The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(03-28-2023 03:27 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:00 PM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  Any statistic.

The NET is pretty lousy as well, but it's what we are stuck with.

I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

I was talking about since 1983 which was the timeframe ODUBB put out there. I did incorrectly refer to that as all D1. Here is the overall record W/L. 5-9 since 1972. https://odusports.com/sports/mens-basket...ia-tech/34

Are we pretending the games between 86 and 2000 did not occur?

I did not see ODU put a timeframe of 1983, but why would we exclude games? I only read someone say we were equal during Blaine....which, BTW, would not be the majority of your life.

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:00 PM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:58 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  RPI is an awful statistic.

Any statistic.

The NET is pretty lousy as well, but it's what we are stuck with.

I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

The data is just as terrible as any other way of determining how teams rank. The NCAAT exemplifies this perfectly. The more weight they put on metrics the more chaotic the thing becomes because the seeding and selection are a disaster at this point.

Until you can tell me how Kenpom accounts for some teams improving more than others over the course of a season, do not tell me that it accurately tells me how teams actually rank against each other. Likewise, tell me how it considers that a team may have been missing its best player, or 3 players, for a stretch of games in December. There is no resume to tell you how good a team is. A resume assumes things are static. Things are not static over the course of a season.

These metrics should be one tool to assess teams, but a human element has to be applied. I don't understand why these tools don't break the season down into parts. Why can't I see what the first 3rd of the season looked like vs what the 2nd and 3rd portions looked like. Doesn't that seem like useful data in determining who is actually better?

(03-28-2023 03:42 PM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:27 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

I was talking about since 1983 which was the timeframe ODUBB put out there. I did incorrectly refer to that as all D1. Here is the overall record W/L. 5-9 since 1972. https://odusports.com/sports/mens-basket...ia-tech/34

Either way, it's reasonable to suggest that the programs were on par with each other for most of our history. I guess the ACC money would eventually change that. I think that Long going to VT is clearly a money issue.

I don't think you can say that based on the data I provided, but its not worth arguing. If you think we were equal during Blaine, despite that, sobeit, but it would still only represent a small sample of out of our timeframe in D1, which is 1976/1977. It cant be argued that we were equal in someone's lifetime.

Moving on to transfers.... :)

(03-28-2023 03:45 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:27 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

I was talking about since 1983 which was the timeframe ODUBB put out there. I did incorrectly refer to that as all D1. Here is the overall record W/L. 5-9 since 1972. https://odusports.com/sports/mens-basket...ia-tech/34

Are we pretending the games between 86 and 2000 did not occur?

I did not see ODU put a timeframe of 1983, but why would we exclude games? I only read someone say we were equal during Blaine....which, BTW, would not be the majority of your life.

ODUBBall, not ODUBB... my bad on that. Post 1864. From 1983-to 2013 (JJs first season) is absolutely the majority of my life. The BT years alone obviously would not be. But yes. This is going nowhere, and believe it or not I don't like to argue. I just get defensive when folks don't give our past squads their due respect. Back to transfers.

(03-28-2023 03:46 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:00 PM)ODUBB35 Wrote:  Any statistic.

The NET is pretty lousy as well, but it's what we are stuck with.

I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

The data is just as terrible as any other way of determining how teams rank. The NCAAT exemplifies this perfectly. The more weight they put on metrics the more chaotic the thing becomes because the seeding and selection are a disaster at this point.

Until you can tell me how Kenpom accounts for some teams improving more than others over the course of a season, do not tell me that it accurately tells me how teams actually rank against each other. Likewise, tell me how it considers that a team may have been missing its best player, or 3 players, for a stretch of games in December. There is no resume to tell you how good a team is. A resume assumes things are static. Things are not static over the course of a season.

These metrics should be one tool to assess teams, but a human element has to be applied. I don't understand why these tools don't break the season down into parts. Why can't I see what the first 3rd of the season looked like vs what the 2nd and 3rd portions looked like. Doesn't that seem like useful data in determining who is actually better?

Thats actually kind of funny and supports how silly the human element is.

Kenpom rankings prior to tournament:

UCONN- 3
San Diego State- 15
FAU- 26
Miami- 43


Humans:

UConn is a 4 seed
SD State is a 5 seed
Miami is a 5 seed
FAU is a 9 seed

Transfers...discussion please !!

(03-28-2023 05:53 PM)Mr.BigBlue Wrote:  Transfers...discussion please !!

Transfer thread has been cleaned up. Carry on.

(03-28-2023 03:53 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:46 PM)Monarchblue Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:17 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:12 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 03:05 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  I believe NET is pretty lousy as well.

But, its easy to say statistics are awful when you want to prove a point and have nothing to support it.

How can one possibly disregard head to head competition? Thats the best statistic of all. Especially with a sample of multiple games, not just a one off lucky night.

ODU is 8-13 vs VT.

If you are talking about during the Blaine years, they did not play they every year. We have won 2 games vs. VT in football, are we essentially equal? What would happen if we played every year, alternating between home and away?

This also ignores the extreme sample size conclusions of judging 1 game out of 35 every year (ignoring they played sporadically)

The data is just as terrible as any other way of determining how teams rank. The NCAAT exemplifies this perfectly. The more weight they put on metrics the more chaotic the thing becomes because the seeding and selection are a disaster at this point.

Until you can tell me how Kenpom accounts for some teams improving more than others over the course of a season, do not tell me that it accurately tells me how teams actually rank against each other. Likewise, tell me how it considers that a team may have been missing its best player, or 3 players, for a stretch of games in December. There is no resume to tell you how good a team is. A resume assumes things are static. Things are not static over the course of a season.

These metrics should be one tool to assess teams, but a human element has to be applied. I don't understand why these tools don't break the season down into parts. Why can't I see what the first 3rd of the season looked like vs what the 2nd and 3rd portions looked like. Doesn't that seem like useful data in determining who is actually better?

Thats actually kind of funny and supports how silly the human element is.

Kenpom rankings prior to tournament:

UCONN- 3
San Diego State- 15
FAU- 26
Miami- 43


Humans:

UConn is a 4 seed
SD State is a 5 seed
Miami is a 5 seed
FAU is a 9 seed

That's interesting. I have seen at least 5 Miami games this season (not a fan of the program but watch a lot of ACC games), including 1 in person, and was convinced that they are a very good team with a lot of toughness. It really took me by surprise. So much so I ensured that I acquired them in a bid pool. I'm somewhat surprised that Kenpom had them that low. I guess it's proof that you can't just rely on any one metric and watching games matters.

I don't believe that performance in NCAAT defines a team, but what Miami is doing is exactly what I saw in the games.

(03-28-2023 02:58 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:50 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:37 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  So I went back and compared KenPom ratings since 1997 between the 2 programs. The data prior to that is not available through KP so I used basketball reference as a guide.

From 97 through 2023, ODU had an average ranking of 124 compared to 94 for VT. Someone brought up that we were equal during Blaine so I compared those years and we average 110 to VTs 88. Since BTs last year is well known, I excluded that year to see what happened and our average was 94 compared to 81 for VT. During that time period VT was rated as a better team in 19 years and ODU was rated as a better team in 8 years. I decided to further narrow it down to BTs peak years (2005 through 2011). VTs average during that timeframe was 57 and ODUs average in that timeframe was 71.

The prior data is probably not quite as good as KP data, but can give us a pretty good understanding. From 1977 to 1996, VT had a SRS score of 6.94 and ODU had one of 3.52 (higher is better). In those years, VT was a higher rated team in 14 seasons and ODU was a higher rated team in 6 years. There were no really peak years for ODU as the success was spread out The best team was in 1977, which had a SRS of 10.65. VT actually had 5 seasons with a higher score than that in that timeframe.

There is no evidence that ODU has been an equal (or similar) basketball program to VT.

KPs and rankings are distorted by SOS. The fact of the matter is we are .500 with them in D1 with a decent sample of games over a long time. We also beat them several times in a row, home and away, during the BT years. ODU literally out recruited VT for Petey Sessoms. As in they really wanted him bad, and he chose ODU. If a person cant even accept that we were equal to VT in the past, then I don't know what to say. I'll concede they've jumped us since joining the ACC for the most part, but some folks just want to believe we were never any good and diminish our past accomplishments to justify the current administration's failures.

No, nothing is distorted by SOS.

And it has nothing to do with any current or past administrations, its simply data.

We are 8-13 against Virginia Tech. Our wins are in 83, 87, 91, 93, 02, 04, 06, and 08. The only win @ VT was December 4, 2003.

During Blaine- we beat them at home in 02, which they were a slightly higher ranked team, but pretty close to even.

In 04, we beat them on the road and were the better team that year.

In 06, we beat them at home when we were the better team that year.

In 07, we lost to them when they were the better team on the year.

In 08, we beat them at home when they were the better team.

In the majority of years were we did not play them, VT was a significantly better team.

During Blaine we went 4-1 against them. During Blaine, they made 1 NCAA tournament and we made 4. You can take KenPom and shove it. Nobody cares if he ranked us 200 in our rebuilding years and ranked VT 120 in theirs. We were the better program and none of our players left to go there.

(03-29-2023 01:27 PM)EverRespect Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:58 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:50 PM)monarx Wrote:  

(03-28-2023 02:37 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  So I went back and compared KenPom ratings since 1997 between the 2 programs. The data prior to that is not available through KP so I used basketball reference as a guide.

From 97 through 2023, ODU had an average ranking of 124 compared to 94 for VT. Someone brought up that we were equal during Blaine so I compared those years and we average 110 to VTs 88. Since BTs last year is well known, I excluded that year to see what happened and our average was 94 compared to 81 for VT. During that time period VT was rated as a better team in 19 years and ODU was rated as a better team in 8 years. I decided to further narrow it down to BTs peak years (2005 through 2011). VTs average during that timeframe was 57 and ODUs average in that timeframe was 71.

The prior data is probably not quite as good as KP data, but can give us a pretty good understanding. From 1977 to 1996, VT had a SRS score of 6.94 and ODU had one of 3.52 (higher is better). In those years, VT was a higher rated team in 14 seasons and ODU was a higher rated team in 6 years. There were no really peak years for ODU as the success was spread out The best team was in 1977, which had a SRS of 10.65. VT actually had 5 seasons with a higher score than that in that timeframe.

There is no evidence that ODU has been an equal (or similar) basketball program to VT.

KPs and rankings are distorted by SOS. The fact of the matter is we are .500 with them in D1 with a decent sample of games over a long time. We also beat them several times in a row, home and away, during the BT years. ODU literally out recruited VT for Petey Sessoms. As in they really wanted him bad, and he chose ODU. If a person cant even accept that we were equal to VT in the past, then I don't know what to say. I'll concede they've jumped us since joining the ACC for the most part, but some folks just want to believe we were never any good and diminish our past accomplishments to justify the current administration's failures.

No, nothing is distorted by SOS.

And it has nothing to do with any current or past administrations, its simply data.

We are 8-13 against Virginia Tech. Our wins are in 83, 87, 91, 93, 02, 04, 06, and 08. The only win @ VT was December 4, 2003.

During Blaine- we beat them at home in 02, which they were a slightly higher ranked team, but pretty close to even.

In 04, we beat them on the road and were the better team that year.

In 06, we beat them at home when we were the better team that year.

In 07, we lost to them when they were the better team on the year.

In 08, we beat them at home when they were the better team.

In the majority of years were we did not play them, VT was a significantly better team.

During Blaine we went 4-1 against them. During Blaine, they made 1 NCAA tournament and we made 4. You can take KenPom and shove it. Nobody cares if he ranked us 200 in our rebuilding years and ranked VT 120 in theirs. We were the better program and none of our players left to go there.

“You can take KenPom and shove it”. Ever bringing the heat!

Right on.

Did not we get some of their Football guys after our 2018 victory? Of course, that was before the days NLI...

We got Cunningham. I feel like there was someone else.

(03-30-2023 07:33 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  We got Cunningham. I feel like there was someone else.

Kumah

(03-30-2023 07:28 AM)ODUODUODU Wrote:  Did not we get some of their Football guys after our 2018 victory? Of course, that was before the days NLI...

Taking discarded players is a little different than taking starters and major contributors.

(03-30-2023 07:50 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(03-30-2023 07:28 AM)ODUODUODU Wrote:  Did not we get some of their Football guys after our 2018 victory? Of course, that was before the days NLI...

Taking discarded players is a little different than taking starters and major contributors.

I'll say competing and beating those people is where it counts...

(03-30-2023 09:52 AM)ODUODUODU Wrote:  

(03-30-2023 07:50 AM)Monarchist13 Wrote:  

(03-30-2023 07:28 AM)ODUODUODU Wrote:  Did not we get some of their Football guys after our 2018 victory? Of course, that was before the days NLI...

Taking discarded players is a little different than taking starters and major contributors.

I'll say competing and beating those people is where it counts...

Agreed. Let’s get a win on the road this year.