Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Discussion on Sean Miller and the Arizona Basketball team

Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby sharkeez » Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:37 pm

#16 in Kenpom
#15 in Sagarin
the highest ranked 3-loss team in both computer ratings.
https://kenpom.com/
http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm

Kenpom/Sagarin rankings
NC State #76/#63
SMU #23/#28
Purdue #9/#7
UNLV #78/#65
Texas A&M #7/#13
Alabama #38/#50
New Mexico #169/#150
Connecticut #91/#85

Sagarin conference ratings
1 BIG 12
2 ATLANTIC COAST
3 BIG EAST
4 SOUTHEASTERN
5 BIG TEN
6 PAC-12
7 AMERICAN ATHLETIC
8 MOUNTAIN WEST
9 MISSOURI VALLEY
10 ATLANTIC 10

Sagarin's Pac-12 ratings
15 Arizona = 87.71 6 3
29 Arizona State = 85.35 7 0
42 Southern California = 83.57 4 2
43 UCLA = 83.22 7 1
47 Oregon = 82.84 5 3
60 Utah = 81.30 6 2
89 Colorado = 77.57 6 1
109 Stanford = 75.05 4 6
110 Washington = 74.98 6 2
123 Washington State = 74.37 6 1
133 Oregon State = 73.61 5 3
144 California = 73.07 3 4
Last edited by sharkeez on Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:41 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
sharkeez
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby BearDownAZ » Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:41 pm

Those aren't based entirely on actual season performance though. Most of the pre-season bias is wiped away by the time we begin Pac-12 play.
BearDownAZ
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby sharkeez » Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:53 pm

your statement is much more true when there's been only 2 or 3 games played. at this point, any preseason bias is minimal.
User avatar
sharkeez
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby BearDownAZ » Wed Dec 06, 2017 7:59 pm

sharkeez wrote:your statement is much more true when there's been only 2 or 3 games played. at this point, any preseason bias is minimal.


That's not true. All you have to do is read some of the articles that kenpom has written in regards to his preseason rankings to know that your statement is flat out wrong.
BearDownAZ
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby sharkeez » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:00 pm

from sagarin: "For the first few weeks of the season, the starting ratings have weight
in the process(BAYESIAN), but once the teams are all WELL CONNECTED, then
the starting ratings are no longer used and all teams are started equal
and the ratings are then done in an UNBIASED manner from that point on."
User avatar
sharkeez
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby BearDownAZ » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:08 pm

sharkeez wrote:from sagarin: "For the first few weeks of the season, the starting ratings have weight
in the process(BAYESIAN), but once the teams are all WELL CONNECTED, then
the starting ratings are no longer used and all teams are started equal
and the ratings are then done in an UNBIASED manner from that point on."


Check out Kenpom and let us know what you find.
BearDownAZ
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby sharkeez » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:08 pm

and kenpom wrote this in 2012 which supports the idea that Kenpom sticks with his preseason ratings longer than Sagarin:
"Now that nearly every team has played at least 10 games, one might think we have enough data to form an accurate assessment of any team based on what they have done on the court this season. Then why still have the influence of pre-season ratings in the current ratings? Because you actually don’t have enough data to work with. The opinion one had of a team before the games started being played still has some predictive value."
User avatar
sharkeez
 
Posts: 351
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 12:52 pm

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby BearDownAZ » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:17 pm

sharkeez wrote:and kenpom wrote this in 2012 which supports the idea that Kenpom sticks with his preseason ratings longer than Sagarin:
"Now that nearly every team has played at least 10 games, one might think we have enough data to form an accurate assessment of any team based on what they have done on the court this season. Then why still have the influence of pre-season ratings in the current ratings? Because you actually don’t have enough data to work with. The opinion one had of a team before the games started being played still has some predictive value."


That was part of what I remember. I know there is another article that suggests a timeline as to when preseason ratings completely fall off and I thought it was sometime in early to mid January. If you're comparing Sagarin to Kenpom, I'd say Sagarin is closer to a free piece of meat that you feed your dog while Kenpom is a filet.
BearDownAZ
 
Posts: 960
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2014 8:57 am

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby Wildcat Jones » Wed Dec 06, 2017 8:56 pm

Stop being so flat out wrong sharkeez. :roll: :lol:
Wildcat Jones
 
Posts: 1254
Joined: Sat Apr 12, 2014 8:02 am

Re: Arizona well-thought-of in computer ratings

Postby greg23 » Thu Dec 07, 2017 12:48 am

From my in depth kenpom days I always thought 10-12 games was what it took to get an accurate measure.
greg23
 
Posts: 1058
Joined: Sun Apr 13, 2014 6:28 pm

Next

Return to Basketball

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests