Not sure if this is useful or lame: | Syracusefan.com

Not sure if this is useful or lame:

Capt. Tuttle

Living Legend
Joined
Aug 22, 2011
Messages
25,292
Like
35,242
sorry if this is how it is actually done, or someone else on the board has done it, but I tried to quantify the quad wins by applying inversely weighted points, positive and negative, for wins and loses, by quadrant.

Assuming it’s a semi-valid method, this isn’t close.
((I couldn’t format it very well on here).

Syracuse. •••••••••••••••••••Louisville

W———L.*************************W———L

1 (4) + 7(-1) = (-3) ••••••• •• 2 (4) + 4 (-1) = (4)
6.(3) + 1 (-2) (16) ••••••••• 2 (3) + 3(-2) = (0)
6.(2). + 1(-3) (9) •••••••••. 4 (2) + 0(-3) = (8)
3.(1) 0 (-4) (3) •••••••••. 9 (1) + 1(-4) = (5)

Total.************ 25.***************** ***************17
 
Last edited:
March... is driving you to madness.


Interesting way to do it.
Well, it seems to me that they do the Quad thing to give value to the wins&losses but they (seemingly) do nothing else to quantify the outcomes. You could go further, I guess, and have some type of equalization factor within each quad (say average ranking of teams you played in each quad, or Palm, RPI, etc.), to give a more specific numbers.

Also, quantification of results diminishes the undue influence, plus or minus, of “the eye test” or recently bias.

Issues, as always, are injured and suspended players, late gelling as a team, do you weight the last X number of games, etc.
 
Last edited:
Well, it seems to me that they do the Quad thing to give value to the wins&losses but they (seemingly) do nothing else to quantify the outcomes. You could go further, I guess, and have some type of equalization factor within each quad (say average ranking of teams you played in each quad, or Palm, RPI, etc.), to give a more specific numbers.

Also, quantification of results diminishes the undue influence, plus or minus, of “the eye test” or recently bias.

Issues, as always, are injured and suspended players, late gelling as a team, do you weight the last X number of games, etc.

Yup - definitely to madness.


I kid, I kid, you’ve clearly put a lot of thought into this.
 
Your method also seems to benefit ‘Cuse given they played 5 more games (3 wins) than L’ville. The ‘# of games played’ variable is one I really have no clue how the committee handles. Playing 5 more games has to count for something.

No matter how the data is sliced, I agree there is no way Louisville should be in before us.
 
March... is driving you to madness.
1615643165289.png
 
Your method also seems to benefit ‘Cuse given they played 5 more games (3 wins) than L’ville. The ‘# of games played’ variable is one I really have no clue how the committee handles. Playing 5 more games has to count for something.

No matter how the data is sliced, I agree there is no way Louisville should be in before us.
Maybe. IDK, given why they were missed. Just trying to make sense of this year
 
Your method also seems to benefit ‘Cuse given they played 5 more games (3 wins) than L’ville. The ‘# of games played’ variable is one I really have no clue how the committee handles. Playing 5 more games has to count for something.

No matter how the data is sliced, I agree there is no way Louisville should be in before us.
I looked at it given your point on games played.
Syracuse earned 1.0 points per game:
25 games, 25 net points.
Louisville earned 0.85 points per game:
20 games, 17 points.
Still works for SU. :)

 
I think all these teams from the current 7-8 seeds all the way to the first 4-8 out are basically the same.
 

Forum statistics

Threads
167,127
Messages
4,681,571
Members
5,900
Latest member
DizzyNY

Online statistics

Members online
50
Guests online
1,672
Total visitors
1,722


Top Bottom