You can say what you want but :-)

USD took Gonzaga to the wire tonight. This league is better than many of you want to admit because of their small gyms. But, you are wrong :upside_down_face:

WCC ranked 13th. For reference, mwc is 8th…

It didn’t go to the wire and why are you posting in the football section?

USD played a very good game but you need neutral officiating to have a chance against Gonzaga when you play your best game. USD didn’t get that. There were so many calls down the stretch that went Gonzaga’s way.

One time both refs blew whistles and one called a foul on Gonzaga and the other called travelling on USD. There was a definite foul but they held on to the travelling call. The other was a call for the ball going out of bounds and the other ref called a foul on USD and the foul call stood. It was another bad call that went against USD.

This league is so ridiculous how they protect Gonzaga.

And by the way, you got owned by Clausewitz.

That’s all political. The east coast always gets more. The WCC is better than they think.

Here comes the conspiracies. :stuck_out_tongue_closed_eyes:

Ironic.

You didn’t glance at the link? It’s not based on polling. The rankings are driven by analytics not opinion. It’s actually pretty rigorous as things go. BPI is one of my favorite metrics. Not perfect but I’ll take it.

You are saying there is no biased opinions put into the statistics? The last time I looked the rankings each week are from observers deciding whose best. So, the very basis starts off as opinion.

Of course you can. But it’s typically in the form of weighting a specific element like home victory margin over road or some other obscure aspect that you can argue with on the margins. It is not going to bias based on geography. BPI, on which these particular rankings are based among other things, does not take into ‘rankings’ or any other opinion poll. Here’s a basic explanation of the statistic.

People can quibble about KenPom or BPI among others, they’re all pretty good. But in general, the WCC is poor.

Bias is conspiracy, is it not? So what is it you are saying? If there is no conspiracy then there can be no bias.

“Each team’s BPI rating represents its projected point differential against an average Division I team on a neutral court. The rating is composed of a predicted offensive and defensive rating, which is on the same net-points scale.”

GR: How are division 1 teams found to be average for the calculation? That would be based on their ranking and who thinks which conference is the strongest to weakest. So, the analytical analysis begins based on opinions. That’s why I said what I said.

It’s just an average of all teams. Conference and ranking is irrelevant. It’s just looking at what did your opponent do against their other opponents, what was the margin, where did they play the game, was anyone injured? So in other words, by taking a baseline we create a common point of comparison to stretch across all teams. A fictitious average team and we pretend that if any given team were to play this fictitious average on a neutral site, what would the margin be? This creates a common numerical unit for us to share with every team. But again, It doesn’t care that Kentucky is in the SEC or Gonzaga is in the WCC. It’s just measuring certain things in the preseason like how many ‘minutes’ are returning to your team and how productive were those minutes? Etc. As the season goes along and we get more data points describing how a team did against other teams (and how those teams did respectively against other teams and so on and so on). Gradually the pre-factors lose weight and it focuses more on current season results. Naturally, this means that BPI is far more predictive at the end of a season than at the beginning. But anyways. The rankings are nowhere on the spreadsheet. It’s also excellent because it takes into account pace of play, injuries, etc.

The one thing it leaves out is matchups and coaching. I think we will have everyone back next year and with more experience we can overcome some of the losses. Bryant will be a senior and stronger. Haws will and should be stronger and hopefully more in control of his anger. I like how he hit that 3 after coming back in. But, how embarrassing was that.

Grasshopper - I think our team would be better if you were hired to be their mental consultant. Kind of like how Phil Jackson was “Big Chief Triangle” to the 90’s Bulls.

As you can see by the reply, you are wasting your time. I suggested that nobody bother trying to have a normal basketball discussion. It won’t matter what you write or how you explain it… it won’t be understood and he will say the opposite because that is what he does…

You mean like individual player matchups and court dynamics? I can see that. It does incorporate coaching in a few different areas. If I remember correctly, Kenpom does a better job in that area.

Incidentally, I think that predictive play design will be one of the most interesting aspects coming out of the new sportsvue technology the NBA is experimenting with. If a computer could help you alter your play design by telling you that a player needs to be standing 3 feet to the left and back a step, that could be incredibly useful stuff that’s so subtle a lot of NBA coaches miss it.

I enjoy seeing the world in numbers.

I do it for my own enjoyment of the sport, and of writing and dialogue. Or maybe I’m a sucker…

I know. I think I could take them into some good meditation programs. Get them mentally prepared to deal with crazy fan conspiracies about them. Get them to relax about them and just play the game. Make the shots especially the layups and 3 pointers.

Ya, sort of like that guy who always turns to a conspiracy for losses and Gonzaga always winning :laughing:

No, you are reasonable. You admit it when someone has an idea. And, yes, I was thinking about individual matchups that can affect the statistics. There’s always a human element that can change any game. That’s why we see upsets and quite a few this year.

Don’t mind Jim. Being Bishop is a lonely calling. Everyone avoids you so they don’t get a new challenging calling. And out in public they don’t want you to see their bad behavior. You should know Jim’s a great guy. Almost as much as his dad :slight_smile:

1 Like

grasshopper,

Are you suggesting that their could be bias with no cause for bias?
Does one actions or lack of actions give reason for some to have bias, or is that just a fantasy?

Craig_Larimer,

or like Phil Jackson and the owners daughter of the Lakers?