What more does ISU have to do? 3 NCAA tourney resume wins, undefeated, 2nd in scoring, 6th in rebounding, 2nd in assists, and 33rd in FGP.
ISU MBB Ranking after beating Iowa
- Thread starter cstrunk
- Start date
Change there name to Kentucky or Kansas and we would be top3.
though by seasons end, I think we are maybe top 20 IMO
I'd say at the end 4. Iowa will be a top 25 RPI win. Michigan top 50 at the end, and BYU, UNI in the top 100. UNI plays a weak conference slate so they should get a lot of wins. The scoring stats are irrelevant as far as ranking goes. What is ridiculous is that they rank teams at the very beginning of the year. They should start this week as the first week of rankings.
KenPom's overall rankings are a classic case of high levels of precision with poor accuracy. While a quantitative system like this sounds great, when things that defy all logic such as your example persist, it's a bad system. I don't care how elegant of a system you have.
It's an interesting tool for some of the detailed analysis, but it's overall rankings are terrible.
This statement is exactly why KenPom should at least be ignored for overall rankings, and quite frankly should be ignored altogether, other than looking at trends for your own team.
Whatever rankings fit your narrative, obviously. If ISU was top 10 in KenPom, the same people in here ripping it would be praising it.
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
Iowa lost on the road to a higher-ranked team. That shouldn't drop them at all.
John Calipari to Kentucky players: Change or keep losing - CBSSports.com
Stories like this should help us pass UK in rankings.
Stories like this should help us pass UK in rankings.
Last edited:
1. I point out the obvious reality that Kenpom is not a good ranking system for determining who is the better team by a who-beat-who of college basketball.
2. Kenpom fanboys instantly jump down my throat for not worshiping their stat hero, these are the people who think it's a great system to rank teams, not me.
It seems finally this year some people are getting that it's a neat site but the rankings suck and aren't even the most rational among computer rankings. The fact that we fall further behind Michigan who we already beat after beating another solid team should seal it for people.
"I watched guys check-in and out without touching hands, which isn't a big deal except for that it rarely happens with close teams. I saw Julius Randle roll his eyes at his guards -- specifically Andrew and Aaron Harrison -- whenever they failed to even think about getting him the ball on the block. I witnessed Calipari reduced to yelling at players to huddle after a foul when most players these days simply huddle on their own."
From that article. Wow. The Julius Randle thing really "shocked" me.
This is the hard thing about coaching 15 5 star guys at a place like UNC or UK. Players have egos that need to be fed. Usually there is enough overwhelming talent on the team that they can win enough to keep that stuff under the surface, but when things go sour, they can go really sour.
I think you can use all the stat systems to rank. Ranking doesn't mean anything in the end. When everything settles, the team that beat the best teams is the champ. Sure it helps your road be 'easier', but tell that to Duke losing to #15 or dare I bring it up?.... Hampton.... Win. Just win.
Yes rankings do matter when you are trying to grow a program. No it's not the end of the world when you are not ranked, but you can't tell me that the exposure we have gotten from being ranked has not been beneficial to the future of the program. Iowa State is being talked about. The fact we even were brought up on SportsCenter when we destroyed UMKC is pretty nice. That's huge for recruiting
