I can't really check this, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's the worst loss for a top 25 kenpom team ever.
I know it would never happen but if I was on the bench and a coach was going to put me in just to dribble out the clock I'd love to see a " no thanks". Like when they put in the backup QB just to take a knee. Insulting.Yes, that is exceedingly stupid and I hate it too.
You know when a team is up by 6 or 7 with ~10 seconds left and everyone stops playing and they just dribble out the clock uncontested? Who will be the first team to realize that matters and play hard until the end (like in the old days)?
Fell from 21 to 38 in KenPom.Will be interesting to see how far Iowa falls tomorrow.
I can't really check this, but I wouldn't be surprised if that's the worst loss for a top 25 kenpom team ever.
Who did they lose to? Evansville?Kentucky
Fell from 21 to 38 in KenPom.
Who did they lose to? Evansville?
Lafayette!Wow
That is a rancid loss for their resume
Splitting hairs at this point but this is worse than the Lafayette loss.Lafayette!
Except they're Iowa and we're Rutgers, lol.Splitting hairs at this point but this is worse than the Lafayette loss.
Lafayette beat us at the buzzer. Iowa lost their game by double digits. Ouch.Splitting hairs at this point but this is worse than the Lafayette loss.
Iowa to 60 in the NET (from 27).Likely will be farther for NET. I think Pomeroy still has some prior season data included in his model to cushion wilder swings.
Yup. I'm not going to get over the refs taking that W from us all season.I saw Ohio State go from 25 to 14 this morning!
Iowa to 60 in the NET (from 27).
Ken Pomeroy discussed the somewhat counterintuitive effect on his ratings of pre-season data (and other good stuff) as the guest on yesterday’s Solving Basketball podcast.
Bigtime upset for Cal over UT Arlington moves them up 22 spots 🤣Ohio St 25 ▶ 14, 95-61 Maine 236▶248
VA Tech 14 ▶ 29, 65-70 @ BC 247▶229
Auburn 55 ▶ 30, 84-71 @ Wash 94▶117
Ariz St 22 ▶ 50, 60-97 @ SanFran 119▶92
Iowa 27 ▶ 60, 83-92 vs E.Illinois 350▶333
How far down do you have to be to only gain 17 places with this win?
JMU 54 ▶ 69, 100-107 @ Coppin St 249▶234
Fla-GC 75 ▶ 77, 84-81 vs Canisius(1-9) 283▶261 (Up 21, close loss)
Ohio 169 ▶ 119, 95-76 @ Delaware 165▶191
Richmond 152 ▶ 147, 81-71 vs Bucknell 209▶224
Lafayette(2-11) 311▶271, 90-65 @ La Salle 270▶307
California(1-12) 341▶319, 73-51 vs UT Arlington 248▶284
Including prior year into February is dumb, especially in the portal / 1 and done eraI think he draws an important distinction between his approach and that of NET. Pomeroy is trying to be predictive - and including priors helps to do that (and he's apparently weighting them a bit less earlier in the season this year, but including them further into the season - even into February). NET, though, is meant to be descriptive of performance to date - not predictive of how they'll do in their next game - so priors are data that wasn't generated by the current team.
Not really. You want it to fade out over time but prior expectations are ALWAYS relevant. If Duke and Morgan St. have the same adjusted efficiency over 30 games, who are you betting on when they face off in game 31?Including prior year into February is dumb, especially in the portal / 1 and done era
It’s simply not true if you are trying to make predictions. data from previous years, if used properly, will improve your predictionsLast season has zero to do with this year
It’s simply not true if you are trying to make predictions. data from previous years, if used properly, will improve your predictions
Including prior year into February is dumb, especially in the portal / 1 and done era
Last season has zero to do with this year
Good discussion. It seems obvious that looking at prior years is useful for prediction. While players can turn over from year to year, I think we all agree that the quality of the coach and program matter. New players get coached up by good coaches as the season progresses. Good programs are more likely to have good coaches and good players that are more likely to improve over the course of the season than weaker programs.From the podcast, he said that the day he removed priors in January each year always saw a spike in the data that made it less accurate as a predictive model. He also said he was going to look in the offseason about changing the amount that priors are weighted on a team-by-team basis, based on things like coaching changes.
He's not trying to build a model that shows how well teams have performed in a ranked list - he's trying to build a model that's predictive of future game results. There's no way to do that early in the season without prior data, and he's finding that even in late January his predictive model was more accurate with priors than without.
NET is trying to say whether Team A or Team B has performed better to date. Kenpom is trying to say by how much Team A would beat Team B if they were to play tomorrow. I think that's an important distinction.
It’s simply not true if you are trying to make predictions. data from previous years, if used properly, will improve your predictions
How is this relevant to my comment? I didn't say prior expectations aren't relevant. Prior SEASON data with a different team are not a good predictor of what a different team the next season will due in February and beyond.Not really. You want it to fade out over time but prior expectations are ALWAYS relevant. If Duke and Morgan St. have the same adjusted efficiency over 30 games, who are you betting on when they face off in game 31?
The correct answer is Duke. I'm not sure whether their win prob should be 51% or 60% or what, but it's definitely >50%
How is this relevant to my comment? I didn't say prior expectations aren't relevant. Prior SEASON data with a different team are not a good predictor of what a different team the next season will due in February and beyond.
For example, how is Murray State's stats with Ja relevant next to the next year's team in February when he's gone?
How you are performing with the current team and current roster in the current season is much more relevant
What about teams with an entirely new coaching staff?
Makes sense. I personally don't care about predictive models which are more useful for gambling. I want to see rankings based on the team's performance this season. Merit based.The new coaching staff is something Pomeroy talked about on the podcast, that he's considering adjusting how much prior data should be used in such situations.
Even if you lose a star player like Ja, there is still consistency year to year with returning players and overall system. In Murray State's case, they were definitely worse without Ja in the lineup, but they still played tough defense and went 23-9, tying for 1st in their conference.
Overall, though, he's found that prior season data, even in late January, made his predictive model more accurate. On its own it's not a good predictor, but as a small (and ever decreasing) factor, it seemingly has some benefit if your goal is making a more accurate predictive model.
Makes sense. I personally don't care about predictive models which are more useful for gambling. I want to see rankings based on the team's performance this season. Merit based.
The prior expectations are based in part on how the team performed in the past.How is this relevant to my comment? I didn't say prior expectations aren't relevant. Prior SEASON data with a different team are not a good predictor of what a different team the next season will due in February and beyond.
Definitely much MORE relevant, once you have a decent number of games. But that doesn’t make everyone else irrelevant.For example, how is Murray State's stats with Ja relevant to the next year's team in February when he's gone?
How you are performing with the current team and current roster in the current season is much more relevant
There will be more noise and uncertainty. If you are trying hard to build a preseason model the coach is probably a component, as well as player turnover etc. but the base for all of that is still going to be “how good were they last year?”What about teams with an entirely new coaching staff?