If we win RPI is not relavent

[CycloneErik]

RPI matters unless we win the Big 12 tournament.

In that case, it probably still matters for seeding, but not for getting in.

 

[SplitIdentity]

RPI matters unless we win the Big 12 tournament.

In that case, it probably still matters for seeding, but not for getting in.

I suppose I should rephrase. It's unfortunate that RPI matters to the committee, because it really is useless IMO.

 

[cyclones500]

I could make a good argument that we are in NOW....but I won't.

If we win one of the at OU, Okie State and Kansas games we are 100% a lock. No need to win at West Virginia. No need to win at least one in KC (although AT LEAST 1 is the minimum expectation for my mental health!).

Look at the numbers:
-We have a top 50 RPI....our remaining games, win or loss, won't hurt that.
-We have a top 30ish BPI...again, remaining games won't really change that.
-Top 5 finish in a power 6 conference
-Decent non-conference strength of schedule (won't hurt us)
-A minimum of 6 wins against Top 100 RPI teams (OU, KState, Baylor (2), BYU, W. Virginia - although they are borderline)

On top of that they have to find 37 at large teams....can you find 37 with a better resume than we have? I can't.

That's the key ingredient no matter how we slice it.

 

[cycloneworld]

I suppose I should rephrase. It's unfortunate that RPI matters to the committee, because it really is useless IMO.

I agree and posted about it late last week. RPI is a flawed, flawed metric. BPI is much better IMO.

 

[CycloneErik]

RPI matters unless we win the Big 12 tournament.

In that case, it probably still matters for seeding, but not for getting in.

I'd need to spend more time than I'm willing to before I evaluated whether it should or not. There could be a good argument/discussion to be had there.

My post was for the OP/title. At this moment in time, I don't think we want to disregard the RPI, unless we win the conference tournament. I'm just not sure why the thread began. The other stuff is interesting.

 

[FDWxMan]

I agree and posted about it late last week. RPI is a flawed, flawed metric. BPI is much better IMO.

It's a lot like sabermetrics in baseball. RPI is about as helpful as Pitcher Wins.

But, some dinosaurs cling to it, so it is still relevant to the committee.

A useful ranking tool? No. But it's what they use, so we still have to put up with it, until they get more open minds in the process.

 

[mikeiastat]

It's a lot like sabermetrics in baseball. RPI is about as helpful as Pitcher Wins.

But, some dinosaurs cling to it, so it is still relevant to the committee.

A useful ranking tool? No. But it's what they use, so we still have to put up with it, until they get more open minds in the process.

Its all a matter of opinion. RPI and Sagarin, BPI and Ken Pom go about it in different ways. They all have their flaws. I wouldn't want to see BPI be the committee's go to nor would I want Ken Pom. I don't think that we'll ever see a true predictor come into it, because the mindset (margin of victory) is not sportsman like as the NCAA sees it.

Ken Pom would dramaticly change the style of play for college basketball. It would be all about the statistical categories, all systems have their flaws and can be manipulated, and RPI is pretty fair. You need to look at it less as those teams are gaming the system, as they are going out and mixing it up so CBB can run better. Those that "game the system" are taking chances and are earning it. Iowa can schedule road games any time they want or pay for some decent competition.

BPI you'd see teams like kansas trying till the last minute to hang a hundred on TT. Then you'd have some teams that don't run up the score. RPI's major flaw for prediction, is that it doesn't take into account Margin of victory. that's also what makes it most sportman like and you can make it more accurate by playing teams that a good sample of team somewhat similar to your team. All calculations give more credit to the road team, and I think there is a small exageration for the RPI, It is good for college athletics. If Iowa doesn't like it, they can afford to go on the road from time to time. Or play better competition. Just stupid to play ten teams over 250 in the RPI, just for the home money grab.

RPI is used for the good of College athletics and everyone knows how to use it to their advantage. Everyone knows the rules. Some are just greedier than others and pay for it in other ways.

You don't think that Ken Pom wouldn't be even more Sabermetric?

 

[FDWxMan]

Its all a matter of opinion. RPI and Sagarin, BPI and Ken Pom go about it in different ways. They all have their flaws. I wouldn't want to see BPI be the committee's go to nor would I want Ken Pom. I don't think that we'll ever see a true predictor come into it, because the mindset (margin of victory) is not sportsman like as the NCAA sees it.

Ken Pom would dramaticly change the style of play for college basketball. It would be all about the statistical categories, all systems have their flaws and can be manipulated, and RPI is pretty fair. You need to look at it less as those teams are gaming the system, as they are going out and mixing it up so CBB can run better. Those that "game the system" are taking chances and are earning it. Iowa can schedule road games any time they want or pay for some decent competition.

BPI you'd see teams like kansas trying till the last minute to hang a hundred on TT. Then you'd have some teams that don't run up the score. RPI's major flaw for prediction, is that it doesn't take into account Margin of victory. that's also what makes it most sportman like and you can make it more accurate by playing teams that a good sample of team somewhat similar to your team. All calculations give more credit to the road team, and I think there is a small exageration for the RPI, It is good for college athletics. If Iowa doesn't like it, they can afford to go on the road from time to time. Or play better competition. Just stupid to play ten teams over 250 in the RPI, just for the home money grab.

RPI is used for the good of College athletics and everyone knows how to use it to their advantage. Everyone knows the rules. Some are just greedier than others and pay for it in other ways.

You don't think that Ken Pom wouldn't be even more Sabermetric?

Mike, is the Big Ten over-rated? Over-hyped? That seems to be a pretty common sentiment on here.

According to RPI, the Big Ten has 3 top-10 teams, and half the conference is in the Top-25.

Anyone think New Mexico is the #3 team in college basketball?

Anyone think Minnesota is #15?

Beating TCU on the road is weighted higher than beating Kansas at home?

RPI is junk. The weight assigned to it for seeding and in-or-out is ridiculous.

 

[mikeiastat]

This is about ISU, not Iowa. RPI is pointless regardless of the team. You really think UNM is 47 spots better than ISU, or MTSU is 23 spots better than ISU? RPI means nothing anyways.

No, but I don't begrudge them being up there. I think NM went out and earned RPI. Keep in mind that RPI is not a failproof ranking, its meant to be used in conjunction with things like quality wins and bad losses. Their RPI will be adjusted downward because they Haven't proven that they can beat top 20 teams consistantly. But in my opinion they have proven they are a top 20 team AT LEAST, and maybe better than that. That is more that we can even say as ISU fans.

ISU could implement the same strategy but for them they have an easy time geting 2 or 3 top ten teams to come to hilton every year, and because of that in the long run it doesn't pay off to focus just on RPI it will bite you more than it pays off if you lose more than 4 or 5 games. There is a balance and if you are able to accurately judge when is a good time to schedule to boost your RPI, I think you should do it. See the ISU, Ohio State home and home a few years back. Sometimes its better to just play it straight up, but if you go out an earn it at the right time it pays off. WHen you have a hard time getting top 10 programs to play in you house, then its Risk meet reward.

 

[mikeiastat]

Mike, is the Big Ten over-rated? Over-hyped? That seems to be a pretty common sentiment on here.

According to RPI, the Big Ten has 3 top-10 teams, and half the conference is in the Top-25.

Anyone think New Mexico is the #3 team in college basketball?

Anyone think Minnesota is #15?

Beating TCU on the road is weighted higher than beating Kansas at home?

RPI is junk. The weight assigned to it for seeding and in-or-out is ridiculous.

Absolutely false. I've proved this time and time again. I wish you Jon Miller diciples would quit take his garbage as truth and making it the company line you make all Iowans look stupid.

Also You would have many of the same problems with any metric. Sagarin, BPI. They all weight road wins more than home wins. Ken Pom is a a good predictor, if teams don't start running up the score, but also, would come with its own set of flaws.

And as far as the Big 10, over hyped - definately, over-rated remains to be seen. 3 top ten teams doesn't seem all that strange to me. Its usually the Big XII that has that. So that I don't really dislike. Iowa still being talked about by the Big 10 brainwashed bubble heads? was rediculous even before yesterday.

Minnesota was good to go in the preseason, but haven't gotten any better. So they got some wins they probably don't get today, but They went out and used their experience to their advantage and are going to get rewarded for it. By the way they are not #15 anymore and that will bear out in the final rankings a lot better. Not worried about it. 5 or 6 outliers out of 300 and some. You don't think BPI would have theirs?

RPI institutionally rewards two things going out and beating teams on the road, and teams like minnesota who are game ready from the start of the season because they players have been together for so long. Both things that are good for CBB and I don't see the NCAA changing that anytime soon. Dislike that they threw out the last ten metric, cause that would mitigate Minnesota's inflated RPI.

 

[LivntheCyLife]

Actually, I'm fairly certain as a metric, that is no longer suposed to be used, (last 10) That doesn't mean that SOME committee memebers might not keep it in the back of their mind.

Now that you say that, I think you are right. They changed it a couple years ago to not being an official criteria that they use.

 

[mjhavlo76]

I believe to more victories and we are a lock.

 

[cycloneworld]

Absolutely false. I've proved this time and time again. I wish you Jon Miller diciples would quit take his garbage as truth and making it the company line you make all Iowans look stupid.

Also You would have many of the same problems with any metric. Sagarin, BPI. They all weight road wins more than home wins. Ken Pom is a a good predictor, if teams don't start running up the score, but also, would come with its own set of flaws.

And as far as the Big 10, over hyped - definately, over-rated remains to be seen. 3 top ten teams doesn't seem all that strange to me. Its usually the Big XII that has that. So that I don't really dislike. Iowa still being talked about by the Big 10 brainwashed bubble heads? was rediculous even before yesterday.

Minnesota was good to go in the preseason, but haven't gotten any better. So they got some wins they probably don't get today, but They went out and used their experience to their advantage and are going to get rewarded for it. By the way they are not #15 anymore and that will bear out in the final rankings a lot better. Not worried about it. 5 or 6 outliers out of 300 and some. You don't think BPI would have theirs?

RPI institutionally rewards two things going out and beating teams on the road, and teams like minnesota who are game ready from the start of the season because they players have been together for so long. Both things that are good for CBB and I don't see the NCAA changing that anytime soon. Dislike that they threw out the last ten metric, cause that would mitigate Minnesota's inflated RPI.

You might want to get your facts straight before going off on people. FYI, Minnesota is #16 so the system has "fixed itself".

Also, "5 or 6 outliers"? Yeah, in the Top 25. It's pretty important to get the top 25 right and RPI can't do it.

RPI rewards a strong SOS, but you could get beat by 30 in those key games it it doesn't kill your RPI. That shouldn't be the case. If you need more examples, here they are:

#3 - New Mexico
#14 - UNLV
#15 - Colorado St
#16 - Minnesota
#22 - Belmont
#27 - Middle Tennessee St

And that's just the Top 30. We would all mock the AP Poll if those teams were ranked in those spots, but we can't mock the RPI?

 

[mikeiastat]

You might want to get your facts straight before going off on people. FYI, Minnesota is #16 so the system has "fixed itself".

Also, "5 or 6 outliers"? Yeah, in the Top 25. It's pretty important to get the top 25 right and RPI can't do it.

RPI rewards a strong SOS, but you could get beat by 30 in those key games it it doesn't kill your RPI. That shouldn't be the case. If you need more examples, here they are:

#3 - New Mexico
#14 - UNLV
#15 - Colorado St
#16 - Minnesota
#22 - Belmont
#27 - Middle Tennessee St

And that's just the Top 30. We would all mock the AP Poll if those teams were ranked in those spots, but we can't mock the RPI?

I do have my facts straight. Name one thing I said that was incorrect. Why people are stupid is because they keep spouting the company line that the road w/ vs TCU is worth more than a home win against Kansas. Just not true, and its not really close. And if all you are nit picking is the minnesota comment, they are 17 where I"m seeing it, and not 15. they are dropping and likely will continue to do so the rest of the season. I didn't even say it was fixed already. Even if they stay in the top 20, There are still few outliers and they are mitigated by the other criteria. Just like would happen with any other junk from Ken Pom, BPI, and Sagarin.

Again, I said that I don't have a big problem with New Mexico. I look at it as the same way ND football plays the system. They never play an elite team and beat all the BCS 25-50. Seldom play anyone under BCS 60 and then everyone says how awesome their schedule is. So they hardly ever have an off weak playing the indiana's of the world so ND is considered #1 without ever playing anyone who is in the top 20. What's good for the goose is good for the gander.

Minnesota is more of an outlier to me than NM. I don't have much of a problem with UNLV or really Minnesota for that matter. They will both be mitigated by the other factors (recency and quality wins) effect from the Committee. Not perfect, but far from garbage. Yet RPI users admit its flaws. Its not meant to be used alone. It is designed to be used in conjuction with other factors. Thats why RPI is only one tool used in the equation. What New Mexico has done is impressive in its own right better than most morons that still think Iowa is just off the bubble give them credit for, but there are other items to plug into the equation. I'm guessing though that they get a 2-5 seed depending on how they prove it at the end of the season and how other teams do on a neutral court and rightfully so.

 

[Cychl82]

Let's just win out

 

[cyclones500]

I don't know enough detail about BPI (or others) vs. RPI for assessment accuracy, but most of what I read from anyone in-the-know, it's apparently a better system. Maybe it'll be used more (or exclusively) at some point, but RPI is the computer tool for now.

What I do trying to build a tournament field (or "guess," I guess you could say), the further into the season it goes, I adhere less strictly to each team's pure RPI, and also take the RPI of tourney contender opponents with a grain of salt. By mid-February, some of it doesn't hold up with a pure top 25/50/100 etc., and I try to consider how true to the ranking each win/loss is, relative to a team's potential inclusion in the tournament (and relative to pecking order).

Random example: Belmont's RPI is still 23. The sole top-50 RPI win is vs. Middle Tennessee. Two top-50 losses (KU, VCU) are fine.

Now, Belmont is out as an at-large regardless of decent numbers, but this applies more to when that team shows up on other teams' resumes as a top-25 win. It doesn't remove it from consideration as "quality", it could have much less weight than a win over a 40 rpi team that has several top-25 wins vs. win over a top-25 with a low-impact resume.