Updated Sagarin Ratings

[SoonerTraveler]

Latest Sagarin Ratings
(with game results through Wednesday, 1-30-2013)

http://sagarin.com/sports/cbsend.htm

Big-12 Teams

3 ..... Kansas
19 ... Baylor
25 ... OSU
26 ... K-State
39 ... OU
47 ... Iowa State
67 ... Texas
82 ... West Virginia
187 ... Texas Tech
232 ... TCU

****************

Top-15 Conference Ratings

1 ... BIG TEN
2 ... BIG EAST
3 ... BIG 12
4 ... ATLANTIC COAST
5 ... PAC-12
6 ... MOUNTAIN WEST
7 ... SOUTHEASTERN
8 ... ATLANTIC 10
9 ... MISSOURI VALLEY
10 ... WEST COAST
11 ... CONFERENCE USA
12 ... HORIZON
13 ... WESTERN ATHLETIC
14 ... METRO ATLANTIC
15 ... BIG WEST

 

[AdaSooner]

I couldn't help but notice the conference ratings. The Big 12 is ranked ahead of the ACC, the Pac-12, the SEC and several other so-called lesser conferences.

Is this really a "down" year in the B-12 or is every conference in the country except the two at the top down this season?

 

[bocabull]

You can see why the Sagarin ratings are completely meaningless and not used by the committee.

Baylor & lil brother brother ranked ahead of us with worse/equal records, much worse strength of schedule and head to head losses against us.

 

[MI Sooner]

And would be favored over us. Since the sagarin predictor attempts to predict the outcome of games (which Vegas lines more or less have to do, if you believe in fairly efficient betting markets), and sagarin's predictor consistently comes pretty close to Vegas on terms of predicting winers ( that is, it predicts nearly as we'll as he best available benchmark), I think it's foolish to dismiss it.

 

[pnkranger]

And would be favored over us. Since the sagarin predictor attempts to predict the outcome of games (which Vegas lines more or less have to do, if you believe in fairly efficient betting markets), and sagarin's predictor consistently comes pretty close to Vegas on terms of predicting winers ( that is, it predicts nearly as we'll as he best available benchmark), I think it's foolish to dismiss it.

If we went by the Sagarin ratings every week, we would be 2-5 in the Big 12 and 11-8 overall. I'll take what I see on the court vs a bunch of gamblers and a computer program.

 

[oSuJeff97]

You can see why the Sagarin ratings are completely meaningless and not used by the committee.

Baylor & lil brother brother ranked ahead of us with worse/equal records, much worse strength of schedule and head to head losses against us.

Your misunderstanding of how the computer rankings work is laughable.

 

[DenverSooner]

Your misunderstanding of how the computer rankings work is laughable.

How so? I don't get OSU or Baylor being ranked ahead of OU. About the only thing I see favoring OSU is a win over NCST. However, OU's win against OSU and road win at Baylor (where OSU lost) would suggest to me that OU should have a better rating. OU has two conference road wins. OSU has zero and I don't think OSU will beat KU in Lawrence on Saturday.

To me it really doesn't matter. The computers will work themselves out. If OU finishes a game or two ahead of OSU in the conference play, I suspect Sagaria will have OU rated higher. If they are tied or OSU is a game ahead but OU sweeps OSU I think Sagaria will have OU rated higher. If they split and OSU has a better conference record, OSU will probably be rated higher. I am not sure what will happen if they split and have the same conference record.

 

[oSuJeff97]

How so? I don't get OSU or Baylor being ranked ahead of OU. About the only thing I see favoring OSU is a win over NCST. However, OU's win against OSU and road win at Baylor (where OSU lost) would suggest to me that OU should have a better rating. OU has two conference road wins. OSU has zero and I don't think OSU will beat KU in Lawrence on Saturday.

Because computer rankings are based on the totality of the season played to date, not one or two "common opponent" games.

The Sagarin, KenPom, RPI, etc., rating are taking every game played by each team and their opponents into consideration. That's a lot of games.

Even if you look at only the games OSU and OU have played... a total of 38... the three games in question (OSU @ OU, OU/OSU @ Baylor) make up 7.8% of the results.

Three games have even less weight in a model that's taking every game into consideration.

If OU keeps playing at a high level, and OSU continues to flounder on the road, then - as you said - the model will correct and "work itself out" as more games are played.

My only point is that holding up one or two games and saying their results prove that a particular computer poll "doesn't work" is foolish and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the polls work.

 

[152219]

How so? I don't get OSU or Baylor being ranked ahead of OU. About the only thing I see favoring OSU is a win over NCST. However, OU's win against OSU and road win at Baylor (where OSU lost) would suggest to me that OU should have a better rating. OU has two conference road wins. OSU has zero and I don't think OSU will beat KU in Lawrence on Saturday.

To me it really doesn't matter. The computers will work themselves out. If OU finishes a game or two ahead of OSU in the conference play, I suspect Sagaria will have OU rated higher. If they are tied or OSU is a game ahead but OU sweeps OSU I think Sagaria will have OU rated higher. If they split and OSU has a better conference record, OSU will probably be rated higher. I am not sure what will happen if they split and have the same conference record.

OU's rating is still taking a slight beating because they won too many close games against what the computer sees as inferior opponents. Increase some of those early seasons wins from 1-4 points to 5-12 and OU likely jumps above about 10-12 teams

 

[bocabull]

Your misunderstanding of how the computer rankings work is laughable.

Aggy dope. Please explain how any sound algorithm can produce a higher ranking for lil brother when OU has the same record & according to sagarin a statistically relevant higher strength of schedule, higher winning % vs top 25 teams, higher winning % vs top 50 teams and a 1-0 head to head record vs lil brother.

It can't which is why sagarin's garbage rankings are ignored by the committee and he's not being paid any significant publishing fees.

Now crawl back under the rock you've been hiding under since OU blew out hillbilly ford & your bubble team.

 

[DenverSooner]

Because computer rankings are based on the totality of the season played to date, not one or two "common opponent" games.

The Sagarin, KenPom, RPI, etc., rating are taking every game played by each team and their opponents into consideration. That's a lot of games.

Even if you look at only the games OSU and OU have played... a total of 38... the three games in question (OSU @ OU, OU/OSU @ Baylor) make up 7.8% of the results.

Three games have even less weight in a model that's taking every game into consideration.

If OU keeps playing at a high level, and OSU continues to flounder on the road, then - as you said - the model will correct and "work itself out" as more games are played.

My only point is that holding up one or two games and saying their results prove that a particular computer poll "doesn't work" is foolish and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the polls work.

But strenght of schedule should put OU higher when you consider the non-common opponents.

 

[152219]

But strenght of schedule should put OU higher when you consider the non-common opponents.

It does in the RPI which only looks at wins and losses and strength of schedule, but Sagarin's total ratings also values things like margin of victory

 

[152219]

FWIW, Kenpom doesn't look at wins and losses as a factor in his algorithm. Completely left out of the equation

 

[152219]

There are 16 places between where OU is ranked according to Sagarin's ELO Chess (which doesn't take margin of victory into account) and his Predictor (which does take MOV into account). OSU's Predictor value is 11 places better than their ELO Chess

 

[stormspencer]

Because computer rankings are based on the totality of the season played to date, not one or two "common opponent" games.

The Sagarin, KenPom, RPI, etc., rating are taking every game played by each team and their opponents into consideration. That's a lot of games.

Even if you look at only the games OSU and OU have played... a total of 38... the three games in question (OSU @ OU, OU/OSU @ Baylor) make up 7.8% of the results.

Three games have even less weight in a model that's taking every game into consideration.

If OU keeps playing at a high level, and OSU continues to flounder on the road, then - as you said - the model will correct and "work itself out" as more games are played.

My only point is that holding up one or two games and saying their results prove that a particular computer poll "doesn't work" is foolish and shows a fundamental misunderstanding of how the polls work.

You are spot on Jeff. Some of our posters get a tad emotional and knee-jerk if the polls/computer rankings don't reflect their perception of where OU basketball should be ranked or assigned....especially if there appears to be an injustice with respect to beating a somewhat "equal" type of team (OSU, Baylor). And yet, some ranking services don't "seem" to reflect that...at least to us they don't.

As you mentioned, computer ranking services such as Kenpom and Sagarin include more variables (effeciency ratings, margin of victory, ect.) in their formulas. And those variables tend to "lessen" the effect of head to head results because the entire season, up to that point, is formulated. as the season moves on, the increasing sample size will allow these differences to work themselves out.

The good news for OU, regarding NCAA Selection, is that we have now beaten several teams that appear to be NCAA quality. In addition to that, the RPI seems to favor us right now with regards to not having any bad losses (losses to teams with a >100 RPI). If this team keeps progressing and winning most of the contested games with good teams, we will be fine.

Personally, I don't care what Kenpom or Sagarin say about us because at some point, wins are all that matter...regardless of how pretty/ugly they are.

 

[skyvue]

Any ranking system that punishes a team in February for a tight win in November is flawed. Anyone can see that OU is entirely different team now than it was in the early going. We had three freshman and a rusty transfer getting tons of minutes.

We've got our legs under us now, and we're worlds better than we were then. It's obvious to any observer, and if the computer can't figure that out, too, then the info it's being fed is flawed.

 

[stormspencer]

FWIW, Kenpom doesn't look at wins and losses as a factor in his algorithm. Completely left out of the equation

You're exactly right. Kenpom utilizes an efficiency rating on offense and defense per 100 possessions to come up with his rating. He also includes an SOS factor, luck, FT and turnover. It's way too complicated for me to explain, but you can find it here:

http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/stats_explained

 

[stormspencer]

Any ranking system that punishes a team in February for a tight win in November is flawed. Anyone can see that OU is entirely different team now than it was in the early going. We had three freshman and a rusty transfer getting tons of minutes.

We've got our legs under us now, and we're worlds better than we were then. It's obvious to any observer, and if the computer can't figure that out, too, then the info it's being fed is flawed.

And fortunately, that is why the NCAA tournament bracket is set up by a committee of people, not computers, to determine who is worthy. "Your record in your last 10 games", injury factors, "how your team has improved over the course of the season", "where your team finished in its conference"...those and a few more are all factors that are supposed to be taken into account when determining the field.

 

[skyvue]

And fortunately, that is why the NCAA tournament bracket is set up by a committee of people, not computers, to determine who is worthy. "Your record in your last 10 games", injury factors, "how your team has improved over the course of the season", "where your team finished in its conference"...those and a few more are all factors that are supposed to be taken into account when determining the field.

Very true, but there's no reason Sagarin and other ranking services couldn't give more weight to the past ten games, too. At this point in the season, January's results should carry more weight than November's.

 

[bocabull]

An efficiency rating or margin of victory vs popcorn state when you're not playing your best lineups and spent about 15 minutes game planning is meaningless in college basketball.

It's not like the NBA where you are comparing apples to apples due to a level of competition that is relatively consistent.

As for knee jerk reactions ... I manage statistical/mathematical algorithms that drive automated futures/equity trading platforms as general partner of a hedge fund. Sagarin/Kenpom use unreliable variables that produce too much static.