mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-27-18 12:34 PM - Post#270185
In response to bradley
A lot of how the league stacks up depends on what you think matters.
By true game score (that includes margin), the top three are really bunched:
Penn 70
Yale 66
Harv 66
Brown stands alone in the 4th spot (54), Dart stands alone in the fifth spot (46) and then the bottom three are relatively bunched:
Prin 38
Colu 36
Corn 34
I'd argue that game score is the best descriptor of how competitive a team has been (and thus a pretty good predictor moving forward).
That being said, you play to win the games, so from a resume view, there's a pretty different story:
You can judge the quality of a win by taking the Adj GS (that Game Score that is completely stripped of margin - shown above) and either subtracting 100 in a loss or crediting the Adj GS in a win. So for instance, beating an Adj GS "75" team gives you 75 points if you win or -25 points if you lose. From that perspective, Penn is crushing it:
Penn 375 pts
Yale 233
Harv 84
Brwn 80
Prin -19
Dart -90
Corn -106
Colu -335
By dividing those numbers above by 100 you can get a metric for "wins against your own schedule relative to what a national average team would have done."
As you can see, Penn, which was handily defeated in its two losses, and Yale separate themselves from Harvard, which actually has a resume very similar to Brown's. Meanwhile, on the flip side, Princeton and Cornell's resumes look a lot more impressive, while Dartmouth and Columbia's are less so.
While resume isn't as great a predictor as margin-adjusted metrics are, what is important to note is that Penn's resume is outstanding. If it splits with Toledo/Temple and takes care of Monmouth/St. Joe's, it will actually have a resume worthy of an at-large bid heading into Ivy play, as crazy as that sounds. And that's a slate of 14 games where it could have as many as three tier II games and a tier I game and no fewer than two tier II games.
Hopefully that helps as some context here.
|
