Quote:
Originally Posted by Chiefs Pantalones
This isn't true. KenPom said we'd finish 4th.
|
Even he doesn't take those that seriously, but this is apparently what those are based on. Seems a lot of it is just looking at last year's team and going from there (and we both were quite flawed to begin with and also lost quite a bit of talent with the departure of the team's 2 best players).
http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/web...n_ratings_2014
Quote:
Pre-season ratings 2014
by Ken Pomeroy on Saturday, October 26, 2013
Pre-season ratings have been posted for the upcoming season. When I first started doing these before the 2011 season, I thought I was pretty awesome. It was kind of a big deal to get every team’s lineup data, mix in some limited recruiting info, and produce a rating that wasn’t laughably horrible. But then Hanner came along with his lineup-based approach and TeamRankings did something that is probably fairly sophisticated, and my preseason ratings became the simplest algorithm possible without being a complete joke.
The system is largely the same as in recent seasons. It independently predicts a team’s adjusted offensive and defensive efficiency. As a reminder, it uses information split into two categories:
- Base level of the program. This takes into account the last five seasons of data for the same unit (offense for predicting offense) and the last season for the opposite unit (defense for predicting offense). It also includes data for how much money the program has spent on men’s basketball for the last three seasons. The bulk of this component is determined by the most recent season’s performance of the unit.
You can make a decent predictive system just by knowing what is normal for a program. If we were predicting the Big 12 standings in 2025 (assuming the conference exists), it would be reasonably safe to say that Kansas will have a winning record and TCU will have a losing record. We can say that with some confidence even though some of the players on those rosters haven’t picked up a basketball yet.
- Personnel. This component handles who’s coming back from last season’s team and which impact recruits are being added to the roster. More impact is given to returning players from earlier classes. And minutes played by those with a high-efficiency/high-usage profile are particularly important. Recruits in the RSCI top 100 have some influence here as well, although most of the influence is in the top 50.
The goal here is really to get each conference’s pecking order correct and to predict end-of-season ratings. To that extent, if a player is expected to be available by late-January or so, he’s included in the personnel calculations. This applies to Louisville’s Chane Behanan and Florida’s Chris Walker, while Georgetown’s Greg Whittington is not included although he may well see action later in the season.
|