Quadrant 1 Wins

[Dano564]

Currently there are 26 teams with 3 or more Quadrant 1 wins.

21 have 4 or more. (Gophers currently have 4).

Here are the only teams with more quadrant 1 wins.

NET TEAM
1 Virginia
3 Duke
4 Michigan
6 Michigan State
7 Kentucky
9 North Carolina
11 Purdue
13 Wisconsin
18 Marquette
20 Kansas
34 Baylor

 

[builtbadgers]

Nice, now what about Quad 2 wins and losses !

 

[builtbadgers]

Reason i said nice is that will be meaningful in the end. Now lets add to it.

 

[Thomasthetank]

Nice, now what about Quad 2 wins and losses !

Built...I have always thought highly of your opinion on here considering your multiple allegiances to other schools.

Here is the one subject we tend to have disagreement on. I have always agreed with Jay Bilas on this matter: its who have you beaten. Not who have you lost to but more so what evidence do we have to proven you can beat a really good team.

What if you have a team that went undefeated against a schedule of 140-200 ranked teams with no games vs quad 1 teams? Are they really good? I don't know. They didn't play anyone of note.

I understand you are stressing that you ranking system via kenpom and NET is superior due to your badger allegiance and gopher fans have always experienced erratic teams therefore favor the RPI and the "who have you beaten" mantra.

However, I feel like who a team loses to is much much leas important as who can you beat. If you lose to an average team at home but beat a top 10 team on the road, I would hold the value of the win much much higher than the loss.

 

[golfing18now]

Built...I have always thought highly of your opinion on here considering your multiple allegiances to other schools.

Here is the one subject we tend to have disagreement on. I have always agreed with Jay Bilas on this matter: its who have you beaten. Not who have you lost to but more so what evidence do we have to proven you can beat a really good team.

What if you have a team that went undefeated against a schedule of 140-200 ranked teams with no games vs quad 1 teams? Are they really good? I don't know. They didn't play anyone of note.

I understand you are stressing that you ranking system via kenpom and NET is superior due to your badger allegiance and gopher fans have always experienced erratic teams therefore favor the RPI and the "who have you beaten" mantra.

However, I feel like who a team loses to is much much leas important as who can you beat. If you lose to an average team at home but beat a top 10 team on the road, I would hold the value of the win much much higher than the loss.

Did you intend for this to be flipped?

 

[Thomasthetank]

Did you intend for this to be flipped?

No. The goal of picking tourney teams is find teams that beat good teams on the road or neutral sites as this is where the NCAA tournament is played. If I were picking teams for the tournament, I'd see who you can beat on the road or at a neutral site.

As I have said, this is just my opinion that appears to be contrary to many peoples beliefs. However, I dont care who you lose to but rather who you have proven you can beat in particular away from your home court

Winning at home and losing on the road only proves you grab your security blanket when the going gets tough. Winning on the road proves more mental toughness than any metric.

 

[Panthadad2]

No. The goal of picking tourney teams is find teams that beat good teams on the road or neutral sites as this is where the NCAA tournament is played. If I were picking teams for the tournament, I'd see who you can beat on the road or at a neutral site.

As I have said, this is just my opinion that appears to be contrary to many peoples beliefs. However, I dont care who you lose to but rather who you have proven you can beat in particular away from your home court

Winning at home and losing on the road only proves you grab your security blanket when the going gets tough. Winning on the road proves more mental toughness than any metric.

+1

 

[golfing18now]

No. The goal of picking tourney teams is find teams that beat good teams on the road or neutral sites as this is where the NCAA tournament is played. If I were picking teams for the tournament, I'd see who you can beat on the road or at a neutral site.

Right. I just thought maybe you stating the obvious here. Clearly losing to an "average team" at home is less desirable than beating a "top ten" team on the road. I thought maybe you were tying to compare losing to a "top ten" team at home vs beating an "average team" on the road. After reading it again I think you were saying the upside of beating a top ten team on the road has more weight than losing to an average team at home.

Apologize to all for that wasted 1 minute of your life that you won't get back.

 

[Thomasthetank]

Right. I just thought maybe you stating the obvious here. Clearly losing to an "average team" at home is less desirable than beating a "top ten" team on the road. I thought maybe you were tying to compare losing to a "top ten" team at home vs beating an "average team" on the road. After reading it again I think you were saying the upside of beating a top ten team on the road has more weight than losing to an average team at home.

Apologize to all for that wasted 1 minute of your life that you won't get back.

Ha. Come on. I wasnt trying to give you any crap. You got my thought process now. I mean if a team is 12-16 with 3 road wins vs top teams, that still doesn't mean much.

But yes, I would weigh more heavily the road wins vs good teams but also I think losses shouldn't be a real penalty unless the team has too many. One or 2 bad losses dont matter to me. Again this appears to be contrary to many especially those tied to the Kenpom bible

 

[golfing18now]

Ha. Come on. I wasnt trying to give you any crap. You got my thought process now. I mean if a team is 12-16 with 3 road wins vs top teams, that still doesn't mean much.

But yes, I would weigh more heavily the road wins vs good teams but also I think losses shouldn't be a real penalty unless the team has too many. One or 2 bad losses dont matter to me. Again this appears to be contrary to many especially those tied to the Kenpom bible

Actually was giving myself crap for my poor reading comprehension skills.

I do agree with your overall point. I would also add the final score of games frequently doesn't tell the whole story. The Maryland game was not a 15 point blow-out until the last few minutes when free throw shooting and jacking up threes added to the overall margin.

 

[Thomasthetank]

Actually was giving myself crap for my poor reading comprehension skills.

I do agree with your overall point. I would also add the final score of games frequently doesn't tell the whole story. The Maryland game was not a 15 point blow-out until the last few minutes when free throw shooting and jacking up threes added to the overall margin.

Exactly. Scores many times dont ever tell the real story of the game. How many times have we heard "final score doesnt really indicate how close the game was?" Plus, Pitino admitted in the Illinois game he left the starters in to increase MOV and maintain efficiency ratings. This is dumb. It's taking away from the game.

 

[bizzle22]

Exactly. Scores many times dont ever tell the real story of the game. How many times have we heard "final score doesnt really indicate how close the game was?" Plus, Pitino admitted in the Illinois game he left the starters in to increase MOV and maintain efficiency ratings. This is dumb. It's taking away from the game.

What do you mean by "it's taking away from the game"?

What does it take away from the game when the 11th player off the bench doesn't get any mop-up time in the last two minutes?

Are you Brady Rudrud's cousin or something?

 

[Cayman]

What do you mean by "it's taking away from the game"?

What does it take away from the game when the 11th player off the bench doesn't get any mop-up time in the last two minutes?

Are you Brady Rudrud's cousin or something?

Giving a tangible benefit to teams for running up the score at the end of a game (increased margin of victory and better efficiency numbers which boost your likelihood to make the tournament and get a better seed) could be seen as encouraging poor sportsmanship. Plus everyone always loves seeing the walk-ons come in in the closing minutes of a comfortable win, and the crowd goes nuts when they score, and it's a cool memorable moment for a kid who's working just as hard as his scholarship teammates and doesn't get as much of the glory. Sports are supposed to be entertainment, and I wouldn't fault fans who want to see the deep bench guys get some minutes at the end of the game instead of leaving the starters into run up the score, although you could argue that the walk-ons only get put in when you're up by much more than 10 points.

On the other hand, you could argue that it's a good thing that a team that is up by 7 or 8 still has incentive to try their hardest at the end of the game even after victory seems very likely. You could also say that you want to see the best players on the court as much as possible, and rewarding teams for getting a large margin of victory encourages that. I've seen the same argument used for why they should add a 6th personal foul: keep the best players in the game.

 

[builtbadgers]

Ha. Come on. I wasnt trying to give you any crap. You got my thought process now. I mean if a team is 12-16 with 3 road wins vs top teams, that still doesn't mean much.

But yes, I would weigh more heavily the road wins vs good teams but also I think losses shouldn't be a real penalty unless the team has too many. One or 2 bad losses dont matter to me. Again this appears to be contrary to many especially those tied to the Kenpom bible

Two bad losses do not bother me unless that is more than a team your comparing yourself to, providing that good and great wins are equal. The penalty for our two bad losses did not drag down kenpom as much as playing poorly several times and it is not just us but everyone judged the same way.