How predictive are the December OOC stats & rankings?
There is perhaps universal agreement that, due to the extraordinary discrepancies between even the most well recognized ranking systems, it is extremely difficult to predict final season rankings for most D1 teams on the basis of early season rankings.
This observation also applies to the wide range of variations that are common throughout OOC schedules and at times into early conference play within many/most individual rating systems.
However, from a "30,000 feet perspective," broad examinations of MBB rankings data from prior seasons suggest that, while there is tremendous variation in the consistency of team rankings even within ranking systems through the course of a season, some team ranking systems, such as the Massey composite, through the first 8 games (1/4 of season) may actually have more predictive value than many may suppose.
If the effectiveness of a team's play and strength of schedule remains consistent enough through a full season, the "first 8 game" rankings can predict final season rankings fairly well, as is most frequently seen with teams that spend an entire season ranked among the top 15 or bottom 50 teams.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
On the one hand, rankings 1/4 of the way through the season tend to be very imprecise and inconsistent predictors of late season rankings - especially when the widely discrepant assessments by specific ranking systems - due to the many factors that contribute to improvements (team "gelling", lower SOS conference play) and declines in team play (e.g., player injuries, higher SOS conference play).
On the other hand, rankings and W-L records through the first 8 games do identify teams that may have high, intermediate, or low potential to be NCAA contenders.
--Consensus or average top 10-20 teams through the first 1/4 of a season are much more likely to make the NCAA than those ranked below #125th in the nation.
--Teams with average rankings in the top 50, after the first 8 games, tend to be more likely to make the NCAA field than those ranked below #150th in the nation.
--Very few teams ranked among the bottom 150, by most ranking systems, after 8 games end up being ranked in the top 75 or top 50 by the end of the regular season.
--Overall, perhaps 3 out of every 4 D1 teams/programs fall into 4 broad tiers in most ranking systems after the first 8 games of any given season:
1) The elite: Typically, these are teams from programs that have made multiple runs beyond the first weekend of the NCAA tournament within the past 5-10 years, have the deepest and most talented rotations, are considered perennial top 25-35 programs, and/or have the best recent recruiting classes, and the highest tier of D1 basketball Head Coaches.
2) The contenders: These are teams from perennial top 68 or up-and-coming programs that have a deep rotation of experienced and talented players, very strong if not elite recruiting classes, very highly regarded Head Coaches, and/or have made 2+ successful NCAA visits and/or NIT Championship round trips in the past few seasons.
3) The upwardly-striving: These are teams from perennial top 130-150 programs that have had some post-season tournament experience (NCAA, NIT, CBI, etc.) during the past 5-10 years, or up-and-coming programs that have a relatively deep rotation of experienced and moderately talented players, 2-3 solid recruiting classes, and/or highly-regarded Head Coaches.
4) The rest: These teams tend to be from perennial bottom 150-170 programs that either haven't made a trip to a NCAA, NIT, CBI, or other post-season tournament in the past 5-10 years, or have a relative shortage of skilled players with experience or talented younger players (due to injuries, ineligible players, and/or poor recruiting), are going through a major rebuilding year, and/or have a Head Coach who has had relatively little success in recent years, is approach the end of his contract, or is "on the hot seat."
Q: Do teams and programs tend to move between the above four categories frequently from season to season?
A: There are certainly semi-frequent mid-season shifts between the groups of elite and contenders teams, between the contenders and upwardly-striving teams, and between some of the better teams among "the rest" group and the struggling teams in the upwardly-striving group.
However, as a long review of the teams ranked among the lower half of 160 least highly ranked teams will tend to confirm, there are 7-8 scores of D1 teams that have little chance to make their way into the third "upwardly striving" tier, and 5 scores of teams that have a very low likelihood of dropping into the bottom 160.
--From this standpoint, rankings after the first 8 games may well tend to be fairly accurate predictors of where most teams will end up: Among the top 160 vs. the bottom 160 teams at the end of the season.
--If this is broadly correct, then the more accurate ranking systems in any given season may tend, at least, to identify teams with top 125 or top 150 potential, as opposed to the more likely middle or lower-tier teams.
============================================
It is important to note, in contrast to the general imprecision of 1st quarter basketball rankings, that the mathematical data that underlie and determine the rankings and bracketologies after the 1st quarter of a season are weighted equally and contribute just as strongly to the final regular season statistics as the data from the 2nd, 3rd, or 4th quarter of the season.
--The implications of this for the relative stability of team statistics will be the subject of the next post in this thread.
.============================================
(This post was last modified: 12-05-2019 07:01 PM by jedclampett.)
|