Dakich raving about Purdue "getting jobbed" nationally....

[BoilerGal74]

... and giving great reasons why we should be at least a 3 if we win B1G Tourney. As well as Purdue better than Gonzaga and West Virginia...Said last night's game was huge for Purdue and no one's paying attention. Givem hell Danny Boy!!!!!

 

[Heller]

Not sure why we need to win the BTT. But I've always thought these computer indexes assume a ranking at the start and that tends to carry through to the end. People thought Virginia and Duke were great and they have turned to be good, but not great. But a win over Duke is still seen as significant.

 

[lbodel]

... and giving great reasons why we should be at least a 3 if we win B1G Tourney. As well as Purdue better than Gonzaga and West Virginia...Said last night's game was huge for Purdue and no one's paying attention. Givem hell Danny Boy!!!!!

Here's the thing with Purdue - they are a good team, no doubt. But I just don't know if they're THAT good. When we're on, we're great. The problem is we're very inconsistent. That being said, I'm not sure how much different other conferences are. Like if we were in the ACC, would it be a similar situation - they beat up on each other a lot too, just like the Big Ten.

But that's why the NCAA Tournament is exciting I suppose, you never know what to expect!

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Here's the thing with Purdue - they are a good team, no doubt. But I just don't know if they're THAT good. When we're on, we're great. The problem is we're very inconsistent. That being said, I'm not sure how much different other conferences are. Like if we were in the ACC, would it be a similar situation - they beat up on each other a lot too, just like the Big Ten.

But that's why the NCAA Tournament is exciting I suppose, you never know what to expect!

We'll know more.......Friday!

 

[FirstDownB]

But I've always thought these computer indexes assume a ranking at the start and that tends to carry through to the end.

Computers don't assume anything as far as "starting positions". They simply take results and make calculations based on programmed algorithms. That's why they are so wacky early in the season when there is such a small sample size.

 

[gelesen]

Computers don't assume anything as far as "starting positions". They simply take results and make calculations based on programmed algorithms. That's why they are so wacky early in the season when there is such a small sample size.

If they don't assume anything than why isn't everyone tied for first and go from there?

 

[gelesen]

Here's the thing with Purdue - they are a good team, no doubt. But I just don't know if they're THAT good. When we're on, we're great. The problem is we're very inconsistent. That being said, I'm not sure how much different other conferences are. Like if we were in the ACC, would it be a similar situation - they beat up on each other a lot too, just like the Big Ten.

But that's why the NCAA Tournament is exciting I suppose, you never know what to expect!

We're 25-6, win the league by 2 games and we're very inconsistent? I think not.

 

[FirstDownB]

If they don't assume anything than why isn't everyone tied for first and go from there?

They are.

 

[gelesen]

They are.

Then why if Duke beats some nobody in game one and say Minn beats similar team by same score yet Duke will e ranked #1 and Minn #67.

 

[Purdue Grad in Texas]

Then why if Duke beats some nobody in game one and say Minn beats similar team by same score yet Duke will e ranked #1 and Minn #67.

It's easier to figure out Fizzbin then this RPI and NCAA seeding....

 

[lbodel]

We're 25-6, win the league by 2 games and we're very inconsistent? I think not.

Look, I love the team - I'm not criticizing them. But I'm also not naive in that the Big Ten is not very top heavy this year. And yes, I'd say we're not consistent. When you lose four games to unranked teams in conference season, I'd say it's a bit inconsistent.

But that's not bashing the team. I flat out said a lot of conferences, including the heralded ACC, beat up on eachother. Duke lost a number of conference games against unranked opponents as well.

I've also stated multiple times now I think any of these teams ranked #5-25 could all beat one another. And teams ranked 15 or 20 through the receiving votes could beat one another as well. So I guess we can be a top 10 team cause I still think we could lose to any of those teams....

Overall, I think people are getting a bit unrealistic expectations. Someone posted earlier that we need to reach the Elite 8 in their minds. That's not realistic. The realistic part of me says we could lose to our first BTT game opponent. Or we could win the championship. And I'd say that about any team in the Big Ten. And quite frankly, I'd say that about pretty much any team out there minus a few (i.e. a Villanova in the Big East...don't think they'll lose their first game). But these double-bye tournaments - your first game is no joke even if you get a double-bye.

 

[BoilerBulldog]

Look, I love the team - I'm not criticizing them. But I'm also not naive in that the Big Ten is not very top heavy this year. And yes, I'd say we're not consistent. When you lose four games to unranked teams in conference season, I'd say it's a bit inconsistent.

But that's not bashing the team. I flat out said a lot of conferences, including the heralded ACC, beat up on eachother. Duke lost a number of conference games against unranked opponents as well.

I've also stated multiple times now I think any of these teams ranked #5-25 could all beat one another. And teams ranked 15 or 20 through the receiving votes could beat one another as well. So I guess we can be a top 10 team cause I still think we could lose to any of those teams....

Overall, I think people are getting a bit unrealistic expectations. Someone posted earlier that we need to reach the Elite 8 in their minds. That's not realistic. The realistic part of me says we could lose to our first BTT game opponent. Or we could win the championship. And I'd say that about any team in the Big Ten. And quite frankly, I'd say that about pretty much any team out there minus a few (i.e. a Villanova in the Big East...don't think they'll lose their first game). But these double-bye tournaments - your first game is no joke even if you get a double-bye.

Yep. +1000.

 

[FirstDownB]

Then why if Duke beats some nobody in game one and say Minn beats similar team by same score yet Duke will e ranked #1 and Minn #67.

Not sure which ratings you are looking at, but here was the RPI top 10 after the first full week of the season:

Rank Team Rating High Low Last
1 Charlotte (2-0) 0.958 1 247 215
2 Clemson (2-0) 0.896 2 125 125
3 Mississippi (2-0) 0.896 1 82 1
4 Gonzaga (2-0) 0.875 1 75 2
5 St Johns (2-0) 0.875 4 277 4
6 Indiana (2-0) 0.854 4 139 6
7 Cincinnati (2-0) 0.833 1 105 7
8 Toledo (1-1) 0.812 8 201 201
9 Albany (1-1) 0.810 3 194 8
10 Nicholls St (1-1) 0.800 6 334 308

Duke was #120

 

[SunnyFL24]

If we would have knocked off Villa or at least Lou.....we wouldn't be having this conversation.We would be a 3 and talking about a 2 if we win the Big tourney...We seldom have any stellar non conf wins and that's what hurts us............

 

[BoilerAndy]

If we would have knocked off Villa or at least Lou.....we wouldn't be having this conversation.We would be a 3 and talking about a 2 if we win the Big tourney...We seldom have any stellar non conf wins and that's what hurts us............

Coulda, shoulda won both. My sense was that they were satisfied to be competing with those teams. They didn't really believe. It's time to believe.

 

[gelesen]

Not sure which ratings you are looking at, but here was the RPI top 10 after the first full week of the season:

Rank Team Rating High Low Last
1 Charlotte (2-0) 0.958 1 247 215
2 Clemson (2-0) 0.896 2 125 125
3 Mississippi (2-0) 0.896 1 82 1
4 Gonzaga (2-0) 0.875 1 75 2
5 St Johns (2-0) 0.875 4 277 4
6 Indiana (2-0) 0.854 4 139 6
7 Cincinnati (2-0) 0.833 1 105 7
8 Toledo (1-1) 0.812 8 201 201
9 Albany (1-1) 0.810 3 194 8
10 Nicholls St (1-1) 0.800 6 334 308

Duke was #120

Sorry, I was thinking of Kenpom and Sagarin. But even this list doesn't make any sense to me.

 

[BoilerBiker]

Computers don't assume anything as far as "starting positions". They simply take results and make calculations based on programmed algorithms. That's why they are so wacky early in the season when there is such a small sample size.

I believe kenpoms preseason 'starting position' rankings do not fully drop from his equation until late January

 

[JohnnyDoeBoiler]

If we would have knocked off Villa or at least Lou.....we wouldn't be having this conversation.We would be a 3 and talking about a 2 if we win the Big tourney...We seldom have any stellar non conf wins and that's what hurts us............

Really if Purdue doesn't drop games to Nebraska and Iowa, Purdue would probably be a lock at a 3 and a near 2 seed...that would mean Purdue wouldn't only have lost to Nova, Lousiville (a one and probable 2 seed), Minnesota (a lock NCAA team), and Michigan (a near lock NCAA team). Sitting at 27-4 with only those 4 losses looks much better than 25-6 with those bad losses added in.

At 27-4, winning the conference by 4 games, and losing only to what would be considered high quality or quality teams...Purdue might just be in the running for a 1 seed if Gonzaga drops their conference tourney.

 

[lbodel]

If we would have knocked off Villa or at least Lou.....we wouldn't be having this conversation.We would be a 3 and talking about a 2 if we win the Big tourney...We seldom have any stellar non conf wins and that's what hurts us............

I think it's a mix. I think if we took off two not great losses - i.e. Iowa and Nebraska - and we were 27-4, we'd be in the top 10 right now.

I still think we're a "teen" team. And since the Big Ten does not have any "top" teams this year - we also don't have a lot of experience playing against top teams outside of the Villanova/Louisville games. You have to consider that a factor as we head into March - we've certainly played close games, had to deal with deficits, etc. - but we haven't been challenged with very talented teams very much.

 

[FirstDownB]

I believe kenpoms preseason 'starting position' rankings do not fully drop from his equation until late January

I believe you are correct- early in the season KenPom uses prior year player data to construct a starting point. KenPom is used a lot for.. sporting.. purposes that cannot wait for a large data set from the current season to kick in. However, to your point, at this point in the season none of the metrics, including KenPom, have anything 'artificial' in them. They are all stat based for the current season. So the notion that a starting position bias has anything to do with the current computer ratings is false.

 

[boilerzz]

Really if Purdue doesn't drop games to Nebraska and Iowa, Purdue would probably be a lock at a 3 and a near 2 seed...that would mean Purdue wouldn't only have lost to Nova, Lousiville (a one and probable 2 seed), Minnesota (a lock NCAA team), and Michigan (a near lock NCAA team). Sitting at 27-4 with only those 4 losses looks much better than 25-6 with those bad losses added in.

At 27-4, winning the conference by 4 games, and losing only to what would be considered high quality or quality teams...Purdue might just be in the running for a 1 seed if Gonzaga drops their conference tourney.

Pretty much everyone in the top 15 can say the same thing.

 

[samcboiler]

It's easier to figure out Fizzbin then this RPI and NCAA seeding....

Just saw this episode about a month ago... LOL...