In partnership with CBSSports.com
Online Now 257
Online now 337 Record: 4649 (2/27/2012)
The place for inside information on the Iowa Hawkeyes
The place to discuss general topics outside of Iowa
You have no favorite boards.
The most viewed topics.
The most replied to topics.
The most up-voted topics.
The most down-voted topics.
The most up-voted posters.
The most down-voted posters.
The most followed posters.
'After last night's big road win at Virginia, Iowa ranks 19th by the Sagarin ratings and 20th by KenPom. #Hawkeyes'
Last week, I could be found here arguing with some posters about the FACT that the
Iowa Hawkeyes Deserved a bid to the NC2A tournament. (If Minnesota & Illinois did)........
And now, some Computer rankings, put the Hawkeyes performance in the Top 20 of the nation.
'Texan by birth, Hawkeye by the Grace of God'
The phrase "kicking a dead horse" seems applicable at this time.
I am not too sure there were a lot of people saying that they didn't believe the Hawkeyes shouldn't get in, but what a lot of people were trying to explain was, based on the criteria in place to get into the tournament, the Hawkeyes wouldn't get in.
I don't know why you can't grasp what people are trying to or have tried to explain to you
This is exactly right. Literally no one said Iowa shouldn't be in based on how good they are as a team, but rather that they wouldn't make it since RPI and non conference SOS were key criteria in the committee's decision.
And do we really need a new thread every time for this stuff? Why not just bump the thread from the last time you used Sagarin and KenPom ratings, which are not factored into the committee's decision, as the end-all be-all for who should be in. And quite honestly, I think that's a bit high for Iowa. They're probably a top 30-35 team, top 20? Doubtful.
This post was edited by Hawkifish 13 months ago
Top 20 doubtful? What is about hard stats that you don't get?
The Sagarin has been around far longer than the Very Shaky rpi.
They ARE in the Top 20, based on all the games played!
What's so hard to understand?
Sagarin doesn't count your opinion or Charles Barkely's..........It's raw, unbiased data.
For Fish........this is the current Sagarin, ALL games thru 3/27;
11 Miami-Florida = 88.82 29 6 79.67( 16) 5 2 | 11 2 | 88.97 10 | 88.59 12
12 Wisconsin = 88.69 23 12 81.93( 1) 7 9 | 9 11 | 88.13 13 | 89.27 11
13 Georgetown = 88.28 25 7 79.17( 22) 4 4 | 9 5 | 88.57 12 | 87.93 14
14 Pittsburgh = 87.50 24 9 77.05( 80) 2 5 | 6 8 | 86.82 17 | 88.22 13
15 Saint Louis = 87.19 28 7 76.36( 98) 2 1 | 7 3 | 87.34 14 | 86.97 18
16 Arizona = 86.94 27 7 78.53( 44) 2 0 | 3 4 | 86.41 20 | 87.47 15
17 North Carolina = 86.74 24 11 80.07( 13) 0 7 | 7 10 | 87.18 15 | 86.27 20
18 Creighton = 86.51 28 8 76.90( 84) 1 1 | 4 3 | 86.30 22 | 86.67 19
19 Iowa = 86.43 24 12 78.26( 49) 2 8 | 5 9 | 86.60 19 | 86.20 21
20 Missouri = 86.34 23 11 78.03( 54) 2 2 | 4 7 | 85.72 26 | 86.98 17
College Basketball 2012-2013 Div I games only through 2013 March 27 Wednesday
RATING W L SCHEDL(RANK) VS top 25 | VS top 50 | ELO_SCORE | PREDICTOR
HOME ADVANTAGE=[ 3.40] [ 3.37] [ 3.41]
21 Kansas State = 86.16 26 8 78.62( 36) 3 6 | 8 8 | 87.13 16 | 85.27 31
22 VCU(Va. Commonwealth) = 86.05 27 9 77.15( 74) 0 5 | 2 8 | 85.10 32 | 87.14 16
23 Marquette = 86.04 25 8 79.60( 17) 5 3 | 8 7 | 86.61 18 | 85.44 27
24 Minnesota = 85.90 21 13 81.70( 2) 4 8 | 7 10 | 85.56 29 | 86.20 22
25 Oklahoma State = 85.76 24 9 78.57( 40) 2 4 | 7 8 | 85.70 27 | 85.75 23
26 Iowa State = 85.69 23 12 78.80( 30) 2 7 | 7 10 | 85.90 24 | 85.41 29
27 NC State = 85.66 24 11 78.75( 32) 2 6 | 4 9 | 85.82 25 | 85.43 28
28 Mississippi = 85.56 27 9 76.52( 94) 4 2 | 4 4 | 85.52 30 | 85.53 26
29 New Mexico = 85.47 29 6 78.08( 52) 0 1 | 8 3 | 86.33 21 | 84.66 33
30 Saint Mary's-Cal. = 85.31 27 7 75.15( 110) 1 3 | 1 4 | 84.86 35 | 85.73 24
This post was edited by Skyhawk52 13 months ago
Don't go after a paying member such as Fish, that's rude of you
There's no such thing as unbiased data.
If there was, then computer rankings wouldn't see as much variance as they do. Each formula was designed by a person. The ranking evaluate teams in light of whatever mathematical formula that person thought best evaluated teams.
Stats Class is now in sesssion...........
Maryland has played a weaker schedule than Iowa.
Maryland is ranked in the 40's, not by Charles Barkely, but
Real data and regression analysis.
Oh----------and look at New Mexico, way down below Theeee IOWA HAWKEYES.
They aren't officially factored in, but committee members and the committee chair have all said that they are aware of computer rankings, not just RPI but Sagarin and KenPom as well, and will analyze them if they think they're valid.
Oh, so you agree with rpi and its geniuses that had the
Mountain West as even 'remotely near' the Best Conferences??
That's a joke!
Did I say that? Don't put words in my mouth. The RPI is biased. It was designed by a person. It evaluates teams in light of whatever mathematical formula that person thought best evaluated teams.
I guarantee you if RPI had Iowa ranked high and Sagarin had them low you'd be spouting off about how biased Sagarin was and how invincible RPI is. None of the computer rankings are singularly perfect and praising one as perfect and another as biased is simply ignorant. The best way to look at computer rankings is together, as a whole.
No one here has argued your assertion that Iowa is good enough to be in the tournament. Most people just felt that the criteria currently in place didn't favor the Hawkeyes, and that proved to be true. We don't need a new thread every time Iowa rises in one of these rankings, because it really is beating a dead horse at this point. Feel free to post those updates in already existing threads.
You can 'guarantee' or spout off all you want.....but that is PURE conjecture on your part, Hawkifish.
All I'm doing is pointing to evidence the refutes your opinion. We can agree to disagree, fine by me.
It seems your tune has changed, softened, since Iowa has been on it post-season run.
You've failed to logically respond or even attempt to understand my, or anyone else's opinion. The fact that you think my opinion has softened is further evidence of that, as is your belief that I didn't think Iowa was good enough to be in the Tournament.
This post has been edited 2 times, most recently by Hawkifish 13 months ago
I posted this 5 days ago. Tell me again about how my opinion has softened. I've literally restated what is essentially the same post every time and yet I've yet to see you actually respond to any points made.
"I think that in terms of how good they are, Iowa deserved to be in, but based on the criteria currently in place, no way."
Theeeee Iowa Hawkeyes already have 2 post season wins, have gotten some nice publicity on ESPN, (especially Dev)
and have sold out CHA twic
I just cannot believe that someone is treating a paying member like Fish like this. Just being straight rude to Fish, and not even using facts while doing it
The only team that didn't make the NCAA that deserves to make an argument it should have been picked is the team that wins the NIT. If the Hawks do that, the OP's argument becomes semi-valid. It still won't change the fact Iowa wasn't picked, though.
For crying out loud, there is no "evidence". The mere fact that Iowa continues to improve their Sagarin rating is due to the fact that they are still playing games and winning. Teams that are not playing anymore, whether in the NCAA's or the NIT's, CBI or CIT tournaments are no longer having their rankings calculated by Sagarin.
Sagarin only uses wins in one aspect, and wins and margin of victory in the other. If your not playing, your not improving your ranking. We're still playing, so we're still improving our ranking. As I've stated before, Sagarin is a PREDICTOR system, designed to predict outcomes of games yet to be played. That's why frigging Vegas uses it.
RPI and BPI are rankings based upon a team's complete body of work, NOT JUST WHAT YOU HAVE DONE LATELY, LIKE SAGARIN!
And it's pure conjecture on your part that Iowa is better than almost all the teams in the NCAA tourney.
So they are making a run in the NIT. What does that prove? That they can beat other teams not in the NCAA tourney. Big deal. There is a reason the other teams weren't in the NCAA and relegated to the NIT. No doubt Iowa was one of the better teams in the NIT but I am not sure why you continue to go on and on about how because Iowa is winning a few games in the NIT that they should have been in the NCAA. FYI - every single year, SOME team that didn't make the NCAA will win the NIT.
FG80............and you're completely ignoring the FACT that the Sagarin and KenPom rankings take into
consideration ALL Games played by ALL teams. So, yeah the Fact that Iowa made a run in the post season, even NIT
does make a difference to the overall rankings of ALL teams, currently.
capeche? Holy schmolly.
Yes, beating Stony Brook in a close game at home > losing to Ohio State on a buzzer beater on a pro OSU court. Sweet, sweet logic.
Can you capeche that Iowa is winning games because they are beating teams that aren't good enough to make the NCAA?
247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports