Reply to thread

Message

[QUOTE="jncuse, post: 5263081, member: 1969"]
I'll step back a bit to try to answer this one.
1) Under the RPI, teams would avoid projected sub 300 teams like the plague.   Teams tried to schedule team ranked 130-200 at home as the sweet spot, if I remember correctly.   They were going to win those games either way.   The RPI was based on your W/L%, multiplied by the win% of your opponents and their opponents.    Margin was irrelevant.  So it was much better to schedule against better teams that you knew you would beat, as they had better win%.

2) So now we moved to NET and margin.   And all of a sudden the sub 300 games become quite in vogue again  -- 31% of games so far are between 261-364.

But it seems one league is particularly effective in those games - the B12.   The B12 doesn't  do better margin wise or win% wise against better teams (as compared to their peers).   But against bad teams they do way better.  
 
Here is my theory on why better teams want to play sub 300 teams so much now.   The reason "Margins" with those games historically stayed someone in control, is that teams historically laid off the dogs earlier than they do now.    You get to a lead of 25 points, your not pushing much harder -- playing depth players.  In the past what's the incentive to play your guys in the last 10 or 15 minutes.

Well now you have the incentive to push deeper into the game with your starters.   Ask everyone to play a bit harder.   Pushing strategies deeper into the game.    And based on the numbers it seems like the B12 does it better than others.   This is where I use the term "you can control the narrative" easier.

If you are playing a #150 team, its much harder to control the narrative margin wise.
[/QUOTE]

Verification

What is a Syracuse fan's favorite color?