Streamers
Professor
Posts: 8254
Loc: NW Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-25-19 09:50 AM - Post#295276
In response to penn nation
I wonder what the odds wi=old be on that parlay?
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
01-27-20 12:23 PM - Post#297565
In response to Streamers
On a pure resume basis, Yale's resume is ~40th nationally (including 39th in the only resume metric on the team sheets - ESPN SOR) and Harvard's resume is in the 60s (68th in ESPN SOR).
Yale will stay pretty much right there with a 10-2 mark down the stretch, but it likely needs an extra win to buffer their best non-Ivy Tourney winning outcome (L at Harvard). But 13-1 plus a L at Harvard in the Ivy Tourney would have them (objectively) solidly in.
The math is tougher for Harvard. Break-even for a bubble team would be 9.6-2.4, but Harvard's starting a full win behind Yale in the strength of record metric AND it has to account for a bigger hit to its strength of record because any tourney loss would be at home. 14-0 would be plenty to go SOR positive even with a tourney loss, BUT the odds of that are less than 1%.
So, Yale's likely the only shot. Weird to think that if Penn St. doesn't close with every last drop of a 16-2 run, the Bulldogs are probably more likely in than out.
|
sparman
PhD Student
Posts: 1347
Reg: 12-08-04
|
01-28-20 04:49 PM - Post#297700
In response to mrjames
I know I'm a broken record on this topic, but you will notice the discussion below is how to get a 12th Big 10 team, not a second ivy:
https://www.washingtonpost.com/sports/2020/01/28/n...
I will not believe the NCAA will faithfully apply "metrics" to add a second ivy at the expense of a big conference team unless and until it happens.
|
mountainred
Masters Student
Posts: 514
Age: 57
Loc: Charleston, WV
Reg: 04-11-10
|
01-28-20 07:43 PM - Post#297720
In response to sparman
Bubble Watch over at The Athletic did list Yale: https://theathletic.com/1564554/2020/01/28/bu bble-...
But they were literally the last team discussed and included this tidbit "there’s not a whole lot on this résumé to suggest it has much of a chance of an at-large bid"
I'm not saying I endorse this thinking. But the first Ivy at-large is going to have to overwhelmingly obvious and impossible to leave out. Or the field will have to expand to 128.
|
rbg
Postdoc
Posts: 3054
Reg: 10-20-14
|
01-29-20 09:09 AM - Post#297730
In response to mountainred
https://collegebasketball .nbcsports.com/2020/01/28...
- YALE (NET: 53, NBC: 12): The Elis are in this conversation because they don’t really have a bad loss to speak of. Their “worst†loss was a road game at San Francisco (95), and if North Carolina (93) gets Cole Anthony back, then that loss is not going to look nearly as bad by Selection Sunday. Their problem is a lack of quality wins. They won at Clemson (81), which is their only Quad 1 or 2 win. That’s not going to change in the Ivy. I think they need to win out and lose to Harvard in the Ivy title game to have a real at-large chance. -
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
At-Large Bid
02-08-20 10:38 AM - Post#298961
In response to rbg
TeamRankings.com has Yale as the favorite to win the regular season ahead of Harvard (50% to 28.4%) but Harvard the favorite to win the Tournament (42.1% to 41.0%).
HCA lives on!
Yale drops in KenPom from #43 to #51. Am I correct to assume that losses to Harvard last night and a loss in the tournament final would knock Yale out of position for an at large bid?
Had Harvard been healthy (Towns and Aiken), we'd be looking at two top 50 teams! I guess that's the once in a [decade?] situation the 2bid crowd has been waiting for.
Edited by HARVARDDADGRAD on 02-08-20 10:40 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
Bryan
Junior
Posts: 231
Loc: Philadelphia
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-20 02:45 PM - Post#299564
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
I don't know a lot about the NET ratings but have followed both Pomeroy and Sagarin for many years. As of today those 3 rankings for the 5 leading contenders for the Ivy playoff are as follows (NET, then Pomeroy, then Sagarin):
Yale 58,50,69
Harvard 106,108,98
Penn 153,146,141
Princeton 188,185,179
Brown 230,218,183
A Pomeroy ranking in the 50's does not usually get a team an at-large bid into the NCAA tournament. If Yale doesn't win the Ivy playoffs then they're unlikely to improve their ranking by the time the field is selected. No one else has a chance at an at-large bid.
It's a very limited data set but these ranking suggest NET is producing ranking results which are at least similar to Pomeroy and Sagarin 2/3 of the way through the season. This is a big improvement over the RPI.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-11-20 03:29 PM - Post#299570
In response to Bryan
For the ILP I think Harvard is in the drivers seat but this weekend could change that entirely.
The historical formula for getting the top seed is win your home games and then win 4+ road games. Harvard is done with all their tough road games (only @ C's) and if they protect home court (6 of 8 at home) would easily win the 1 seed. In other words, they have the easiest road to winning out and finishing 11-3.
Princeton is next, having protected home court so far and with the next best road win @Penn (4 road/4 home left)
Penn has 2 road wins and 1 home loss (4 road/4 home left)
Yale and Brown could jump into the picture with a sweep or even a split this weekend.
My ILP rankings, based on the win your home games/split your road games formula is currently:
Harvard
Princeton
Penn
Yale
Brown
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
02-11-20 03:47 PM - Post#299573
In response to PennFan10
Very interesting. Yale at 5-1 ending up in 4th place is most interesting. I'd add that Bruner's health matters there.
Hope that my Crimson can win out at home and at C's, but I fear that this squad is more of a counterpuncher, winning on tenacity and strength. The best play of Bassey, Djuricic and Kirkwood seems to come when behind. That's a dangerous formula.
|
iogyhufi
Masters Student
Posts: 681
Age: 27
Reg: 10-10-17
|
02-11-20 04:44 PM - Post#299577
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
Yeah, I'm going to go ahead and wager that, barring a serious injury to a starter (presuming that such a thing hasn't already happened to Bruner), Yale will not be finishing fourth.
Geez, Harvard trots out its best performance in a month by far (and follows it up with a lemon) and now the sky is falling for the Bulldogs and the Crimson are king of the hill.
I'd agree that Harvard has the easiest road forward of any team, but they've also banked two more league losses than Princeton or Yale have. That static disadvantage will be hard to overcome, especially since it would require Harvard to do at least 2 of the following (in my opinion)
1. Sweep the NY roadtrip
2. Sweep the Ps at home
3. Sweep Yale/Brown at home
and none of those will come easy. It's entirely possible that Harvard is the best team in the league, but they've got a pretty steep hill to climb to get back to the top.
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
02-11-20 05:11 PM - Post#299578
In response to iogyhufi
Agreed.
Yale and Princeton have the inside track to the regular season championship.
As we've learned, the regular season means little. Last year Harvard was 7-0 vs Tournament participants but couldn't win that final road game.
Harvard has now won 7 regular season contests vs Yale, but lost 2 tournament contests vs the Eli's.
Sadly, all that matters is figuring our which of HYPPB is the odd team out. After that it's a crap shoot, although I'm rooting for HCA to prevail!
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
02-11-20 05:32 PM - Post#299580
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
Though the empiricists may scoff, my simplistic formula, which is highly accurate historically is as follows: 0 points for a home win or a road loss. +1 for a road win and -1 for a home loss.
EVERY year the past dozen or so, the regular season champion is at least +4, which means they win all their home games and 4+ road games or, in the case they lose a home game or 2, they win 1-2 extra road games. This has been the case for every regular season league champ.
What you guys are arguing is based on what has happened to date, but not all schedules are created equal. Harvard and Princeton are +2 against their schedule, Penn is +1 and Yale is 0 with Brown -1 (a home loss). Harvard has the easiest path but the lowest margin for error (they have to win out to get to +4). Yale has the biggest upside but the hardest schedule (6 of final 8 on road). Yale could get to +6 if they win out but they have to play at all 3 of the other contenders. Harvard has done that already. Penn and Princeton still have to play @ the other contenders.
Harvard's path is definitely the easiest to the 1 seed.
Just another way to look at it.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-20 05:53 PM - Post#299584
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
If Yale wins out and loses at Harvard (if it loses a neutral-site game, it's toast), it would have a true resume ranking around 40. That would be an at-large resume, but with the way the committee looks at the world, that would probably be an NIT 5 or 6 seed.
Here's how the teams currently rank by Adj Eff Margin in Ivy play:
Yale +12
Princeton +8
Harvard +3
Penn -1
Brown -4
Cornell -6
Columbia -8
Dartmouth -8
And here's the schedule strength each has left:
1/2) Cornell/Columbia .5407
3/4) Penn/Princeton .5060
5/6) Yale/Brown .4965
7/8) Harvard/Dartmouth .3963
Given Dartmouth's 0-6 start and the Cs .5407 SOS remaining (Cornell has a 4% chance of getting to 7 wins), it's pretty safe (98-ish percent) to say those teams won't be in the Ivy Tourney.
My guess among those five teams:
Yale 11-3
Princeton 9-5
Harvard 8-6
Penn 8-6
Brown 7-7
I'll buy Harvard's dominance against the C's when I see it. Harvard hasn't gone 4-for-4 against the C's since the dominant 2014 team. Schedule is weak enough that it'd be hard to bet on 4-4 down the stretch, and while all the systems seem to be saying 6-2, I foresee there being a lot more close games in Harvard's future.
Penn and Princeton both host the C's in their final weekend, and the Tigers' loss to the Big Red aside, I find it hard to believe they'll drop one to either with a tourney spot on the line. Thus, you're asking them to go 2-4 against Y/B home and away and H/D away. TOUGH but should be do-able.
Brown's the wildcard. Probably won't be better than a one- or two-point favorite the rest of the way. But should be within a few points either way for five of the final eight. Problem for Brown is that it has a tough tiebreak situation having already been swept by Yale. Assuming Yale wins the title, it has to win at Harvard to have that tiebreak. In a situation where it sweeps Penn or Princeton, it probably wouldn't need the tiebreaker with that team at that point and a split wouldn't likely be favorable.
Thus, I think Brown's performance this weekend is probably the most interesting thing to watch (though I *guarantee* Harvard will stub its toe and find itself in an entertaining battle in at least one game this weekend). Brown getting swept would start to crystallize the tourney picture, but if it can grab a game (or sweep), things would get CRAZY down the stretch.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
02-11-20 05:59 PM - Post#299586
In response to PennFan10
FWIW, I think Harvard and Yale were only +3 last year, though unless the C's and Dartmouth have a huge second half, I do think it'll take +4 at least to get it done this year (as it almost always does).
|
iogyhufi
Masters Student
Posts: 681
Age: 27
Reg: 10-10-17
|
At-Large Bid
02-11-20 05:59 PM - Post#299588
In response to PennFan10
That makes a certain amount of sense, I grant, but it also presumes that all games within a certain category are created equal (e.g., losing at home to Princeton gets treated the same as losing at home to Cornell).
I generally prefer to line corresponding games up when comparing where teams are in the standings. For example, Harvard has one loss where Yale has a win (@BRN) and one win where Yale has a loss (@Yale). So they're even in that respect, but Harvard has banked two losses and a win that Yale has yet to play (@PENN, @PRI, @DRT respectively), whereas Yale has banked three wins that Harvard has yet to play (vs. BRN, vs. COR, vs. COL). By this model, Harvard and Yale are currently even in shared games, but Yale is 3-0 in non-shared games whereas Harvard is 1-2 in non-shared games.
This means that the best that Harvard can do is match Yale on those games (and could possibly do worse), whereas Yale has the potential to pick up games that Harvard did not. In my model, Yale's got better future potential than Harvard does when the two are compared.
Edited by iogyhufi on 02-11-20 06:00 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
At-Large Bid
02-11-20 06:11 PM - Post#299589
In response to mrjames
FWIW, I think Harvard and Yale were only +3 last year, though unless the C's and Dartmouth have a huge second half, I do think it'll take +4 at least to get it done this year (as it almost always does).
Yes you are right, wacky year. (Blasted empiricists ruining my attempt at data scrubbing)
Edited by PennFan10 on 02-11-20 06:15 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
PennFan10
Postdoc
Posts: 3585
Reg: 02-15-15
|
Re: At-Large Bid
02-11-20 06:14 PM - Post#299590
In response to iogyhufi
That makes a certain amount of sense, I grant, but it also presumes that all games within a certain category are created equal (e.g., losing at home to Princeton gets treated the same as losing at home to Cornell).
I generally prefer to line corresponding games up when comparing where teams are in the standings. For example, Harvard has one loss where Yale has a win (@BRN) and one win where Yale has a loss (@Yale). So they're even in that respect, but Harvard has banked two losses and a win that Yale has yet to play (@PENN, @PRI, @DRT respectively), whereas Yale has banked three wins that Harvard has yet to play (vs. BRN, vs. COR, vs. COL). By this model, Harvard and Yale are currently even in shared games, but Yale is 3-0 in non-shared games whereas Harvard is 1-2 in non-shared games.
This means that the best that Harvard can do is match Yale on those games (and could possibly do worse), whereas Yale has the potential to pick up games that Harvard did not. In my model, Yale's got better future potential than Harvard does when the two are compared.
Yea but my model has historical accuracy and your's is just now created with a stick in the dirt no? Ha. Actually, I said as much as Harvard at +2 can only get to +4 (or worse if they stub their toe as Mike says) and Yale can get to +6 so has more upside. Yale's road to +6 is harder than Harvard's road to +4 but Yale also has more margin for error than Harvard.....which is effectively the same thing you said in your post
|
iogyhufi
Masters Student
Posts: 681
Age: 27
Reg: 10-10-17
|
Re: At-Large Bid
02-11-20 07:31 PM - Post#299594
In response to PennFan10
Sure, but your model is only useful for post-hoc evaluation because teams don't play the same games at the same time. If you'd like to place a wager on your model's predictions being correct (i.e., that Yale finishes fourth), I'm sure you'd find plenty of takers.
EDIT: Missed the bit about future potential in your model. That makes things make a lot more sense to me. I should also clarify that I use this to compare teams mid-season, not after the season (because at that point it'd be silly to use).
Edited by iogyhufi on 02-11-20 07:35 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6413
Reg: 11-22-04
|
02-11-20 08:07 PM - Post#299595
In response to PennFan10
Doesn’t this basically assume all teams are equal? Yale may have a more “difficult†path, but they will be favored in every game the rest of the way, while Harvard will not. Won’t your model almost always presume that a good team that plays its early season games on the road is in better shape than the team that played at home?
|
HARVARDDADGRAD
Postdoc
Posts: 2692
Loc: New Jersey
Reg: 01-21-14
|
02-11-20 09:34 PM - Post#299597
In response to SomeGuy
Harvard may well be favored in each remaining game.
|
