Subscribe!
CourtIntelligence powered by kenpom.com

The good stuff


At other venues...
  • ESPN.com ($)
  • Deadspin
  • Slate

  • Strategy
  • Whether to foul up 3 late
  • The value of 2-for-1’s

  • Philosophy
  • Brady Heslip’s non-slump
  • The magic of negative motivation
  • A treatise on plus-minus
  • The preseason AP poll is great
  • The magic of negative motivation
  • The lack of information in close-game performance
  • Why I don’t believe in clutchness*

  • Fun stuff
  • The missing 1-point games
  • Which two teams last lost longest ago?
  • How many first-round picks will Kentucky have?
  • Prepare for the Kobe invasion
  • Predicting John Henson's free throw percentage
  • Can Derrick Williams set the three-point accuracy record?
  • Play-by-play Theater: earliest disqualification
  • Monthly Archives

  • September 2014
  • July 2014
  • May 2014
  • April 2014
  • March 2014
  • February 2014
  • January 2014
  • December 2013
  • November 2013
  • October 2013
  • September 2013
  • August 2013
  • July 2013
  • June 2013
  • May 2013
  • April 2013
  • March 2013
  • February 2013
  • January 2013
  • December 2012
  • November 2012
  • October 2012
  • September 2012
  • August 2012
  • July 2012
  • June 2012
  • May 2012
  • April 2012
  • March 2012
  • February 2012
  • January 2012
  • December 2011
  • November 2011
  • October 2011
  • September 2011
  • August 2011
  • July 2011
  • June 2011
  • April 2011
  • March 2011
  • February 2011
  • January 2011
  • December 2010
  • November 2010
  • October 2010
  • August 2010
  • July 2010
  • June 2010
  • May 2010
  • April 2010
  • March 2010
  • February 2010
  • January 2010
  • December 2009
  • November 2009
  • October 2009
  • July 2009
  • February 2009
  • January 2009
  • December 2008
  • November 2008
  • October 2007
  • September 2007
  • July 2007
  • June 2007
  • May 2007
  • April 2007
  • March 2007
  • February 2007
  • January 2007
  • December 2006
  • November 2006
  • October 2006
  • September 2006
  • August 2006
  • July 2006
  • June 2006
  • May 2006
  • April 2006
  • March 2006
  • February 2006
  • January 2006
  • December 2005
  • November 2005
  • October 2005
  • September 2005
  • August 2005
  • July 2005
  • June 2005
  • May 2005
  • April 2005
  • March 2005
  • February 2005
  • January 2005
  • December 2004
  • November 2004
  • October 2004
  • September 2004
  • August 2004
  • July 2004
  • June 2004
  • May 2004
  • April 2004
  • March 2004
  • February 2004
  • January 2004
  • December 2003
  • November 2003

  • RSS feed

    Fairness in quality wins

    by Ken Pomeroy on Friday, January 3, 2014


    Oregon got a really nice road win last night, winning at Utah 70-68 in overtime, on one of the more unusual final sequences you’ll see to decide a game. Even though I don’t think the Utes are world-beaters, it was a really good win for the Ducks. All the available info we have so far suggests they are about the 70th best team in the country. Utah probably isn’t going to the NCAA tournament, but beating the nation’s 70th best team on the road is quite difficult.

    According to my model, Oregon had about a 56% chance of winning at the Huntsman Center, but if the teams played in Eugene, the Ducks would have an 81% chance of winning. So sure, Utah looked good last night, but they probably wouldn’t look as good if there was a rematch. (Then again, there’s about a 20% chance they would look as good. But I think that figure puts things in perspective.)

    The Utes’ RPI - and yes I feel dirty for having looked this up - was around 150 before the game and is projected to finish around 90. So unless Utah overachieves the rest of the year, this is not going to be what those married to the RPI would call a quality win. In fact, I blame the RPI for the general perception in a non-RPI world that a win like this isn’t all that special. Come tournament time, people start talking about top 50 wins almost at the exclusion of anything else. It gets kind of absurd as a team’s opponents can make or break its resume depending on whether an opponent ends up #50 or #51.

    The problem is that road win over #51 is significantly more difficult than a home win over #50. We can all agree on that, right? And yet one counts as quality and the other doesn’t. This type of thinking has also slipped into everyday talk well before tournament resume comparison becomes an issue. “Hey, so-and-so has X top 50 wins,” ignoring the context of where those games took place, which is a pretty important consideration.

    If the NCAA wants to keep using the RPI as its go-to metric then it really should consider a simple change to how the games against quality opponents are aggregated. Here’s a handy table describing the difficulty that the 30th ranked team would have in winning games against teams of various rankings by location of the game.

                    against…
             Home   Neutral  Road
    Win%    Opp Rk  Opp Rk  Opp Rk
    59        20      50      73
    76        57     100     177
    
    

    You could make the baseline team whatever you want, but it wouldn’t change the calibration much. Instead of focusing on games against the top 50, the NCAA could call it games against quality opponents or Tier I opponents, or something catchy that would get a hashtag. Whatever you call it, that group would include home games against the top 20, neutral games against the top 50, and road games against the top 75. I can’t imagine the code change would take more than an hour for the NCAA to implement. Boom, now Oregon has a quality win it deserves, and teams picking off the 47th ranked team at home don’t. (Using my ratings, anyway.)

    You could do likewise for the record against the top 50-100. Call them Tier II games. Home games against teams ranked 21-60, neutral games against teams ranked 51-100 and road games against teams ranked 76-175. These ranges present a much fairer reflection of a team’s record in losable games.

    Plus, it would set a good example for the rest of the college basketball world. If Oregon had beaten, say, San Diego State at home, I think they would have got a lot more credit than they did for winning at Utah. “It’s a win against ranked team” many pundits would say. But it would be about as impressive as winning a game at an average Pac-12 team. People should start talking that way because this is how college basketball, with its large home-court advantage, really works.