|
|
Post by treasurevalleybeav on Mar 11, 2024 15:03:11 GMT -8
I’m lost. Are we still talking about Norm Stewart? I think some of Ralph's great teams of the 80's played Mizzou when they had Sunvold and Stipanovich. IIRC they were highly ranked too for a few years and also flamed out in the tourney. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 11, 2024 16:18:17 GMT -8
Losing the top six scorers would be more difficult to replace in a single season? And a better record, despite losing those top six scorers would be something to condone or forgive? And a slightly better record the season following might be as well? Asking for a friend of a friend. Well you can tell your friend context does matter. I assume he or she is talking about the 2022-2023 Beavers team. First, I would tell your friend that according to ESPN, the Beavers lost their top 5 scorers not 6. Then I’d say the Beavers top 2 scorers transferred after the program’s worst season ever, and there was a strong possibility the top scorer wouldn’t have transferred if the head coach had been able to control his locker room and not allowed a toxic environment. Missouri’s top 4 scorers graduated. But your friend is right. OSU won 3 more games that year compared to Missouri this year. But I’m sure you have told your friend about RPI, NET and KenPom, so you might tell her or him to check those out. Oh hell, I’ll save him or her the time. Beavers 2022-23 RPI 288 NET 222 KENPOM. 214 Missouri 2023-24 RPI. 236 NET 156 KenPom 146 Just for fun he or she might be interested in those numbers for the Beavers for the year after the NCAA run (since Missouri this year follows NCAA tourney team too) and for this year. And to a little more context, the Beavers lost 44% of its scoring, 30% of its rebounding and 56% of its assists from that tourney team while Tigers lost 72%, 74% and 55% respectively But here are those other numbers for your friend. Beavers 2021-22 RPI 295 NET 256 KenPom 233 Beavers 2023-24 RPI 199 NET 161 KenPom 156 Look at that, over the last 3 years, all Beavers’ numbers except this year’s RPI are worse than Missouri’s numbers this year. If those numbers depress your friend as much as they do me, don’t worry I have just the thing to make him or her feel better — send get well cards to the 4 Missouri scholarship players and 1 walk-on who had in-season surgeries this year. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 11, 2024 16:54:37 GMT -8
I’m lost. Are we still talking about Norm Stewart? I think some of Ralph's great teams of the 80's played Mizzou when they had Sunvold and Stipanovich. IIRC they were highly ranked too for a few years and also flamed out in the tourney. Oregon State travelled to Columbia to play #8 Missouri in 1982, Sundvold and Stipanovich's senior year. Missouri won 87-59. After winning three consecutive Pac-10 Championships, the Beavs finished third in the Pac-10 in 1982-83. Oregon State played in the NIT in 1983, beating Idaho and New Orleans before bowing out to eventual champion Fresno State 76-67. Missouri got a bye but lost to Iowa in first game of the NCAA Tournament, 77-63. Missouri went to the Sweet Sixteen two of the three years previous and played in the Elite Eight for the first time since 1944 in 1976. It would be another six years before Missouri got back to the Sweet 16 and another five years before another Elite Eight (although that run was eventually vacated by the NCAA). |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 11, 2024 17:23:30 GMT -8
Losing the top six scorers would be more difficult to replace in a single season? And a better record, despite losing those top six scorers would be something to condone or forgive? And a slightly better record the season following might be as well? Asking for a friend of a friend. Well you can tell your friend context does matter. I assume he or she is talking about the 2022-2023 Beavers team. First, I would tell your friend that according to ESPN, the Beavers lost their top 5 scorers not 6. Then I’d say the Beavers top 2 scorers transferred after the program’s worst season ever, and there was a strong possibility the top scorer wouldn’t have transferred if the head coach had been able to control his locker room and not allowed a toxic environment. Missouri’s top 4 scorers graduated. But your friend is right. OSU won 3 more games that year compared to Missouri this year. But I’m sure you have told your friend about RPI, NET and KenPom, so you might tell her or him to check those out. Oh hell, I’ll save him or her the time. Beavers 2022-23 RPI 288 NET 222 KENPOM. 214 Missouri 2023-24 RPI. 236 NET 156 KenPom 146 Just for fun he or she might be interested in those numbers for the Beavers for the year after the NCAA run (since Missouri this year follows NCAA tourney team too) and for this year. And to a little more context, the Beavers lost 44% of its scoring, 30% of its rebounding and 56% of its assists from that tourney team while Tigers lost 72%, 74% and 55% respectively But here are those other numbers for your friend. Beavers 2021-22 RPI 295 NET 256 KenPom 233 Beavers 2023-24 RPI 199 NET 161 KenPom 156 Look at that, over the last 3 years, all Beavers’ numbers except this year’s RPI are worse than Missouri’s numbers this year. If those numbers depress your friend as much as they do me, don’t worry I have just the thing to make him or her feel better — send get well cards to the 4 Missouri scholarship players and 1 walk-on who had in-season surgeries this year. Xzavier Malone-Key averaged 14.9 ppg, which is top four, and he graduated, as well. Oregon State has a better record than Missouri in nonconference and conference play and played a stronger nonconference slate. If Oregon State is ranked behind Missouri, the only possible reason is that the SEC is so much better than the Pac-12 that going 0-18 in the SEC is "more impressive" than going 5-15 in Pac-12 play, which is hogwash. I disagree. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 11, 2024 17:38:11 GMT -8
Well you can tell your friend context does matter. I assume he or she is talking about the 2022-2023 Beavers team. First, I would tell your friend that according to ESPN, the Beavers lost their top 5 scorers not 6. Then I’d say the Beavers top 2 scorers transferred after the program’s worst season ever, and there was a strong possibility the top scorer wouldn’t have transferred if the head coach had been able to control his locker room and not allowed a toxic environment. Missouri’s top 4 scorers graduated. But your friend is right. OSU won 3 more games that year compared to Missouri this year. But I’m sure you have told your friend about RPI, NET and KenPom, so you might tell her or him to check those out. Oh hell, I’ll save him or her the time. Beavers 2022-23 RPI 288 NET 222 KENPOM. 214 Missouri 2023-24 RPI. 236 NET 156 KenPom 146 Just for fun he or she might be interested in those numbers for the Beavers for the year after the NCAA run (since Missouri this year follows NCAA tourney team too) and for this year. And to a little more context, the Beavers lost 44% of its scoring, 30% of its rebounding and 56% of its assists from that tourney team while Tigers lost 72%, 74% and 55% respectively But here are those other numbers for your friend. Beavers 2021-22 RPI 295 NET 256 KenPom 233 Beavers 2023-24 RPI 199 NET 161 KenPom 156 Look at that, over the last 3 years, all Beavers’ numbers except this year’s RPI are worse than Missouri’s numbers this year. If those numbers depress your friend as much as they do me, don’t worry I have just the thing to make him or her feel better — send get well cards to the 4 Missouri scholarship players and 1 walk-on who had in-season surgeries this year. Xzavier Malone-Key averaged 14.9 ppg, which is top four, and he graduated, as well. Oregon State has a better record than Missouri in nonconference and conference play and played a stronger nonconference slate. If Oregon State is ranked behind Missouri, the only possible reason is that the SEC is so much better than the Pac-12 that going 0-18 in the SEC is "more impressive" than going 5-15 in Pac-12 play, which is hogwash. I disagree. LOL. That is too funny. And ranking you don’t like is hogwash. But if RPI or NET are in your favor then things are set in stone. And FYI KenPom is not impacted by conference. But I’m sure you’ll let us know why it’s still hogwash. As for Malone-Key, ESPN and Beavers website don’t seem to agree with you so something is funky. From Beavers website: SENIOR (2021-22): Played in 12 games and started one … Missed the final 13 games with an injured back … Averaged 3.8 points, 1.3 rebounds and 0.6 assists in 10.1 minutes per game. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 11, 2024 17:53:03 GMT -8
Xzavier Malone-Key averaged 14.9 ppg, which is top four, and he graduated, as well. Oregon State has a better record than Missouri in nonconference and conference play and played a stronger nonconference slate. If Oregon State is ranked behind Missouri, the only possible reason is that the SEC is so much better than the Pac-12 that going 0-18 in the SEC is "more impressive" than going 5-15 in Pac-12 play, which is hogwash. I disagree. LOL. That is too funny. And ranking you don’t like is hogwash. But if RPI or NET are in your favor then things are set in stone. And FYI KenPom is not impacted by conference. But I’m sure you’ll let us know why it’s still hogwash. As for Malone-Key, ESPN and Beavers website don’t seem to agree with you so something is funky. From Beavers website: SENIOR (2021-22): Played in 12 games and started one … Missed the final 13 games with an injured back … Averaged 3.8 points, 1.3 rebounds and 0.6 assists in 10.1 minutes per game. All rankings suffer from pooling. Getting beat by "good" teams often pools you closer to the good teams than teams that beat "worse" teams. You can break down the NET rankings into components and see that Oregon State has a better record in both conference and nonconference play and that Oregon State played better teams on average. Ken Pom notes the same, though. Oregon State had a better record against better teams in nonconference play. You cannot break out separate conference standings, but I would imagine that it would be about the same. Ken Pom accounts for things like the foregoing with "Luck," which measures how much better or worse a team has performed than how Ken Pom rates them. Oregon State rates as 69th in "Luck," while Missouri is dead last in "Luck." Without being able to filter out goofy stats like "Luck," it is always difficult to take things like Ken Pom's ranking seriously. RPI, for all of its flaws, eliminates things like close losses and close wins and "Luck," filtering everything out to see how a team does sterilely against the schedule. While generally helpful, I do not believe that the Ken Pom or the NET rankings are helpful in evaluating how Missouri and Oregon State have done this year. |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Mar 11, 2024 18:02:43 GMT -8
Xzavier Malone-Key averaged 14.9 ppg, which is top four, and he graduated, as well. Oregon State has a better record than Missouri in nonconference and conference play and played a stronger nonconference slate. If Oregon State is ranked behind Missouri, the only possible reason is that the SEC is so much better than the Pac-12 that going 0-18 in the SEC is "more impressive" than going 5-15 in Pac-12 play, which is hogwash. I disagree. LOL. That is too funny. And ranking you don’t like is hogwash. But if RPI or NET are in your favor then things are set in stone. And FYI KenPom is not impacted by conference. But I’m sure you’ll let us know why it’s still hogwash. As for Malone-Key, ESPN and Beavers website don’t seem to agree with you so something is funky. From Beavers website: SENIOR (2021-22): Played in 12 games and started one … Missed the final 13 games with an injured back … Averaged 3.8 points, 1.3 rebounds and 0.6 assists in 10.1 minutes per game. Lol... never bring actual facts that contradict him. He'll find some workaround, or just make crap up as his opinion on rankings and their intricacies are fact. Plus, any fact you present he can't contradict you'll see suddenly omitted from the discussion. Many times it's BS... "bloviate special". Good luck |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 11, 2024 18:04:04 GMT -8
LOL. That is too funny. And ranking you don’t like is hogwash. But if RPI or NET are in your favor then things are set in stone. And FYI KenPom is not impacted by conference. But I’m sure you’ll let us know why it’s still hogwash. As for Malone-Key, ESPN and Beavers website don’t seem to agree with you so something is funky. From Beavers website: SENIOR (2021-22): Played in 12 games and started one … Missed the final 13 games with an injured back … Averaged 3.8 points, 1.3 rebounds and 0.6 assists in 10.1 minutes per game. All rankings suffer from pooling. Getting beat by "good" teams often pools you closer to the good teams than teams that beat "worse" teams. You can break down the NET rankings into components and see that Oregon State has a better record in both conference and nonconference play and that Oregon State played better teams on average. Ken Pom notes the same, though. Oregon State had a better record against better teams in nonconference play. You cannot break out separate conference standings, but I would imagine that it would be about the same. Ken Pom accounts for things like the foregoing with "Luck," which measures how much better or worse a team has performed than how Ken Pom rates them. Oregon State rates as 69th in "Luck," while Missouri is dead last in "Luck." Without being able to filter out goofy stats like "Luck," it is always difficult to take things like Ken Pom's ranking seriously. RPI, for all of its flaws, eliminates things like close losses and close wins and "Luck," filtering everything out to see how a team does sterilely against the schedule. While generally helpful, I do not believe that the Ken Pom or the NET rankings are helpful in evaluating how Missouri and Oregon State have done this year. You are so ful of crapola. You regularly cite RPI, NET and KenPom. If they are so bad stop referencing them in your posts. But I doubt you will when any of them fall on your side of the argument. |
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 11, 2024 18:10:30 GMT -8
So now we’re arguing over who is s%#ttier?
Good lord.
|
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 11, 2024 18:13:50 GMT -8
LOL. That is too funny. And ranking you don’t like is hogwash. But if RPI or NET are in your favor then things are set in stone. And FYI KenPom is not impacted by conference. But I’m sure you’ll let us know why it’s still hogwash. As for Malone-Key, ESPN and Beavers website don’t seem to agree with you so something is funky. From Beavers website: SENIOR (2021-22): Played in 12 games and started one … Missed the final 13 games with an injured back … Averaged 3.8 points, 1.3 rebounds and 0.6 assists in 10.1 minutes per game. Lol... never bring actual facts that contradict him. He'll find some workaround, or just make crap up as his opinion on rankings and their intricacies are fact. Plus, any fact you present he can't contradict you'll see suddenly omitted from the discussion. Many times it's BS... "bloviate special". Good luck I think my favorite might be just now when he says how bad KenPom is and then cites a KenPom metric. So even within the same year and two teams, some KenPom metrics are hogwash but another is just fine. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 11, 2024 19:46:17 GMT -8
Lol... never bring actual facts that contradict him. He'll find some workaround, or just make crap up as his opinion on rankings and their intricacies are fact. Plus, any fact you present he can't contradict you'll see suddenly omitted from the discussion. Many times it's BS... "bloviate special". Good luck I think my favorite might be just now when he says how bad KenPom is and then cites a KenPom metric. So even within the same year and two teams, some KenPom metrics are hogwash but another is just fine. Duuuuuuuuuuuuude!!!!!!!! I am citing the KenPom metric to show how bad KenPom is. When you have to throw in a "metric" called "Luck," I question how you are analyzing the data. If you can account for garbage like "Luck," KenPom may be a great metric. I just have no away to account for "Luck." |
|
|
|
Post by spudbeaver on Mar 11, 2024 20:42:49 GMT -8
So now we’re arguing over who is s%#ttier? Good lord. Actually seems appropriate, sadly. Let’s just play UCLA and get this thing over with. Where’s Beaverology btw? |
|
|
|
Post by rgeorge on Mar 11, 2024 21:00:42 GMT -8
Lol... never bring actual facts that contradict him. He'll find some workaround, or just make crap up as his opinion on rankings and their intricacies are fact. Plus, any fact you present he can't contradict you'll see suddenly omitted from the discussion. Many times it's BS... "bloviate special". Good luck I think my favorite might be just now when he says how bad KenPom is and then cites a KenPom metric. So even within the same year and two teams, some KenPom metrics are hogwash but another is just fine. Sort of appreciated the complete ignoring of the importance of Malone-Key info. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 12, 2024 4:43:56 GMT -8
I think my favorite might be just now when he says how bad KenPom is and then cites a KenPom metric. So even within the same year and two teams, some KenPom metrics are hogwash but another is just fine. Sort of appreciated the complete ignoring of the importance of Malone-Key info. I guess I’m getting used to that kind of thing from him now. Have to wonder if he just stopped watching team during that 3 win season — not that I’d blame him if he did. How else to explain that he could think he averaged nearly 15 ppg. I highly doubt Malone-Key even broke double figures in a game that year. Also find it amusing that the discussion started around the 2022-23 team, but he switched emphasis to this year’s team when he saw the metric numbers showed outside of number of wins the 2023 team wasn’t really close to being better than Missouri this year. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Mar 12, 2024 6:49:16 GMT -8
Wilky
I find it interesting that the two metric systems the NCAA uses — NET and KenPom — you find greatly flawed, but the one they got rid of — RPI — you love. I think that may well be because RPI relies predominantly on SOS, and for some reason you think that is the true, accurate way to measure things. In fact you say that “for all of its flaws [RPI] . . . [filters] everything out to see how a team does sterilely against the schedule.” That is literally its greatest flaw.
RPI doesn’t take into consideration where game was played or the actual quality of the opponent (only won-loss record), so a home win against Binghamton is actually better than a road win against UCLA. RPI tries to lessen the opponent quality problem by factoring in the opponents’ opponents records, but that has its own flaws. It also doesn’t consider the number of noncon games.
Missouri played 3 more noncon games than OSU because of shorter conf schedule and they didn’t play a Linfield. To the latter point, Linfield (8-17), who Beavers beat 82-46 in first game of season, doesn’t factor into SOS because they’re not D1. Missouri played Arkansas-Pine Bluff (9-18) in its first game and beat them 101-79. But since MO’s “let’s get a win in first game” opponent is D1, that bad record is factored into SOS. And given the juggernaut the SEC has become, one would expect those two extra noncon games to be against cupcake like teams (especially given the difficulty of the core of their noncon schedule) — further hurting their noncon SOS.
Now let’s look at the core of the teams’ noncon schedules. Both teams played 6 noncon games against teams better than .500.
Oregon State
W - Troy
W - App St
L - Neb (N)
L - Baylor (N)
L - Pitt (N)
W- UC Davis
Missouri
L - Memphis
W- Minnesota (A)
W- Pittsburgh (A)
L - Kansas (A)
L - Seton Hall (N)
L - Illinois (N)
Hmmmm anything jump out at you? Maybe that 5 of 6 of Missouri’s opponents were P6 with the lone one that wasn’t having beat Clemson, TA&M and UVA. The 3 non-P6 opponents of the Beavs have one quality win among them — a win over Auburn. Or you might have noticed that 3 of Missouri’s games are actual road games. And in one of those away games they beat Pitt 71-64, while the Beavers lost to Pitt at a neutral site 76-51. Man that’s a 22 point swing. I’m sorry but if you can look at that and conclude the Beavers played an overall “stronger noncon slate” because MO played Loyola-Maryland and Central Arkansas in its 2 extra noncon games, you might want to watch more college bball — or maybe stop watching it completely.
The funny thing about this discussion now is that I never said Missouri was better than this year’s team — though those outcomes against common opponent Pittsburgh certainly does give one pause. I’ve just been responding to your ridiculous “those metrics are hogwash if they don’t agree with my side of the argument” approach and your belief that SOS and RPI are the only true metric (well, again, unless they go against your side of the argument).
|
|
