2023-2024 MBB computer projections thread

[CyPunch]

Only thing I can figure is that his field goal % is a bit weak (43.5) and free throw % (68.2). He has only turned it over 9 times (to 20 assists) and committed 7 fouls.

Poor rebounder and below average defender so he's going to get dinged in all encompassing statistic like that. He competes on the defensive end but he's limited athletically.

Pav has been a good connector offensively. The shooting and scoring has picked up for him since the DePaul game as well. Him and CuJo seem to be adjusting to their role as back of the rotation complimentary players after being the best player on mid major teams last year.

 

[VeloClone]

Surprised Pavs efficiency is so low. What all goes into that?

Weren't the majority of his minutes early in the season with the scrubs? Isn't he also the last of the players listed to still play with the scrubs when the starters and regulars come out at the end of blowouts? Doesn't who you play with affect your rating in this stat since there are fewer points scored for and more points scored against at that point?

 

[VeloClone]

What is this madness?

When I was in high school some friends of mine who were good art students got hired by our small town government to work in the sign shop on their summer project of replacing street signs. They got the hot idea to work ahead on putting the ordinal suffixes on the street signs so they could just put the appropriate numbers on when the crews were ready to do a particular intersection. Let's just suffice to say they figured out the error of their ways when a picture of two of the signs and a story about all of the errors of this type on the signs appeared on the front page of our local paper. They had put 'th' on every sign and used them regardless of if it was a 'First', 'Second', 'Third' or an actual ordinal that ended in 'th'.

 

[VeloClone]

This site recreates the actual sheets given to the committee...

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2024/team-net-sheet?team=Iowa-State

View attachment 120924

"SAG" on that site is #1 for everybody because it's not been updated or definitely replaced.

So, we're reliant on BPI and KenPom for now. Maybe something like Torvik will replace it.

As it stands today they have the following future games in each Quad:

Q1: 11
...1A: 9
...1B: 2
Q2: 4
...2A: 3
...2B: 1
Q3: 2 (K St, Okie St)
Q4: 3 (including WVU!)

 

[MJ271]

Weren't the majority of his minutes early in the season with the scrubs? Isn't he also the last of the players listed to still play with the scrubs when the starters and regulars come out at the end of blowouts? Doesn't who you play with affect your rating in this stat since there are fewer points scored for and more points scored against at that point?

I didn't think that PER was a stat that's very affected by when you're on the court, who you're on the court with, and how the team does when you're on the court. (Cade Keldermann's PER is actually 20.4, for instance.)

But I do agree on the whole, some of Pav's stats are affected by how little he played against the first few non-conference blowouts and his time disproportionately coming against good teams plus at the end of games. I often use cbbanalytics.com to check out on-off net ratings, and he looks terrible on that metric due to that fact.

 

[BigJCy]

National Writers starting to notice our NET ranking. Most don't agree with it which I guess I can't really blame them for that.

 

[CloniesForLife]

National Writers starting to notice our NET ranking. Most don't agree with it which I guess I can't really blame them for that.

Yeah we still have to prove it but we will have plenty of opportunities to do so shortly

 

[Cyclonepride]

Yeah we still have to prove it but we will have plenty of opportunities to do so shortly

Yep, and a lot of the teams that loaded up their non-con will be going into a weak conference schedule (which is why they loaded up their non-con).

 

[Gunnerclone]

National Writers starting to notice our NET ranking. Most don't agree with it which I guess I can't really blame them for that.

There’s no disagreeing or agreeing with an individual team’s position in the NET lol. It’s not a subjective ranking.

 

[CyPunch]

It's better for general interest in the sport (and in turn the writers) if teams schedule intriguing non-conference games.

It's a competitive advantage in the current system to schedule bad teams and blow them out. That's just the way it is.

 

[Halincandenza]

Surprised Pavs efficiency is so low. What all goes into that?

It's actually not bad, just below average. But his is because he just doesn't produce many stats when he is out there. So while he may move the ball, hustle, be in the right spot on defense etc, it isn't going to have him rated very highly because he isn't getting rebounds, assists, points, etc.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Yeah we still have to prove it but we will have plenty of opportunities to do so shortly

I don't think anybody thinks this team sucks and will fold when it plays real teams based on being "overrated" in the NET. I think it is more a "the NET needs more data to be dependable," which it does, and I think our fans (or at least the nerds who take the time to post in a basketball analytics thread on Cyclone Fanatic) would be the first ones to admit we haven't proven much but have ample chance to in the Big 12.

 

[Halincandenza]

I don't think anybody thinks this team sucks and will fold when it plays real teams based on being "overrated" in the NET. I think it is more a "the NET needs more data to be dependable," which it does, and I think our fans (or at least the nerds who take the time to post in a basketball analytics thread on Cyclone Fanatic) would be the first ones to admit we haven't proven much but have ample chance to in the Big 12.

Yeah, by the end of January we should know a lot about the team.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Yeah, by the end of January we should know a lot about the team.

January is a gauntlet, though...

at Oklahoma
v. Houston
v. Oklahoma State
at BYU
at TCU
v. Kansas State
v. Kansas

Going 4-3 against that would be awesome.

I think 3-4 would be a "par."

Anything under that is a bit disappointing to concerning.

Anything more would be wow.

 

[VeloClone]

National Writers starting to notice our NET ranking. Most don't agree with it which I guess I can't really blame them for that.

To be fair not a single team has a win against an NCAA tournament team. To the best of my knowledge there isn't a team in the land that is the same team that played in the tourney last year. It is a useless, meaningless statement that is just meant to be provocative.

EDIT: after posting this I realized that my assumption that they meant teams playing in last year's tourney wasn't it at all since ISU punked Iowa who made the tourney last year. So he is basing it on projections for this year's tourney with only about a third of a season played and practically no conference games. It is an even more stupid comment than I originally thought.

 

[Sigmapolis]

To be fair not a single team has a win against an NCAA tournament team. To the best of my knowledge there isn't a team in the land that is the same team that played in the tourney last year. It is a useless, meaningless statement that is just meant to be provocative.

Steelmaning this, we haven't beat anybody who projects anywhere near the NCAA tournament this season. Iowa and DePaul are P6 teams but two of the worst P6 teams in the country.

 

[madguy30]

To be fair not a single team has a win against an NCAA tournament team. To the best of my knowledge there isn't a team in the land that is the same team that played in the tourney last year. It is a useless, meaningless statement that is just meant to be provocative.

EDIT: after posting this I realized that my assumption that they meant teams playing in last year's tourney wasn't it at all since ISU punked Iowa who made the tourney last year. So he is basing it on projections for this year's tourney with only about a third of a season played and practically no conference games. It is an even more stupid comment than I originally thought.

Yeah last year the wins over UNC and Nova looked great right about now.

In the end ISU didn't beat any tourney teams outside the conference.

Basketball seasons are goofy like that.

 

[EnkAMania]

January is a gauntlet, though...

at Oklahoma
v. Houston
v. Oklahoma State
at BYU
at TCU
v. Kansas State
v. Kansas

Going 4-3 against that would be awesome.

I think 3-4 would be a "par."

Anything under that is a bit disappointing to concerning.

Anything more would be wow.

Hopefully Kansas State continues to implode.

 

[VeloClone]

Steelmaning this, we haven't beat anybody who projects anywhere near the NCAA tournament this season. Iowa and DePaul are P6 teams but two of the worst P6 teams in the country.

I'm not disagreeing that ISU hasn't played anyone yet, but it is just a symptom of sports journalist arrogance that they talk about teams as definitively NCAA tournament teams or not NCAA tournament teams at this juncture of the season.

 

[NorthCyd]

National Writers starting to notice our NET ranking. Most don't agree with it which I guess I can't really blame them for that.

Everybody should know the NET can be manipulated. It's going to be true with any kind of ranking system. You could do the same thing with RPI, although that was more about scheduling than game performance.

At the end of the day it's the Quad 1-2 wins and 3-4 losses that really matter come tournament time.