*** OFFICIAL ISU VS KSU POST GAME THREAD ***
- Thread starter fenton06
- Start date
Don't forget your power towel
[video=youtube;-A-05wPlQQ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A-05wPlQQ4[/video]
[video=youtube;-A-05wPlQQ4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-A-05wPlQQ4[/video]
CycloneErik
Well-Known Member
I would agree with you on the top 25. However, the selection committe removed any last X games metric from their selection information a few years ago. Apparently the powers that be thought that too much weight was being given to a team that feasted on a weak closing schedule and not enough to the over all body of work.
Now they have to get rid of looking at non-con record and SOS separately from the overall record and SOS.
May have been posted before, but:
SHOT PERCENTAGES
3 pointers: 50% (11-22)
Field goals: 48.1% (26 - 54)
Free throws: 45.5% (10 -22)
Nothing like winning in the exact opposite way as expected!
The historical average for free throws for men's college basketball is 69%. If we had only been average, we'd have an extra 5 points tacked onto our total.
SHOT PERCENTAGES
3 pointers: 50% (11-22)
Field goals: 48.1% (26 - 54)
Free throws: 45.5% (10 -22)
Nothing like winning in the exact opposite way as expected!
The historical average for free throws for men's college basketball is 69%. If we had only been average, we'd have an extra 5 points tacked onto our total.
Unfortunately ISU had shown against TTU that they can play much, much worse. For the dorks out there ISU's game to game performance is a roll of a 20 sided die.
I'm glad they dropped the Last-10 (which became Last-12). It seemed to make sense as one tool in the process, because the goal was to have teams "playing their best basketball" heading into the tournament. But as you said, W-L can vary a lot depending on schedule.
I hadn't considered separation of the non-league & overall SOS. Is the idea with that to balance a team in a brutal conference that doesn't schedule anyone challenging in non-conference?
Probably also should add more rating systems to traditional RPI (KenPom, Sagarin, and such). At least there's as much attention paid to results vs. RPI ranks and not just straight SOS/RPI.
And they should go back to 64 teams. I'm guessing that's the least likely to occur among these ... :sad:
Agreed with this. I mean, you should look at things overall, but if youre looking for the best 68 teams for the tournament (minus a****ids), it somewhat accomplishes the opposite if you focus too much on the early season, a time where a lot of teams that might be like ours (less experienced playing together) are still developing into a team. It should absolutely be strongly considered for mid-majors who use it as their SOS builder, but for most major conference teams the primary (75%) judge of their worthiness should be their performance against their conference slate (weighted by how strong that conference is)
Last edited:
Hey, lay off...these wildcats ain't too good with the math and all. Plus, NESW directions are difficult when your head is up Bill Snyder's saggy arse.
Iowa State's about 6 points away from being top 15 in the country. If Ben Mclemore wouldn't have banked in that three and we would've beat Tech (both games still eat at me) we would be atop the B12 and a top 15 team in college basketball to this point
Disagree on the dice. This team sucks consistently on the road with the exeption of KU which was probably due to extra prep time and the crowd energy. They will predictably lay an egg against Okie State on Wednesday.