2019-2020 B1G Basketball Thread

[medinabuckeye1]

• tOSU, MSU, UMD, M, PU
• IA, PSU
• IU
• MN, IL, UW, RU
• NU, UNL

Those would be mine.

If we go with these, the upsets so far are:

The problem is:

That would make 3 major upsets 2 games in.  It may eventually smooth out and be ok, but I think too much is still unknown to get that detailed.

Two thoughts on this:
First, it is definitely difficult to get so detailed with so much still unknown.  That hasn't stopped us from trying in the past.  We just set up our tiers and if they need adjustments, we'll adjust them as we go.  

Second, it was phrased here as three upsets two games in, but on an overall level I'm looking at it as three upsets in 14 games.  That isn't that bad.  That is 21% of games resulting in upsets.  For comparison, at the end of the year last year we had 33 upsets in 140 games which is 23.6%.  
Compare to:

• OSU, MSU, UMD
• UM, IA, PSU
• IU, MN, PU, RU, IL, WI
• <blank>
• NU, UNL

That makes Michigan's loss at Illinois no longer an upset.  Purdue's loss at UNL is still an upset.  Ohio State's loss at MN is still an upset.  I didn't check everything else.  I still like the above but more thoughts?  

I will say that I think bwar has a point, maybe there should be a blank tier above NU/UNL because that gap looks pretty big.  

[Abba]

I'm ok with that, but I think Nebraska maybe should move up to tier 4 there.  They took IU to overtime on the road and beat Purdue.  Yes, a small sample size, but we can always bump them down later if they lose at home to a few of those tier 3 teams.

[betarhoalphadelta]

I absolutely disagree with any system that has Purdue in tier 1, regardless of what KenPom says. The defense is a tier 1 defense, the offense is tier 3 or 4 at this point. If the offense gets fixed, this might be a tier 1 team. But it's nowhere near there today, and we don't see evidence that it's turning around.

I don't think you move Nebraska up. They just lost at home to KenPom #232 North Dakota. Their two B1G games looked like they were maybe turning a corner, but that suggests not, and that their home court advantage isn't sufficient to be projected to beat any of those teams in tier 3.

I think Hoiberg might be a good coach, and he might have enough talent to upset some teams [as done with Purdue], but tier 4 would project them to beat a number of teams that I don't think they should be projected to beat. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Sagarin Predictor as of today:

Can you sort this by rating and repost it?  

For the tiers that I proposed I just used the KenPom rankings that @MaximumSam posted and then put the tier divides in where the biggest gaps were.  Ie:

• The five teams that I put in tier-1 are #1, #5, #8, #11, and #13.  Those are all reasonably close together (biggest gap is four from tOSU to MSU).  Then there is a seven team gap, then
• The two teams that I put in tier-2 are #20 and #24.  Those are pretty close together then there is a 10 team gap, then
• I put #34 IU alone in tier-3 because they are 10 spots behind #24 PSU and 11 spots ahead of #45 MN
• The teams I put in tier-4 are #45, #46, #51, and #53.  Those are all pretty close together then there is a HUMONGOUS gap, then
• I put #100 NU and #139 UNL in tier-5

I'd like to look at Sagarin the same way and compare more directly.  Thanks.  

[Abba]

I don't think you move Nebraska up. They just lost at home to KenPom #232 North Dakota. Their two B1G games looked like they were maybe turning a corner, but that suggests not, and that their home court advantage isn't sufficient to be projected to beat any of those teams in tier 3.

Whoops, I missed that result.  Yes, I think they belong in tier 5 then.

[medinabuckeye1]

Whoops, I missed that result.  Yes, I think they belong in tier 5 then.

Based solely on the two league games, UNL looks pretty good.  Later in the season I base my thoughts on tiers almost entirely on league results and just ignore the OOC results because there is so much fluctuation in level of opposition and teams getting better or not getting better but this early you really can't.  Each team only has two league results and that is just way too small of a sample size to base this on.  If they still look that good in league games at the end of January . . .

[betarhoalphadelta]

Here you go... 

[medinabuckeye1]

Here you go...

Thank you.  

Ok, here are the B1G's teams with their sagrin and kenpom rankings and the difference (relative to other B1G teams):



So the two systems agree on tOSU, MSU, UMD, M, NU, and UNL.  That is almost half the conference.  Then the only disagreement on IA, PSU, IU, and MN is that KenPom has Purdue ahead of all of them while Sagrin has PU behind all of them.  Then the only disagreement on IL and UW is that Sagrin has RU ahead of both of them while KenPom has RU behind both of them.  

So proposed tiers combining both of these:

• tOSU, MSU, UMD M (the top-4 in both)
• IA, PSU, PU (#5, 6, and 9 per Sagrin, #5, 6, and 7 per KenPom)
• IU (#7/8)
• MN, IL, UW, RU (#8, 10, 11, and 12 per sagrin, #9, 10, 11, and 12 per KenPom)
• NU, UNL (the bottom 2 in both)

Thoughts?

[Abba]

It seems a bit unnecessary to put IU in its own tier.  They are 11-1, but they did not look good at all in conference games.  I think I'd rather just slide them up or down to combine the tiers.  At this point I'll say down and keep a close eye on them on whether they should be moved up.  I also really don't want to put PU tier 1 at this point, but if enough argue the other way, then I'll let it go.  

Making those adjustments would give us:

• tOSU, MSU, UMD, M
• IA, PSU, PU
• IU, MN, IL, UW, RU
• (Empty)
• NU, UNL

[betarhoalphadelta]

• tOSU, MSU, UMD, M
• IA, PSU, PU
• IU, MN, IL, UW, RU
• (Empty)
• NU, UNL

I'm okay with this.

[medinabuckeye1]

Making those adjustments would give us:

• tOSU, MSU, UMD, M
• IA, PSU, PU
• IU, MN, IL, UW, RU
• (Empty)
• NU, UNL

Just a note:
Sliding IU down a tier has only a minor impact on them. In this case, no impact at all because the creation of an empty tier below that means that what we have really done is to slide MN, IL, UW, and RU up.

The big impact is on them and on the tier-2 teams.

I'm not arguing against this, just pointing out what it does.

[Abba]

Looking at those tiers, I would expect, or at least favor the tier 3 teams at home to beat the tier 2 teams.  I feel like tier 1 are the tourney locks, tier 2 are the tourney probables, while tier 3 are good enough to get in if they can perform slightly above (maybe +2 wins) their tier.

[847badgerfan]

Looking at those tiers, I would expect, or at least favor the tier 3 teams at home to beat the tier 2 teams.  I feel like tier 1 are the tourney locks, tier 2 are the tourney probables, while tier 3 are good enough to get in if they can perform slightly above (maybe +2 wins) their tier.

Correct. One tier below beating a team from a tier above while playing at home is not an upset. To be an upset, the difference would have to be 2 tiers. 


I know Medina has a list of all of the scenarios, and what constitutes an upset or not.

[mcwterps1]

I mean, it's the second-highest rated since the title team, and you tell us they're all monstrously overrated, so checks out.

Cool. 
Confirmed.