Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



Username Post: Pomeroy Rankings        (Topic#21017)
SomeGuy 
Professor
Posts: 6391

Reg: 11-22-04
01-21-18 11:38 AM - Post#244309    

Just to give some historical context, it has been a while since the league has played as poorly as it has so far.

We haven't finished without a top 100 team since 2009 (Cornell won that year). Only Princeton has a chance this year.

Also, right now we only have 3 teams in the top 200 (and Harvard is on the edge). That hasn't happened since 2010.

I think we're doing better on the back end though. For most of the year, only Dartmouth has been in the bottom 100. U fortunately, Cornell laying an egg at Columbia dropped them down there as well.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Pomeroy Rankings
01-21-18 12:14 PM - Post#244313    
    In response to SomeGuy

This is where the poor recruiting class of 2014 (and to some extent 2015) is still killing the league. You cannot miss entirely on one class and follow it up with an okay, but not great, class and expect it not to hurt you a couple years down the line.

Here are the win shares by class right now (yes, the frosh!!! are outperforming the seniors):

Frosh - 12.3
Soph - 21.3
Jr - 22.7
Sr - 11.2

Here are the experience ranks nationally (No. 1 would be most experienced):

Princeton - 164
Penn - 168
(252 starts bottom 100)
Columbia - 256
Yale - 284
Dartmouth - 285
Cornell - 296
Brown - 329
Harvard - 336

So, when you lose three potential/likely All-Ivy First Teamers (Mason, Bruner, Aiken) for significant time from (probably) the least experienced league in the nation, the impact is going to be felt more acutely due to the lack of those senior leaders.

In other words, this is likely to be an outlier year as we pay for a terrible 2014 class. Much like we might experience a step back in a few years to pay for a terrible (depth-wise) 2018 class. In the interim, though, we have a decent 2015 class, historic 2016 class and decent 2017 class to drive the league forward in a big way over the next couple years.

 
SomeGuy 
Professor
Posts: 6391

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Pomeroy Rankings
01-21-18 02:04 PM - Post#244322    
    In response to mrjames

Is experience just based on class year? I don't understand how Harvard could possibly come up as less experienced than Brown when Harvard returned 4 starters and so many rotation players. Brown is starting 3 new players, and has another who is a major contributor. Harvard has one new guy in the rotation, one who is usually in the rotation, and one who is sometimes in the rotation. The rest of these guys were all playing a lot last year.

Edited by SomeGuy on 01-21-18 02:05 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
SRP 
Postdoc
Posts: 4894

Reg: 02-04-06
01-21-18 02:40 PM - Post#244325    
    In response to SomeGuy

Princeton dropped nine ranks on Pomeroy while taking exams. Tiger opponents just not holding up their end.

 
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 3614
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
01-21-18 03:13 PM - Post#244328    
    In response to SRP

From the Penn side, I’d also note that we are missing 2 of our 3 frosh this year for most of the year due to injury (one who played 8 games and showed flashes and the other our top recruit who hasn’t played at all). Will be glad to see them integrated into the lineup next year, and if they were healthy. Expectation they would have been on top 8 of the rotation this year.

 
mrjames 
Professor
Posts: 6062

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
01-21-18 05:35 PM - Post#244335    
    In response to Mike Porter

Based on class year, not overall possessions played to that point in one’s career. Not sure the answer would be too much different either way.

 
SomeGuy 
Professor
Posts: 6391

Reg: 11-22-04
Pomeroy Rankings
01-21-18 08:07 PM - Post#244341    
    In response to mrjames

I guess it depends on how you slice it. Harvard returned 73% of their minutes from last year (and 4 starters, and all but 2 guys in the rotation). The guys who made up that 73% are up to 82% this year. That seems like an experienced team to me, rather than an inexperienced one.

Just to contrast that with Brown, the returnees only made up 48% of their minutes last year, and they are 54% this year.

Edited by SomeGuy on 01-21-18 08:14 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
whitakk 
Masters Student
Posts: 523

Age: 32
Reg: 11-11-14
01-21-18 08:12 PM - Post#244343    
    In response to mrjames

Returning minutes is often used as a proxy for "experience". By that metric ("minutes continuity" in KenPom's parlance) five Ivy teams are above the D-I average, with Harvard a close second to Penn for the top of the league (64% minutes continuity).

The discrepancy with Mike's metrics largely reflects how much playing time was earned by freshmen last year -- that class is "experienced" in the sense that they got playing time last year, but still inexperienced in terms of overall time in D-I.

Right now the entire league has five seniors starting combined. (And two of them play for arguably the worst team.)

 
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

826 Views




Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.012 seconds.   Total Queries: 8   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 01:37 PM
Top