|
|
Post by linuxbeav on Dec 3, 2018 9:56:02 GMT -8
Here are the latest NET rankings. ASU is repping the PAC12 well. Scoring 101 on Missouri St. helped us. St Louis will be a good challenge, which will help us significantly if we can get the road W. | RANK | PREVIOUS | SCHOOL | CONFERENCE | RECORD | ROAD | NEUTRAL | HOME | NON DIV I |
| | 11 | 10 | Arizona St. | Pac-12 | 7-0 | 0-0 | 2-0 | 5-0 | 0-0 |
| | 19 | 24 | Arizona | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 1-0 | 1-2 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 42 | 75 | UCLA | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 6-0 | 0-0 |
| | 54 | 54 | Oregon | Pac-12 | 4-3 | 0-1 | 1-1 | 3-1 | 0-0 |
| | 56 | 58 | Colorado | Pac-12 | 5-1 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 63 | 55 | Washington | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 0-1 | 2-1 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 77 | 96 | Oregon St. | Pac-12 | 6-1 | 1-0 | 2-1 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| | 96 | 97 | Stanford | Pac-12 | 4-4 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
| | 119 | 119 | Southern California | Pac-12 | 5-3 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 4-2 | 0-0 |
| | 156 | 156 | Washington St. | Pac-12 | 4-2
| 0-2 | 0-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 159 | 158 | Utah | Pac-12 | 4-3 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| | 208 | 207 | California | Pac-12 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 0-3 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
|
| 48 | 46 | Saint Louis | Atlantic 10 | 6-1 | 1-0
| 0-1 | 5-0 | 0-0 |
|
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Dec 3, 2018 10:14:55 GMT -8
It's early but I like seeing team "1 and Done" sitting at 4-3 with 1 true road game so far.
Bad day for the conf on Saturday - Houston > ducks, NM State > WSU, St Marys > Cal.
Stanford and USC had "good losses" I suppose, (to Kansas & Nevada) but losses nonetheless... How about Nevada ranked #5? Pretty cool.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 3, 2018 10:55:08 GMT -8
Here are the latest NET rankings. ASU is repping the PAC12 well. Scoring 101 on Missouri St. helped us. St Louis will be a good challenge, which will help us significantly if we can get the road W. | RANK | PREVIOUS | SCHOOL | CONFERENCE | RECORD | ROAD | NEUTRAL | HOME | NON DIV I |
| | 11 | 10 | Arizona St. | Pac-12 | 7-0 | 0-0 | 2-0 | 5-0 | 0-0 |
| | 19 | 24 | Arizona | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 1-0 | 1-2 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 42 | 75 | UCLA | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 0-0 | 0-2 | 6-0 | 0-0 |
| | 54 | 54 | Oregon | Pac-12 | 4-3 | 0-1 | 1-1 | 3-1 | 0-0 |
| | 56 | 58 | Colorado | Pac-12 | 5-1 | 1-1 | 0-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 63 | 55 | Washington | Pac-12 | 6-2 | 0-1 | 2-1 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 77 | 96 | Oregon St. | Pac-12 | 6-1 | 1-0 | 2-1 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| | 96 | 97 | Stanford | Pac-12 | 4-4 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
| | 119 | 119 | Southern California | Pac-12 | 5-3 | 0-0 | 1-1 | 4-2 | 0-0 |
| | 156 | 156 | Washington St. | Pac-12 | 4-2
| 0-2 | 0-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 |
| | 159 | 158 | Utah | Pac-12 | 4-3 | 0-1 | 1-2 | 3-0 | 0-0 |
| | 208 | 207 | California | Pac-12 | 2-4 | 0-1 | 0-3 | 2-0 | 0-0 |
|
| 48 | 46 | Saint Louis | Atlantic 10 | 6-1 | 1-0
| 0-1 | 5-0 | 0-0 |
I'm not sure when the " previous" was taken, but we win vs a LBSt on the road, Mizz St at home and increase 19 spots, yet UW wns two vs equally weak competition (depending on the site) and goes down 8?? Furd beat Port St, loses in OT at Kansas and goes up 1?? I believe the ucks have lost 2 to weak opponents since the last NET rating and stayed at 54? ASU has 7 wins, but only one vs a decent squad in Miss St and they are #10. This system is a real eye opener. So far it seems to say, "... play as weak of pre-season schedule as you can... go undefeated and you're a top 10 team headed into league play". Nolan has the Pac12 rated the 6th best conference, curently Arizona the leader at #14, UW #30, Buffs #32, ASU #38. Season end "predictor" using league rating and outcomes has Zona the leader with rating of #46, Buffs at #47, UW at #51, UCLA #53, ASU #54, OSU #60, Utah #68, Furd #72, Cal #75, ucks #76, SC #79... BUT then tosses in Zags at #80?? League play must really lower their # as it is currently #4!! WSU at #105. Individual team predictor page is interesting for OSU: * 0-6 vs Group 1 teams... all Pac12 teams on the road * 7-5 vs Group 2 teams... 5-1 home Pac12... 1-2 Pac12 away... lose to St Louis by 2, beat A&M by 9, Mizz loss * 9-0 vs Group 3 teams... 3-0 vs Pac12 home (Oregon, SC, WSU)... plus all non-league played/to be played * 3-0 vs Group 4 teams... played/C.Conn left 19-11/9-9 is the predictor... has 11 of our Pac12 games decided by 5 points of less (5 W's and 6 L's). If you believe in this stuff it seems that OSU tourney bid come down to finishing in close games. Didn't happen last year, but can start @ St Louis, predictor says 2 point loss... 63-65. Predicts: Zona 14-4 UCLA 14-4 SC 13-5 Buffs 12-6 ASU 12-6 ucks 11-7 OSU 9-9 UW 9-9 Split with OSU Furd 5-13 WSU 5-13 Utah 4-14 Cal 0-18 Not sure Cal goes 0 fer or Utes 4-14... or ucks lose 7?? |
|
|
|
Post by linuxbeav on Dec 3, 2018 13:15:04 GMT -8
I like Nolan rankings, but they are pretty close to your traditional RPI. He doesn't take into account margin of victory, offensive and defensive efficiency, and other more progressive stat analysis. I have found that the computer rankings that take more factors into play tend to give a better predictive score on teams, especially as the computer has more games to analyze a team by.
The one thing that computers fail at is accounting for injuries/suspensions/etc.
You can usually find a model that confirms your opinion, whether or not that is a good model. Personally, I think AZ is "down" this year (still top 3 or 4 in the PAC), and ASU is better. The NCAA NET is getting more accurate as more games are being played. KenPom is my favorite at this time for computer models.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 3, 2018 13:29:58 GMT -8
I like Nolan rankings, but they are pretty close to your traditional RPI. He doesn't take into account margin of victory, offensive and defensive efficiency, and other more progressive stat analysis. I have found that the computer rankings that take more factors into play tend to give a better predictive score on teams, especially as the computer has more games to analyze a team by. The one thing that computers fail at is accounting for injuries/suspensions/etc. You can usually find a model that confirms your opinion, whether or not that is a good model. Personally, I think AZ is "down" this year (still top 3 or 4 in the PAC), and ASU is better. The NCAA NET is getting more accurate as more games are being played. KenPom is my favorite at this time for computer models. <iframe width="20.159999999999968" height="6.4599999999999795" style="position: absolute; width: 20.159999999999968px; height: 6.4599999999999795px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none;left: 15px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_37264368" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.159999999999968" height="6.4599999999999795" style="position: absolute; width: 20.16px; height: 6.46px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 934px; top: -5px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_60882612" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.159999999999968" height="6.4599999999999795" style="position: absolute; width: 20.16px; height: 6.46px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 15px; top: 261px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_34656976" scrolling="no"></iframe> <iframe width="20.159999999999968" height="6.4599999999999795" style="position: absolute; width: 20.16px; height: 6.46px; z-index: -9999; border-style: none; left: 934px; top: 261px;" id="MoatPxIOPT1_46455424" scrolling="no"></iframe> I'm not sure I "believe" any of them, nor base any opinions on them, but there are huge disparities that can cause one to question validity. But, the season will play out, and the NET ratings will certainly be disparaged by those who don't benefit. KenPom stands (as of Sunday, 12/2): ucks #33 ASU #42 UCLA #45 Zona #47 UW #52 SC #63 Buffs #67 OSU #70 / StLouis #72 / A&M #78 Furd #95 Utes #114 Cal #163 WSU #174 Which seems to me a plausible (in my early/limited views) Pac12 finish with multiple mutations among the top 5. |
|
|
|
Post by linuxbeav on Dec 3, 2018 19:27:53 GMT -8
While I "like" KenPom, I don't want to quote his ratings right now because he has the team to the south as the top PAC12 team somehow.
|
|
|
|
Post by babeav on Dec 3, 2018 20:28:35 GMT -8
Ken must be drunk......
|
|
|
|
Post by nexus73 on Dec 4, 2018 15:12:32 GMT -8
OSU 6-1. UO 4-3. Makes a person wonder how with so many highly touted recruits and a decent coach that the guys who sometimes wear green have a record that would be more associated with us at this point in the season while we are the 1-loss team with only ASU having a better record.
|
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Dec 4, 2018 18:45:14 GMT -8
OSU 6-1. UO 4-3. Makes a person wonder how with so many highly touted recruits and a decent coach that the guys who sometimes wear green have a record that would be more associated with us at this point in the season while we are the 1-loss team with only ASU having a better record. Makes one wonder, with all that money....oh, nevermind. |
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Dec 4, 2018 19:03:14 GMT -8
For my money, Massey has the best computer ratings. Here's his take, which looks pretty reasonable to me:
27 Arizona 6-2
28 Arizona St 7-0
53 UCLA 6-2
60 Washington 6-2
67 Oregon St 6-1
78 Stanford 4-4
82 Colorado 5-1
83 USC 5-3
84 Oregon 4-3
114 Utah 4-3
168 Washington St 4-2
219 California 2-4
He has St. Louis at #91, TA&M at #110. He has both of those schools favored slightly (by 1 and 3 points, respectively), which is weird, but probably has something to do with the way the program evaluates offenses and defenses. He ranks the offenses and defenses separately from the overall ranking, and uses those rankings for the game predictions. So a team that either wins by 20 or loses by 10 every game might be favored over a team that simply wins by two every game. Which tells you, if you love playing the sports book, you probably shouldn't base your bets on a ratings computer.
|
|
|
|
Post by sagebrush on Dec 5, 2018 8:08:06 GMT -8
Note the time. Ken and 1111 must have been out together for a liquid lunch and overachieved. |
|
|
|
Post by joecool on Dec 5, 2018 15:42:25 GMT -8
OSU 6-1. UO 4-3. Makes a person wonder how with so many highly touted recruits and a decent coach that the guys who sometimes wear green have a record that would be more associated with us at this point in the season while we are the 1-loss team with only ASU having a better record. Are you seriously comparing college basketball records after 7 games? |
|
|
|
Post by nexus73 on Dec 6, 2018 7:17:38 GMT -8
OSU 6-1. UO 4-3. Makes a person wonder how with so many highly touted recruits and a decent coach that the guys who sometimes wear green have a record that would be more associated with us at this point in the season while we are the 1-loss team with only ASU having a better record. Are you seriously comparing college basketball records after 7 games? No, I am humorously comparing expectations for records after 7 games. If your name is Phil Knight, right about now you are tearing your hair out. On the other hand if you are a Beaver Believer, you could not be much happier! |
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Dec 6, 2018 8:53:32 GMT -8
OSU 6-1. UO 4-3. Makes a person wonder how with so many highly touted recruits and a decent coach that the guys who sometimes wear green have a record that would be more associated with us at this point in the season while we are the 1-loss team with only ASU having a better record. Are you seriously comparing college basketball records after 7 games? |
|
