Princeton

D1 Womens Lacrosse
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Princeton

Post by njbill »

Matnum PI wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:17 am There are few things worse than preseason rankings. All teams should start the new year where they left off in the previous year.

8meter, some only care about the champ, #1. Others care about more.
I don’t know. Did JMU start off number one last year? I think you need to take into account who graduated, who transferred, and how good the incoming freshmen are. And you need to do that for each team in order to can come up with some sort of ranking. I agree, though, that preseason rankings are not particularly valuable. They are fun discussion starters for fans, though.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

1-Rankings should be earned. Not given based on subjective metrics. In that way, I like RPI and other number-based metrics. (I just don't like the RPI metric as a number based metric.)
2- Yes, in theory, 25% of the team from last season is gone. But a ranking based on 75% of a team, to me, is better than a ranking based on "I think...".
3- JMU should've been #1 or not ranked at all.
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Princeton

Post by njbill »

I guess I am more old-school than you are. Numbers have their place, but they are only one factor, in my view. For many years I did end of year girls high school rankings on LaxPower. I used the LaxPower ratings as a starting point, but almost always deviated from them for (I thought) valid reasons.

I agree rankings should be earned. But RPI before the season starts is worthless so you have to look at the available information which I think primarily involves personnel.

It depends on which 25% graduated. In the case of JMU last year, they had lost a huge amount of talent from the 2017 team and simply weren’t going to be the number one team in 2018.

Yes, where a team ended up last year is a relevant factor, but only one factor. More important to me is the changes in personnel.
User avatar
admin
Site Admin
Posts: 2982
Joined: Tue Jan 16, 2018 1:20 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by admin »

njbill wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:18 am I guess I am more old-school than you are. Numbers have their place, but they are only one factor, in my view. For many years I did end of year girls high school rankings on LaxPower. I used the LaxPower ratings as a starting point, but almost always deviated from them for (I thought) valid reasons.
100% agree. And in the name of time constraints, you do what you need to do. With this said, if you had more time, I bet you could've figured out why the rankings "didn't seem right". And, in theory, you could've figured out why it wasn't right and how you could've amended it... with numbers.
njbill wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:18 am I agree rankings should be earned. But RPI before the season starts is worthless so you have to look at the available information which I think primarily involves personnel.

It depends on which 25% graduated. In the case of JMU last year, they had lost a huge amount of talent from the 2017 team and simply weren’t going to be the number one team in 2018.

Yes, where a team ended up last year is a relevant factor, but only one factor. More important to me is the changes in personnel.
Agreed. And I can even imagine how this could be calculated. Especially on offense.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: Princeton

Post by wlaxnut »

Bart wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:04 am
wlaxnut wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 8:25 am
Bart wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:30 am I know they are just ranking but in my warped view.........you are #1 until someone beats you and takes it away.
So in this case you’re referring to Maryland?
Yup. Ended the year there and should start there.
I agree with you on Maryland. But that rationale wouldn’t have worked with JMU the year before.
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Princeton

Post by njbill »

admin wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:46 am
njbill wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:18 am I guess I am more old-school than you are. Numbers have their place, but they are only one factor, in my view. For many years I did end of year girls high school rankings on LaxPower. I used the LaxPower ratings as a starting point, but almost always deviated from them for (I thought) valid reasons.
100% agree. And in the name of time constraints, you do what you need to do. With this said, if you had more time, I bet you could've figured out why the rankings "didn't seem right". And, in theory, you could've figured out why it wasn't right and how you could've amended it... with numbers.


Haha. I’m embarrassed to admit how much time I did spend on those rankings. I did know, or at least had a very good idea I thought, why the LaxPower rankings were what they were. There’s a fair amount to it, but the crux was that I gave more weight to big games, particularly playoff games, then did LaxPower.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

If you beat a team in the play-offs, even if you're currently ranked #54 and they're ranked #1, the formerly #1 team drops due to this loss and the formerly #54 team is automatically at least 1 ahead of the formerly #1. For end-of-season, single-loss-elimination games, winning trumps everything.

And that's a good example of creating a number-based rule in order to make the rankings right.
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: Princeton

Post by wlaxnut »

Matnum PI wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 8:41 am P'ton's best wins are Stony Brook, Loyola, and Florida. Not highly ranked teams.
What about beating #12 Penn twice? They also beat Penn State when they were ranked #8.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

Based on IL's own ranking, Penn is #15 and PSU is unranked. https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/WDI/polls. OK wins and a loss to Brown and they're #6? I don't get it...
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: Princeton

Post by wlaxnut »

Matnum PI wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 12:17 pm Based on IL's own ranking, Penn is #15 and PSU is unranked. https://www.insidelacrosse.com/league/WDI/polls. OK wins and a loss to Brown and they're #6? I don't get it...
At the time Princeton beat them they were ranked #12 and #8 respectively.
Bart
Posts: 2268
Joined: Mon May 13, 2019 12:42 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Bart »

wlaxnut wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 11:53 am
Bart wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:04 am
wlaxnut wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 8:25 am
Bart wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 7:30 am I know they are just ranking but in my warped view.........you are #1 until someone beats you and takes it away.
So in this case you’re referring to Maryland?
Yup. Ended the year there and should start there.
I agree with you on Maryland. But that rationale wouldn’t have worked with JMU the year before.
Sure it would. I'll show you how. JMU won. The last time the ball was in the field of play they were the champion. Until the ball enters the field of play again they remain the champion and number 1. Could that last all of an hour after the season starts? Absolutely but until someone beats them they are at the top of the heap. IMO the initial #1 ranking comes with winning the National Championship it is up to the other teams to take that away. Just one persons $0.02.
wlaxnut
Posts: 1939
Joined: Sat Feb 23, 2019 5:00 am

Re: Princeton

Post by wlaxnut »

Dr. Tact wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 8:26 pm
Matnum PI wrote: Thu Oct 03, 2019 7:19 pm Virginia, Notre Dame, Denver, and Michigan should all be ahead of them. And RPI is a blunt tool. Too much credit given to a good SOS... which P'ton has. but not good Ws and Ls.
UVA maybe, Michigan and Denver a stretch, Notre Dame nope.
I agree with Notre Dame assessment. They had 2 quality wins last year—UVA and UNC. Besides that, nobody highly ranked.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

Bart wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 12:28 pmIMO the initial #1 ranking comes with winning the National Championship it is up to the other teams to take that away. Just one persons $0.02.
And, by definition, the same should hold true for #2, #3, #4, etc.
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Princeton

Post by njbill »

Gee, I don’t agree with this approach at all. Winning the national championship in 2017 entitles the team to the number one ranking in 2017. 2018 is a different year. You look at how the teams are going to do that year, not how they did in the past. I guess that’s my two cents.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

You gotta start somewhere. And at least the rankings were earned.
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
njbill
Posts: 6835
Joined: Thu Aug 09, 2018 1:35 am

Re: Princeton

Post by njbill »

They were earned. For the prior year. Two things. First, why even have preseason rankings if they’re going to be the same as the final prior year’s rankings? They wouldn’t add anything. Second, this is not how preseason rankings are done in most sports. Generally those who prepare preseason rankings try to make an effort to guess as to how the teams will do in the year in question.
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

And those same people are creating purely subjective Rankings throughout the season as well. Which is fine. I'm just saying, for a Ranking based on numbers, the preseason rankings also need to be based on numbers. Thus, last season's numbers. For the more subjective Rankings, then a preseason ranking of this same ilk only make sense. With this said...

I have zero issue with subjective rankings. But, when they don't make sense, admittedly, it bothers me. And, for me, when a rank-er says, I just think they're better!, this doesn't make snese to me. (For the record, I'm not saying this about anybody in this thread. Not even IL necessarily. Just speaking generally.)
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
User avatar
Dr. Tact
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:36 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Dr. Tact »

wlaxnut wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:59 am
cltlax wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 9:49 am
wlaxnut wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:59 am
Dr. Tact wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 6:08 am And the NCAA has Princeton as #4.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/lacrosse-wome ... 020-season

Mechicken #8, UVA #10, ND #11, Denver #13

So who knows....good thread though.
“Mechicken” eh?
Would the good doctor please expound?
Just sound it out phonetically with the emphasis on the Me
Still doesn’t make sense. Why chicken?
No offense, just the sophomoric way we talked about Michigan. Guess it comes from Ohio relatives.

I like Michigan, really I do....
User avatar
Matnum PI
Posts: 11101
Joined: Mon Jan 22, 2018 3:03 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Matnum PI »

Dr. Tact wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:57 pm And the NCAA has Princeton as #4.
NCAA has P'ton at #5. I dunno. I don't get it. https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/lacrosse- ... crosse-rpi
Ahead of SU? I dunno...
Caddy Day
Caddies Welcome 1-1:15
User avatar
Dr. Tact
Posts: 3312
Joined: Wed Aug 29, 2018 6:36 pm

Re: Princeton

Post by Dr. Tact »

Matnum PI wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 5:08 pm
Dr. Tact wrote: Fri Oct 04, 2019 4:57 pm And the NCAA has Princeton as #4.
NCAA has P'ton at #5. I dunno. I don't get it. https://www.ncaa.com/rankings/lacrosse- ... crosse-rpi
Ahead of SU? I dunno...
Well the article I posted had them at 4, but either way it is better than your question on #6.
Post Reply

Return to “D1 WOMENS LACROSSE”