Welcome to SHOO-SHOO, RAH-RAH! The Duquesne Dukes Basketball Fan Message Board!
One of America's Great Message Boards - Any Inappropriate Posts Will Be Deleted!
I feel I have been honest and reasonable of my assessments of Duquesne basketball over the years. So much as to rile a few feathers on this board, claiming that I am a negative Nancy. This year I have taken a wait and see approach before commenting. Basically because I really could not figure them out. I have stated that our out conference schedule is very weak but I figure that was to improve a young team while achieving a nice record. Mission accomplished! Then I was waiting for the end of the season collapse. Never occurred. I thought the second time around the conference coaches figured out how to beat us, they did in the previous two seasons. Not this year. So l look at our 8 losses. 2 to Dayton by close margins, understandable considering they are definitely a top four team in the country. The two out of conference games to UAB and Marshall over the Christmas holidays. Every team in the country has had some sort of slump. That takes us to the other four losses. 2 on the road to UMASS and RI back to back. Those are tough conference games on the road which makes those losses acceptable. The other two losses were at home to St Bona and GW. Unfortunately we play to our opponents level of competition. Example being played close games versus Dayton top team and Fordham bottom team of the conference. So you are going to lose those types of games occasionally. The last two victories on the road against VCU and St Bona are definitely feathers in our cap. So that brings me to the ratings and rankings. I haven't looked deeply into it, but I strongly suspect our OOC schedule is still hurting us because as bad as some of those teams were projected, they actually underperformed as the season went on. Margin of victory is huge for KenPom as well as beating his spread. If that is the case, how can Minnesota and Purdue be ranked so high with a combined 29 losses to basically the same teams. And since they were ranked so high wouldn’t that have a bigger (damaging) effect because they had to have losses when they were favored. I'm going to use Torvik as a proxy for Kenpom because there is no subscription to access every team's stats. I'm going to use Torvik as a proxy for Kenpom because there is no subscription to access every team's stats. That's basically it. Look at the Big East, virtually every game is a quad1 or quad2. You just can't compete with that coming out of the A10, especially after playing a crap ooc schedule. The schedule wasn't a mistake though. We weren't ready for a hard schedule. Got to upgrade next year. It's tricky though, because the good teams will know what we have coming back and won't want to play us, and the quality mid majors will want a return game, which we won't want. Need to get Pitt and Penn State back on the schedule, and get the Dukes into a decent early season tournament where we will get a shot at some decent teams on a neutral court. They’ve dropped in losses but all the B1G teams, outside of Northwestern and Nebraska are ranked highly so they’re not being penalized as harshly.** Last edited by Brian (3/04/2020 1:21 pm) Based on what everyone is explaining, the deck is stacked against the non power conference schools. So then if you are not having an outstanding season it is very hard to move up the ratings. The NCAA should open the tournament to all teams, it would only take another week and a half and could be played when the the conference tournaments take place. Then you can use these ratings to seed them or throw them in the garbage can. yak-rbc and Brian, good stuff. Appreciate the digging; it's interesting to compare results. I know RPI doesn't carry the weight it used to ... but still - I I don't know if this is true, but I read a few years ago, probably here, that the A 10 has some say in who teams schedule, so as to help, not hurt the overall league's RPI. When you're a bottom four team like Duquesne was for so long, line up those Northeast teams and the HBCUs, and as you get better you better schedule some tougher opponents even a visit to a top 25 team with no return visit (Duke and Kentucky for the Dukes in the last 12 years), and if you are an elite A 10 team, you better be scheduling teams with double digit RPIS and the occasional top 25 team. I know RPI doesn't carry the weight it used to ... but still - No. I know RPI doesn't carry the weight it used to ... but still - No. What's frustrating is the answer is undeniably no after how good this season feels. Take away two losses... one of the bad ones from non con and one of the bad ones in conference play. I think we would be arguing heavily for a bid with the wins we have and losses to just UAB and UMASS, or Marshall and GW. If that were the case I think Fridays game would have been the deciding factor of the A10s 2nd bid. Last edited by BluffHunter (3/05/2020 10:07 am) I know RPI doesn't carry the weight it used to ... but still - No. What's frustrating is the answer is undeniably no after how good this season feels. Take away two losses... one of the bad ones from non con and one of the bad ones in conference play. I think we would be arguing heavily for a bid with the wins we have and losses to just UAB and UMASS, or Marshall and GW. If that were the case I think Fridays game would have been the deciding factor of the A10s 2nd bid. UAB, and GW are quad 4 losses. That kills any chance we had. I don't think anyone expected UAB to be this bad. We never should have lost that game. Indiana St. was the only decent team we played ooc, so we're bringing nothing to the table there. No. What's frustrating is the answer is undeniably no after how good this season feels. Take away two losses... one of the bad ones from non con and one of the bad ones in conference play. I think we would be arguing heavily for a bid with the wins we have and losses to just UAB and UMASS, or Marshall and GW. If that were the case I think Fridays game would have been the deciding factor of the A10s 2nd bid. UAB, and GW are quad 4 losses. That kills any chance we had. I don't think anyone expected UAB to be this bad. We never should have lost that game. Indiana St. was the only decent team we played ooc, so we're bringing nothing to the table there. Thanks for the reply. I didn't even realize how bad UAB was until now... and GW for that matter, 227?! Sheesh. That game was painful to see unfold. Doesn't matter now. Beat Richmond and take that momentum full force to Brooklyn, I believe we have a shot. Even thinking about trying to get out there for it. Last edited by BluffHunter (3/05/2020 10:40 am) UAB, and GW are quad 4 losses. That kills any chance we had. I don't think anyone expected UAB to be this bad. We never should have lost that game. Indiana St. was the only decent team we played ooc, so we're bringing nothing to the table there. Thanks for the reply. I didn't even realize how bad UAB was until now... and GW for that matter, 227?! Sheesh. That game was painful to see unfold. Doesn't matter now. Beat Richmond and take that momentum full force to Brooklyn, I believe we have a shot. Even thinking about trying to get out there for it. It's a long shot to beat Dayton, but we've got as good a chance as anyone in the league. Got to get there first though. I I don't know if this is true, but I read a few years ago, probably here, that the A 10 has some say in who teams schedule, so as to help, not hurt the overall league's RPI. When you're a bottom four team like Duquesne was for so long, line up those Northeast teams and the HBCUs, and as you get better you better schedule some tougher opponents even a visit to a top 25 team with no return visit (Duke and Kentucky for the Dukes in the last 12 years), and if you are an elite A 10 team, you better be scheduling teams with double digit RPIS and the occasional top 25 team. I I don't know if this is true, but I read a few years ago, probably here, that the A 10 has some say in who teams schedule, so as to help, not hurt the overall league's RPI. When you're a bottom four team like Duquesne was for so long, line up those Northeast teams and the HBCUs, and as you get better you better schedule some tougher opponents even a visit to a top 25 team with no return visit (Duke and Kentucky for the Dukes in the last 12 years), and if you are an elite A 10 team, you better be scheduling teams with double digit RPIS and the occasional top 25 team. They wanted teams to schedule to their ability. Cellar dwellers to schedule lightly, and powers to schedule more aggressively. They wanted everyone to come out of the ooc with at least 10 wins.
Offline
Ratings and rankings.
Dave Harper has told me personally that he makes the schedule up with Ken Prom ratings playing a factor. So as the season progresses I look at this ratings. I can not figure these ratings out for the life of me. Some examples to follow. Duquesne has defeated St Louis at home and away by 14 points each time yet we have a 91 rating and they possess a 76. We just defeated VCU at their place and they have a 71. Earlier this year we defeated Davidson and they have a 75. We have a better overall and conference record than these teams. Try and figure that out. Now nationally look at these teams, with their rating, their school name and then their record. 13 WVU 20-10, 15 Michigan 18-11, 20 Texas Tech 18-12, 23 Purdue 16-14, 29 Marquette 18-11 and 32 Minnesota 13-15. These teams are around or below a five hundred winning percentage in their conference. In my humble opinion that makes this rating system a joke !
Bracketology experts have most of these teams in the tournament or on the bubble with the exception of Minnesota. The NCAA should not accept any team that has a .500 or lower conference record unless they win their tournament. Is that not what the tournaments are for ? For us to be on the bubble for the NIT is a joke. Any thoughts ?
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Taking the last 5 games..
-Favored by 11 vs GW, lose by 3 and drop 7 spots.
-15 point dogs at Dayton, lose by 10, gain 2 spots
- 2 point dogs at Bona, win by 4 in OT (I think it basically is a tie in his ratings for regulation). Slight gain of 4 spots.
- 9 point faves at home vs. Mason, only win by 3 and give up a high point per possession score to a below average offensive team and drop 7 spots.
- gained the 7 spots back out performing the six point spread last night vs VCU.
Dukes will be the slightest of underdogs Friday against Richmond. Outside of a blowout win, likely not going to move up much despite a quality win if that result we all hope for happens to go our way.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
•
Thread Starter
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Duquesne is ranked 90th. Amongst their losses are 9 point loss to 188, a 22! point loss to 153, loss to 187, and a home loss to 214.
VCU has a loss to the same 187 team and a home loss to 175. We have double their terrible losses and dont have a win against 44 (LSU) or 47 (yet, that's Richmond) either.
Davidson is peculiar because they have a habit of beating the #@/! Out of bad teams, like 76, 187, 174, 121. They have more large margin losses than us but they are generally to much better teams and/or on the road. Our top 4 wins are basically a wash with theirs. Their worst losses are to 150 on the road, 159 on the road, 214 on the road, 242 on the road. They would be close to a wash on our worst 4 losses but theirs are all on the road and 3 of them were close. They're ranked 74
I will preface Minnesota by saying that despite their lofty metrics ranking, they dont belong in the NCAAs as they will be below .500. But their worst loss of the season is a lone Q3 loss to 86 or a road loss to 113 on the road. They've got wins against 8 (twice),11,14,19,66,67. They're in the Big 10 so it's really hard for us to compete with that and they get a multitude of chances but...that's a ton of great wins
I hate myself for loving you. Quoting me without the expressed written consent of the National Hockey League is prohibited.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
yak-rbc wrote:
Duquesne is ranked 90th. Amongst their losses are 9 point loss to 188, a 22! point loss to 153, loss to 187, and a home loss to 214.
VCU has a loss to the same 187 team and a home loss to 175. We have double their terrible losses and dont have a win against 44 (LSU) or 47 (yet, that's Richmond) either.
Davidson is peculiar because they have a habit of beating the #@/! Out of bad teams, like 76, 187, 174, 121. They have more large margin losses than us but they are generally to much better teams and/or on the road. Our top 4 wins are basically a wash with theirs. Their worst losses are to 150 on the road, 159 on the road, 214 on the road, 242 on the road. They would be close to a wash on our worst 4 losses but theirs are all on the road and 3 of them were close. They're ranked 74
I will preface Minnesota by saying that despite their lofty metrics ranking, they dont belong in the NCAAs as they will be below .500. But their worst loss of the season is a lone Q3 loss to 86 or a road loss to 113 on the road. They've got wins against 8 (twice),11,14,19,66,67. They're in the Big 10 so it's really hard for us to compete with that and they get a multitude of chances but...that's a ton of great wins
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Minnesota is 2-5 in their last seven but +10 in point differential over those seven games. They also have the hardest schedule per Kenpom factoring his ratings and where the games are played.
I’d say Purdue keeps their ranking afloat behind the large margin of victories they’ve enjoyed over Virginia, Michigan St, Iowa , Wisconsin and Indiana. They’ve been ranked high all year so every loss or string of losses has been negated by these huge margin of victories they’ve enjoyed over highly ranked teams.
*Purdue lost to Nebraska and dropped from 6th to 10 which is where, in my opinion, I feel KenPom favors the Power Conference teams since they start the season ranked highly based off the preseason projections and a loss such as a double digit loss at Nebraska while ranked as a top 10 team drops you only a few spots. Teams around 100 that have lost to Nebraska and Northwestern this year have dropped 15-30 spots after losing to them.
TL/DR: the metrics seem to reward blowout wins , close losses to highly ranked teams and doesn’t favor teams that win a lot of close games as much and if you can get one of those lofty rankings (barring a total collapse) you’re not as likely to drop
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
•
Thread Starter
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Wildwood13, one thing to remember about KenPom and some other analytics sites, these are predictive rankings. They are designed to predict how a team will perform today against another team. If you note, the opening betting line is rarely more than a point off from the KenPom prediction. For example, KenPom has the Dukes losing by 1 to Richmond; watch the betting line, it will not be far off.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
As of today, the Dukes have an RPI of 58. Is it possible we could still make the NCAA with a weak OOC and some bad losses? Thoughts?
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Wildwood13 wrote:
Dave Harper has told me personally that he makes the schedule up with Ken Prom ratings playing a factor. So as the season progresses I look at this ratings. I can not figure these ratings out for the life of me. S?
Is this still true?
Vicimus Atlanticum decem
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
indygjm wrote:
As of today, the Dukes have an RPI of 58. Is it possible we could still make the NCAA with a weak OOC and some bad losses? Thoughts?
I hate myself for loving you. Quoting me without the expressed written consent of the National Hockey League is prohibited.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
yak-rbc wrote:indygjm wrote:
As of today, the Dukes have an RPI of 58. Is it possible we could still make the NCAA with a weak OOC and some bad losses? Thoughts?
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
BluffHunter wrote:yak-rbc wrote:indygjm wrote:
As of today, the Dukes have an RPI of 58. Is it possible we could still make the NCAA with a weak OOC and some bad losses? Thoughts?
Look at Georgetown. 15-15, and 26 spots ahead of us. You know why? They've played 14 quad 1 games, and 7 quad 2. They only won 4 of those quad 1s, but the losses don't hurt. This is why the P5, and BE schools just crush us in the computer rankings. Almost all of their games are against quality opponents. They don't have to play a GW level team. let alone actually lose to them at home.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
duq81 wrote:BluffHunter wrote:yak-rbc wrote:
Look at Georgetown. 15-15, and 26 spots ahead of us. You know why? They've played 14 quad 1 games, and 7 quad 2. They only won 4 of those quad 1s, but the losses don't hurt. This is why the P5, and BE schools just crush us in the computer rankings. Almost all of their games are against quality opponents. They don't have to play a GW level team. let alone actually lose to them at home.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
BluffHunter wrote:duq81 wrote:BluffHunter wrote:
What's frustrating is the answer is undeniably no after how good this season feels. Take away two losses... one of the bad ones from non con and one of the bad ones in conference play. I think we would be arguing heavily for a bid with the wins we have and losses to just UAB and UMASS, or Marshall and GW. If that were the case I think Fridays game would have been the deciding factor of the A10s 2nd bid.
Look at Georgetown. 15-15, and 26 spots ahead of us. You know why? They've played 14 quad 1 games, and 7 quad 2. They only won 4 of those quad 1s, but the losses don't hurt. This is why the P5, and BE schools just crush us in the computer rankings. Almost all of their games are against quality opponents. They don't have to play a GW level team. let alone actually lose to them at home.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
Tejas_Duke wrote:Wildwood13 wrote:
Dave Harper has told me personally that he makes the schedule up with Ken Prom ratings playing a factor. So as the season progresses I look at this ratings. I can not figure these ratings out for the life of me. S?
Is this still true?
I also remember this about the A-10 signing off on basketball schedules. It was supposed to be patterned after the Missouri Valley Conference. What I don't know is how or if they are still doing it.
Offline
Re: Ratings and rankings.
scduke wrote:Tejas_Duke wrote:Wildwood13 wrote:
Dave Harper has told me personally that he makes the schedule up with Ken Prom ratings playing a factor. So as the season progresses I look at this ratings. I can not figure these ratings out for the life of me. S?
Is this still true?
I also remember this about the A-10 signing off on basketball schedules. It was supposed to be patterned after the Missouri Valley Conference. What I don't know is how or if they are still doing it.
1 of 1