Revsine

[Greene Rice FIG]

No you don’t. You said we were terrible when we were 6-5. Most of the sane people on the board were frustrated at what an inconsistent team we were not that we were terrible .,That’s , because we already saw them play well and beat a # 1 at the time that was truly playing like a number 1 then and they are not now , and then we wouldn’t score 25 in the. first half and commit 10 or more unforced turnovers in 6 straight BIg 10 games against teams we were better than. That is what most people saw Jekyll and Hyde. You trying to rewrite your posting history is ridiculous.
If you cannot see what has happened in the last 7 halves of basketball , offensively ( including efficiency ) , defensively ( including 2 point efficiency and end of game efficiency , mostly by our beloved and your favorite Caleb ) and at the foul line , then you are missing it. The reason computers should never be used to select teams is because computers cannot recognize when a team gets better as the season goes on , that a team in November is not the same as February and March , nor does it account for injuries or other factors, nor does it know how hot a team has become. Human eyes the eye test should determine the teams and if you then want to use the efficiency metrics to back up your position that this is the team you are seeing with your eyes then use them in that way. By the way your Bart predictive model is a perfect example of what I am talking about.

I don't let 7 halves of basketball in a 30+ game season weigh too much on my thinking. We are playing great and we need to keep the momentum going.

I have increased my thoughts of what type of team we are on a normal day. We are definitely a flawed team, but I am no longer thinking we are a bottom third power conference team.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

then why are they spitting out tournament odds

shut up

 

[kcg88]

Give me kcg probabilities......
at Purdue
at Indiana

GRF has.....
at Purdue 12.5%
at Indiana 30%

0-2 61.25%

If a team plays like the 165th best team for a month and then the 45th best team for a month I don't think it's accurate say "this team will perform like the 100th best team moving forward."

Blind guessing:

At Purdue 10%
At Indiana 35%

I suppose this is showing that I think it's easier to win on the road against non-elite teams than the computers think.

I don't think Indiana's defense is as good as the numbers say. It's the same players as last year and they were a bad defense last year. Yes, I know there's a new coach and that matters. We could certainly go in and lose 64-49. That result wouldn't surprise me.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

If a team plays like the 165th best team for a month and then the 45th best team for a month I don't think it's accurate say "this team will perform like the 100th best team moving forward."

Blind guessing:

At Purdue 10%
At Indiana 35%

I suppose this is showing that I think it's easier to win on the road against non-elite teams than the computers think.

I don't think Indiana's defense is as good as the numbers say. It's the same players as last year and they were a bad defense last year. Yes, I know there's a new coach and that matters. We could certainly go in and lose 64-49. That result wouldn't surprise me.

Show me a month stretch where this team has played even to a 45th best team. You might have to really thread a needle somewhere, but I don't think the computers will give it to you.

 

[goru7]

I don't let 7 halves of basketball in a 30+ game season weigh too much on my thinking. We are playing great and we need to keep the momentum going.

I have increased my thoughts of what type of team we are on a normal day. We are definitely a flawed team, but I am no longer thinking we are a bottom third power conference team.

Glad you at least quoted yourself correctly “ I do not let 1 half from Paul change my opinion of him , “ I do not let 3 halves change my opinion that this is a terrible team “. You and your agreement partner Sojo saying we are a “bottom third power conference team “. Love that you quoted yourself correctly.

Now just try to be objective without looking at a computer for 1 damn second and tell me truthfully what these last 7 halves of Paul’s play does to your thinking ? What does it tell you about our offensive efficiency ? What does it tell you about our defense in the second half at the end of games ( winning time ) . Who has the last 7 halves been played against ? Home or away ? Having almost 5 guys in double figures ? Hint : We are playing like a really really good team now.

 

[Eagleton95.99]

It isn't a man....it is us, it is our season.

The computer still tells us that we aren't nearly as good as we think we are. People forget it was less than a few weeks ago people thought we were terrible. I put a thread showing how 6 possessions framed our season to that point. It wasn't designed to say we were better than our record said, but almost everyone said it didn't matter and we are bad.

We have now had 3 great games in a row and people want to say we are so much better than what a computer says. Computers have no emotions, fans do. You get a more objective look analyzing data.

You can look back the past 2 1/2 years and find quite a bit of amazing 3 game runs from Rutgers. It shows us what we are capable of, not who we really are. the same can be said when looking at the rough patches.

FIFY "The computer still tells us that we weren't nearly as good as we are now"

Look, any model that's used to predict game outcomes will weight recent games higher in the formula. The NET is trying to weigh the whole season equally. That is a "subjective" decision made to have a model that fits the criteria as laid out by the NCAA. Fine. But if you are trying to judge how good this team is today, looking at data from months ago isn't very objective.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Paul is playing with a ton of confidence and the team and coaching staff have a ton of confidence in him. Right now we are firing on all cylinders.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

FIFY "The computer still tells us that we weren't nearly as good as we are now"

Look, any model that's used to predict game outcomes will weight recent games higher in the formula. The NET is trying to weigh the whole season equally. That is a "subjective" decision made to have a model that fits the criteria as laid out by the NCAA. Fine. But if you are trying to judge how good this team is today, looking at data from months ago isn't very objective.

How about what we were on February 1st?

Yes. Your point is well taken. Looking on the Rutgers page from bart the slope of our line has a positive slope. We are getting better .

https://www.barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Rutgers

 

[goru7]

Paul is playing with a ton of confidence and the team and coaching staff have a ton of confidence in him. Right now we are firing on all cylinders.

Good. We are making progress. Others have now chimed in to advise do not let the computers be the end all be all. That is it. I love you as a fan and who I consider an integral part of these message boards . Let’s keep it going RU. !!!

 

[kcg88]

Show me a month stretch where this team has played even to a 45th best team. You might have to really thread a needle somewhere, but I don't think the computers will give it to you.

Fair point.

Last I looked KenPom had us at 2.17 expected wins over the last six. We only need to overperform by 0.83 of a win to get to the magic number of 12-8. Considering the way they've been playing I don't think it's outrageous to say that our expected wins might be more like 2.40 and we only need to overperform by 0.60.

Beating OSU and MSU when they shot the lights out from 3P was very impressive. Trayce Jackson-Davis could slip on a banana peel on March 1 and that's like 0.15 right there.

 

[Scangg]

Indiana stinks. They have one good B1G win against OSU. We own them recently. Fully expect that game to be a win.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Indiana stinks. They have one good B1G win against OSU. We own them recently. Fully expect that game to be a win.

PLEASE STOP IT!!!!!! PLEASE!!! everything you are saying is 100% true, but PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[Eagleton95.99]

How about what we were on February 1st?

Yes. Your point is well taken. Looking on the Rutgers page from bart the slope of our line has a positive slope. We are getting better .

https://www.barttorvik.com/team.php?team=Rutgers

As someone that spent a lot of time in grad school on stats, I know that every single statistical model is just an approximation of reality and cannot take all of the variables into play. And it's subjective and biased humans that decide what data gets into the model and how to weight the data. These models don't factor in team and player growth.

The graph you showed still doesn't take into account any non-linear effects. For example - if there was some guy that, for a whole year trained to be able to dunk. Every day our guy John was training. Every day John was tested and failed to dunk. Then one day John dunks. Then he does it again the next day, and the next for a week. How much would you weight the previous 365 days in your predictive model of his ability to dunk on day 8 (after dunking 7 days in a row)? Common sense is that you would not factor in the previous 365 days much at all and you would assume he is now at a new plateau that is sustainable.

I'm not convinced that RU is as good as it's last 3 games. Hoops is not one guy dunking. But I think we are much more likely to be our last 3 games than the previous 20. And most of the models are still looking at the whole as if it's all the same thing.

In Edit: Bart discounts earlier games at 1% reduced weighting per day, after 40 days. That's something. But it's arbitrary and not a good way to capture growth in a team like RU. Again, looking at our dunking example, you would want to discount all dunk attempts prior to the first successful dunk 100%. The model needs to fit the situation.

 

[kcg88]

PLEASE STOP IT!!!!!! PLEASE!!! everything you are saying is 100% true, but PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I think he was saying the same things about Wisconsin FWIW.

 

[Scangg]

I think he was saying the same things about Wisconsin FWIW.

I did... kept saying what a good matchup Wisconsin was with it being Davis's worst matchup of the year seeing Caleb and a good matchup for Paul on both ends.

Illinois.... I'm more hoping for the magic of the RAC. They scare me, but had a close one against NW last game and lost to Purdue before that. Hopefully we are catching them going through a downtrend in play.

 

[goru7]

Indiana stinks. They have one good B1G win against OSU. We own them recently. Fully expect that game to be a win.

They actually have 2 as they beat Purdue but you are correct we have faired very well against them and expecting similar results.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

As someone that spent a lot of time in grad school on stats, I know that every single statistical model is just an approximation of reality and cannot take all of the variables into play. And it's subjective and biased humans that decide what data gets into the model and how to weight the data. These models don't factor in team and player growth.

The graph you showed still doesn't take into account any non-linear effects. For example - if there was some guy that, for a whole year trained to be able to dunk. Every day our guy John was training. Every day John was tested and failed to dunk. Then one day John dunks. Then he does it again the next day, and the next for a week. How much would you weight the previous 365 days in your predictive model of his ability to dunk on day 8? Common sense is that you would not factor in the previous 365 days much at all and you would assume he is now at a new plateau that is sustainable.

I'm not convinced that RU is as good as it's last 3 games. Hoops is not one guy dunking. But I think we are much more likely to be our last 3 games than the previous 20. And most of the models are still looking at the whole as if it's all the same thing.

We don't have a John on the team.

Our last 3 games we have played like a top 4 or 5 team.

The biggest flaw in the bart and ken models is that things aren't linear. results are not completely independent.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

We will beat Illinois....the PSU game at the end is what terrifies me.

 

[srru86]

PLEASE STOP IT!!!!!! PLEASE!!! everything you are saying is 100% true, but PLEASE NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Yes, I like to think I'm a rational person not given to superstitions. But still - let's not tempt the fates of basketball.

 

[bac2therac]

Indiana stinks. They have one good B1G win against OSU. We own them recently. Fully expect that game to be a win.

Indiana has a better overall profile than RU at the moment taking into account ALL factors....RU fans have to back off just focusing on Q1 wins as everything, its not

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

crazy how much better the same roster can be at defense one coach to the next.

 

[kcg88]

Indiana has a better overall profile than RU at the moment taking into account ALL factors....RU fans have to back off just focusing on Q1 wins as everything, its not

They have a better resume but I'm not convinced they're the better team. Our conference efficiency is better than theirs.

 

[bac2therac]

They have a better resume but I'm not convinced they're the better team. Our conference efficiency is better than theirs.

As i am numbers crunching right now what I find highly alarming and striking is Rutgers strategy to not play a better OOC schedule and its refusal to play neutral site games

Rutgers comes up pretty poorly in the road/neutral mark compared to most of the bubble. A really bad situation that people on this board overlook. Rutgers does not ONE road OOC win. The Wisconsin win was awesome but we may need more

 

[Scangg]

Indiana has a better overall profile than RU at the moment taking into account ALL factors....RU fans have to back off just focusing on Q1 wins as everything, its not

Irrelevant to my comment but ok

 

[bac2therac]

Irrelevant to my comment but ok

Was beating Purdue irrelevant to your comment

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

As i am numbers crunching right now what I find highly alarming and striking is Rutgers strategy to not play a better OOC schedule and its refusal to play neutral site games

Rutgers comes up pretty poorly in the road/neutral mark compared to most of the bubble. A really bad situation that people on this board overlook. Rutgers does not ONE road OOC win. The Wisconsin win was awesome but we may need more

You play the weak OOC so you get a chance of finding out what your rotations should be. In our OOC Pike was able to figure a lot out. The problem is you aren't supposed to lose to one of your cupcakes.

If we would have scheduled 2 decent teams instead of the cream puffs we could be sitting today with a 13-11 record.

When you schedule harder teams you lose more often.

 

[kcg88]

As i am numbers crunching right now what I find highly alarming and striking is Rutgers strategy to not play a better OOC schedule and its refusal to play neutral site games

Rutgers comes up pretty poorly in the road/neutral mark compared to most of the bubble. A really bad situation that people on this board overlook. Rutgers does not ONE road OOC win. The Wisconsin win was awesome but we may need more

Yes, getting in a preseason tournament is a must. At least on an every other year basis.

Lack of true OOC road games isn't an issue. Between ACC, Gavitt, and Seton Hall we'll be on the road at least once. They'll probably sent us to Miami for the umpteenth time next season. Combine that with two (or three) neutral games and we're all set. Iowa State for example only played one OOC true road game this season.

 

[bac2therac]

You play the weak OOC so you get a chance of finding out what your rotations should be. In our OOC Pike was able to figure a lot out. The problem is you aren't supposed to lose to one of your cupcakes.

If we would have scheduled 2 decent teams instead of the cream puffs we could be sitting today with a 13-11 record.

When you schedule harder teams you lose more often.

You play the weak OOC so you get a chance of finding out what your rotations should be. In our OOC Pike was able to figure a lot out. The problem is you aren't supposed to lose to one of your cupcakes.

If we would have scheduled 2 decent teams instead of the cream puffs we could be sitting today with a 13-11 record.

When you schedule harder teams you lose more often.

Smh

 

[Scangg]

Was beating Purdue irrelevant to your comment

Rutgers beating Purdue? I have no idea what you are even getting at here lol...

but yes Rutgers beating Purdue is irrelevant to me thinking Indiana stinks and has basically 1 good win and that we will beat them

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

smh?

If we don't make it the discussion isn't going to be about wins, it will be about who we lost to.

puno

 

[bac2therac]

Rutgers beating Purdue? I have no idea what you are even getting at here lol...

but yes Rutgers beating Purdue is irrelevant to me thinking Indiana stinks and has basically 1 good win and that we will beat them

Indiana beat Purdue, you didnt even post that when you trashed them

 

[bac2therac]

smh?

If we don't make it the discussion isn't going to be about wins, it will be about who we lost to.

we lost to Lafayette because Geo and other starters didnt bother to show

we struggled vs cupcakes because players didnt show, not because of a lineup situation, they truly were not bringing it

honestly I dont think our non conference fleshed anything out

multiple starters were bad, Pike wasnt even able to develop the bench.

not until conference play started and we got those two games after covid did this team start to show anything

 

[Scangg]

Indiana beat Purdue, you didnt even post that when you trashed them

Oh.. yea good win obviously I missed that one...

but it's also the first time they beat them since 2016 in a intrastate rivalry. Bound to happen at some point. We used to beat SHU more regularly than that even when we stunk

 

[RUDave_01]

Rutgers comes up pretty poorly in the road/neutral mark compared to most of the bubble. A really bad situation that people on this board overlook. Rutgers does not ONE road OOC win. The Wisconsin win was awesome but we may need more

That's a fair statement. At this point, I suspect getting one more outside the RAC might be enough, especially if they hold serve at home. I'd love another Q1 true road win to tamper those who would call the Whisky win a one off.

 

[RUtrumpet92_rivals498139]

Rutgers beating Purdue? I have no idea what you are even getting at here lol...

but yes Rutgers beating Purdue is irrelevant to me thinking Indiana stinks and has basically 1 good win and that we will beat them

I think he means that you are not calling Indiana beating Purdue a "good win", when I think almost everyone would say it is.

Overall, I agree with you on Indiana. I don't think they are that good. TJD is a very talented player who came up small against Myles the last few seasons. Slow him down, overwhelm their backcourt, and they are very beatable. They are now 7-7 B1G with a tough home game vs. Wisconsin tomorrow, and an even tougher trip to Ohio State on Saturday. It is possible they will be 7-9 before playing a very inconsistent Maryland that hasn't closed out many wins, but is capable of scaring anyone (they beat Illinois, won at the RAC, and almost won at Mackey). Let's give them wins over Maryland and at Minnesota for argument's sake. They close with us and at Purdue. If we win that game (I think it is 50/50 at least for us to win there) and they finish 9-11, that's not an NCAA resume.

 

[Scangg]

I think he means that you are not calling Indiana beating Purdue a "good win", when I think almost everyone would say it is.

Overall, I agree with you on Indiana. I don't think they are that good. TJD is a very talented player who came up small against Myles the last few seasons. Slow him down, overwhelm their backcourt, and they are very beatable. They are now 7-7 B1G with a tough home game vs. Wisconsin tomorrow, and an even tougher trip to Ohio State on Saturday. It is possible they will be 7-9 before playing a very inconsistent Maryland that hasn't closed out many wins, but is capable of scaring anyone (they beat Illinois, won at the RAC, and almost won at Mackey). Let's give them wins over Maryland and at Minnesota for argument's sake. They close with us and at Purdue. If we win that game (I think it is 50/50 at least for us to win there) and they finish 9-11, that's not an NCAA resume.

Both teams may be fighting for their tournament lives when we play Indiana depending on how these next games go.

Michigan and Indiana both late season RU games where both teams may need wins to try to secure a spot in the dance. We likely need a W in at least one of them

 

[goru7]

That's a fair statement. At this point, I suspect getting one more outside the RAC might be enough, especially if they hold serve at home. I'd love another Q1 true road win to tamper those who would call the Whisky win a one off.

Whisky is not a 1 off. We have 3 road wins this year , kinda like Michigan and Indiana and Iowa teams we are fighting for for the bid. This is not like us needing to win at Purdue 2 years ago when we had 0 and last year at Minnesota when we had 1 . This is trying to overcome the bad stuff on the resume which in my opinion is Lafayette essentially and to a lesser extent UMASS . DePaul , Maryland , Northwestern and Minnesota are not bad losses as they are all 100 or lower in the dreaded disgusting NET.
Not saying you said it but your reference to others saying or thinking it are smoking something to make their brain stupid.

 

[RUtrumpet92_rivals498139]

Michigan and Indiana both late season RU games where both teams may need wins to try to secure a spot in the dance. We likely need a W in at least one of them

If we defend the RAC and finish 12-8, I think we're sitting okay going into the B1G tournament. But I'm with you, another road win over a team also fighting for a bid would be HUGE. Establish ourselves as more deserving of that slot and embellish the resume, too.

 

[RUChoppin]

Computer models like kenpom/bart/etc that take into account the whole season with equal weight to all games are going to have some warts.

If you weight the game @Illinois with 0 minutes from Baker, 27 from Jones, and 18 min from Agee the same as all other games, for instance, it's not going to align with what we're seeing with the rotation we've been seeing for the last 7 weeks. Similarly, if you weight Illinois' 16-pt loss @Maryland without Cockburn the same as their games over the last several weeks.

Personnel/rotations are important, and the way a team looks in Nov may be completely different than how they look in February... but the models generally weight every game equally and don't take that into account. Which is where there might be some value to more heavily weighting recent games with the team's late-season personnel/rotations.

I know the selection committee isn't supposed to care if you lose your star player in the week before selection Sunday, because they take your accomplished body of work.... or if you got your star player back from a long medical absence and started setting the world on fire. But if you're trying to gauge the relative strengths of teams "right now", the data they generated with different personnel shouldn't really be weighted the same, imo.

 

[RUChoppin]

Show me a month stretch where this team has played even to a 45th best team. You might have to really thread a needle somewhere, but I don't think the computers will give it to you.

We changed our rotation after the Illinois beatdown, and have seen much better performance overall.

Up through that game (8 games), we were shooting .394 FG, .444 2P, .277 3P, .662 FT, while averaging 65.6 ppg and giving up 65.9 ppg.

Since then (16 games), we've been shooting .462 FG, .506 2P, .374 3P, .741 FT, while averaging 69.8 ppg and giving up 64.3 ppg (and against a stronger schedule).

I don't know if we're a "top 45" team during he last 16 games, but we've been a damn sight better than 81st.