2024 Bracketology

[coda]

Apologies if this has been discussed above, but in taking margin of victory into account how do you incorporate different styles and pace of play? One can realistically imagine a team that is defense oriented and may only win their games by 2 or 3 goals but the outcome of the game is never in doubt. Do they get penalized for that?

you would have to adjust for possessions.. Just an example to keep it simple

Team A.. averages 15 possessions. Scores 10 pts a game

Team B averaged 18 possessions. Scores 12 pts a game.

They would be considered equal offense, as both score .667 goals per possession. You can do same with defense and that would would give the adjustment. You are just calculating efficiency, instead of overall score, which is better.

[Big Dog]

I'm not suggesting scoring margin alone solves the issue of ranking teams who ultimately don't play common schedule. However, truly am amazed by anyone who thinks that winning (or losing) by 10 is the same (i.e, provides same insight into respective rankings of teams) as winning (or losing) by one.

Imagine a world where two teams play same exact schedule. Both go 11-2. Firs team averages 8 goal margin in their win, and loses 2 in OT. Other team averages 2 goals marin in 11 wins, and gets blown out by 10 in losses. Per RPI, they are the same. Nobody would look at those two teams and conclude they are equivalent.

Folks love to call a 'bad loss' a loss (regardless of margin) to a non-Top 20 team, yet, losing by 10 isn't?

Can lacrosse do better? Yes. That is what this discussion is about. Nobody is saying there is a perfect model that will be 100% correct. Its just about improving. I just dont understand people arguing that less information is better.

The problem for lax is that there are too few games in a season to make "other information" statistically meaningful. And once league play starts, RPIs can't change much. (All your opponent's play each other.) The Net ranking in basketball (kinda) works bcos they play 30+ games.

That said, not a fan of scoring margin in such a short season.

You would obviously love more data-points, but college lacrosse season mirrors college football pretty well. I dont see a huge difference in the season in comparison. The less data-points you have the more information you need. Simpler models work better with more data pts.

And yet College football does not use margin of victory.

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/spor ... e-protocol

I dont even know how they calculate SOS. What metrics are they relying on? That we do not know. Likely that the models they look at uses pts and/or yards in their calculations, but without knowing what information they rely on it is impossible to say. More likely to use yards/play than pts per play, but that is unique to football.

pretty easy to google the formulas used, but No, it does not include margin of victory. (no bonus points for 'Bama beating on the Little Sisters of teh Poor by 70.)

For example, one that used to be popular:
Though the BCS is now defunct, its calculation for strength of schedule lives on. This system takes the sum of the team's opponent's records and multiplies by two. It then adds that number to the team's opponent's opponent's record and multiplies by one. Finally, that number is divided by three.

[coda]

I'm not suggesting scoring margin alone solves the issue of ranking teams who ultimately don't play common schedule. However, truly am amazed by anyone who thinks that winning (or losing) by 10 is the same (i.e, provides same insight into respective rankings of teams) as winning (or losing) by one.

Imagine a world where two teams play same exact schedule. Both go 11-2. Firs team averages 8 goal margin in their win, and loses 2 in OT. Other team averages 2 goals marin in 11 wins, and gets blown out by 10 in losses. Per RPI, they are the same. Nobody would look at those two teams and conclude they are equivalent.

Folks love to call a 'bad loss' a loss (regardless of margin) to a non-Top 20 team, yet, losing by 10 isn't?

Can lacrosse do better? Yes. That is what this discussion is about. Nobody is saying there is a perfect model that will be 100% correct. Its just about improving. I just dont understand people arguing that less information is better.

The problem for lax is that there are too few games in a season to make "other information" statistically meaningful. And once league play starts, RPIs can't change much. (All your opponent's play each other.) The Net ranking in basketball (kinda) works bcos they play 30+ games.

That said, not a fan of scoring margin in such a short season.

You would obviously love more data-points, but college lacrosse season mirrors college football pretty well. I dont see a huge difference in the season in comparison. The less data-points you have the more information you need. Simpler models work better with more data pts.

And yet College football does not use margin of victory.

https://collegefootballplayoff.com/spor ... e-protocol

I dont even know how they calculate SOS. What metrics are they relying on? That we do not know. Likely that the models they look at uses pts and/or yards in their calculations, but without knowing what information they rely on it is impossible to say. More likely to use yards/play than pts per play, but that is unique to football.

pretty easy to google the formulas used, but No, it does not include margin of victory. (no bonus points for 'Bama beating on the Little Sisters of teh Poor by 70.)

For example, one that used to be popular:
Though the BCS is now defunct, its calculation for strength of schedule lives on. This system takes the sum of the team's opponent's records and multiplies by two. It then adds that number to the team's opponent's opponent's record and multiplies by one. Finally, that number is divided by three.

That looks right. I was not sure if they used ESPN, Massey, etc. I dont know what goes into the metrics they use. Do they use models? I am pretty sure they see some data, but I am not sure which ones they use. Those will be performance based. Yards per play/pts per play something to distinguish teams. I highly doubt that they simply look at SOS and W/L records. They also use the eye test, which obviously uses MOV, despite saying they discourage MOV. The exact factors and weighting of those factors has never been released as far as I know.

[Wheels]

pretty easy to google the formulas used, but No, it does not include margin of victory. (no bonus points for 'Bama beating on the Little Sisters of teh Poor by 70.)

For example, one that used to be popular:
Though the BCS is now defunct, its calculation for strength of schedule lives on. This system takes the sum of the team's opponent's records and multiplies by two. It then adds that number to the team's opponent's opponent's record and multiplies by one. Finally, that number is divided by three.

Hence the possible multicollinearity issues with the RPI.

[Finster]

pretty easy to google the formulas used, but No, it does not include margin of victory. (no bonus points for 'Bama beating on the Little Sisters of teh Poor by 70.)

For example, one that used to be popular:
Though the BCS is now defunct, its calculation for strength of schedule lives on. This system takes the sum of the team's opponent's records and multiplies by two. It then adds that number to the team's opponent's opponent's record and multiplies by one. Finally, that number is divided by three.

Hence the possible multicollinearity issues with the RPI.

Wheels: in the laxreference bracket bets, it looks like a majority of betters have taken Princeton to take out UMD. Not me. Though I don't think Maryland will go far, I think they get by Princeton.

I like the terps' chances against any team where if your defense can shut off one player, the opponent's offense must pivot dramatically. Here, I think Zapitello can shut off Makesy, which means Princeton then must turn to their freshmen.Tough ask in their first D1 tourney. I'll go with MD by 2.

[10stone5]

I’m not in that pool, betting

but I have Terps over Tigers for what its worth.

[coda]

pretty easy to google the formulas used, but No, it does not include margin of victory. (no bonus points for 'Bama beating on the Little Sisters of teh Poor by 70.)

For example, one that used to be popular:
Though the BCS is now defunct, its calculation for strength of schedule lives on. This system takes the sum of the team's opponent's records and multiplies by two. It then adds that number to the team's opponent's opponent's record and multiplies by one. Finally, that number is divided by three.

Hence the possible multicollinearity issues with the RPI.

Wheels: in the laxreference bracket bets, it looks like a majority of betters have taken Princeton to take out UMD. Not me. Though I don't think Maryland will go far, I think they get by Princeton.

I like the terps' chances against any team where if your defense can shut off one player, the opponent's offense must pivot dramatically. Here, I think Zapitello can shut off Makesy, which means Princeton then must turn to their freshmen.Tough ask in their first D1 tourney. I'll go with MD by 2.

Last I looked Princeton was -1.5, which explains why the majority are taking Princeton. I do think this comes down to the specialist. If Wierman dominates like the last game you have to like Maryland's chances. McNaney has to find hi sold form. He is been solid mediocre all year, that needs to change if Maryland is looking to advance.

To make Final 4
ND: -650
PSU: +700
GT: +1300
Albany: +8000

Hopkins: -110 (surprised about this)
UVA: +105
St Josephs: +1400
Lehigh: +2300

Cuse: -155
Michigan: +380
Denver: +450
Towson: +750

[keno in reno]

So I'd say the selection and seeding protocol worked perfectly this year. Nobody ever wants to congratulate the system, but it worked. Maybe you can argue amongst the seeds?

[Wheels]

So I'd say the selection and seeding protocol worked perfectly this year. Nobody ever wants to congratulate the system, but it worked. Maybe you can argue amongst the seeds?

Patrick Stevens last night mentioned that if all the seeds win, it would be the first time since 2004 that the bracket went straight chalk.

[AreaLax]

Saturday doubleheader at Hofstra:

(1) Notre Dame-(8) Georgetown is the early game.

(2) Duke-(7) Maryland will follow.

Sunday doubleheader set at Towson

(4) Syracuse-(5) Denver is the early game.

(3) Hopkins-(6) Virginia to follow.

[wgdsr]

so with the acc's getting 4 in and put in different brackets this time, we have 4 acc vs. ..... given everyone's obsession with conferences and related sports radio-speak, between fanlax, lax media and lax twitter, how many heads explode if we get acc tourney redux?

don't consider it very likely, but it's still there rn. would be pretty surprised if 2 acc's don't advance, and more than that and we're going to be hearing a whole lot about acc vs the world.

[Chousnake]

so with the acc's getting 4 in and put in different brackets this time, we have 4 acc vs. ..... given everyone's obsession with conferences and related sports radio-speak, between fanlax, lax media and lax twitter, how many heads explode if we get acc tourney redux?

don't consider it very likely, but it's still there rn. would be pretty surprised if 2 acc's don't advance, and more than that and we're going to be hearing a whole lot about acc vs the world.

Looking at the match ups, I would not be surprised to see 4 ACC teams advance at this point.

[CU77]

Using Massey win probabilities, the chance of an all-ACC final four is 22%.

No, I won't call it "championship weekend"