2018-2019 B1G Basketball Thread

[ELA]

Again....many of the metrics that you use are based upon efficiency rather than results.  It makes little sense.  Jerry Palm on the other hand....hasn't bent the knee.  


https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/


It's ridiculous that future results are based upon things like efficiency.  Especially when efficiency ratings do not consider strength of opponent.  Again....results don't seem to matter.  Flawed judgement plays a role.

But that is the sole purpose of the tiers, to project games going forward

[bayareabadger]

Again....many of the metrics that you use are based upon efficiency rather than results.  It makes little sense.  Jerry Palm on the other hand....hasn't bent the knee.  


https://www.cbssports.com/college-basketball/bracketology/


It's ridiculous that future results are based upon things like efficiency.  Especially when efficiency ratings do not consider strength of opponent.  Again....results don't seem to matter.  Flawed judgement plays a role.

A. Using raw results if you want to have a predictive element is not particularly useful 
B. Most efficiency metrics account for SOS
C. Bracketogy is a frivolity. How ESPN or Palm do it differently is interesting, but not worth getting up in arms about. Also RPI is somewhat easy to game and generally not that useful. 
We’ll get to he end of the year and weigh resumes. If those resumes of accomplishments. 
I guess this is my question, what has you perturbed? That our own little small-scale projection system isn’t built purely on past results? That Joe Lunardi is using KenPom projeted record seemingly?

[FearlessF]

Since I'm a Husker fan and didn't spend much time on this thread in the past the questions raised by RestingB!tchFace and the answers have cleared up the "tiers" for me.

Thanks to all

[RestingB!tchFace]

A. Using raw results if you want to have a predictive element is not particularly useful
B. Most efficiency metrics account for SOS
C. Bracketogy is a frivolity. How ESPN or Palm do it differently is interesting, but not worth getting up in arms about. Also RPI is somewhat easy to game and generally not that useful.
We’ll get to he end of the year and weigh resumes. If those resumes of accomplishments.
I guess this is my question, what has you perturbed? That our own little small-scale projection system isn’t built purely on past results? That Joe Lunardi is using KenPom projeted record seemingly?

It's mostly that....like any preseason ranking....certain teams have to dive bomb their way down while other teams have to scratch their way up.  Beat a team a tier above you?  Well that's expected?  Tier 3 team loses at home to a tier 7 team?  No movement.  It's a very subjective ranking system that seems to have little logic built in.  Also....a few posters from some of the best teams seem to be making the decisions without much outside input.  It's an all around odd ranking system.

[ELA]

You keep saying Maryland lost at home, no matter how many times people point out to you it's not.

Generally a team has to get +/-2 before anything is reevaluated, Maryland is currently -1.  But they'd be -1 no matter where we move them, so I'm not sure what you want.  Like everyone has told you, if they fall to -2, thne they probably will be dropped.  Minnesota is currently Even, why would they get moved?  If they get up to +2 (which many have pointed out, the lower you are, the easier it is to add unexpected wins, so if they are undertiered that should quickly correct itself), then they will get moved up.

Also, medina accepts, and invites input from all comers.  The issue is nobody but you sees any reason to move a team up that isn't even +1, let alone +2.  That isn't rejecting outside input, that's rejecting a singular viewpoint, that stands at odds with all other views.  And I think the longer you're here, the more you'll see the posters here (more often that not) underrate their own team, rather than the opposite, we are a bunch of sandbaggers.  I personally refuse to believe MSU has a shot at beating UM, even at home, until/unless it happens.

[medinabuckeye1]

This is VERY MUCH the case.  A lot of people expect homerism but instead what I see here is @mcwterps1 has been telling me for months that I have his Terps too high and a month or so ago @bwarbiany was telling me that I had his Boilermakers too high.  
The same thing happens in the football power rankings.  It is almost always Buckeye fans that have Ohio State lowest, Spartan fans that have MSU lowest, etc.  
I want to add, upthread somewhere @RestingB!tchFace said that it was fans of a few of the best teams seem to have all of the input.  Well, I have a lot of input and I wish my Buckeyes were one of the best teams, but sadly they aren't.  
Finally, it seems that @RestingB!tchFace thinks that Minnesota should move up.  Ok, lets contemplate that.  They currently have one positive upset (win at UW) and one negative upset (loss at IL).  If we moved them up into tier-4:

• The win at UW would still be a positive upset +1
• The loss at Illinois would still be a negative upset -1 = even
• The home loss to Maryland would become a negative upset -1 = -1

So instead of being even with one positive and one negative upset, they would be -1 with one positive and two negative upsets.  That wouldn't be logical.  

Now lets look at Maryland:  If we moved them down to tier-4:

• The NEUTRAL SITE loss to Illinois would still be a negative upset -1
• The road win at Minnesota would become a positive upset +1 = even
• The road win at Ohio State would become a positive upset +1 = +1

This one is a tougher call.  If we moved Maryland down they would be +1 instead of the -1 that they are now.  Right now it is basically a wash.  They are -1 in tier-3 and would be +1 in tier-4.  Here are their upcoming games:

• Their game against Wisconsin on Friday will not change anything because they are expected to lose.  If they do, then they'll still be -1.  If they win then they'll be even.  
• Next Wednesday they are expected to win at Nebraska.  If they don't, they'll get moved down (unless they beat UW because then the upsets would offset).  
• Two weeks from yesterday they are expected to beat Purdue at home.  If they don't then we'll have to decide whether to move Maryland down or Purdue up.  
• On February 6 they are expected to lose at Michigan.  
• On February 19 they are expected to lose at Iowa.  

We'll monitor this and move them if/when it is appropriate.  

[betarhoalphadelta]

Additional point. If you moved Maryland down and kept Minnesota in tier-5, as you point out that makes Maryland +1 due to a road win. But it would also cause Minnesota to drop from even to -1, without even moving them. 

[Anonymous Coward]

https://mobile.twitter.com/totally_t_bomb/status/1090633684049383424?ref_src=twsrc%5Etfw%7Ctwcamp%5Etweetembed%7Ctwterm%5E1090633684049383424&ref_url=https%3A%2F%2Fmgoblog.com%2Fcontent%2Fbar-more-dust-solid-and-probably-named-black-rose-or-similar

[847badgerfan]

As I peek at this Rutgers/Indiana tilt I can't help but pose this here.


Back in 1990, and maybe a little later, IU was talked about in the same breath as Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Dook and UCLA*. A blueblood program, with nary a doubt.


Fast-forward to today, and I wonder if IU, (* and UCLA), can ever regain that status. They have run through coaches left and right. They have fans that have expectations to be like they once were. Will they ever be like that? Has it been too long?


I mean, the kids looking for those blue blood offers today don't have any memory of IU being elite. None. 30 years. So?

[mcwterps1]

Maryland has potential, because the young kids will get better and better as the year goes on, but so will everyone else's kids. 

Bruno is a man inside, and Cowan can create on his own, but beyond that, they all can struggle easily. 

If they had 1 more older and consistent performer, I'd say they are worth the high tier. Even Jalen Smith has struggled. 

They would have to score more consistently from other sources for me to be higher on them.

I am impressed with the defense though. There is length and speed to disrupt, but we miss too many layups and easy put backs, it's frustrating. 

[ELA]

Langford having season ending surgery.  I'm guessing that ends any sort of title hopes.  Just hoping for 2nd weekend now.

[bayareabadger]

This Maryland-UW game is weird. 

Based on watching the first half of the first meeting and then going to be, I feel like there's a structural bad matchup buried somewhere in there. Great big, two shooters, good guard, that's a handful.

The line isn't out, but UW is a 6-point KenPom favorite. That feels high to me, and UW seems to have been getting a few breaks with bad opponent shooting and being hot from 3, so there might be a regression game soon. 

The Badgers are likewise in a weird spot. After this, they're likewise projected to be favored by four at Minnesota. I'm leery of both of these. If they manage to win both somehow, they're in oddly good shape. At Mich is a loss, and MSU in Madison is trending closer, even before the Langford thing. UW was for a while projected to finish 6-4 per that system, and now it's up to 7-3. That seems a little bullish.

We'll have to see. If UW's shooter swing forward could shoot better, like not 0-7, that'd be nice. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Indiana's upset loss at Rutgers rearranged the projections.  Before I get to that, we now have three teams outside of +/-1:

• -2 Indiana.  The Hoosiers have an upset home loss to Nebraska and an upset road loss to Rutgers.  I'm not sure how we should treat that because my sense is that Nebraska was a much better team a couple of weeks ago when they won in Bloomington.  Also, Rutgers is one of the +2 teams (see below) so it is possible that they should move up . . .
• +2 Illinois.  The Illini have an upset home win over Minnesota and the upset neutral site win over Maryland.  They are a bottom-tier team so having more positive than negative upsets is partially just a result of having more chances for positive variance.  I don't think they are ready to be moved just yet.  
• +2 Rutgers.  The Scarlet Knights have an upset home loss to Northwestern and THREE positive upsets:

• at Penn State
• vs Ohio State
• vs Indiana

If they hadn't lost the home game to Northwestern I would move them up but that is a troubling loss.  Their three positive upsets obviously more than offset it but, like Illinois, Rutgers is in the bottom tier so part of the reason for having so many positive upsets is that they have LOTS of opportunities for positive variance.  

I'm not 100% convinced that we need to move any teams just yet.  I think I'll hold here until after this weekend's games.  

The current tiers (with +/- variance*):

• Michigan State (EVEN), Michigan (-1)
• Purdue (EVEN)
• Maryland (-1)
• Wisconsin (+1, +2-1=+1), Iowa (-1)
• Ohio State (EVEN +1, -1), Minnesota (EVEN +1, -1), Indiana (-2)
• Northwestern (+1), Nebraska (EVEN +1, -1)
• Illinois (+2), Rutgers (+2, +3-1=+2), Penn State (-1)

*The team got there the shortest possible way unless indicated.  Ie, if a team is +1 with just one positive upset I just put +1 but if they are +1 with two positive upsets and a negative upset I explain that. 

Updated projected final standings/BTT seeds:

• 18-2/29-2 Michigan (wins tiebreaker with MSU based on record against PU)
• 18-2/27-4 Michigan State
• 17-3/24-7 Purdue
• 13-7/22-9 Maryland
• 12-8/20-11 Wisconsin
• 11-9/22-9 Iowa
• 9-11/19-12 Ohio State (wins tiebreaker with MN based on H2H, no game in Minneapolis)
• 9-11/19-12 Minnesota
• 8-12/17-14 Indiana
• 7-13/16-15 Northwestern
• 6-14/10-21 Illinois
• 5-15/12-18 Rutgers (wins tiebreaker over UNL based on H2H, no game in Lincoln)
• 5-15/15-16 Nebraska
• 2-18/9-22 Penn State

[MaximumSam]

As I peek at this Rutgers/Indiana tilt I can't help but pose this here.


Back in 1990, and maybe a little later, IU was talked about in the same breath as Kansas, Kentucky, UNC, Dook and UCLA*. A blueblood program, with nary a doubt.


Fast-forward to today, and I wonder if IU, (* and UCLA), can ever regain that status. They have run through coaches left and right. They have fans that have expectations to be like they once were. Will they ever be like that? Has it been too long?


I mean, the kids looking for those blue blood offers today don't have any memory of IU being elite. None. 30 years. So?

Man, how about Rutgers? 4-6 in conference and smack dab in the middle of the standings.
Anyways, I watch IU, because OSU and Gene Smith caught a lot of flak for not getting Archie Miller.  It's not as if there is a wide berth between the two teams this season, and both teams are recruiting well.  But Indiana might take a bit longer to get there - if Langford goes pro they lose their two top scorers and the rest of the team has looked a little lost at times.  So I hope they don't make a rash decision if they have another average season next year.  That's the fool's gold of basketball recruiting - getting a guy who will leave after one season doesn't help the program long term, and an average program needs long term help.