Best Conference

[HoopsTournament]

So I got into a little twitter discussion about the best conference in basketball. Here is how it started:



I responded that it wasn't even the best league THIS year. The reason why is that Georgia Tech, NC State and Boston College are dragging it down. The ACC is better at the top. They will have more teams in the tournament (but maybe not a higher percentage). They will probably have more teams in every round of the tournament. But that does not make them the best conference from top to bottom. Because the bottom of the ACC is BAD.

Here are the 5 major rating systems and where the Big 12 and the ACC compare. Only RPI has ACC better.

 

[ISUTex]

I don't have a problem saying the ACC is the best this year. The Big 12 has a great argument too. Both are way above the rest of the country. The ACC has more top teams, but the Big 12 has 80% of it's league possibly getting at large bids.

 

[HoopsTournament]

ACC has the best teams, but they are not the best from top to bottom. If he would have left the "from top to bottom" out, then I don't have an issue with it, but when he adds that statement, that is where he is wrong and has no basis in fact to back it up.

 

[JohnnyFive]

Hawk fan told me two weeks ago the Big 10 was the toughest and that's why all their records will hold them back from a top seed this year. Hawk fan gon' Hawk fan I guess.

 

[1976]

Hawk fan told me two weeks ago the Big 10 was the toughest and that's why all their records will hold them back from a top seed this year. Hawk fan gon' Hawk fan I guess.

Big 10 is easily the worst Power 5. I rank them like this:
1. ACC- I think the Big 12 is close but a lot of good ACC teams this year.
2. Big 12
3. PAC 12
4. SEC
5. Big East






Big 10

 

[surly]

Parity does not equal quality. And I couldn't define the term 'best conference.'

The NCAA tournament will tell a lot about conference strength.

http://kenpom.com/

 

[cayin]

Parity does not equal quality. And I couldn't define the term 'best conference.'

The NCAA tournament will tell a lot about conference strength.

http://kenpom.com/

not it won't. Upsets happen in the tournament. Middle Tennessee State is not better than MSU, but they were on that day. UAB wasn't better than ISU. Upsets take teams out, some teams that get beat would beat the team that beat them 9 out of 10 times. Plus the tournament is all about match ups. You can seed it one way and the ACC could do the best. Then you could shake it up and reseed the exact same teams and another league would do better.

 

[cyclones500]

Pitt may have gotten back into fringe conversation for a tournament bid by beating FS and SU. But if I'm on the committee, I wouldn't ignore losing at home to Miami by 26 and Louisville by 51.(Oh, and yeah, Duquesne). And Syracuse lost to St. John's by 33 points, and BC by 15, so I wouldn't call that some kind of high-quality win.

 

[Gunnerclone]

Parity does not equal quality. And I couldn't define the term 'best conference.'

The NCAA tournament will tell a lot about conference strength.

http://kenpom.com/

I never like this argument. It's like using bowl season as an indicator of conference strength. A conference like the MVC gets two in and both get upsets in the first round and say WSU gets to the sweet 16 and they beat a Big 12, an Acc, and a big ten team and you'll get threads and articles like "is the MVC better than big12, acc, and big ten? Three games out of a like 300 on neutral courts say Yes."

 

[I-stateTheTruth]

I have to agree that the ACC is better this year. I thought TTU, TCU, UT and OU were all going to be better, not that they're easy outs.

 

[michaelrr1]

ACC is the best this year.

 

[HoopsTournament]

Parity does not equal quality. And I couldn't define the term 'best conference.'

The NCAA tournament will tell a lot about conference strength.

http://kenpom.com/

Actually, the tournament only tells a lot about the strength at the top. It doesn't compare the bottom. ACC is better at the top and will probably be better in the tournament. That doesn't mean they are better from top to bottom. Ratings are what tell lot about overall conference strength.

 

[HoopsTournament]

ACC is the best this year.

Ratings which are objective say otherwise. If you said ACC excluding Ga Tech, NC State and BC is the best, then I would agree. But those three teams are still in the ACC and they are really bad, especially BC.

 

[HoopsTournament]

I have to agree that the ACC is better this year. I thought TTU, TCU, UT and OU were all going to be better, not that they're easy outs.

The difference is that ACC has several easy outs.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I do not know how you can throw out the bottom third of a conference in somehow judging its strength. That seems a nice way to cherry pick your standards.

If the question is...

"A team has to play a full round-robin, or a double round-robin, through every potential opponent in a conference. How difficult is it going to be, game-to-game, night-to-night, to win games against Conference A versus Conference B?"

...which is how I would measure "conference strength," then...

The Big 12 is the hardest in the country.

Our worst two teams are Oklahoma and Texas. Oklahoma is depleted after last year, and the injury bug has got them bad, but they still beat WVU in Morgantown and have Lon Kruger around. Texas has underachieved to some extent, but they still have way too much talent for anybody to take a nap on them (as we learned in Austin).

Here is how you would rank the two sets of schools using (normalized for P5) SRS...

West Virginia Mountaineers 1.94
North Carolina Tar Heels 1.80
Louisville Cardinals 1.71
Kansas Jayhawks 1.51
Duke Blue Devils 1.46
Virginia Cavaliers 1.42
Baylor Bears 1.20
Florida State Seminoles 1.15
Iowa State Cyclones 1.01
Oklahoma State Cowboys 0.94
Miami Hurricanes 0.50
Kansas State Wildcats 0.44
Texas Tech Red Raiders 0.40
TCU Horned Frogs 0.35
Wake Forest Demon Deacons 0.34
Syracuse Orange 0.34
Clemson Tigers 0.24
Virginia Tech Hokies 0.11
Pitt Panthers -0.18
Texas Longhorns -0.22
Oklahoma Sooners -0.25
Georgia Tech Yellow Jackets -0.63
NC State Wolfpack -0.74
Boston College Eagles -1.16

The ACC has some really good teams at the top, yes, but so does the Big 12 with WVU, KU, Baylor, and, heck, ISU nowadays, but the ACC has a huge underclass of relatively mediocre to bad teams that you could beat up on, as well.

 

[BBHMagic]

Let's get our math on: compare the best, top quarter, middle, bottom quarter, and worst teams and assign points for each. Who would win the majority of games played in the hypothetical matchups.

Best Kansas v. North Carolina - Point Big XII - Big XII 1, ACC 0
Q 1 West Virginia v. Notre Dame - Point Big XII - Big XII 2, ACC 0
Mid TCU/OSU v. Syracuse - It's hard to say. RPI has OSU and TCU both far better than Syracuse. Kenpom has also has them both better. Sagarin has Syracuse right in between both of them. Since it's not clear whose better. I'll call it a draw.
Q3 Texas Tech v. Clemson - Point Big XII - Big XII 3, ACC 0
Worst Oklahoma v. Boston College - Point Big XII - Big XII 4, ACC 0

The Big XII wins EASILY. The ACC has nothing on the Big XII when compared objectively.

I don't think there's a logical argument for the ACC as the best conference unless your argument is something more specific than the ACC being the best. They have 50% more teams than the Big XII. OF COURSE they're going to have a larger number of good teams, that doesn't mean the overall quality of the conference is better.

 

[randomfan44]

So I got into a little twitter discussion about the best conference in basketball. Here is how it started:



I responded that it wasn't even the best league THIS year. The reason why is that Georgia Tech, NC State and Boston College are dragging it down. The ACC is better at the top. They will have more teams in the tournament (but maybe not a higher percentage). They will probably have more teams in every round of the tournament. But that does not make them the best conference from top to bottom. Because the bottom of the ACC is BAD.

Here are the 5 major rating systems and where the Big 12 and the ACC compare. Only RPI has ACC better.

View attachment 46597

It's funny that Rothstein thinks Pitt beating Syracuse, the 8th place team in the ACC, is some sign that the bottom of the pack is really good. Texas, the 9th place team in the Big 12, beat Iowa State, who is tied for 2nd. Oklahoma, the LAST place team in the Big 12, beat West Virginia, who is tied for 2nd.

 

[surly]

Actually, the tournament only tells a lot about the strength at the top. It doesn't compare the bottom. ACC is better at the top and will probably be better in the tournament. That doesn't mean they are better from top to bottom. Ratings are what tell lot about overall conference strength.

You'd rather compare the strength at the bottom? People who say "the dance" or bowls don't matter in determining conference strength, generally, are people who lose a lot. If 7 Big12 teams get in "the dance," the outcomes could tell a lot about this league.

Say four are knocked out in the first game. That would suggest to me that the league is overrated. Say 2 make the Final 4, that would suggest just the opposite. But if one makes the finals and the rest sort of fall out along the way, it suggests the conference is nothing beyond average.

 

[randomfan44]

You'd rather compare the strength at the bottom? People who say the dance or bowls don't matter in determining conference strength, generally, are people who lose a lot. If 7 Big12 teams get in "the dance," the outcomes could tell a lot about this league.

Say four are knocked out in the first game. That would suggest to me that the league is overrated. Say 2 make the Final 4, that would suggest just the opposite.

When trying to determine the top to bottom strength of the entire conference? Yes. Tourney results is the worst measure of a conference. Everyone plays different games against different opponents that you cannot compare.

 

[nfrine]

You'd rather compare the strength at the bottom?

The older you get, the more important bottom strength is....you'll find that out someday.