If you believe in KenPom then you'd have to love Gonzaga
- Thread starter Smashcat
- Start date
Gonzaga probably is better than their record. I could see them beating Houston in the second round, picked that in my bracket.
Took the same thing. We know it won't be chalk and that one doesn't see far fetched
When I watched them in Seattle, I thought they were going be a top 10-15 type team all year. They have good guards and their big was a force that game.
Not a lot of pressure on them entering this year’s tournament. I think they smoke uga and will give Houston a game.
Not a lot of pressure on them entering this year’s tournament. I think they smoke uga and will give Houston a game.
The fantasy world in which I partly reside has the Zags shocking the Cougars and UK beating the Vols a third time to setup a UK - Zags elite eight game. Our first two games, we win over Troy and Illinois by 30+ each game. We then go on to win #9 by beating Auburn and dUKe. LOL !
but that's the fantasy side
Realistically, losing to UT once we meet them on the second weekend would be more in line to what one would think.
But I dunno, this might be the biggest rollercoaster part of our season, yet. Love that our team and family has stuck together and believes we can win. Because we can. We've proven that, and for the rest of the country to sleep on Kentucky ?
well, I don't mind that a bit, bring them all on. It's madness, anything can happen.
but that's the fantasy side
Realistically, losing to UT once we meet them on the second weekend would be more in line to what one would think.
But I dunno, this might be the biggest rollercoaster part of our season, yet. Love that our team and family has stuck together and believes we can win. Because we can. We've proven that, and for the rest of the country to sleep on Kentucky ?
well, I don't mind that a bit, bring them all on. It's madness, anything can happen.
They lost to St. Mary's twice. I believe they were highly ranked in Aike's model as well. Kind of a head scratcher.
The issue is...........despite this.......they will still be an underdog vs a 1 seed.
Then people will just say "see they were overrated" lol.
They are probably somewhere between the seed they got and the computer metric and quite possibly much closer to the computer metric.
Then people will just say "see they were overrated" lol.
They are probably somewhere between the seed they got and the computer metric and quite possibly much closer to the computer metric.
This is also why people will point and say we can't just can the committee and go strictly by computer metrics. People would flip if Gonzaga was given a 2 or 3 seed.
Even tho, it's already been shown this is superior to "resume based" seeding. But on the other hand, results should count I guess for something.
Even tho, it's already been shown this is superior to "resume based" seeding. But on the other hand, results should count I guess for something.
I agree. Houston is a monster, will be one of the best round of 32 games in recent memory. All the pressure will be on Sampson here, which is why I picked the Dogs
It's a bit crazy......that's a tough 2nd round match for Houston. I figured once the Zags were hovering around that line I was thinking oh man some 1 seed isn't gonna be thrilled with that lol.
Idk, never really loved Gonzaga. I've always thought two things have worked against them. 1. They don't usually have elite talent. When they do, you can trust them, but they often don't have the elite talent that other top10 teams have and 2. Their competition in conference play is just too weak for their ability. They aren't getting tested enough. They aren't going to see the speed, length and athleticism in the WCC then they will in even just the 1st round of the NCAAT this year.
Now you couple that with a year where they weren't quite the dominant force in the WCC as they usually are... and.. idk. Should they be higher than anyone 8 seed? Yeah. But I don't have them going far.
The good news is they are playing in boring ass Kansas, so not as likely for Mark Few to get loaded and grab another DUI. If this was in Vegas or Nola or Nashville.. different story.
Now you couple that with a year where they weren't quite the dominant force in the WCC as they usually are... and.. idk. Should they be higher than anyone 8 seed? Yeah. But I don't have them going far.
The good news is they are playing in boring ass Kansas, so not as likely for Mark Few to get loaded and grab another DUI. If this was in Vegas or Nola or Nashville.. different story.
I don't know how to feel or what to think about the conference thing.
I mean it makes logical sense. Playing against tougher competition should in theory help. Playing weaker teams time and time again should make it harder when you do have to face a team that's very good.
But then things don't tend to play out like it. We'll see how the SEC does this year but previous the last few dominant conferences ended up having a bunch of teams go to the tournament and not perform to their seed level.
This is also an argument as to why people don't think Duke will win the title.
I just don't know at this point how much (if it does at all).........matter.
I mean it makes logical sense. Playing against tougher competition should in theory help. Playing weaker teams time and time again should make it harder when you do have to face a team that's very good.
But then things don't tend to play out like it. We'll see how the SEC does this year but previous the last few dominant conferences ended up having a bunch of teams go to the tournament and not perform to their seed level.
This is also an argument as to why people don't think Duke will win the title.
I just don't know at this point how much (if it does at all).........matter.
I don’t believe in Kenpom.
Kenpom is a very useful tool.
But the way you improve on Kenpom is by beating teams that you shouldn’t be able to beat if you go only by Kenpom. That’s not even a problem. It’s just the way the tool works. Like any tool, you have to know how it works in order to use it properly.
Kenpom is a very useful tool.
But the way you improve on Kenpom is by beating teams that you shouldn’t be able to beat if you go only by Kenpom. That’s not even a problem. It’s just the way the tool works. Like any tool, you have to know how it works in order to use it properly.
But isn't that how things should work?
To me, this isn't any different than looking at wins and losses and adjusting expectations and rating based on those results. It's just wins/losses sets that line at zero.........whereas with Kenpom it's all about what you would be expected to do given your talent level and your opponents.
Should win by 20 and only win by 10 = you move down. Win by 30 = you move up.
Seems logical to me.
The thing too about the conference strength and whether that helps/hurts.............with the tournament..........it's always a small sample.
So we never really get a true answer to the question.
If the Zags beat Houston, does that mean their computer metric was justified? If they lose in the first round, does that mean they were rated too highly in the metric?
I'm not sure either of those things are true or could be known from single results.
So we never really get a true answer to the question.
If the Zags beat Houston, does that mean their computer metric was justified? If they lose in the first round, does that mean they were rated too highly in the metric?
I'm not sure either of those things are true or could be known from single results.
I think once a conference gets 10 teams in.. they are undoubtedly going to have some lower seeds that probably won't be favored. I'm sure if the 14 SEC teams in.. 3 or 4 will drop in round 1, and close to half will be gone by end of round 2.
Gonzaga is maybe the most unique example of a team just outplayed it's conference (Iona is another lesser example). It seems that they just put far more effort and resources in their basketball team, than places like Santa Clara and Pepperdine. It sort of seems like they just beat up on the WCC, stack their wins and bolster their metrics doing so.
But, your competition doesn't neccessrily dictate how good you are.. gonzaga could be a great team that just happens to play worse teams. Not much you can do. But I still believe they're probably bowing out in round 1 or 2.
See the first part I think this is why you can't just say "oh the SEC went 6-2 in the tournament". I think you need to look at how the teams do relative to the seeding they were given. I think that's the only way to look at this accurately. If UK gets a 3 seed, they should make the S16. If they do, they have performed as expected. If not they didn't.
It is interesting tho. It seems like the biggest sticking point to me with all these metrics is "these metrics supposedly adjust for SOS but are they adjusting accurately". Because in theory, the Zags or Duke for that matter, shouldn't be able to just bolster metrics. They obviously have to win by a much much greater margin than say an SEC team this year. The system should account for that. But are they accounting enough? That's the interesting question to me. And also why I say they are probably somewhere between the computer metric and seed. Because even me, who is a big believer of these systems, aren't fully 100% on board with some of the mid major rankings in these things.
But if that's how it should work and that's how it is working I guess I'm a bit confused as to why you don't believe in it?
Gonzaga is a really weird outlier this year. Kenpom isn’t the only metric that really likes them, but their resume isn’t great after they had a stretch in December where they just couldn’t seem to close out a game against their best non-conference competition then took a couple of losses they frankly shouldn’t have early in conference play before seeming to right the ship late. They objectively didn’t earn much more than the seed they got since that’s based on accomplishments and not projections, but that’s potentially a really brutal draw for Houston to likely play them as a second round opponent.
The thing is if Gonzaga played in the SEC this year, how would they have done?
In other words do they have a not so great resume because they aren't a good team or do they not have a great resume because they lack opportunities for those type of wins.
If they played in the SEC, they would have had Q1 games left and right. Half those games or so would be at home. They'd have been favored in quite a bit of them and all of a sudden the resume would have looked much better.
........that's why it's so hard to evaluate teams from mid major conferences that lack these opportunities and why they tend to be the ones with the most disagreement in the Bracket Matrix.
In other words do they have a not so great resume because they aren't a good team or do they not have a great resume because they lack opportunities for those type of wins.
If they played in the SEC, they would have had Q1 games left and right. Half those games or so would be at home. They'd have been favored in quite a bit of them and all of a sudden the resume would have looked much better.
........that's why it's so hard to evaluate teams from mid major conferences that lack these opportunities and why they tend to be the ones with the most disagreement in the Bracket Matrix.
It’s not meant to be believed in.
It’s a tool. It provides numbers that show trends. Because that’s a lot handier than tracking all those same little numbers by hand. And because those trends can be useful as a resource for human beings in helping us make predictions based on a wider range of data as well as deductive logic, insight, and intuition. The tool itself is not making predictions. At least not with the sets of numbers this thread is referring to (I believe there may be some prediction functionality for paid users but I wouldn’t swear to it either way.)
Regarding what this thread is addressing and what most people think of as Kenpom, if you take its trends as predictions and if you believe in them then you’re doing it wrong.
Latest posts
-
-
Time to lay down its hard to beat a team 3 times- Latest: OHIO COLONEL
-
-
-
