Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 7 of 7 « First<4567
Username Post: Ivy Title/Tourney Odds        (Topic#19752)
Mike Porter 
Postdoc
Posts: 2125
Mike Porter
Loc: Los Angeles, CA
Reg: 11-21-04
Re: Ivy Title/Tourney Odds
02-21-17 09:57 PM - Post#222955    
    In response to SomeGuy

Completely with you SG. I'm most concerned with Cornell first and think they'll come out fired up at home wanting to make up for the blowout at the Palestra. That will be a tough game.

 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4128

Reg: 11-22-04
Re: Ivy Title/Tourney Odds
02-22-17 09:10 AM - Post#222977    
    In response to Mike Porter

They'll look a little different, too. Instead of the 4 guard they've run all season, this weekend they went to a more traditional lineup with 2 bigs to start games. So the freshman Warren will play more, which may enable them to matchup a little better when we play with 2 bigs.

They also know that they won the 2nd half at the Palestra pressing and chucking 3s. So we could see a high variance approach (which, unfortunately, can lead to high variance results).

 
mountainred 
Junior
Posts: 240

Age: 50
Loc: Charleston, WV
Reg: 04-11-10
02-22-17 10:22 AM - Post#222981    
    In response to SomeGuy

I hope Earl doesn't try to draw any grand conclusions from what "worked" in garbage time to what would work while the game is still on the line. After 24 games, it is clear the Big Red isn't a good three point shooting team. When you are #278 in 3 point shooting there will be the occasional hot night, but the bell curve of results is mostly bad.

 
PennFan10 
Masters Student
Posts: 963

Reg: 02-15-15
02-24-17 03:36 PM - Post#223257    
    In response to mrjames

reposting some great tweets by Mr James on tiebreakers:

Mike James‏@ivybball
Penn is the favorite right now. A win over COL would make it an overwhelming favorite but anything other than a COL sweep is fine or better.

Mike James‏@ivybball
In the vast, vast majority of scenarios, the 2/3 game is Harvard-Yale & Princeton is the 1, opening with, well, that's where things get fun.

Mike James‏@ivybball
Of course, there are also some crazier scenarios where a 3-7 team wins out, but let's treat those with the reasonableness they deserve.

Mike James‏@ivybball
So, for Yale, 8-6 is obviously in. 7-7 would be good so long as the Penn-Columbia loser loses one more game.

Mike James‏@ivybball
Given that Yale already is 0-2 vs PRIN & would likely be 0-2 vs HAR for this to be an issue, record vs other qualified teams would be rough.

Mike James‏@ivybball
If Yale needs a tiebreaker to qualify, it will have won at <= 1 game down the stretch. If that game isn't vs COL, it will split H2H breaker.

Mike James‏@ivybball
Harvard is pretty locked into the 2/3 game unless it loses out (& loses breakers) or makes up 2 gms (prob 3 given tiebreakers) on Princeton.

Mike James‏@ivybball
Princeton will be the 1-seed at 12-2 or better unless Harvard wins out & the other team the Tigers lose to isn't Columbia & gets the 4-seed.

Mike James‏@ivybball
With less than 7 hrs to tip, let's reset the Ivy race & provide the cheat sheet for understanding the impacts of various games this weekend.

 
PennFan10 
Masters Student
Posts: 963

Reg: 02-15-15
02-24-17 03:38 PM - Post#223258    
    In response to PennFan10

I wonder how "reasonable" a 3-7 team running the table is/isn't. Can't be any more/less likely than Penn going from 0-6 to 7-7

Cornell and Dartmouth are still in this thing.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4604

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
02-24-17 03:54 PM - Post#223261    
    In response to PennFan10

Here are the "win out" odds for each team:

Brown (6 wins): 1.7%
Columbia (8 wins): 1.9%
Cornell (7 wins): 0.6%
Dartmouth (7 wins): 0.1%
Harvard (12 wins): 5.4%
Penn (8 wins): 15.7%
Princeton (14 wins): 40.8%
Yale (10 wins): 10.4%

So, every team is expected to lose at least once and only Princeton is remotely close to tipping over to going undefeated the rest of the way being more likely than not.

That being said, there is a ~1/3 chance that one of the seven non-Princeton teams will pull off a 4-0 final stretch. And when you throw in Princeton, there's a ~2/3 chance that some team will go 4-0 down the stretch (obviously most likely to be the Tigers).

 
TigerFan 
Masters Student
Posts: 871

Reg: 11-21-04
02-24-17 04:03 PM - Post#223265    
    In response to mrjames

Mike, Wish you had time to discuss variance and the Quakers last night on the vine. Is there a statistical model predicting the Quakers will revert to their norm or is that just a well educated hunch? (is that sufficient bait for you?)

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4604

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
02-24-17 04:55 PM - Post#223278    
    In response to TigerFan

I always manage to destroy that podcast. Feel so bad every single time I go on there.

I'm relying on the work of others here, but essentially, if you were to recursively walk through each team's ratings progression throughout the year, you would find that after any given game, you would be better off predicting that a team moves towards its YTD performance average rather than further away from it.

There are definite exceptions to this. There have been teams that have just progressively increased their ranking all season (Kyle Smith's new squad, for instance). But that's the exception, not the rule. Generally, a short term vacillation in performance tends to regress back toward the dominant YTD trend.

My hypothesis on this is that style-driven improvements or declines are more likely to sustain and not regress than improvements or declines driven by elements more influenced by luck or variance (jumper shooting for and against, free throw defense, non-steal TOs). Why I'm so suspicious of Penn's sudden surge is that its eFG% in the four-game surge has been 48%, 62%, 70% and 59%. It was 57% at La Salle. In the four and three game slides in Jan and Feb it was 49%, 41%, 49% and 49% and 42%, 55% and 47%.

Looking at it from a eFG% for vs. against, you see that during the slides they went:
+11%
-11%
-6%
+3%
-6%
-3%
-16%

And during this run:
+5%
+15%
+19%
+21%

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of runs driven by outsized eFG% differentials. FWIW, Penn's long run eFG% differential is +3% for the year.

 
JadwinGeorge 
Sophomore
Posts: 190

Age: 69
Reg: 12-04-15
02-24-17 05:21 PM - Post#223290    
    In response to mrjames

I wish you could make your Skype connection compatible with Peter Andrews'. Your visits are always interesting and loaded with insight not readily available to casual fans. I enjoyed the discussion "off the air" after we finished the podcast, too. And not just because you predict recognition for Weisz, Cook and Stephens.

 
TheLine 
Postdoc
Posts: 2973

Age: 53
Reg: 07-07-09
02-24-17 05:22 PM - Post#223291    
    In response to mrjames

There has been a personnel change towards players who have been more efficient, like Betley. That has also had a positive effect on the rest of the team - spacing is improved, others are getting less contested shots, Brodeur and Foreman aren't putting up as many low percentage shots.

So I think some of the better efficiency is for real. How much is the question.


 
Streamers 
PhD Student
Posts: 1693
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
02-24-17 05:22 PM - Post#223292    
    In response to mrjames

  • mrjames Said:

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of runs driven by outsized eFG% differentials. FWIW, Penn's long run eFG% differential is +3% for the year.



The data agrees with you; but please consider the fact Penn is effectively putting a different team out on the floor now than they did during 0-6. If there was an anomaly this year, it was the OOC wins against LaSalle and UCF; and I attribute those in large part to inferior coaching/scheme by the opposition.

 
PennFan10 
Masters Student
Posts: 963

Reg: 02-15-15
02-24-17 09:09 PM - Post#223370    
    In response to Streamers

Mike James,

Your twitter stuff is awesome. Thanks for posting it.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 15773

Reg: 11-21-04
02-25-17 09:28 AM - Post#223487    
    In response to mrjames

Here's my question. While Penn may have had a 15.7% chance of winning out (before last night), what was it's chance of winning 5 straight after losing the first 6?

And what is your point spread tonight for both Penn-Columbia and Yale-Dartmouth?

 
SomeGuy 
Postdoc
Posts: 4128

Reg: 11-22-04
02-25-17 10:45 AM - Post#223493    
    In response to palestra38

i'm guessing the odds of losing the 1st six weren't very high either. But the odds of going 5-6 for the first 11 were higher, and overall that's where we are.

 
PennFan10 
Masters Student
Posts: 963

Reg: 02-15-15
02-25-17 11:04 AM - Post#223499    
    In response to SomeGuy

Kenpom has Penn -1 for tonight.

 
Streamers 
PhD Student
Posts: 1693
Streamers
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
02-25-17 11:07 AM - Post#223501    
    In response to PennFan10

Vegas has Lions -1 (they know something about Howard)

Note Penn is about 20 slots above Yale in the rankings now.

 
mrjames 
Postdoc
Posts: 4604

Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
Ivy Title/Tourney Odds
03-04-17 01:26 PM - Post#224709    
    In response to mrjames

Bump?

  • Quote:
I'm relying on the work of others here, but essentially, if you were to recursively walk through each team's ratings progression throughout the year, you would find that after any given game, you would be better off predicting that a team moves towards its YTD performance average rather than further away from it.

There are definite exceptions to this. There have been teams that have just progressively increased their ranking all season (Kyle Smith's new squad, for instance). But that's the exception, not the rule. Generally, a short term vacillation in performance tends to regress back toward the dominant YTD trend.

My hypothesis on this is that style-driven improvements or declines are more likely to sustain and not regress than improvements or declines driven by elements more influenced by luck or variance (jumper shooting for and against, free throw defense, non-steal TOs). Why I'm so suspicious of Penn's sudden surge is that its eFG% in the four-game surge has been 48%, 62%, 70% and 59%. It was 57% at La Salle. In the four and three game slides in Jan and Feb it was 49%, 41%, 49% and 49% and 42%, 55% and 47%.

Looking at it from a eFG% for vs. against, you see that during the slides they went:
+11%
-11%
-6%
+3%
-6%
-3%
-16%

And during this run:
+5%
+15%
+19%
+21%

I'm HIGHLY skeptical of runs driven by outsized eFG% differentials. FWIW, Penn's long run eFG% differential is +3% for the year.




 
 Page 7 of 7 « First<4567
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

12219 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: 0.125 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 08:29 PM
Top