~2017-18 Big Ten Basketball Thread~

[Brutus Buckeye]

[medinabuckeye1]

Maryland's RPI just fell from #74 to #76 overnight, meaning MSU, Purdue and UM all lose one Quadrant 1 win, because a road win over Maryland no longer qualifies.

This illustrates my main objection to this system.  I don't like the hard cut-offs.  
This system effectively treats a road game against #1 as being equivalent to a road game against #75.  At the same time, a road win against #75 (or 74, UMD as of yesterday) is MUCH better than a road win over #76.  
We all know that beating #75 on the road is obviously NOT the same thing as beating #1 on the road.  Conversely, we all know that beating #75 or #76 on the road is almost exactly the same thing.  
More sophisticated computer rankings can deal with this easily by simply treating a road win over #1 as being slightly better than a road win over #2 which is slightly better than a road win over #3, etc, etc.  
In a more sophisticated system the difference between beating #74 Maryland and beating #76 Maryland is negligible as it should be.  In the system we have, the difference between beating #74 Maryland and beating #76 Maryland is a major issue.  It shouldn't be.  

[medinabuckeye1]

FWIW:
I feel the same way when people talk about wins over "ranked teams" in football.  Beating #1 is a MUCH bigger deal than beating #25 and beating #25 is essentially equivalent to beating #26 but talking of "ranked wins" treats the wins over #1 and #25 as equivalents while treating the win over #26 as equivalent to beating the worst team in FBS and/or an FCS team.  Similarly, in football, the more sophisticated computer systems handle this appropriately by treating a win over #1 as slightly better than a win over #2 and a win over #2 as slightly better than a win over #3, etc.  

[ELA]

This illustrates my main objection to this system.  I don't like the hard cut-offs.  
This system effectively treats a road game against #1 as being equivalent to a road game against #75.  At the same time, a road win against #75 (or 74, UMD as of yesterday) is MUCH better than a road win over #76.  
We all know that beating #75 on the road is obviously NOT the same thing as beating #1 on the road.  Conversely, we all know that beating #75 or #76 on the road is almost exactly the same thing.  
More sophisticated computer rankings can deal with this easily by simply treating a road win over #1 as being slightly better than a road win over #2 which is slightly better than a road win over #3, etc, etc.  
In a more sophisticated system the difference between beating #74 Maryland and beating #76 Maryland is negligible as it should be.  In the system we have, the difference between beating #74 Maryland and beating #76 Maryland is a major issue.  It shouldn't be.  

Yeah, that's what I don't get.  The quality of wins is factored into whatever computer ranking system you use.  So why throw this in on top of it?

[ELA]

Tyler Cook putting his name in the draft, but not hiring an agent

[Brutus Buckeye]

The Bearcats take down the 'Stangs. 

[FearlessF]

Money it's gotta be the shoes!

[ELA]

Cincy coach Mick Cronin throwing shade at Pitino

Cincinnati coach Mick Cronin wore a pullover for today's American tournament game against SMU in honor of Bob Huggins, one of his mentors. "I could have still been banging around at Woodard High School if he didn't hire me," Cronin said. He did bring suits for the weekend, though. "Tomorrow, I'll wear a real expensive suit like Rick Pitino," he said.

[Brutus Buckeye]

He should go for Ketchup, since the other two have already covered Mustard and Mayo. 

[betarhoalphadelta]

FWIW:
I feel the same way when people talk about wins over "ranked teams" in football.  Beating #1 is a MUCH bigger deal than beating #25 and beating #25 is essentially equivalent to beating #26 but talking of "ranked wins" treats the wins over #1 and #25 as equivalents while treating the win over #26 as equivalent to beating the worst team in FBS and/or an FCS team.  Similarly, in football, the more sophisticated computer systems handle this appropriately by treating a win over #1 as slightly better than a win over #2 and a win over #2 as slightly better than a win over #3, etc.  

Yeah, and we constantly talk about wins over ranked at the time teams, despite what else happens to them. I remember in football, for a long time a win over a ranked Illinois team was Purdue's most recent "ranked road win". It might still be. That game was right before Illinois took a 6-game losing streak. So it's not all that big of an accomplishment, but it was a ranked win on the road, dammit!
The thing is that people are dumb. We like hard cutoffs, because we like to categorize things. "Beating a ranked team" means something to us emotionally, even if it's the #23 team and they drop out of the rankings the next week. 

[medinabuckeye1]

Yeah, and we constantly talk about wins over ranked at the time teams, despite what else happens to them. I remember in football, for a long time a win over a ranked Illinois team was Purdue's most recent "ranked road win". It might still be. That game was right before Illinois took a 6-game losing streak. So it's not all that big of an accomplishment, but it was a ranked win on the road, dammit!
The thing is that people are dumb. We like hard cutoffs, because we like to categorize things. "Beating a ranked team" means something to us emotionally, even if it's the #23 team and they drop out of the rankings the next week.

Oh I get that but I think those are also two very different things.  
A Purdue fan (your example), bragging about a "road win over a ranked team" even though said "ranked" team subsequently lost their next five games and finished sub .500 and unranked doesn't bother me too much.  
What does annoy me is when the people responsible for NCAA Tournament selection and/or seeding or the people responsible for CFP selection talk about wins over "ranked" teams.  Then it actually matters.  At least in the CFP era it seems to have improved somewhat because people are mostly talking now about wins over teams ranked at the end of the season.  That is obviously a lot better than talking about wins over ranked at the time teams. Still, it suffers from the hard cut-off issue of treating wins over #1 or #25 as equivalent and also treating wins over #26 or #126 as equivalent.  

[Brutus Buckeye]

[ELA]

The SEC still using the It Just Means More motto, even painting it on the court, is like the Big Ten returning to NYC next year.  Just really refusing to acknowledge something in reality is so much dumber than it appears in a meeting.

Also enjoying the side banner noting they have the most Quadrant 1 and 2 Wins.  Aside from the "why?" I also ask why?  If you know what that even means, you also know it's a dumb metric and you know the SEC was pretty good in basketball this year for the first time in like a decade, and therefore don't need to be told, and can only laugh at it.  If you do need to be informed the SEC was good, then that message is for you...except you don't know what a Quadrant 1 win means, so the message is lost.

So you've got a message that is going to mean nothing to the target audience, and is going to be laughed at by everyone else.  Marketing 101 I suppose.

[Brutus Buckeye]