Digging Deeper Into Pomeroy & the ACC
by acc_10k on Jan 1, 2012 6:46 PM EST
Email
Print
If there is anything we should have learned from Steven by now, it is that RPI is meaningless in actually evaluating basketball teams, and the Pomeroy ratings are the true measure of man. Is it true the ACC is really down this year? As we wind down the non-conference portion of the schedule, here's where we stand:
- North Carolina (5)
- Duke (8)
- Virginia (29)
- Virginia Tech (35)
- Florida State (39)
- Miami (57)
- NC State (62)
- Clemson (97)
- Georgia Tech (103)
- Maryland (160)
- Wake Forest (164)
- Boston College (255)
How does this compare? Well last year, which if you'll recall was not historically strong, the ACC finished with six teams in the top 36, and only Wake was worse than 94th. (They were, um, quite a bit worse. Keep scrolling down - you're not there yet.) In 2010, all 12 teams finished in the top 76, and five were 27th or better. In 2009, Virginia was worst at 104th, ten teams were in the top 80, six in the top 40, and four in the top 25. In 2008, NC State was the worst team in the conference at 96th (this was the year we scored 13 in the first half at Chapel Hill.) Eight teams were in the top 56. In 2007, all 12 teams were 87th or better, and the conference had nine of the top 45 and four of the top 17.
In case that was too many numbers in one paragraph: the second worst-ranked ACC team of the past five seasons, Virginia in 2009, is the rough equivalent of this year's Clemson and Georgia Tech teams. Who, if you noticed, are waaayy ahead of the bottom three right now. The worst team of the Sidney Lowe error ranks ahead of five 2012 ACC teams. So this isn't outhouse-type stinky. This is a Calcutta-slum dysentary outbreak style shit-storm.
- Rating the schedules of each team: Duke (12), UNC (47), NC State (72), Miami (77), Florida St. (107), VaTech (169), Wake (228), BC (235), GaTech (256), Clemson (307), Maryland (309), UVa (332). 'Cus if you make it look like a soft, creamy cupcake, maybe people won't notice it's shit until they bite into it. (And good for you, BC! The only team whose SOS beats its rating.)
- The ACC has three of the eight luckiest teams in the nation - Duke (8th), Wake (5th), and Maryland as the nation's very luckiest team. State is slightly better than average (92nd) in this category, which compares your actual record to your predicted record based on offensive and defensive rating. Clemson and Georgia Tech are in the bottom 20 in this category, which explains how they have 7-6 records despite overall ratings much higher than Maryland and Wake.
- If you're looking for a game that will be fun, check out Wake at home on Feb. 4. They are top 50 in nation in adjusted tempo, 213th in adjusted defense. Pointspolsion! Also possibly Miami, which doesn't bring the tempo, but does match us with a top 30 offense and a not-top-100 defense. Not fun: Florida State (#5 defense, #175 offense), Clemson, and Georgia Tech.
20 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
I wondered that too
I think maybe some of the weaker teams rate worse on Pomeroy than on RPI? The list, I think complete:
Syracuse (4), Indiana (7), Texas (26), Stanford (32), Vanderbilt (40), St.Bonaventure (94), Princeton (134), UNCA (148), Campbell (179), Northeastern (199), WCU (216), NC Central (217), Morehead St (228), Elon (230)
Delaware St. is 289.
we have a higher rpi and sos on other sites
http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html
54. N.C. St. SOS 28th
http://statsheet.com/mcb/rankings/RPI
49. NC State SOS 29th
http://www.cbssports.com/collegebasketball/teams/page/NCST/north-carolina-state-wolfpack
RPI 47th
The RPI isn't the same thing
Those rankings are all trying (obviously not perfectly) to duplicate the NCAA’s RPI formula. Pomeroy is ranking teams based on per-possession stats for points and points allowed, and the strength of the competition it was done against. The biggest difference is margin of victory is a big deal, instead of not mattering at all, and it makes the rankings (usually) a lot better for evaluating teams. But the RPI is the one that is used by the selection committee, so it actually matters how you rate there.
Our opponents RPI’s (using RealTimeRPI – don’t know why, but the different sites do vary):
Syracuse (1), Indiana (16), Vanderbilt (30), Texas (72), Stanford (84), St.Bonaventure (92), Elon (116), Princeton (130), UNCA (144), Campbell (173), Northeastern (184), Western Carolina (208), NC Central (224), Morehead St. (234)
Hmm...
As much as I don’t like seeing State in the bottom half of the ACC, I think the Pomeroy ratings are about right here. Here’s hoping that Gottfried and the team can pick it up in conference play. I’m hoping for a top-six finish and would love a Thursday-bye in the ACCT. Given our schedule and the stench of the league, I don’t think it’s out of the real of possibility.
Predicting our ACC record
OK. Based on the RPI rankings, let’s say we win all of the games against lower RPI rated teams and lose all of the games to higher rated RPI teams (except Miami, too close to call so we split with the Canes). That works out to 9-7.
Probably a good guess right now
That almost certainly wouldn’t get us in, because we would be in such lousy shape in terms of quality wins. Also, that’s a path that pretty much guarantees losing the tie-breaker for seeding in the ACC Tourney.
Pomeroy might have us as a slight underdog at Clemson and GT, and even or slightly favored at home against UVa. I think if we go 9-7, it’s more likely to have 6 or 7 home wins. Or, a more optimistic spin, if we go 8-0 against the bad teams, I think we’ll have a better shot at 11-5. Anyone who wins all the games against the bad teams is either insanely lucky, or has a big enough margin of error to to win more than one against the top half.
The schedule sets up to get people’s hopes really high. In the first 10 games we have two each against BC, WF, and GT, and don’t play Duke, FSU, or VT. Anything less than 8-2 is nothing to get excited about. (Even 8-2 means we lost at Miami or home against Virginia, in addition to the probable pounding in Chapel Hill.)
I dont think 11-5 is required
9-7 or 10-6 with a win or 2 in the acc tourny and we are dancing
Call me Mr Grumpy ...
..but this is all meaningless. We could have predicted all of this in September. We lost to all the good teams and beat all the weaker teams in the pre-season. Thank heavens we beat the weaker teams, but nothing to get excited about. We expected to beat them if the team was playing well at all. We certainly had the talent to get it done. And some of them were closer than they should have been.
What matters is seeing the results of these 15 games reaping rewards in conference play starting Sunday. We all know there is no equivalent to ACC play, and until you get into it, you really don’t know what you’ve got.
It certainly looks like Gott has added a method to the madness we watched last year. I think last year proved that decent but under-developed talent plus inadequate coaching was worth a 15-16 season. I think we can all agree that our talent has improved this year. Zo, Richard, Calvin, CJW and Painter are undeniably playing more productively. Scott seems a little more able to create a shot. From a coaching perspective, again there is no denying that we are seeing game strategy unfold on the floor where once there was none.
So, now we come to the big question. What’s the new staff worth?
My opinion? I think we continue to get better. They are better 1/1/12 than 12/1/2011. I think we can win 10 during the season, taking us into the ACCT at 21 wins. I think we can win 2 in the ACCT, giving us 23 wins and getting us into the dance. And I think maybe we win 2 there.
I think a real coaching staff is worth 10 wins if they’ve got a talented team that will learn, and can avoid costly injuries.
To quote a great man, “…you may say I’m a dreamer, but I’m not the only one …”
GO PACK!!
We played well during the non-con portion
At the start of the season we lost a few games we should of won (i.e. Vandy; Stanford) and played well in games against Indiana and Syracuse. I saw what I wanted to see, a TEAM, rather than a bunch of individuals, which was a drastic difference in terms of play.
Success in the 2nd half for me, is winning games at home we should win, winning a few games on the road that we probably shouldn’t (VT, Miami, Clemson – only because we never play well at Clemson) and getting to 20 wins. The ACC is weak. It is Dook/UNX and then a massive, massive drop-off. VT, UVA, Miami, FSU and us, I think are all close, after that, there appears to be another big drop-off to Maryland, GT, Wake and then another massive drop-off to Clemson, BC.
Indiana is
the one that we should have won. State was up by what? 8? With 6 minutes to go I think. I don’t really think we were up on Vandy. But we let let Stanford and Indy come back and win those 2 games. Imagine how we would look now if we had beat Indy then.
by SunDropDrinker13 on Jan 3, 2012 10:35 AM EST up reply actions
Whoops
Seth Davis disagrees that this will be a good season for the Pack.
http://sportsillustrated.cnn.com/2012/writers/seth_davis/01/02/stock.report/1.html
I must be wrong.
I'm conflicted on these blowhards
Sometimes I think: “It’s their job to give opinions. They have to write something and strong opinions make for a more compelling read.”
Other times I think: “Seth Davis is a full bag of used douche who is too lazy to back up his opinion with trivial things like facts or stats. He only stated that we aren’t good because we played well against good teams. His column should be called Basesless Opinions Seth Davis Thinks To Himself While He Takes a Crap”
by PackMentality on Jan 2, 2012 5:53 PM EST up reply actions
I'm Never Conflicted About This Guy
" Basesless Opinions Seth Davis Thinks To Himself While He Takes a Crap" should read, “Baseless Opinions Seth Davis Read From Somebody Else While …”
Never seen anything original or creative out of this guy.
He thinks Maryland hasn't played bad?
They’ve been horrible! They beat 3 of the worst teams in D1 by a combined 12 points, and they haven’t played bad?! This guy should pay everyone that reads his trash for our wasted time and the brain cells that were killed.
by SunDropDrinker13 on Jan 3, 2012 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
I honestly think we can do 11-5
I think we were || this close from being 12-2 right now and I think this state team will do well in the weakened ACC.
I love the Steelers.
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
Recent FanPosts
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
