RPI - So Far, No Good

[jeffto]

Not surprisingly, UC is the 272th best team out of 340 Division I teams according to the latest RPI. Normally I would say it's way to0 early to put much faith in the RPI, but I have a hard time quarreling with this rank.

http://kenpom.com/rpi.php

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Still way too early, I think.

[Big B]

Well Georgetown @ 121, Kentucky @ 151 and Depauls behind us. I will have to go with to early. But don't know how much better it will get.

[Bp4thebest]

We are about that bad, but just take a look at the top 25... for instence, the 25th ranked team has played noone and lost once.. then 3 of the top 5 are little schools who don't play anyone good! It will change but UC could be in the middle 100's at this rate by the end of the year!

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

To reinforce that these ratings are TOO EARLY...

http://kenpom.com/rate.php This are Pomeroy ratings (not RPI) but I don't think WVU is really the #1 team in Div I basketball.

[jeffto]

To reinforce that these ratings are TOO EARLY...

http://kenpom.com/rate.php This are Pomeroy ratings (not RPI) but I don't think WVU is really the #1 team in Div I basketball.
You must think UC should be higher?!?

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

You must think UC should be higher?!?

No - I think it's too early for any of these (numerically based) rating systems to produce a meaningful result.

And I don't think WVU is #1 in Div I.

[jeffto]

No - I think it's too early for any of these (numerically based) rating systems to produce a meaningful result.

You need to reread my initial post. I said it's too early (after 25% of the season), BUT, I find it hard to quarrel with the rank. It may not even go up. Our SOS gets better but our winning % is going to go down from here.

The team stinks and I think Mick would be the first to admit it.

As far as WVU goes, I agree and the writers and coaches agree. Their rank is wrong: that does not automatically make ours wrong. If you're saying it's (UC) wrong, what should it be?

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

[QUOTE=Bearcat Fan Since 1958;12407]No - I think it's too early for any of these (numerically based) rating systems to produce a meaningful result./QUOTE]

You need to reread my initial post. I said it's too early (after 25% of the season), BUT, I find it hard to quarrel with the rank. It may not even go up. Our SOS gets better but our winning % is going to go down from here.

The team stinks and I think Mick would be the first to admit it.

As far as WVU goes, I agree and the writers and coaches agree. Their rank is wrong: that does not automatically make ours wrong. If you're saying it's (UC) wrong, what should it be?

Not right. Not wrong. Too early to tell. That's my point.

[jeffto]

Not right. Not wrong. Too early to tell. That's my point.

Well let's analyze it. UC finished last year at #174. So far this year they've dropped 100 places. I think you (and many others) have said they're not as good as last year, so a drop is to be expected. 100 places? Who knows (which I guess is your point). But if you step back and look at it you quickly realize that #174 is no darn good, and that a lower rank is no-darn-good-and-then-some. That's MY point.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Well let's analyze it. UC finished last year at #174. So far this year they've dropped 100 places. I think you (and many others) have said they're not as good as last year, so a drop is to be expected. 100 places? Who knows (which I guess is your point). But if you step back and look at it you quickly realize that #174 is no darn good, and that a lower rank is no-darn-good-and-then-some. That's MY point.

UC was ranked much higher (better) than #174 this time last year. Then, as now, it's to early to tell what's right and what's wrong about numerically based ratings.

UC has played poorly so far. I agree with that. The score is 0-0 in every one of the remaining games on the schedule.

[Nerf]

Pittsburgh (6-0) finished last year at #5, this year they're at #80, a drop of 75 points.

The point is, it's too early in the season; that is, there is too little data for these numbers to mean anything.

[Bearcat-in-Italy]

Why are we talking about ratings with this team????????!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

What is the point? There is no point in discussing ratings this year with this UC team. Please don't torture us with discussions of RPI and Sagrin ratings. There simply is no point. I believe in miracles, but not this year with this team. 11 wins. Let's all just keep supporting the team as best we can. Make a love offering and get down a couple of times this year to the games. Get there early, enjoy the cheerleaders and the pep band.

[jeffto]

I wasn't talking about WVU nor Pitt. The fact is that UC stinks and the (albeit, early) RPI backs that up. Does the fact the RPI is based on only 25% of the season show bias? Of course, but I'm predicting that the final rank for UC won't be much different than now.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

Pittsburgh (6-0) finished last year at #5, this year they're at #80, a drop of 75 points.

The point is, it's too early in the season; that is, there is too little data for these numbers to mean anything.

Bingo. My point exactly.

[Bearcat Fan Since 1958]

I wasn't talking about WVU nor Pitt. The fact is that UC stinks and the (albeit, early) RPI backs that up. Does the fact the RPI is based on only 25% of the season show bias? Of course, but I'm predicting that the final rank for UC won't be much different than now.

UC played poorly so far. They may continue to do that, or maybe not.

Until (and if) they do, keep an open mind.

[Bearcat-in-Italy]

This is THE most depressing thread ever. The most obvious conclusions are being drawn that we are terrible. No RPI needed.

Go Cats!

[tophat]

Any talk about RPI is stupid. We can all see how bad we are and don't need the RPI to confirm it.

[Nerf]

So, a month later. How are we looking?

http://kenpom.com/rpi.php

Up over 100 points.

Think that win over Louisville helped? Well, at 9-4 they're #106 in the RPI, so it helped a bit.

But the win over Miami at 6-6 and #30 in the RPI is what really gave us that boost.

[Mick's Da Man]

Our SOS is a very respectable 67th. I know top 20 teams have SOS's in the top 20..........but ours will continue to climb now that we're in the Big East.

We're 157th in the rpi.

For comparison,

UC (6-7) = 157 SOS (67)

Mississippi (12-0) = 13 rpi SOS (119)
Miami(OH) (6-6) = 30 rpi SOS (5)
Illinois State (9-3) = 41 rpi SOS (93).......might be better than we think?
NC State (9-3) = 42 rpi SOS (72)
West Virginia (9-2) = 43 rpi SOS (121)
Indiana (11-1) = 44 rpi SOS (195)
Purdue (9-4) = 147 rpi SOS (227)
UK (6-6) = 228 rpi SOS (186)
Georgia (7-3) = 194 rpi SOS (319)
Iowa (7-6) = 235 rpi SOS (252)
GW (4-6)= 232 rpi SOS (193)
Charlotte (8-3)= 155 rpi SOS (233)
New Orleans (9-2) = 152 rpi SOS (322)
Auburn (8-2) = 167 rpi SOS (334)

Here's the Big East:
___RPI____Team_____Record______SOS
1.__7_____Pitt_______10-1________48
2.__11____Syr_______10-3________4
3.__21____Prov_______9-3________25
4.__31____Villan______10-1________154
5.__43____WVA_______9-2_________121
6.__45____Marqu______9-1_________179
7.__48____Gtown_____10-1________243
8.__61____UConn______9-2________147
9.__64____Seton H_____9-3_________125
10._87____SFla________9-4_________146
11._93____NDame_____10-2________236
12._106___L'ville_______9-4_________104
13._136___St.Johns_____6-5_________64
14._144___Depaul_______4-7_________23
15._157___UC__________6-7_________68
16._174___Rutgers______8-5_________242

Now that I listed all those. I feel even better about our team continuing to improve. Tough schedule looks like it will pay dividends in quickly growing up.