Having trouble getting registered or subscribing? Email us at info@kysportsreport.com or Private Message CitizenBBN and we'll get you set up!

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Results 31 to 55 of 55
  1. #31

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Okay so lemme know when yer ready.

    (I'm still working on mine too)

  2. #32

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    I finally found something on this. Here is a chart of the last 15 National champs.
    It is unbelievable how predictive just those two categories are.
    It lists before tournament and after tournament.
    As you can see, there is some change.
    But all were within shot of where they needed to be.




    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
    Cool chart and very telling as to the effect of a 6 game run to the Title and the solid numbers across the board entering it. It’s interesting to note the Cats actually dropped nominally from 2/6 to 2/7, but the IU game alone probably had an impact there.

  3. #33

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Krank View Post
    Okay so lemme know when yer ready.

    (I'm still working on mine too)
    Itís weird. These stats say Nova should be the favorite by a lot. They are head and shoulders above every team.
    But my gut tells me they could lose early. Which to trust? Haha

  4. #34
    Super Kitten
    Join Date
    Oct 2012
    Location
    Cold Spring
    Posts
    1,524

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    I personally think Nova has a cake walk to final 4. Therefore they are my favorite to win. As usual anything can happen.

  5. #35

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    Itís weird. These stats say Nova should be the favorite by a lot. They are head and shoulders above every team.
    But my gut tells me they could lose early. Which to trust? Haha
    I've seen Butler beat them three times lol.

    Still, they are VERY good... for THIS year's level of play when compared to all of the NCAA.

    I contend that, if this is a season wherein the level of play, the overall strength of teams across the board, is down a big notch, then then predictability becomes more difficult, perhaps even within the matrix of these stats.

    Hellifiknow fo' Sho' tho'.

    But I feel strongly that weaknesses, seen or unseen in some of these numbers MIGHT have to be taken with a boulder sized grain of salt.

    Just because it SEEMS to be one of those kind of years.

    Just my uninformed take.

  6. #36

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Krank View Post
    I've seen Butler beat them three times lol.

    Still, they are VERY good... for THIS year's level of play when compared to all of the NCAA.

    I contend that, if this is a season wherein the level of play, the overall strength of teams across the board, is down a big notch, then then predictability becomes more difficult, perhaps even within the matrix of these stats.

    Hellifiknow fo' Sho' tho'.

    But I feel strongly that weaknesses, seen or unseen in some of these numbers MIGHT have to be taken with a boulder sized grain of salt.

    Just because it SEEMS to be one of those kind of years.

    Just my uninformed take.
    You may absolutely be right. But Iím not laying money on Zona to win it all to find out.

  7. #37

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    IM heading into a meeting. But if someone has time I would love to see the last 10 games records of the national champs (not counting NCAA tourney obviously).
    I bet we see a def trend there as well. Easy to look up.

  8. #38

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Terminus View Post
    Cool chart and very telling as to the effect of a 6 game run to the Title and the solid numbers across the board entering it. It’s interesting to note the Cats actually dropped nominally from 2/6 to 2/7, but the IU game alone probably had an impact there.
    What the chart shows me is my gripe about it, statistically. The numbers are too close. You shouldn't have deviances of 5, 10, 15, and 20 or more places over a tournament.

    The reason you do have that is because the numbers are incredibly close to begin with. That's why, no matter what the ordinal numbers say, you have to look beyond those numbers to the numbers behind it. Gather the ones that are "close." Those are the ones.

    This will probably be the year there will be some team with a # 40 that wins it, even after the tournament, because that will mean 0.004 difference between # 25 and # 40. Or something like that.

  9. #39

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    You may absolutely be right. But I’m not laying money on Zona to win it all to find out.
    F**k Arizona.

    I'm in Arizona this week, BTW, lol.

    Seriously lovin' the weather.

    I was also in Vegas over the weekend, like you, correct?

    Thought I saw you relay that in some other thread.

    I played the Book for the first time.

    Netted a tidy profit on conference tournaments, which are likely better odds for bettor success compared to the Dance.

    But that's based on one experience if course.
    "Shut your eyes and you'll burst into flame"

  10. #40

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Krank View Post
    F**k Arizona.

    I'm in Arizona this week, BTW, lol.

    Seriously lovin' the weather.

    I was also in Vegas over the weekend, like you, correct?

    Thought I saw you relay that in some other thread.

    I played the Book for the first time.

    Netted a tidy profit on conference tournaments, which are likely better odds for bettor success compared to the Dance.

    But that's based on one experience if course.
    Got back from Vegas yesterday. Good thing or you would have to borrow someoneís phone to text and meet for a drink.

  11. #41

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Last 10 games:

    UNC - 7-3
    Nova - 8-2
    Duke - 9-1
    UCoNN - 7-3
    UL - 10-0
    UK - 9-1

  12. #42

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Darrell KSR View Post
    What the chart shows me is my gripe about it, statistically. The numbers are too close. You shouldn't have deviances of 5, 10, 15, and 20 or more places over a tournament.

    The reason you do have that is because the numbers are incredibly close to begin with. That's why, no matter what the ordinal numbers say, you have to look beyond those numbers to the numbers behind it. Gather the ones that are "close." Those are the ones.

    This will probably be the year there will be some team with a # 40 that wins it, even after the tournament, because that will mean 0.004 difference between # 25 and # 40. Or something like that.
    But yet the hard lines remain the same. It eliminates several top teams for this year alone.
    The 3pt fga is very drastic especially.

  13. #43

    Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    But yet the hard lines remain the same. It eliminates several top teams for this year alone.
    The 3pt fga is very drastic especially.
    Run it a thousand times and it won't though, and I suspect a healthy dose. (Edit - I'm just talking about the ordinal ranking. I am much more persuaded by the 3-point FGAs you describe.)

    That's my rub. I compensate for it by including an ill-defined margin of error. As in, I have no earthly idea.

  14. #44

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Darrell KSR View Post
    Run it a thousand times and it won't though, and I suspect a healthy dose. (Edit - I'm just talking about the ordinal ranking. I am much more persuaded by the 3-point FGAs you describe.)

    That's my rub. I compensate for it by including an ill-defined margin of error. As in, I have no earthly idea.
    I think itís fair to use a margin of error. Thatís part of why I included those teams hot late. I think they are the ones most likely to move up in a category.
    But as the chart shows, they can only move so much in 6 games. And 6 games against better opponents most likely.

  15. #45
    I'm with you. Not only has it worked (in the sense that when I wear my lucky shirt, Kentucky wins), but it is logical (in the sense that it measures, in the most precise way, the exact two tempo-free components of a basketball game. And the only two that really matter.)

  16. #46
    Comeback Cat Catfan73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    3,817

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    I used the Kenpom numbers somewhat when filling out my bracket and while there is value there, most of what I saw could have been gleaned from common sense. Once you expand things just a bit to allow for movement during the tournament they mostly become general guidelines because you’re not eliminating enough teams. But since I don’t have much common sense (according to Mrs. Catfan) I need all the help I can get.

    I think one has to think outside the box a bit anyway. If what looked like the best team on paper won every game then everyone’s bracket would be perfect.
    Don't panic

  17. #47

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Have to believe that UKs extreme youth would make most of the Cats numbers pre February, or even mid February, meaningless.

    Would love to see what our numbers are the last ten games.

  18. #48

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Catfan73 View Post
    I used the Kenpom numbers somewhat when filling out my bracket and while there is value there, most of what I saw could have been gleaned from common sense. Once you expand things just a bit to allow for movement during the tournament they mostly become general guidelines because you’re not eliminating enough teams. But since I don’t have much common sense (according to Mrs. Catfan) I need all the help I can get.

    I think one has to think outside the box a bit anyway. If what looked like the best team on paper won every game then everyone’s bracket would be perfect.
    To a certain degree thatís true but not fully.
    There are def teams that many are picking to win it all that analytics say they most likely will not (AZ being the best example).
    And betting wise (if you care) there are some really good long shots that analytics like better than Vegas does.
    Auburn is 65-1. I donít think they will win it, but those are incredible odds for a team that analytically has a shot.
    Cincy, Gonzaga, WVU, and even UK are good odds on teams with a shot.

  19. #49

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    Got back from Vegas yesterday. Good thing or you would have to borrow someoneís phone to text and meet for a drink.
    Where were you staying if you don't mind me asking?

  20. #50

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Krank View Post
    Where were you staying if you don't mind me asking?
    Mandalay this trip.
    I found a conference code online so paid next to nothing.

  21. #51

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by ukpumacat View Post
    Mandalay this trip.
    I found a conference code online so paid next to nothing.
    I was up at SLS, opposite end of the strip. We had fun.

  22. #52

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Krank View Post
    I was up at SLS, opposite end of the strip. We had fun.
    Nice. I havenít stayed there yet.

    Iím not gonna lie. I have paralysis by analysis. Iíve looked at numbers so long that I have no clue. Haha.
    I went with my gut more than I did the numbers. Iím more excited to look back after and see how the numbers stack up.

  23. #53
    Comeback Cat Catfan73's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Location
    Louisville, KY
    Posts
    3,817

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    We moved to 22-22 in kenpom without even having to play . I guess it was those silly NITers moving around.
    Don't panic

  24. #54

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Quote Originally Posted by Catfan73 View Post
    We moved to 22-22 in kenpom without even having to play . I guess it was those silly NITers moving around.
    Interesting. I wonder which teams dropped...I guess I could do a little checking and find out...

  25. #55

    Re: Tournament Predictive Statistics

    Itís interesting to go back and look after just one day. The two ďupsetsĒ- Zona and Miami were by far the lowest rates Kenpoms at their seed line.
    I had Zona as the last team in Tier 2 (and really shouldnít have as their defensive rating is so bad) and didnít even have Miami at all.
    Letís see if tomorrow follows suit as well.

Bookmarks

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •