2023-2024 MBB computer projections thread

[dafarmer]

CBS Sports has ISU as the #5 team.

 

[Sigmapolis]

C-Willy and @brentblum keep emphasizing being >#50 in both offensive rating and defensive rating is essentially a prerequisite to be a contender for the national title. So, if you filter the Torvik rankings right based on those criteria, then one of the following teams will be your national champion in two months...

ACC
---
Duke
North Carolina
Wake Forest

American
---
SMU

BIG 12
---
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Texas

BIG EAST
---
Connecticut
Creighton
Marquette
St. John's

BIG TEN
---
Illinois
Michigan St.
Nebraska
Purdue
Wisconsin

MWC
---
Colorado St.
New Mexico

SEC
---
Auburn
Tennessee

PAC-12
---
Arizona

WCC
---
Gonzaga
St. Mary's

 

[dahliaclone]

C-Willy and @brentblum keep emphasizing being >#50 in both offensive rating and defensive rating is essentially a prerequisite to be a contender for the national title. So, if you filter the Torvik rankings right based on those criteria, then one of the following teams will be your national champion in two months...

ACC
---
Duke
North Carolina
Wake Forest

American
---
SMU

BIG 12
---
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Texas

BIG EAST
---
Connecticut
Creighton
Marquette
St. John's

BIG TEN
---
Illinois
Michigan St.
Nebraska
Purdue
Wisconsin

MWC
---
Colorado St.
New Mexico

SEC
---
Auburn
Tennessee

PAC-12
---
Arizona

WCC
---
Gonzaga
St. Mary's

Good stuff. Several have no shot at winning it all though IMO.

 

[NWICY]

I hesitate to say this but one team who could do the most for ISU would be for K State to win an effing game for a change. They sit at NET 77. If they would move up just two spots to 75 the win in Ames would move up from a Q3 to Q2b and the future game in Manahattan would move up from a Q2a to Q1b.

That would be great for ISU's resume but it is so damned enjoyable watching the **** show in Manhattan.

I'll take the **** show. I think we are OK without the help of the mildcats.

 

[alarson]

Good stuff. Several have no shot at winning it all though IMO.

I'd guess while you need to be minimum top 50 in both, you also need to be at least top 25 in one.

 

[NorthCyd]

C-Willy and @brentblum keep emphasizing being >#50 in both offensive rating and defensive rating is essentially a prerequisite to be a contender for the national title. So, if you filter the Torvik rankings right based on those criteria, then one of the following teams will be your national champion in two months...

ACC
---
Duke
North Carolina
Wake Forest

American
---
SMU

BIG 12
---
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Texas

BIG EAST
---
Connecticut
Creighton
Marquette
St. John's

BIG TEN
---
Illinois
Michigan St.
Nebraska
Purdue
Wisconsin

MWC
---
Colorado St.
New Mexico

SEC
---
Auburn
Tennessee

PAC-12
---
Arizona

WCC
---
Gonzaga
St. Mary's

I would modify it to select teams that are elite in one category. Take your pick whatever elite is, top 10.... top 5. ISU shows up in either one.

 

[peteypie]

Good stuff. Several have no shot at winning it all though IMO.

I would narrow it down to top 40 in both. I think the last 10 champs have been top 40 in both. After our loss to Houston we improved on adjusted offense from 43 to 39. D is top 3. That narrows the list to about 10 to 15 teams

 

[danvillecyclone]

I'd guess while you need to be minimum top 50 in both, you also need to be at least top 25 in one.

Forgive me as I’m not clear what rankings are being discussed above…
But as KenPom goes the threshold is:

40 for Offense
25 for Defense

And we are currently at 40 for Offense

Pretty sure that’s for the last 22 years or so.

 

[danvillecyclone]

40/25 club:

UConn
Houston
Purdue
Arizona
Tennessee
Auburn
Iowa State
Duke
North Carolina
Creighton
Marquette
Michigan State


Notables left out:
Illinois
Baylor
BYU
Kansas
Kentucky

 

[alarson]

Forgive me as I’m not clear what rankings are being discussed above…
But as KenPom goes the threshold is:

40 for Offense
25 for Defense

And we are currently at 40 for Offense

Pretty sure that’s for the last 22 years or so.

That's a commonly quoted metric for champions, you are correct on that. However I believe that is based on post-tournament ratings. Most champions are going to move up in the kenpom ratings as the tournament goes on.

But as much as this is quoted, your odds go way up if you're on the higher end of things (which seems obvious). The vast majority of champions the last ~20 years have finished top 10 in both categories.

 

[Sigmapolis]

I'd guess while you need to be minimum top 50 in both, you also need to be at least top 25 in one.

Arizona
Auburn
Connecticut
Creighton
Duke
Gonzaga
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Marquette
Michigan St.
New Mexico
North Carolina
Purdue
Tennessee
Texas
Wisconsin

UNIQUE: Gonzaga, New Mexico, Wisconsin

I would narrow it down to top 40 in both.

Arizona
Auburn
Connecticut
Creighton
Duke
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Marquette
Michigan St.
North Carolina
Purdue
St. John's
St. Mary's
Tennessee
Texas
Wake Forest

UNIQUE: St. John's, St. Mary's, Wake Forest

Everybody else is 2/2 here...

Arizona
Auburn
Connecticut
Creighton
Duke
Houston
Iowa St.
Kansas
Marquette
Michigan St.
North Carolina
Purdue
Tennessee
Texas

 

[jcf817]

That's a commonly quoted metric for champions, you are correct on that. However I believe that is based on post-tournament ratings. Most champions are going to move up in the kenpom ratings as the tournament goes on.

But as much as this is quoted, your odds go way up if you're on the higher end of things (which seems obvious). The vast majority of champions the last ~20 years have finished top 10 in both categories.

Any idea if metrics are available for the end of the regular season going back that far? It would be more informative to know where the championship teams were before conference tournament play started.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Any idea if metrics are available for the end of the regular season going back that far? It would be more informative to know where the championship teams were before conference tournament play started.

You can query Torvik for specific date ranges.

That would take a good amount of work to analyze, though.

 

[CascadeClone]

Filtering via metrics is good, but you have to add some other factors to it as well.

• Momentum - are they hot, or fading?
• Location - do they have to play another team in their backyard?
• Coaching - plus or minus?

Here's your "don't pick them too far" list right here:
Zona, Purdont, Tenn, TCU, Illinois, Marquette. You've been warned!

 

[cyfan92]

Filtering via metrics is good, but you have to add some other factors to it as well.

• Momentum - are they hot, or fading?
• Location - do they have to play another team in their backyard?
• Coaching - plus or minus?

Here's your "don't pick them too far" list right here:
Zona, Purdont, Tenn, TCU, Illinois, Marquette. You've been warned!

View attachment 124457

Can you please share the Torvik link to that?

 

[cyfan92]

Torvik does NOT like us going 5-2 coming home... The last 3 seed seems really harsh for 7-6 is Q1 and 13-8 in a combined Q1/Q2.. NO losses outside of Q2 as well...

Time to start cheering AGAINST teams like Alabama, Marquette, Duke, Creighton, Kansas, UNC, Illinois... etc

 

[danvillecyclone]

With Rutgers getting blasted last night, Iowa St is now #2 KP defense.

 

[8bitnes]

With Rutgers getting blasted last night, Iowa St is now #2 KP defense.

Would love to see a 75-50 kind of game tomorrow vs WVU

 

[VeloClone]

... Time to start cheering AGAINST teams like Alabama, Marquette, Duke, Creighton, Kansas, UNC, Illinois... etc

Time to now? Been cheering against most of those for two weeks or better.

 

[ChickenNuggetMan]

With Rutgers getting blasted last night, Iowa St is now #2 KP defense.

On BartTorvik too