FanLax Forum Poll

[Matnum PI]

...If you are evaluating the strength of a team, depth and how the next man up is able to fill roles has certainly got to be a part of it.

agreed but... How do you *bottomline* evaluate a team? how do you know if the next man up is actually performing? How do you know who is better, MD or Syracuse? Who is better, Duke or Syracuse? Yes, head-to-head SU beat Duke but... Who is better? I think the answer to 'who is performing?", "who is better?", "Who is #1, #2, #3, etc.?", etc. is answered with... Ws and Ls and who were those Ws and Ls against.

[rolldodge]

...If you are evaluating the strength of a team, depth and how the next man up is able to fill roles has certainly got to be a part of it.

agreed but... How do you *bottomline* evaluate a team? how do you know if the next man up is actually performing? How do you know who is better, MD or Syracuse? Who is better, Duke or Syracuse? Yes, head-to-head SU beat Duke but... Who is better? I think the answer to 'who is performing?", "who is better?", "Who is #1, #2, #3, etc.?", etc. is answered with... Ws and Ls and who were those Ws and Ls against.

Yes, exactly. If your team has injuries and you still win, that's how you evaluate it.

[Matnum PI]

I understand your model still think for projecting the future there isn’t nearly enough data points for it to be significant but respect the approach.

100%. Agreed but... rankings should evaluate performance (thus far in 2022), not predict the future. No?

[rolldodge]

I believe you are utilizing a modified version of Matnums methodology of stacking w/l’s so understand how you’re doing it but really do think they should be above Jax and Army, beyond that I’m not too moved by having them at a “lowly” 14.

It's not my version. It's just being intellectually honest. Rankings need to be based on Ws and Ls. Yes, it's painful to drop a team when you know, for example, Albany would never lose to UMBC if Connor Fields was playing but... You have to respect the Ws and Ls. UMBC won, period. Would I bet against Albany in a UMBC rematch with Fields back on the field? No way. But Albany lost and both Albany and UMBC should be punished and rewarded accordingly. Ws and Ls. Just Ws and Ls.

If you are evaluating the strength of a team, depth and how the next man up is able to fill roles has certainly got to be a part of it.

If you are protecting the next hundred games with static rosters then for sure. For a week to week, 15-20 data point exercise I’m not so sure but understand it.

What team is "better" and more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament? The team that has injuries and loses, or the team that has injuries and still wins? Its not even about injuries. If a team is over-reliant on one or two guys, what happens when that one or two guys is not injured but has an off day?

[GSP]

Full disclosure, MasonDixon had Marquette as their #1 team. I assumed it was a mistake and made it Maryland.

UPDATED: 1:07 PM EST

Nah dude I meant Marquette...

Impossible to take you guys seriously! UVA is #4 in Coaches' Poll (who might know a LITTLE something about the subject), #3 in the Media Poll, yet a third of your contributors have them between 11 and 14.
But hey, you guys carry on with your little, self-congratulatory, circle jerk.

You are free to enter your own poll! I'll be curious to see how you incorporate your "my team lost because of injuries" metric across the board!

I believe you are utilizing a modified version of Matnums methodology of stacking w/l’s so understand how you’re doing it but really do think they should be above Jax and Army, beyond that I’m not too moved by having them at a “lowly” 14.

I am sure that you know more than the coaches do.

[Matnum PI]

Yes, exactly. If your team has injuries and you still win, that's how you evaluate it.

the question is, when UMBC beat Albany when Fields wasn't playing (due to injury), do you discount the win? What if Duke, MD, or UVA beat this Fields-less Albany team (in 2018, I believe)? Still discount it but just not as much? My point is that justice should be blind and if a ranker is treating UMBC beat X differently than Duke beat X, that's not blind. I am confident, SO confident, that if you blindfolded and ear-muffed one of the Media or Coach Rankers and only showed them A beat UVA, 12-8 then A lost to Duke 13-11 and then A etc. And then did the same for B. For C. etc. Their rankings would look *very* different. And that's just wrong. Justice should be blind. Not tinged with prejudices due to my subjective feelings and perspectives.

[Matnum PI]

I am sure that you know more than the coaches do.

About coaching a D1 lacrosse team, no. About objectively ranking the D1 teams based on their Ws and Ls, yes. It is extremely likely that I am better at this than they are. And i think it is extremely likely that a lot of the lacrosse fans within this forum are too.

[Matnum PI]

What team is "better" and more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament? The team that has injuries and looses, or the team that has injuries and still wins? Its not even about injuries. If a team is over-reliant on one or two guys, what happens when that one or two guys is not injured but has an off day?

"What team is better?", yes. That interests me. "What team is more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament?", that's interesting too but now we're predicting the future and I believe rankings should be based on the past and not predictions about the future.

[rolldodge]

What team is "better" and more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament? The team that has injuries and looses, or the team that has injuries and still wins? Its not even about injuries. If a team is over-reliant on one or two guys, what happens when that one or two guys is not injured but has an off day?

"What team is better?", yes. That interests me. "What team is more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament?", that's interesting too but now we're predicting the future and I believe rankings should be based on the past and not predictions about the future.

I generally agree, but how "good" a team is is always going to be somewhat predictive of the future. What I try to avoid in my poll is treating it as a guess of what the ranking is going to be at the end of the season.

[Matnum PI]

I generally agree, but how "good" a team is is always going to be somewhat predictive of the future...

Others can use Rankings as a predictor and the Ranker can as well but the actual Ranker when create the rankings should not (I believe). the Ranker is merely evaluating the past. but to each their own.

[rolldodge]

I generally agree, but how "good" a team is is always going to be somewhat predictive of the future...

Others can use Rankings as a predictor and the Ranker can as well but the actual Ranker when create the rankings should not (I believe). the Ranker is merely evaluating the past. but to each their own.

Yes, I don't do "would this team beat this team if they played today" as part of my ranking ... because there are way too many variables to account for and too much room for bias in that calculation.

[Farfromgeneva]

Full disclosure, MasonDixon had Marquette as their #1 team. I assumed it was a mistake and made it Maryland.

UPDATED: 1:07 PM EST

Nah dude I meant Marquette...

Impossible to take you guys seriously! UVA is #4 in Coaches' Poll (who might know a LITTLE something about the subject), #3 in the Media Poll, yet a third of your contributors have them between 11 and 14.
But hey, you guys carry on with your little, self-congratulatory, circle jerk.

You are free to enter your own poll! I'll be curious to see how you incorporate your "my team lost because of injuries" metric across the board!

I believe you are utilizing a modified version of Matnums methodology of stacking w/l’s so understand how you’re doing it but really do think they should be above Jax and Army, beyond that I’m not too moved by having them at a “lowly” 14.

I am sure that you know more than the coaches do.

I’m sure you’re being unnecessary bitchy. Why are you crying about this?

[ICGrad]

I am sure that you know more than the coaches do.

About coaching a D1 lacrosse team, no. About objectively ranking the D1 teams based on their Ws and Ls, yes. It is extremely likely that I am better at this than they are. And i think it is extremely likely that a lot of the lacrosse fans within this forum are too.

Especially when you consider that it's often not even the coaches who fill their ballots out, that in-season even those coaches who do fill out the forms are mostly focused on teams in their conference and/or on their schedule, that the SIDs and others who fill out the polls are sometimes just "mailing it in," and that self-interest often creeps into such polls as well.

My guess is that some of the people filling out the polls here spend far more time doing so than some of the coaches/SIDs do.

[Farfromgeneva]

It was just a petulant comment by a salty UVA fan. No amount of data or facts would make a difference here. Or logic.

[Matnum PI]

...too much room for bias in that calculation.

I'm with you...

[Gobigred]

What team is "better" and more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament? The team that has injuries and looses, or the team that has injuries and still wins? Its not even about injuries. If a team is over-reliant on one or two guys, what happens when that one or two guys is not injured but has an off day?

"What team is better?", yes. That interests me. "What team is more likely to survive the stresses of the tournament?", that's interesting too but now we're predicting the future and I believe rankings should be based on the past and not predictions about the future.

Exactly. You choose teams based on what they've done...whom they've beaten and whom they've lost to...not on how you think they'll perform next week. That's why they've been playing a 12 to 15 game season...to earn their selection. Or not.

[rolldodge]

Full disclosure, MasonDixon had Marquette as their #1 team. I assumed it was a mistake and made it Maryland.

UPDATED: 1:07 PM EST

Nah dude I meant Marquette...

Impossible to take you guys seriously! UVA is #4 in Coaches' Poll (who might know a LITTLE something about the subject), #3 in the Media Poll, yet a third of your contributors have them between 11 and 14.
But hey, you guys carry on with your little, self-congratulatory, circle jerk.

You are free to enter your own poll! I'll be curious to see how you incorporate your "my team lost because of injuries" metric across the board!

I believe you are utilizing a modified version of Matnums methodology of stacking w/l’s so understand how you’re doing it but really do think they should be above Jax and Army, beyond that I’m not too moved by having them at a “lowly” 14.

You can surely make a case for that, but its certainly not clear cut. Just take a look at the numbers (of course your calculus could include different/other data points). If you value weakness of losses over strength of wins, then I can see Virginia above these two. I generally prejudice strength of wins (particularly top 10 wins).

Jacksonville. 13-2 /// W: Duke (8), Denver (15), Richmond (16) /// L: Utah (21), Hopkins (20)
Army. 11-3. /// W: Cornell (7), Boston U (14), Loyola (22), UMass (25) /// L: Lehigh (29), Navy (28), Rutgers(6)
Virginia. 11-3 /// W: Notre Dame (13), UNC (17), UNC (17), Hopkins (20), Towson (27) /// L to Richmond (16), Duke (8), Maryland (1)

[Farfromgeneva]

Full disclosure, MasonDixon had Marquette as their #1 team. I assumed it was a mistake and made it Maryland.

UPDATED: 1:07 PM EST

Nah dude I meant Marquette...

Impossible to take you guys seriously! UVA is #4 in Coaches' Poll (who might know a LITTLE something about the subject), #3 in the Media Poll, yet a third of your contributors have them between 11 and 14.
But hey, you guys carry on with your little, self-congratulatory, circle jerk.

You are free to enter your own poll! I'll be curious to see how you incorporate your "my team lost because of injuries" metric across the board!

I believe you are utilizing a modified version of Matnums methodology of stacking w/l’s so understand how you’re doing it but really do think they should be above Jax and Army, beyond that I’m not too moved by having them at a “lowly” 14.

You can surely make a case for that, but its certainly not clear cut. Just take a look at the numbers (of course your calculus could include different/other data points). If you value weakness of losses over strength of wins, then I can see Virginia above these two. I generally prejudice strength of wins (particularly top 10 wins).

Jacksonville. 13-2 /// W: Duke (8), Denver (15), Richmond (16) /// L: Utah (21), Hopkins (20)
Army. 11-3. /// W: Cornell (7), Boston U (14), Loyola (22), UMass (25) /// L: Lehigh (29), Navy (28), Rutgers(6)
Virginia. 11-3 /// W: Notre Dame (13), UNC (17), UNC (17), Hopkins (20), Towson (27) /// L to Richmond (16), Duke (8), Maryland (1)

No I get it and not bothered by any of those but even under your methodology one really has to lean heavily on the Cornell win for Army vis a vis UVA or completely dismiss the losses it seems. Even if you want to throw out the * game but then you’re back into subjectivity territory, that Lehigh loss along with the relative collections of wins seems like it would still skew towards UVA > USMA.

Of course double counting UNC can cut both ways I think as well.

[masondixonlax]

Impossible to take you guys seriously! UVA is #4 in Coaches' Poll (who might know a LITTLE something about the subject), #3 in the Media Poll, yet a third of your contributors have them between 11 and 14.
But hey, you guys carry on with your little, self-congratulatory, circle jerk.

The consensus Forum Ranking for UVA is #8... which I'd say, if anything, is too high. You're only as good as your wins and losses. Their 3 best wins are against Notre Dame, UNC, and JHU. Not so amazing. Factor in their 3 worst losses against Richmond, Duke, and MD and... This is not a #3 team, #4 team. Using the Media Poll numbers, UVA beat #7, #19, and #NR, they lost to #17, #12, and #1 and based on these Ws and Ls, you agree that they should be... #3? With all due respect, GSP, logically, how does that add up?

Separately, just for another example, Penn's 3 best wins are against Harvard, Cornell, and Duke and their 3 worst losses are to Brown, Yale, and Princeton. Again, based on the Media Poll, that means they beat #8, #12, and #15 and they lost to #5, #6, and #9. Based on these numbers, logically, they should be #8, #9 and... The Media Poll has them at #13. Where's the logic in that? I could do this for most every team on their list. With this forum poll, at least they're logically consistent. And, which I like very much, they're relatively transparent.

Personally, I think your faith in the experts is misplaced. I like the Forum Ranking.

Owned by logic… and make your own pole if you disagree

[GSP]

It was just a petulant comment by a salty UVA fan. No amount of data or facts would make a difference here. Or logic.

I do like UVA but I am both a Penn Grad alum and primarily a Quaker fan. If Penn plays UVA, I will root for Penn. Unfortunately for my fantasy existence, I am also a realist as well and know that if UVA played Penn 10 times UVA would win at least 8 times and likely by 5 or 6 goals. If UVA payed any of the Ivies, it is my position that they would win 6 or 7 out of 10 albeit by a much smaller margin. Look at Ivy squads individual (not 1 from (column A and 1 from B) defensive efficiency numbers or goal tending strength, or FOGO abilities.

Which Ivy possesses the COMBINED strength of an attack unit of Moore, Schellenberger, and Cormier, AND a FOGO like LaSalla, AND a goalkeeper that matches Nunes, AND a defense of Saustad, Kastner, Matsui and Bower AND a line of middies comparable to Connor, Dickson, Schutz, Garno, and Sallade?

I want to see the 2 best teams meet on Memorial day--Maryland and UVA!!!