| Ramblermania.net https://www.ramblermania.net:443/forum/ |
|
| ken-pom rankings https://www.ramblermania.net:443/forum/viewtopic.php?f=12&t=1295 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | natetheskate [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 10:23 am ] |
| Post subject: | ken-pom rankings |
LU comes in at 107 behind WS at 15, UNI at 59, Evansville at73 and Illinois State at 95........rest of the Valley is barely with in firing distance. Creighton was 86 |
|
| Author: | ahunte1 [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 11:39 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
His system has us at 16-12 overall, 10-8 in conference and tied for 4th. Two potential games in Alaska aren't counted because the matchups aren't set, but we are the strongest team in the field, so I have to imagine we will be projected win those as well, making us 18-12. The interesting thing to me is that the overall record is based on the cumulative probabilities of winning each game, but if you simply add up the W-L in conference, you get a 12-6 record. The projection comes in at 10-8 because some games are closer to 50/50 like vs Evansville at home. The six solid conference losses are home vs Wichita State, and on the road at Wichita, UNI, Evansville, IL St, and IN St. The two toughest games on the schedule are (no surprise) at Notre Dame and at Wichita. We have an 11% chance to win those. MVC Team Rankings: Wichita - 15 UNI - 59 Evansville - 73 ISUr - 95 LUC - 107 ISUb - 146 SIU - 193 MSU - 199 Drake - 233 Bradley - 276 |
|
| Author: | goramblers2011 [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:30 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
I'd be disappointed with an 18-12 record. I think the floor for this team is 20 regular season wins. |
|
| Author: | ahunte1 [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 12:39 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
goramblers2011 wrote: I'd be disappointed with an 18-12 record. I agree. I find it hard to look at the schedule and pencil in 12 losses. |
|
| Author: | GoRamblers [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 1:56 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
ahunte1 wrote: goramblers2011 wrote: I'd be disappointed with an 18-12 record. I agree. I find it hard to look at the schedule and pencil in 12 losses. My only fear is that we find a way to live up to the expectations. |
|
| Author: | swellafelon [ Mon Oct 26, 2015 3:13 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
GoRamblers wrote: ahunte1 wrote: goramblers2011 wrote: I'd be disappointed with an 18-12 record. I agree. I find it hard to look at the schedule and pencil in 12 losses. My only fear is that we find a way to live up to the expectations. You haven't posted in almost a month and THIS is the best you've got?!? Go back to the bullpen and take some more warmups. And I swear if the City starts charging me for garbage pickup, I'm moving to Naperville! |
|
| Author: | GoRamblers [ Tue Oct 27, 2015 7:42 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: ken-pom rankings |
swellafelon wrote: GoRamblers wrote: ahunte1 wrote: I agree. I find it hard to look at the schedule and pencil in 12 losses. My only fear is that we find a way to live up to the expectations. You haven't posted in almost a month and THIS is the best you've got?!? Go back to the bullpen and take some more warmups. And I swear if the City starts charging me for garbage pickup, I'm moving to Naperville! Can't all be winners, Swella. So where in Naperville are you going to move? |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 6 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group http://www.phpbb.com/ |
|