The first week's power ratings (through games of last Sunday) are a joyful celebration of the quirks of conclusions that can be drawn from a very small data set. Let's look at some of the interesting items in the Strength power rating.
First of all, note the home field advantage number: 14.35!! Or about four times as large as it will be in just a few weeks. Right now, there is little sound information as to which teams are good teams, so the computer is "deciding" that home court—not the fact that good teams are hosting inferior ones—is a large factor in these blowouts.
Now take a look at the current top ten:
# Team rec Rating
1. Washington St. 1-0 36.64
2. Brown 0-1 35.84
3. New Mexico 1-1 31.98
4. Eastern Michigan 1-0 28.32
5. Lipscomb 1-0 26.32
6. Tennessee Martin 1-0 25.32
7. Marquette 1-0 24.64
8. Arkansas Little Rock 2-0 24.02
9. Michigan St. 1-0 23.64
10. Baylor 1-0 21.82
Washington State is #1 thanks to their 76-25 blowout of Mississippi Valley State which took on an even more powerful appearance since Arizona State beat MVSU by just 16. Michigan State and Marquette made the top ten just for randomly having a bigger blowout than most other teams. Other teams with blowout wins rank high right now, too, until over the next weeks those wins are diminished when the algorithm has sufficient information to conclude that the opposition was weak.
But what about Brown, who ranks #2 despite going 0-1? First, remember the huge home court advantage number. Brown lost at Rhode Island (#18) by just two points, meaning that they are considered to be 12 points better! And in turn, Rhode Island lost to #45 Duke—again, on the road—by just three, putting them 11 points ahead of the Blue Devils. So until the home field advantage calms down, both of these teams will rank higher than the teams they lost to, which is how 0-1 Brown is deemed the second-best team in the nation by this algorithm.
In a couple of weeks all this quirkiness will be gone; relative strengths will become apparent, diminishing blowout wins, and home court advantage will be well under double-digit values. But for now, a blowout win or a close loss on the road to a good team pays dividends.
Additionally, there are 391 teams listed at the moment. This will pare down to about 345 over the next month, as teams with too few games played are delisted and only those in Division I remain.
The Success rating is in its infancy, too:
# Team rec Rating
1. Clemson 3-0 6.38
2. San Francisco 2-0 5.63
3. Arkansas Little Rock 2-0 5.62
4. Minnesota 3-0 5.18
5. Maine 2-0 4.64
6. Temple 2-1 3.73
7. Michigan 2-0 3.26
8. Bowling Green 2-1 3.19
9. Cheyney 1-0 3.13
10. Norfolk St. 1-0 3.13
Teams with more than one win rank better, and in particular teams that won tournaments rate higher. This is because in a tournament finalé, you are guaranteed to have beaten a team with a couple of wins. #1 Clemson won the Charleston classic to go 3-0, and one of the teams they beat, 2-1 Temple, is #6 despite having a loss. Likewise, #4 Minnesota won the NABC classic, beating 2-1 Bowling Green (2-1) in the second round.
Early in the year, when the rankings are combined into the aptly-named "Combined" power rating, the Strength ratings dominate:
# Team rec Rating
1. Washington St. 1-0 37.09
2. Brown 0-1 35.10
3. New Mexico 1-1 32.28
4. Arkansas Little Rock 2-0 29.65
5. Eastern Michigan 1-0 28.77
6. Lipscomb 1-0 26.77
7. Tennessee Martin 1-0 25.77
8. Marquette 1-0 25.09
9. Maine 2-0 24.82
10. Norfolk St. 1-0 24.49
This is practically a mirror of the Strength ratings. Teams that won several games, in a tournament perhaps, played tougher competition, and had closer games. Until the algorithm can differentiate the teams effectively, these closer games don't rate very high. As the season goes on, the Success ratings build and become more significant in the Combined tally, while the Strength factor remains basically constant after the first few weeks.
Stephen Curry scores zero, still the key to Davidson's win
One game I wish I could have seen is Davidson vs. Loyola (MD) Tuesday night, where Stephen Curry—previously the nation's leading scorer—was "held" to zero points on 0-of-3 shooting, but the Wildcats still rolled, winning 78-48.
Curry was double-teamed the entire night, and after a few possessions just stood in the corner and watched as his teammates scored relentlessly with their 4-on-3 advantage.
As exciting as it is to watch Curry take over a game and score 30 or 40 points, I think I would have enjoyed his performance tonight even more. It's a rare and remarkable performance by a player of his caliber to be willing to play this way. How many leading scorers would have felt comfortable doing this?
Even with his lowest scoring total ever, Curry was the key to Davidson's win. The players who carried out the scoring were Bryant Barr (6 of 11 threes) and Andrew Lovedale (20 points), but Curry was still the MVP. Unless you give that to Loyola coach Jimmy Patsos, who stuck with his "triangle and two" even when the "two" became a corner trap of a player who didn't have the ball.
Patsos was the coach involved in a strange incident where an official seemingly bullied him into leaving the coaching area and watching from the stands. I haven't heard what the deal was with that incident, but along with this game, it's certain at the very least that he has an unorthodox style.
The ESPN guys think it's worse that than, calling his strategy "selfish" and lauding Curry for handling the double team in a way similar to how Larry Bird handled a similar double team when he played at Indiana State.
Posted on November 26, 2008 at 11:57 PM in commentary | Permalink | Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)
Reblog (0) | | Digg This | Save to del.icio.us | |