemplar, we see by inspection that the bottom 16 “in” spots are occupied by automatic bid teams that otherwise would not make it in. This means that if a hard cutoff were to be used, you’d have to first reserve slots 49-64 for automatic-bid teams, and then set the RPI hard cutoff at 48. Note that Warren Nolan projects an end-of-season RPI of #47 for Minnesota. So by an RPI hard-cutoff approach, Nolan projects the Gophers to be on the Bubble (as noted by @thatjanelpick and others). (Yet Charlie calls us an end-of-season Top-25 team. We’ll get back to that, below.)

By Nolan’s projections (and a thought-experiment assumption of a hard cutoff at RPI #48), Michigan would be just out at a projected RPI of #57. Something as simple as Michigan beating Minnesota could flip that, putting Michigan in and Minnesota out (in our thought experiment). So in any RPI-only based selection criterion, we’d have to hit a target RPI of #48 or better to be in (never mind whether or not the AP or Coaches Poll rated us a Top-25 team). This gets to the essence of why RPI is stupid, as I’ll expand on in the next several paragraphs.

So maybe Warren Nolan’s RPI projection algorithm is just inaccurate. But what if Warren Nolan and Charlie Creme are both right? That could actually happen if the Big Ten is super strong this year. In that scenario, Charlie’s numbers (on the right) would accurately reflect the relative qualities of the teams, but the end-of-season RPIs (that are supposed to be representative of the relative qualities of the teams, but aren’t) for the Big Ten would be smeared all over the spectrum from #5 to #95 for the teams that Charlie thinks should be in. This could result in a real dilemma, since it would explicitly demonstrate how bad RPI is as an intended metric to rank the relative quality of teams.

How the latter might come about could be due to the following fatal flaw in the RPI metric along with a Creme-conjectured situation in which the Big Ten might have 11 good teams and 3 bad teams this year. There are a lot of in-conference Big-Ten games in the season, and each game must have both a winner and loser. All the B1G games are a W for somebody and an L for somebody, when integrated over the entire conference schedule. But the Losses are highly concentrated among the worst 3 teams. That’s why (as Warren Nolan predicts) the 3 worst Big-Ten teams end up with horrible RPIs of #219, #217 and #182. But every team in the B1G has to play these three horrible-RPI teams (some twice). But RPI is mostly a measure of how horrible-versus-good-RPI are the teams that you play. So those three horrible-RPI Big-Ten teams really badly drag down the RPI of the 11 good teams in the Big Ten. In addition to whatever other non-conference bad-RPI teams that you were unfortunate to schedule. In summary, the RPI of the 11 good B1G teams gets badly dragged down by the bad RPIs of the 3 bad teams.

Think about that for a second. The very fact that the Big Ten is so really good this year (in fact it is conjectured by Creme to have 11 out of 14 teams as “good teams”) is responsible for the Big Ten to collectively have its RPIs dragged into the gutter. In this oddball scenario (which very well might happen this year), the very excellence of the Big Ten might result in worse RPIs such that fewer than usual Big-Ten teams make it into the tournament if they use a simple RPI cutoff like #48. Unless someone with common sense and basketball knowledge (like Charlie Creme) can prevail on the Committee to accept Big-Ten teams with RPIs ranging from #47 to #95. We all know that the Gophers didn’t get in last year with a SoS-dragged-down RPI of #102, so fat chance that Purdue will get in with a #95.

This is another example of how RPI is not a very good measure of relative team quality, since in certain scenarios it is an anti-measure, not a measure.

The very strong potential of such an anti-measure RPI effect on the super-strong Big Ten this year, with the very strength of the Big Ten putting a millstone on the neck of Big-Ten teams’ RPIs, makes it that much more important for Big-Ten teams “not to play” non-conference teams expected to have very bad RPIs. On the positive side, Whalen has made some huge improvements to our non-conference schedule this year (over the Marlene-generated bad SoS of last year). But on the negative side, we’re still playing too many charity teams. See the adjacent post on current RPIs of our opponents thus far. Ironically, our gift to American of playing them, not only nearly resulted in a really bad loss, but ironically may yet end up being the defining factor that boots Minnesota out of NCAA Tournament play (just because we played them and thus received a big kick in the (a)S(o)S). All for the convenience of picking up another non-conf road game on our swing through D.C. Now we have to fight that much harder to keep our RPI better than #48 in the Big-Ten season. Moral of the story: Try to schedule zero non-conf games against teams that will end up with an RPI worse than #200.

Note that Notre Dame should end up with an RPI of #170. So as @thatjanelpick notes, we ironically get no benefit just from playing the Irish, although we do get some small benefit from beating them.

For one thing, Northwestern whose RPI #10 now (currently 1st in the B1G), will move to the middle of the pack. Not to worry, NW is not going to beat us all. It's current position at the top of the RPI stack is just due to a good record so far plus a really good SoS so far. Ohio State who ranks at #12 RPI (2nd in the B1G) right now, does so because of an even better SoS than NW (plus a so-so record so far). Ohio State will move way down in RPI, but it’s final SoS is projected at 7. This is strong enough to put its projected RPI over Nebraska in spite of a projected losing record for Ohio State and a winning record for Nebraska. The Ohio State Coach was shrewd. In a rebuilding year, not only did he go out and get a strong rookie class, but also lined up a tough schedule that just might keep them in the playoffs in spite of a losing record (whereas last year the Gophers had a winning record but were booted out of the playoffs simply due to a poor SoS.

Indiana who is #19 RPI now (versus Maryland's #42) will not be better than Maryland at end of season. Maryland is projected to come in first in the Big Ten at RPI #5, whereas it thinks Indiana ends up right behind it with a #7 RPI. In both cases it thinks these teams will have great records along with fairly strong SoSes, thus the good RPIs.

Across the board, in comparing the two tables, the projected end-of-season RPIs look more sensible than current RPIs. Although I don’t know who thought NW would be so good. And I’m not sure I would have picked Indiana for second place.

Minnesota ends up in 6th place in projected RPI at #47 with a projected SoS of 38. I think (or at least hope) that Minnesota does better than the projected 20-9 (10-8) record (10-1 non-conference) record. But that does require that we win-out the remaining non-conference, plus win some tough Big-Ten games.

In comparison to the projected #47 RPI ranking, Charlie Creme’s bracketology assessment puts the Gophers at an NCAA rank ranging from about #21 to #24. That’s quite literally half the ranking number than what Warren Nolan’s RPI projection would have us at. Charlie essentially has us on the tail of the AP Top-25 poll by end of season. Again, the great discrepancy, which I conjectured above might well be a simple mathematical result of the superiority of the Big Ten this year in conjunction with the stupidity of the RPI. Could our season end up on the AP ranked teams list and the Big Dance Bubble at the same time?

We can conclude that:

(a) Current RPIs after 8 games are whack.

(b) RealtimeRPI's Gamer end-of-season predictions are whack.

(c) Warren Nolan's end-of-season predictions are less whack, but perhaps not completely accurate (we’ll see). Warren Nolan is also a really nice website for current RPI information - perhaps even better than the official NCAA RPI site.

(d) The end-of-season projections are seemingly way off from a more realistic estimate from Charlie Creme’s bracketology. Although one possibility is just inaccuracy in the Warren Nolan projections, we fear that there may be something more evil in play here. Specifically, it could be that the very quality of (all but 3 of) the Big Ten this year, will assess a stiff RPI penalty to the 11 quality Big-Ten teams, simply because they are forced to play all the Big Ten teams, (especially) including the 3 bad ones who all have really bad RPIs that will drag down the RPIs of the good B1G teams. If so, this is just another sign that RPI is mathematically invalid and bankrupt as an intended quality metric. The way RPI is currently defined is just wrong (if we want it to be a measure of how good the teams are, which we do). Even a change of emphasis from the current RPI ~ 75% * SoS + 25% * WonLossFactor to an alternate formulation such as (as I'll call it) RPI5050 ~ 50% * SoS + 50% * WonLossFactor, would be a huge step in the right direction to "right the ship" on the already-sunk-to-the-bottom-of-the-ocean RPI metric (and probably an improvement over NET as well).

(e) I will leave this point in, even though it was my initial use of wrong-year Warren Nolan data that triggered the thought - since on further consideration, the thought is probably still valid. The differences between Gamer's EoS projections and Warren Nolan's EoS projections might turn out to be more severe than one might expect (especially early in the season). There is a strong potential of a mathematical instability in such projections agorithms, as follows. A perhaps seemingly small error in your projection algorithm can be exponentially magnified in its effects by the compounding of errors that occurs due to the fact that for end-of-season predictions, your RPIs are wrong, which makes your SoSes wrong, and wrong SoSes recursively feedback into even-further-wrong RPIs, which continue to compound (ad infinitum) to make your EoS projections wronger and wronger, almost without end. That's how you could conceivably get Warren Nolan projections that disagree with Gamer projections by a lot in spite of starting out with the same (limited) historical won/loss data. I currently have no evidence that this happens in practice; but it’s easy to see how it could happen. A good analogy would be that this potential occurrence (if it happens) would be somewhat similar to the Butterfly Effect or any similar chaotic process.
 
Last edited:

Katogopher

Member
Joined
Jan 4, 2018
Messages
157
Reaction score
13
Points
18
Ok probably not the right thread, but related to RPI, Charlie Crete’s latest bracketology has 11B1G Teams in the NCAA Tourney leading all conferences. Lot’s to shake out over the season but would be nice to have the B1G relevant in WBB again.
 

thatjanelpick

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
498
Reaction score
10
Points
18
Iggy, I'll let you fill in the SoS later from NCAA data, but I want to contrast to the above current (after game 8) RPIs to the projected end-of-season RPIs. For this I'll use Warren Nolan data. Some of us (including me) are liking that website better than RealtimeRPI and even better than the official NCAA RPI website. For one thing, Warren Nolan has Nitty Gritty sheets and Team Sheets and the whole nine yards. It also might update even earlier Monday morning than the proper NCAA site (two samples show that Gopher data doesn't show up at NCAA until 10 AM-ish). Importantly, I'm not sure how much I trust the supposedly official NCAA RPI site anymore. I found five of our players missing from the NCAA individual statistics website, so how much confidence does that give me that even their won/loss data is even correct, or up-to-date (other teams may report their weekend results even later than Minnesota does). Also, in the past RealtimeRPI has been shown to be prone to errors.

Importantly for this post, the end-of-season projections that the RealtimeRPI Gamer algorithm produces have been shown to be, well, let's just say wackier than they need be early in the season (where, admittedly, a bit of wackiness is expected). But the end-of-season RPI projection algorithm used by Warren Nolan seems to be, well, let's just say quite a bit less wacky than Gamer (Note: Strike the latter comment - see below for details why Warren Nolan projections seem even whackier than Gamer projections). So let me quote the Warren-Nolan-projected end-of-season RPI for the B1G (plus Notre Dame and Missouri State) for comparison to the above current RPIs. (Note, however, one negative thing about their predictions is that the predictions seem out of date, since Notre Dame has already lost more than they predict, including our defeat of them. So these must be taken with a grain of salt, apparently.)

#Predicted-EoS-RPI-Rank Team (Predicted Won-Loss) Predicted-EoS-SoS
#2 Notre Dame (35-4) 1
#7 Iowa (29-7) 8
#15 Maryland (29-5) 60
#30 Rutgers (23-10) 37
#37 Michigan State (21-12) 36
#40 Indiana (21-13) 33
#41 Missouri State (25-10) 76
#42 Michigan (22-12) 57
#71 Northwestern (21-15) 56
#90 Purdue (19-15) 54
#91 Nebraska (14-16) 30
#102 Minnesota (21-11) 116
#104 Ohio State (15-15) 50
#144 Penn State (12-18) 47
#184 Wisconsin (15-18) 126
#216 Illinois (10-20) 95

OK, I take it all back. My confidence in Warren Nolan (in its end-of-season predictions, anyway) is completely shaken. They seem to be even more whack than Gamer's predictions - which is the opposite of what I expected (suggestion to self: don't write your post according to expectations and then later prove yourself wrong!).

Gamer, although very whack on individual game outcome predictions, does predict a better season record for the Gophers than Warren Nolan does. Gamer projects an overall final 21-8 record for the Gophers, compared to Warren Nolan's 21-11 projection. That's not even the same number of games, so maybe Warren Nolan projects B1G Tourney results too? In any event, I think both project too low for the Gophers.

Gamer predicts an EoS RPI of 24 and an SoS of 37. Compared to Warren Nolan's prediction of RPI of 102 and SoS of 116.

Well, I guess Warren Nolan's EoS projections are a bunch of BS. But, maybe it's current RPI statistics are OK (although I'm starting to doubt that too). So I guess this exercise was mainly a waste, but let's see what we can salvage.

Note that (even if Warren Nolan's EoS projections are way off base) to the extent that there is anything valid to those projections, Notre Dame should end up higher in the RPI than they are right now.

For one thing, Northwestern whose RPI #10 now, will move to the middle of the pack. Not to worry, NW is not going to beat us all. It's current position at the top of the RPI stack is just due to a good record so far plus a really good SoS so far. Ohio State who ranks at #12 RPI right now, does so because of an even better SoS than NW (plus a so-so record so far). Indiana who is #19 RPI now (versus Maryland's #42) will not be better than Maryland at end of season. Also, Warren Nolan's suggestion that Iowa will best Maryland in RPI in the end, seems pretty whack too.

Warren Nolan's suggestion that Minnesota will have a 100+ RPI at end of season is very whack. We're going to make the tournament. I'd put money on it

All we can conclude is that:

(a) Current RPIs after 8 games are whack.

(b) RealtimeRPI's Gamer end-of-season predictions are whack.

(c) Warren Nolan's end-of-season predictions are (amazingly) even more whack than Gamer's (although Warren Nolan is a really nice website for current RPI information - perhaps even better than the official NCAA RPI site).

(d) Even though the end-of-season projections are seemingly way off from any sort of reality, we can notice that of those B1G teams that are (mistakenly) projected to be atop the Big-Ten heap, the way that they make it there is predominantly via really good Strength of Schedule, and not so much via outstanding won-loss records. That's a natural effect of the way RPI is defined to be mostly a measure of Strength of Schedule with a little bit of Won-Loss record thrown in to partially temper the latter. The way RPI is currently defined is just wrong (if we want it to be a measure of how good the teams are, which we do). Even a change of emphasis from the current RPI ~ 75% * SoS + 25% * WonLossFactor to an alternate formulation such as (as I'll call it) RPI5050 ~ 50% * SoS + 50% * WonLossFactor, would be a huge step in the right direction to "right the ship" on the already sunk-to-the-bottom-of-the-ocean RPI metric (and probably an improvement over NET as well).

(e) The extreme (to the point of being absurd) differences between Gamer's EoS projections and Warren Nolan's EoS projections demonstrate the strong potential of a mathematical instability in such projections agorithms, as follows. A perhaps seemingly small error in your projection algorithm can be exponentially magnified in its effects by the compounding of errors that occurs due to the fact that for end-of-season predictions, your RPIs are wrong, which makes your SoSes wrong, and wrong SoSes recursively feedback into even-further-wrong RPIs, which continue to compound (ad infinitum) to make your EoS projections wronger and wronger, almost without end. That's how you can get Warren Nolan projections that disagree with Gamer projections so much that they look like they're both from different Planets (neither of which is Earth).
Are you reading the wrong year, maybe? Nolan currently projects a 47 RPI and a 40 SOS (both of which would put the Gophers on the bubble). Tangentially, those last handful of games this season are going to be TOUGH.
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
Are you reading the wrong year, maybe? Nolan currently projects a 47 RPI and a 40 SOS (both of which would put the Gophers on the bubble). Tangentially, those last handful of games this season are going to be TOUGH.
Yes, thanks @thatjanelpick - that’s exactly what happened - I got fooled by a combination of fine print on the page plus Google misdirecting me. Warren Nolan puts a date in medium font on the upper left, and that’s the ending year not the starting year (but I saw 2019 and thought it was the starting year, so got fooled). I got there via Google and clicked on what looked like the main link (which I mistakenly figured was the latest season). Nope. I got what I call “Not OK, Googled.” I think Google search engine has gone downhill lately, and now it doesn’t give me what I’m searching for, but rather what *most* people are looking for (that coincidentally has a lot of the same words of what I’m looking for). Well, what Warren Nolan site have most people looked for most recently? Last season’s RPIs (2018-2019) - hardly anyone but me and @thatjanelpick and a few others of you are looking at the 2019-2020 RPIs already. Not OK, Google.

So if you search for the Warren Nolan RPIs, include “2020” in the search string. And make sure you see “2020” on the upper left of the data page.

I think I’ll go back and edit my earlier post with the right data and then note it as updated when done.

Update: The previous post has now been updated with the correct data. Per the post by @Katogopher, I also added a column for Charlie Creme’s bracketology.
 
Last edited:

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
For the moment anyway, Minnesota is one slot ahead of Maryland in current RPI. The Gophers are at #42 (SoS 122) and the Terrapins at #43 (SoS 89 and an 8-2 record).

But in Nolan’s end-of-season projections, it still thinks Maryland is a #5 RPI. Minnesota has moved slightly off-bubble to an end-of-season projected RPI of #35 (from the bubbly #47).

It’s not the GW win per se that triggered the move, as it thought we beat GW pre-game as well. Perhaps it incorporates margin of victory in its model? Or perhaps other Big-Ten results from last night influenced its opinion?

In any event, it now thinks we go 12-6 in the Big Ten (improved from its pre-GW opinion of 10-8). It still thinks we win out the remainder of the non-conf season, for a projected record of 22-7. I think this is more aligned with our expectations as well.

Nolan estimates our end-of-season RPI at #35 with an SoS of 40.

Meanwhile, back at the RealtimeRPI ranch, Gamer has duly noted that we didn’t just squeak by GW by one point like it thought we would. But it thinks we go 11-7 in the Big Ten for an end-of-season RPI of #26 and an SoS of 40 (and a record of 21-8).

This doesn’t make sense, since Gamer projects a worse record but a better RPI (while both project the same SoS). Makes one think that one or the other of Gamer or Warren Nolan doesn’t even use the correct algorithm for computing RPI. At this point, I would be more suspect of Gamer than Nolan (simply because Nolan seems to have a better projection model).
 
Last edited:

thatjanelpick

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
498
Reaction score
10
Points
18
I feel like reckoning with Notre Dame is a big problem for both sites. Especially at the beginning of the season, I think last year's results are still a big factor, which becomes less the case as the season progresses. Last year's results are not going to be a good indicator at all of how Notre Dame does this year, in which they very likely will miss the NCAAs completely, so predicting how many wins they'll get -- which then plays into how many wins every team they play will get -- is a very widely moving target. This is true of other teams, as well, but I imagine few will have ND's year-to-year disparity.
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
I feel like reckoning with Notre Dame is a big problem for both sites. Especially at the beginning of the season, I think last year's results are still a big factor, which becomes less the case as the season progresses. Last year's results are not going to be a good indicator at all of how Notre Dame does this year, in which they very likely will miss the NCAAs completely, so predicting how many wins they'll get -- which then plays into how many wins every team they play will get -- is a very widely moving target. This is true of other teams, as well, but I imagine few will have ND's year-to-year disparity.
Warren Nolan puts ND at an end-of-season RPI of #171 with SoS of 17 and record of 9-21 (4-14 ACC).

That coupled with Charlie Creme’s current bracketology that puts ND as missing the Big Dance.

Gamer predicts them at #70 with SoS of 19 and record of 16-14 (10-8 ACC).

That’s a wide disparity in projections. Could it be that Gamer has a “memory” of last-year’s record but Nolan doesn’t?

It seems like Nolan (as well as Charlie) sort-of “knows” that all 5 of their starters graduated to the WNBA, but Gamer doesn’t.

I think it’s safe to say that the Irish season will be somewhere between the Nolan and Gamer projections. I saw signs of possible improvement over the season in their game with the Gophers. As someone stated, glad we played em early.
 
Last edited:

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63
I was waiting for today's NCAA Nitty-Gritty sheet which will contain strength of schedule; but nothing yet. Must be a NCAA holiday. They now update them every day (actually they've provided daily updates for a couple of years). I'm thinking instead of regular Monday RPI this should continue to morph into occasional RPI and analysis. Here's this week's:

Through Games of 15 December (RPI, Record and SOS (when available)):

10 Northwestern (7-1)
11 Ohio State (6-4)
12 Indiana (10-1)
23 Iowa (8-2)
25 Purdue (7-3)
38 Maryland (8-2)
41 Rutgers (10-1)
42 Minnesota (9-1)
46 Michigan (9-1)
58 Wisconsin (7-3)
84 Nebraska (9-1)
103 Michigan State (7-2)
153 Illinois (8-2)
236 Penn State (5-5)
 

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63

RPI through games of 22 December; Before start of conference games.

15 Indiana 10-2
16 Iowa 9-2
18 Northwestern 10-1
19 Purdue 9-3
21 Ohio State 7-4
33 Minnesota 10-1
41 Rutgers 10-1
43 Michigan 9-2
45 Maryland 9-2
83 Wisconsin 8-3
101 Nebraska 10-1
116 Illinois 9-2
137 Michigan State 7-4
225 Penn State 6-5
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28

RPI through games of 22 December; Before start of conference games.

15 Indiana 10-2
16 Iowa 9-2
18 Northwestern 10-1
19 Purdue 9-3
21 Ohio State 7-4
33 Minnesota 10-1
41 Rutgers 10-1
43 Michigan 9-2
45 Maryland 9-2
83 Wisconsin 8-3
101 Nebraska 10-1
116 Illinois 9-2
137 Michigan State 7-4
225 Penn State 6-5
Now that the non-conference season is over, and both RPI and Creme’s bracketology have been updated, let’s update the projected end-of-season RPI data to as of today (Monday, 12/23/2019) from the Warren Nolan projections, and compare that to Charlie Creme’s latest rankings implied by his bracketology.

Projected End of Season RPIs and Charlie Creme Bracketology

RPI Team W-L (Conf W-L) SoS Charlie
—————————————————-
#4 Maryland 27-2 (18-0) 16 #17-20
#6 Indiana 26-4 (16-2) 9 #13-16
#21 Minnesota 23-6 (13-5) 36 #21-24
#26 Rutgers 24-5 (14-4) 88 #25-28
#30 Northwestern 22-7 (12-6) 49 #33-36
#34 Iowa 19-10 (10-8) 22 #21-24
#49 Michigan 19-10 (10-8) 35 #25-28
—————————————————-
#56 Ohio State 14-15 (7-11) 6 #37-40
#86 Michigan State 18-11 (11-7) 70 out (was #25-28)
#108 Nebraska 17-12 (7-11) 60 out (was #45-48)
—————————————————-
#155 Purdue 12-18 (3-15) 29 #37-40
#176 Wisconsin 10-19 (2-16) 27 out
#178 Illinois 12-17 (3-15) 50 out
#241 Penn State 6-23 (0-18) 55 out

Among the Bad teams, Wisconsin and Illinois went up a couple RPI ranks but Penn State went down and is now projected to be winless by Nolan. And Purdue pretty-much jumps down to join the Bad teams at #155.

Michigan State, now at #86, jumps down from the Very Good teams to join the Good teams. At the same time, Michigan (#49) and in particular Iowa (#34) jump up to join the Very Good teams.

Minnesota (now #21) swaps places with Rutgers (now #26) and is now projected to end the season in third place by RPI within the Big Ten.

In summary (by RPI, anyway), 7 Big-Ten teams look Very Good (all with RPIs less than #50), and another 3 teams look Good, and 4 look Bad. It’s getting crowded at the top of the Big Ten.

By the way, Lehigh is predicted to have an end-of-season RPI of #45. That’s better than all Big Ten teams except the top-6 teams (Maryland, Indiana, us, Rutgers, Northwestern and Iowa), and gives us a little SoS boost. Does the fact that we handled Lehigh quite easily mean that we should have no trouble with Big-Ten teams with projected end-of-season RPIs worse than Lehigh’s? Well, we shall see. But I suspect that it’s more an indicator that RPI is a poor metric of teams’ basketball quality.

Creme’s bracketology is as of this Monday (12/23), where (as noted) he now picks 9 Big Ten teams (and not the 11 he picked previously) for the Big Dance. The Creme numbers are a range from 4*N-3 to 4*N where N represents his ranking of the team within its regional. For the most part, Creme’s rankings moved up or down with the RPI motion.

However there are a few anomalies in Charlie’s bracketology relative to projected end-of-season RPI rankings. He still considers Purdue to be (barely) in, in spite of a Nolan-projected end-of-season RPI of #155. Two teams that are now out per Charlie (in spite of much better projected end-of-season RPIs than Purdue) are Michigan State and Nebraska. Minnesota stayed the same in Charlie’s ranking within the bracketology, and is now equal to Iowa in his opinion (with both behind Maryland and Indiana).

Incidentally, in Charlie’s implied ranking, Indiana now gets a slightly higher rating than Maryland. But in Nolan’s projected end-of-season RPIs, Maryland still edged out Indiana.

Within the middle-three so-called Good teams, Ohio State is projected to have the worst record at end of season. But it is given the highest projected RPI merely because the Ohio State coach was smart enough to schedule tough teams, such that it ends up with the 6th best SoS in the NCAA Div I. Similarly, Charlie (apparently respecting projected RPI over won/loss record) counts Ohio State as in, but Michigan State and Nebraska as out of the Big Dance.
 
Last edited:

thatjanelpick

Member
Joined
Feb 16, 2016
Messages
498
Reaction score
10
Points
18
Creme likes OSU not "merely" because of scheduling but because that Louisville win is one of the best OOC wins in the country.
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28
Creme likes OSU not "merely" because of scheduling but because that Louisville win is one of the best OOC wins in the country.
Thanks for that very good point @thatjanepick - showing the possible double benefit of booking a difficult non-conference schedule. The number-6 ranked SoS of Ohio State acts like an RPI life jacket, holding Ohio State's head out of water (and potentially still in contention for a playoff berth in spite of it being a rebuilding year for them). Then, because they do have a difficult schedule, that puts them in a position of potentially having a very good game against a highly ranked team, and actually beating them. Bingo, against Louisville! That win looks great to the Selection Committee.

By the way, now that @Shades has posted the AP Top 25 (in which Minnesota now ranks #26, just edged out by Texas, as noted), we can see that for the first time this season there is a certain amount of agreement between the AP ranking and Charlie Creme's bracketology ranking and the projected end-of-season RPI ranking as "guessed" by Warren Nolan.

Among Big Ten teams only, Minnesota is 3rd in projected end-of-season RPI, and is tied with Iowa for 3rd in Charlie Creme's bracketology, and is 4th (behind Michigan and the standard first-two Maryland/Indiana) in the AP Top-25 ranking. Also, per the Warren Nolan end-of-season projected won/loss column, Minnesota is projected to have the 4th fewest Big-Ten losses (5) - behind Maryland (0), Indiana (2) and Rutgers (4). In other words, there's a certain amount of consensus that the Gophers "might" end up about 3rd or 4th in the Big Ten. Of course, that's a lot to predict just based on non-conference games. Let the Big-Ten battles begin.
 
Last edited:

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28

RPI through games of 22 December; Before start of conference games.
15 Indiana 10-2
16 Iowa 9-2
18 Northwestern 10-1
19 Purdue 9-3
21 Ohio State 7-4
33 Minnesota 10-1
41 Rutgers 10-1
43 Michigan 9-2
45 Maryland 9-2
83 Wisconsin 8-3
101 Nebraska 10-1
116 Illinois 9-2
137 Michigan State 7-4
225 Penn State 6-5
Let’s take another look (from a different angle) at the current post-non-conference-season RPI rankings for Big-Ten teams. This time we’ll add Strength-of-Schedule (SoS) ranking statistics and sort by that. It amounts to a SoS/RPI snapshot of the non-conference season of each Big-Ten team.

Team RPI SoS Non-Conf Record

Ohio State #21 #5 7-4
Purdue #19 #20 9-3
Indiana #15 #22 10-2
Iowa #16 #32 9-2
Northwestern #18 #44 10-1
Michigan #43 #79 9-2
Maryland #45 #106 9-2
Minnesota #33 #117 10-1
Wisconsin #83 #160 8-3
Michigan State #137 #182 7-4
Rutgers #41 #191 10-1
Penn State #224 #253 6-5
Illinois #116 #256 9-2
Nebraska #101 #281 10-1

Each Big-Ten team played 11 non-conference games, except Purdue and Indiana, who played 12. As a general rule, they won more than they lost, so that the number of non-conference games lost is a good (negative) indicator of their overall won/loss success in the non-conference season.

We sorted the table by SoS (column three). Ohio State had by-far the toughest non-conference schedule - ranked 5th toughest in NCAA Div I. Non-conf SoS ranged all the way to #281 for Nebraska - a cupcake schedule. At #117, Minnesota’s pre-Big-Ten SoS improved a lot over last year’s non-conf cupcake schedule - willed to us by Marlene. You can see that by the fact that last year, we ended up with an end-of-season SoS of #102 - not much better than our current end-of-non-conference-season SoS of #117. When you figure that playing the Big Ten generally boosts our SoS (and therefore also boosts our RPI), you can see that what happened to us last year, was that Marlene left us with such a sand-bagged non-conference-season SoS that it was completely impossible to play ourselves out of that non-conf SoS (and RPI) hole without being nearly undefeated in the B1G. We gave it a valiant effort, but a few early Big-Ten losses left the top of the SoS/RPI hole out of reach.

This season things look much better for the Gophers. We have an improved non-conference schedule that at least gives us a fightin chance of ending the season with a Selection-Committee likeable RPI - at least if we do reasonably well in Big-Ten competition. We are set up leaning toward success instead of buried in a deep hole of horrible-SoS failure.

When we look at the above table - in order from great SoS to horrible cupcake SoS, we can easily note that as a general rule, the teams who set themselves up with a tough non-conference schedule were also largely the teams that suffered the most non-conference losses. This makes sense, of course. That’s the danger of scheduling games against top teams - you might lose some of those.

The first 4 entries illustrate this. Ohio State had 4 losses, but justifiably so since it had the 5th most difficult non-conference schedule in the NCAA. Purdue had 3 losses with the slightly less difficult 20th ranked SoS. Indiana, with the 22nd most difficult non-conf schedule, lucked out and had only 2 losses. This gambit paid off, since it thereby got the highest end-of-non-conference-season RPI of #15. Continuing on, Iowa had a 32nd-place non-conference SoS and also netted two losses, for a #16 RPI at end of non-conf play. Worked for them, too. The SoS/RPI boost that Indiana and Iowa got from good non-conference scheduling (and solid non-conference play to back that up) will go a long way to make up for any losses they incur in Big-Ten play. In contrast, the merely middle-of-the-road Gopher non-conference SoS of #117 will go a long way to drag down their RPI in spite of (hopefully) excellent Big-Ten play.

Scanning down the list we see Penn State with 5 non-conference losses, but that’s an entirely different scenario since it played cupcake teams, getting a #203 non-conference SoS. What’s going on with PSU is that it’s a weak team and thus perhaps justifiably wanting a weak schedule, but to no avail since it lost almost half its non-conference games anyway. And Michigan State is a bit of a weird case. They got 4 losses on a 172nd ranked SoS, making them appear to be a weak team as well. Yet many of us expected them to be better, including the AP who had them as a ranked team until this week. (I suspect they had injuries.) Toward the bottom of the list you also find some weak teams who nevertheless had only one or two losses - due to the very weakness of their non-conf opponents thus far.

In the middle we find Minnesota with a very middle-of-the-road 117th ranked SoS. Yet it had only one loss. And in hindsight, that loss was to a now-ranked team. We lost the game we should have lost, and won the rest. (Although, and the stats don’t show this, but a couple teams that we beat gave us a whole lot more trouble than we expected - but we learned from those games.) We actually ended up in a four-way tie for fewest non-conference losses in the Big Ten. However, of those 4 B1G teams with only a single non-conference loss, two teams have significantly poor non-conf SoSes, and only Northwestern did that against a fairly strong (at least stronger than our #117-SoS) non-conf schedule meriting an SoS of #44.

Let’s reprise to the top SoS Big-Ten teams once more. Notice that in spite of their 4, 3 or 2 non-conference losses, that didn’t seem to hurt their non-conference RPIs very much. In fact, their RPIs as of this point are also among the best in the Big Ten. That exposes the dirty little secret: RPI is, for the most part, not a direct measure of the basketball quality of a team. Rather, RPI is mostly a measure of Strength of Schedule. RPI is about 75% correlated to Strength of Schedule (mostly your opponents but also your opponents’ opponents); and only 25% correlated to a team’s won-loss record.

That being the case, we see that in spite of an improved (read: by and large more difficult) non-conference schedule this year, Whalen and staff still have a lot more progress to make next year in the non-conference schedule department. We’re still only posting a middle-of-the-road #117 SoS for the non-conference schedule this year. That puts us in a SoS hole relative to other Big-Ten teams, when starting out the Big Ten season. Especially relative to teams like Ohio State, Purdue and Indiana with non-conference SoSes of #5, #20 and #22, respectively. Those teams wrote themselves a pre-Big-Ten-season RPI check (at no cost to them) in the form of an SoS coupon. The non-conference SoS forms the basis for the end-of-season SoS, and thus the end-of-season RPI (since RPI is 75% based on SoS). And every Big Ten team gets approximately the same SoS boost by playing Big-Ten teams during the B1G season, so that part’s a wash (plus/minus whether they schedule you to play more good B1G teams than bad teams). So if you start the Big-Ten season in an end-of-non-conference-season SoS hole, which means also in an RPI hole, then the only way you can get your end-of-season RPI back to where it belongs is to terrorize the Big Ten and beat every team in sight (except perhaps Maryland).

Last year, Stollings dug us a non-conference hole that was too deep to climb out of (minus one Diva, anyway). This year the non-conference SoS is improved, but still leaves us in a hole to dig out of during Big-Ten season. The hole is only a few feet deep, mind you, so it’s doable. But it’s still an SoS hole relative to some of the other good teams in the Big Ten.

What causes the non-conference hole is largely the Charity Games - a term I’ll use for us volunteering to play teams that will end up with RPI ranks in the high 200s and 300s. Playing a couple of those teams can completely offset the SoS benefit of playing several high-ranked or mid-ranked RPI teams. These games are just charity, and playing them should not have that effect (but it does, with the bogus mathematics of the current RPI/SoS NCAA rating system). It’s almost like Uncle Sam charging you a $10,000 penalty at IRS tax time, just because you threw a $20 bill into Santa’s charity bucket while Christmas shopping. It’s stupid and makes no mathematical sense. Yet that’s the way it is, right now. Under the RPI/SoS regime, any charity is mercilessly penalized at Big-Dance selection time.

As long as the NCAA burdens WBB with RPI, our coaching staff will have to learn how to refrain from scheduling Charity Games, as much as possible. Schedule a 150-RPI team instead. The motto should be “just say no to Charity Games” (with the possible exceptions that if a strong Whalen/coach friendship calls-out for a Charity Game, well OK then, maybe one per season is OK; and we should probably honor existing home-and-away commitments).

Yet don’t make enemies with really-bad-RPI Charity Teams, either. Because if NCAA switches WBB to NET (like MBB), it will likely be of benefit to schedule a few Charity Games. Because NET is bad in the opposite sense that RPI is bad. Go figure.
 
Last edited:

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63


NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 12/29/19. This obviously includes the opening Big Ten contests. So, some teams got a slight boost to SOS (Nebraska defeating Iowa) and some got a slight hit (Minnesota defeating Penn State).




RPI​
TeamSOS
12​
Indiana20
13​
Purdue31
15​
Northwestern57
16​
Iowa8
27​
Maryland81
29​
Ohio State4
32​
Rutgers191
35​
Minnesota159
49​
Michigan59
74​
Nebraska298
89​
Wisconsin119
122​
Michigan State146
138​
Illinois241
214​
Penn State194
 

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63
NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through Sunday's games (1-5-20).

RPITeamSOSConf
12Indiana102-0
13Iowa72-1
22Northwestern462-1
23Ohio State41-1
24Purdue322-1
30Maryland521-1
40Rutgers1472-1
45Michigan752-1
47Minnesota1041-2
71Nebraska2532-1
89Michigan State741-2
115Wisconsin1691-2
143Illinois2180-2
201Penn State1320-3
 

Shades

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
50
Points
48
Gopher opponent ASU just knocked off Oregon!
 

Shades

Well-known member
Joined
Oct 30, 2015
Messages
1,775
Reaction score
50
Points
48
Another Gopher opponent, Missouri St, had a big come from behind victory to hold onto the #1 RPI in the country.
 

SpaceJunkie

Member
Joined
Feb 27, 2019
Messages
36
Reaction score
7
Points
8
Gopher opponent ASU just knocked off Oregon!
And they just beat Oregon St too. Of course, these past years when Gophers actually have a significant non-conf win they decide to suck in the Big Ten, unlike Stollings when Gopher sucked non-conference and were somewhat decent in Big Ten play.
 

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63

NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 1-12-20. The NCAA was little slow putting out the nitty gritty sheets. Our slide continues.



RPITeamSOSConf
9Indiana7
4-1​
10Iowa6
4-1​
15Northwestern30
4-1​
24Maryland36
3-2​
25Rutgers78
4-1​
27Purdue12
2-3​
30Ohio State8
3-2​
54Nebraska165
3-2​
57Minnesota64
1-4​
59Michigan56
2-3​
96Michigan State90
2-3​
112Wisconsin100
1-4​
127Illinois134
1-4​
205Penn State150
1-4​
 

CutDownTheNet

Active member
Joined
Oct 4, 2018
Messages
584
Reaction score
38
Points
28

NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 1-12-20. The NCAA was little slow putting out the nitty gritty sheets. Our slide continues.



RPITeamSOSConf
9Indiana7
4-1​
10Iowa6
4-1​
15Northwestern30
4-1​
24Maryland36
3-2​
25Rutgers78
4-1​
27Purdue12
2-3​
30Ohio State8
3-2​
54Nebraska165
3-2​
57Minnesota64
1-4​
59Michigan56
2-3​
96Michigan State90
2-3​
112Wisconsin100
1-4​
127Illinois134
1-4​
205Penn State150
1-4​
At this seemingly crucial juncture of the Big-Ten season, this augments Iggy's post of NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 1-12-20 with Warren Nolan's projected End-of-Season RPI, End-of-Season SoS and End-of-Season Conf W-L

EoS RPIEoS SoSEoS ConfTeamCur RPICur SoSCur Conf
51516-2Maryland24363-2
8915-3Indiana974-1
162113-5Iowa6104-1
215114-4Northwestern15304-1
258415-3Rutgers25784-1
4458-10Ohio State3083-2
64619-9Nebraska541653-2
65237-11Minnesota57641-4
69288-10Michigan59562-3
98296-12Purdue27122-3
109659-9Michigan State96902-3
163353-15Wisconsin1121001-4
202581-17Illinois1271341-4
214482-16Penn State2051501-4

The only projected Illinois win is the one Minnesota gave them.

Nolan currently predicts 6 more wins for the Gophers - but many of the wins are predicted as close games, and many of the losses are also predicted as close games. See http://warrennolan.com/basketballw/2020/team-predict-schedule?team=Minnesota

This projection would give us a 7-11 Big-Ten record (in projected 8th place), but at an RPI of 65 (sandwiched between Nebraska and Michigan), probably out of reach of a playoff berth. If we win all the predicted close wins, but convert all the predicted close losses to wins (with other predicted results the same), we would end up with a 10-8 Big-Ten record and a better RPI. The latter eventuality would most likely swap us with Nebraska (who has a low projected SoS that helps us out) and put us in 7th place, right behind Ohio State. Although our SoS (projected at 23 by end of season) is definitely helping our RPI this season (instead of hindering it as typical in the past), just our bad luck that Ohio State wisely set up an even better SoS projected to be 5 by end of season - so OSU trumps us in SoS (no political puns intended) and therefore also trumps us in RPI in spite of a projected worse W-L record (after noted adjustment for winning all close games).

Two conclusions: (1) SoS (via RPI) might be the factor by which Ohio State looks better than Minnesota to the Selection Committee in spite of a potentially better W-L for Minnesota (if indeed, we achieve all our remaining season goals as noted); (2) our loss to Ohio State might turn out to be our most damaging loss. Beating OSU twice would certainly have looked better to the Selection Committee if they end up having to decide between either Ohio State or Minnesota. In any event, getting into the Big Dance might hinge on winning all the projected close future games, plus the Selection Committee letting 7 Big-Ten teams into the Dance.

Nolan projects us losing all five of the last-five tough games, especially Indiana, @iowa and Maryland. But the first two (of the last five) are projected close losses @Ohio State and @Michigan State. The above "way in" to the Dance relies on us winning both of the latter two close games.

Before that (in order), Nolan projects us winning Thursday against Iowa by one point; winning by 4 points @Purdue; beating Wisconsin; losing @Indiana; winning a close one against Nebraska; losing by one point against Rutgers; winning @Wisconsin; and beating Michigan by 2 points.

There is still hope to Dance, but clearly we can't do any of this w/o Pitts and the Bellos. Of course, the other way into the Big Dance would be to win the Big-Ten tournament and get the automatic berth. I wouldn't put it past us to do just that (again, pending help from Pitts and the Bellos).
 
Last edited:

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63

NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 1-19-20. Purdue gave us a bump. There are two games this evening on BTN, Michigan State @ Rutgers and Indiana @ Maryland



RPITeamSOSConf
6Iowa8
6-1​
11Indiana6
4-2​
16Northwestern31
6-1​
20Maryland20
4-2​
26Rutgers100
5-1​
32Ohio State9
4-3​
33Purdue10
3-4​
47Nebraska119
4-3​
53Minnesota50
2-5​
56Michigan60
3-4​
99Michigan State124
3-3​
135Illinois109
1-6​
139Wisconsin76
1-6​
216Penn State83
1-6​
 

Ignatius L Hoops

Well-known member
Joined
Sep 9, 2015
Messages
5,720
Reaction score
104
Points
63

Going into tonight's game in Bloomington here's the NCAA RPI and Strength of Schedule through games of 1-26-20.



RPITeamSOSConf
4Iowa10
8-1​
8Maryland11
7-2​
14Indiana5
5-3​
15Northwestern25
7-2​
25Ohio State3
4-4​
29Purdue16
5-4​
41Rutgers99
5-3​
48Michigan49
4-4​
50Nebraska88
5-4​
70Minnesota57
2-6​
94Michigan State78
4-5​
119Wisconsin58
2-7​
149Illinois102
1-7​
188Penn State70
1-8​
 
Top Bottom