Same Party, Different House
https://fanlax.com/forum/
Diversity of thought is good. As long as the thought pattern is rational. And this thought pattern is rational. Bottomline, currently, Cornell's Ws aren't as strong as Virginia, Loyola, Maryland, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Richmond, and Penn State. Beat OSU on Saturday and, all but certainly, they'll move up. Until then, Ws over Lehigh, Albany, and Hobart has them ranked in the 8th spot...
I could not agree more, if we really look deeply into strength of schedule then these rankings and your thought process make complete sense.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 12:14 pmDiversity of thought is good. As long as the thought pattern is rational. And this thought pattern is rational. Bottomline, currently, Cornell's Ws aren't as strong as Virginia, Loyola, Maryland, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Richmond, and Penn State. Beat OSU on Saturday and, all but certainly, they'll move up. Until then, Ws over Lehigh, Albany, and Hobart has them ranked in the 8th spot...
Wizard, first, thank you. Second, if people didn't know the teams that were being ranked, just who they beat and lost to, rankings, from IL to the average FanLax post-er, would look dramatically different. The brand equity of each D1 men's team plays no small role in where teams are ranked. And this should not be the case. Rankings should be a pure, fair meritocracy.KnowingWizardofODAC wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 12:31 pm I could not agree more, if we really look deeply into strength of schedule then these rankings and your thought process make complete sense.
"Lies, damned lies, and statistics."Gobigred wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 11:59 amGood laugh from this.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 10:41 am Based on each teams' 3 Best Wins and 3 Worst Losses, these are the D1 Men's Top 20. As a heads-up, the Ivies are at a distinct disadvantage as they've only played 2-3 games.
Rank, Team, Games Played, Win Percentage, Strength of Schedule
– Team GP W% SOS
1 Virginia 3 100% 5
2 Loyola 4 75% 4
3 Maryland 4 75% 7
4 Duke 5 80% 17
5 Johns Hopkins 5 60% 5
6 Richmond 4 75% 13
7 Penn State 4 75% 15
8 Cornell 3 100% 36
9 North Carolina 4 75% 18
10 Notre Dame 3 100% 46
11 Ohio State 4 75% 25
12 Rutgers 5 80% 35
13 Villanova 3 67% 8
14 Saint Joseph's 3 100% 53
15 Robert Morris 3 100% 57
16 Army 4 75% 34
17 UMBC 3 100% 61
18 Vermont 4 50% 10
19 Syracuse 5 60% 27
20 Manhattan 4 75% 39
Also, a good laugh. A team that was crushed by Rutgers and has a one-goal win over an ordinary Towson team is not the second best team in the division. Losses count, too.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 12:14 pmDiversity of thought is good. As long as the thought pattern is rational. And this thought pattern is rational. Bottomline, currently, Cornell's Ws aren't as strong as Virginia, Loyola, Maryland, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Richmond, and Penn State. Beat OSU on Saturday and, all but certainly, they'll move up. Until then, Ws over Lehigh, Albany, and Hobart has them ranked in the 8th spot...
*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
Binary thinking. Simpler, I guess. Loses nuance though.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:12 pm*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
In a world where the dataset is so small and not diverse enough one has to make some compromises. I suspect Matnum is arguing that within the context of this methodology more than personally feeling that is a universal truth.PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:23 pmBinary thinking. Simpler, I guess. Loses nuance though.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:12 pm*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
I don't know if that's true. Losing nuance that is. Keep in mind, the technology we're typing on right now is binary. 0s and 1s. Binary is simple when it's just an on-off switch. But once there are as many on-off switches as there are number of games played, then the system becomes pretty nuanced. In terms of the individual games, yes, unquestionably, very simple. And I personally believe this is how sports are meant to be, how games are meant to be evaluated. So to speak, 2 points for a W, 0 points for an L, and nothing in between. Even if the game goes into OT. Just Ws and Ls.
On March 2nd, yes, the dataset is relatively small. But give it two weeks, heck, 2 months, the dataset won't be small at all. That aside, I'm not arguing within the context of this methodology. I'm speaking to what I genuinely believe to be true, what makes sense, what is fair. And the methodology was created to support this truth, this way of thinking.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:31 pm In a world where the dataset is so small and not diverse enough one has to make some compromises. I suspect Matnum is arguing that within the context of this methodology more than personally feeling that is a universal truth.
Got itMatnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:48 pmOn March 2nd, yes, the dataset is relatively small. But give it two weeks, heck, 2 months, the dataset won't be small at all. That aside, I'm not arguing within the context of this methodology. I'm speaking to what I genuinely believe to be true, what makes sense, what is fair. And the methodology was created to support this truth, this way of thinking.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:31 pm In a world where the dataset is so small and not diverse enough one has to make some compromises. I suspect Matnum is arguing that within the context of this methodology more than personally feeling that is a universal truth.
Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:48 pmOn March 2nd, yes, the dataset is relatively small. But give it two weeks, heck, 2 months, the dataset won't be small at all. That aside, I'm not arguing within the context of this methodology. I'm speaking to what I genuinely believe to be true, what makes sense, what is fair. And the methodology was created to support this truth, this way of thinking.Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:31 pm In a world where the dataset is so small and not diverse enough one has to make some compromises. I suspect Matnum is arguing that within the context of this methodology more than personally feeling that is a universal truth.
Undeniably, "the truth" is a very large word. But as long as, for the sake of simplicity, the coaches agree with the methodology, the system will produce not necessarily "the truth" but a fair ranking that all can agree upon. Not dissimilar from the game itself, we all agree that the winner is the team that puts the ball in the net more than the other team. It makes sense, it's fair.PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 3:43 pm Okay, so at some point in the future, your methodology will impart the "truth." When? End of regular season? After league playoffs? NCAA tourney? Unfortunately for any comparative system with single terminus indicators, the "truth" is a slippery idea.
I would be interested in the deviation of your methodology from other, more "nuanced" systems that attempt to manage the difficulty of comparison between elements that never are subject to your determination, i.e. head-to-head competition.
Will the variances converge or diverge as the season progresses?
But the Power Rankings, which do take into account victory margins (subject to a mercy rule) and home-field advantage, also rank Loyola highly.PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:23 pmBinary thinking. Simpler, I guess. Loses nuance though.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:12 pm*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
You just did that to show Notre Dame #1 didn’t you!44WeWantMore wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 6:33 pmBut the Power Rankings, which do take into account victory margins (subject to a mercy rule) and home-field advantage, also rank Loyola highly.PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:23 pmBinary thinking. Simpler, I guess. Loses nuance though.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:12 pm*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
Edit: They may have dropped the HFA adjustment: https://www.laxnumbers.com/team_info.ph ... =30337&s=1
Farfromgeneva wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 7:16 pmYou just did that to show Notre Dame #1 didn’t you!44WeWantMore wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 6:33 pmBut the Power Rankings, which do take into account victory margins (subject to a mercy rule) and home-field advantage, also rank Loyola highly.PizzaSnake wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:23 pmBinary thinking. Simpler, I guess. Loses nuance though.Matnum PI wrote: ↑Thu Mar 02, 2023 2:12 pm*That* I can hear. Winning by a small margin, winning by a large margin. For some, this is meaningful when ranking a team. For me and, for that matter, for FanLax Computer, it is not. A W is a W, an L is an L. That is why an OT loss hurts so much. You were so close and... L. But, again, I hear you. I don't hold the same perspective, but I hear you. "Crushed", as just spoken to, is irrelevant. But losing to RU, yes they did. For some, for many, they're undefeated obsessed. Losing obviously isn't good but a loss is only as good or as bad as who you lost to. So, yes, this loss hurts Loyola. But their quality wins off-set this. Once other teams start getting similar quality wins (without losing), they'll surpass Loyola. But until then, Loyola is #2.
Edit: They may have dropped the HFA adjustment: https://www.laxnumbers.com/team_info.ph ... =30337&s=1
