RebKell's Junkie Boards
Board Junkies Forums
 
Log in Register FAQ Memberlist Search RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index

AP Poll
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
 
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion
View previous topic :: View next topic  
Author Message
Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15050
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 9:27 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

ArtBest23 wrote:
Myrtle said "Most of the top teams who have actually played top teams have lost." But more likely those supposed top teams who lost weren't actually top teams in the first place or at least weren't nearly as "top" as we were led to believe. And thus you can't assume that the teams who beat them were "top" just by reason of having beaten an over-hyped opponent.

Orrrrrr.....we could agree that REAL PARITY has finally arrived in our game, and among the top 30-40 teams, anybody can beat ANYBODY on any given day. Right!??

Shocked Laughing



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2687
Location: indianowa


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 10:43 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Why are some of y'all so pressed about the polls?
a) of course voters will often 'get it wrong'
b) even if the polls were perfect there'd still be upsets
c) they're fun



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
singinerd54



Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 1535
Location: Missouri


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 11:41 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I'm interested in seeing people's Top 10s. You're welcome to critique mine, provided you offer what yours would be or how you would change mine. I haven't seen many of these teams play, and the eye test is obviously important, so this is mostly based off of results and margins of victory. While this is not the way rankings should be done, I assume it's how many of them actually get done.

Prior to today's big games, this is what I've got. I gave strong preference to teams who have played (and beaten) at least one Power 5 team (with the exception of Stanford), and to being undefeated. This is more of a what-have-you-done take.

1) South Carolina
2) Stanford
3) UConn
4) Notre Dame
5) Indiana
6) Ohio St
7) Oregon
Cool Creighton
9) Utah
10) ...Kansas St? (I think UNC is the only other currently ranked team who meets my criteria, but TCU looks bad [on paper])


calbearman76



Joined: 02 Nov 2009
Posts: 4985
Location: Carson City


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 1:21 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Add Marquette (4-0, win over Texas) and Gonzaga (4-0, win over Louisville) and they play today


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14376



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 3:02 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

1 SCar
1a Stanford

3 UConn

4-17 (in no particular order)
Louisville
VaTech
Notre Dame
NCar
Indiana
Ohio St
Iowa
UCLA
LSU
Marquette
Creighton
Villinova
Kansas St
Iowa St


PickledGinger



Joined: 04 Oct 2013
Posts: 1276



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/20/22 3:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

calbearman76 wrote:
Add Marquette (4-0, win over Texas) and Gonzaga (4-0, win over Louisville) and they play today


Add UCLA to that list, although beating Tennessee is becoming less impressive by the day.



_________________
Unspoken expectations are just premeditated resentments.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 65578
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/21/22 1:20 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-womens-college-basketball-poll?week=3

South Carolina still unanimous

Connecticut up to #3

Utah up to #17

Texas down to #19

UCLA and Kansas State in
Oklahoma and Nebraska out



_________________
It kills me when people talk about California hedonism. Anybody who talks about California hedonism has never spent a Christmas in Sacramento.
singinerd54



Joined: 18 Feb 2009
Posts: 1535
Location: Missouri


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/21/22 1:42 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Oklahoma loses by 46 to Utah (their #17) while Marquette beats Texas (their #19) and Oklahoma gets more points than Marquette Laughing Rolling Eyes


ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14376



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/21/22 2:03 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

So, Ohio State jumps 4 places to #4 in the country based on . . . . [drum roll] ....... beating 0-4 Ohio and 0-4 McNeese St. . . . . even as the opponent in its "signature win", Tennessee, continues to lose. And Indiana, also living off of the Tennessee name, is rewarded for beating Quinnipiac and Bowling Green with a whopping SIX place jump to an exalted #6 in the country.

Yet Marquette which has better record so far than either of them with wins over Texas and Gonzaga can't even make it into the top 25?

Wow. Just WOW!

Does anybody here seriously think for a moment that Ohio State and Indiana are two of the top six teams in the entire country? If you do, please explain that for me.

And before you go off, this isn't a complaint that Notre Dame is too low. I have no problem with their ranking in absolute terms. While I've been very happy with how they've looked, I don't think they've proven even their number 7 spot yet. (I certainly don't think they belong at 4 either). And as I posted previously, I think it's very hard to distinguish numbers 3-17. But I am pretty confident that Ohio St isn't #4. (And, unlike many, I even happen to like McGuff and what he's got going in Columbus).


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15050
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/21/22 3:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Laughing These are actually becoming amusing, in their own way. Given the numerous, hard-to-justify 'drops' & 'bump-ups' of 5 and 8 levels (TN & TX with double digit drops), I'm beginning to think these polled journalists are just throwing random darts for their rankings.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5137



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/21/22 9:04 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

The problem was the general assumption in the media that a team can bring in 2 or 3 transfers and as long as they were HS stars they can fit in seamlessly.

Tenn & Texas should get better as the season goes on but those loses will hurt their seeding.


undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2687
Location: indianowa


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/22/22 11:48 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
The problem was the general assumption in the media that a team can bring in 2 or 3 transfers and as long as they were HS stars they can fit in seamlessly.

Tenn & Texas should get better as the season goes on but those loses will hurt their seeding.


Most of Texas and Tennessee's transfers were a lot more than just 'HS stars.' They had all balled out at their prior schools so the production at the collegiate level was well there.

And in Texas's case, the issue is less about the transfers not meshing and more about just not having their starting PG who is also their best two-way player.



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5137



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/23/22 12:56 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
linkster wrote:
The problem was the general assumption in the media that a team can bring in 2 or 3 transfers and as long as they were HS stars they can fit in seamlessly.

Tenn & Texas should get better as the season goes on but those loses will hurt their seeding.


Most of Texas and Tennessee's transfers were a lot more than just 'HS stars.' They had all balled out at their prior schools so the production at the collegiate level was well there.

And in Texas's case, the issue is less about the transfers not meshing and more about just not having their starting PG who is also their best two-way player.


UConn also played without their starting pg so the 2 teams were playing even. Very Happy

As for ballin out, Saniya Rivers went 1-31 from 3 at SCar yet ESPN saw her helping right away at the 2 for NCSt while Lopez-Senechal was assumed to be a longshot to help simply because she played at a non-P5 conference. Rivers was the No 3 recruit (ESPN). Have the new Vols and the old vols worked out their roles or are there too many chiefs?

It's fine to rank teams subjectively for a preseason poll but it's time to look at the records of those teams and maybe reconsider the tranfers' effect.


Coyotes



Joined: 28 Jan 2018
Posts: 1321



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/23/22 12:28 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

linkster wrote:
undersized_post wrote:
linkster wrote:
The problem was the general assumption in the media that a team can bring in 2 or 3 transfers and as long as they were HS stars they can fit in seamlessly.

Tenn & Texas should get better as the season goes on but those loses will hurt their seeding.


Most of Texas and Tennessee's transfers were a lot more than just 'HS stars.' They had all balled out at their prior schools so the production at the collegiate level was well there.

And in Texas's case, the issue is less about the transfers not meshing and more about just not having their starting PG who is also their best two-way player.


UConn also played without their starting pg so the 2 teams were playing even. Very Happy

As for ballin out, Saniya Rivers went 1-31 from 3 at SCar yet ESPN saw her helping right away at the 2 for NCSt while Lopez-Senechal was assumed to be a longshot to help simply because she played at a non-P5 conference. Rivers was the No 3 recruit (ESPN). Have the new Vols and the old vols worked out their roles or are there too many chiefs?

It's fine to rank teams subjectively for a preseason poll but it's time to look at the records of those teams and maybe reconsider the tranfers' effect.


I know that you're purposely being facetious because why the hell not troll people, but there's a major difference between Rori Harmon and Paige Bueckers in the simple fact that Rori Harmon will actually play this season and make a direct impact on results for the rest of the year once she hits the court.


summertime blues



Joined: 16 Apr 2013
Posts: 7111
Location: Shenandoah Valley


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/23/22 3:32 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

I don't think the pollsters actually ever watch games. I think they just pick their "darlings" and move them up or down as they look at the scores. That's all. Same with the men's game and football. It's a sham.



_________________
Don't take life so serious. It ain't nohows permanent.
It takes 3 years to build a team and 7 to build a program.--Conventional Wisdom
ArtBest23



Joined: 02 Jul 2013
Posts: 14376



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/24/22 4:14 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

As a great example of the "these transfers are going to be superstars and instantaneously launch their new team into Final Four contention" is Viginia Tech.

Tech, led by Kitley and with King and Amoore returning, was going to be a very good team, but all the media could do was drool over how newly-arrived Owusu (Maryland) and Soule (BC) were going to lead them to the top. Both newcomers were even named to the preseason All-ACC team, over for example ND's Westbeld and Citron (who were, BTW, the last 2 ACC Freshman of the Year)

But while it's still early, these two are not setting the world on fire and are currently 5th and 6th on the team in scoring. The media ignored, of course, that Owusu didn't get along with anyone at Maryland, and that on a team led by Kitley, Soule wasn't going to get all those in-the-paint points she got at BC, and can't play a flex forward because she has no outside shot. Predictably, she has made zero 3s this season so far, shooting 0/5.

VaTech may actually contend for the ACC title and even a FF spot, but if they do, it likely will be because of a huge year by Kitley and perhaps King (who is 16/34 from the arc) and not the transfers.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 65578
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 1:12 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

https://apnews.com/hub/ap-top-25-womens-college-basketball-poll?week=4

South Carolina still unanimous

Indiana up to #5

UCLA up to #15

Louisville down to #18

Tennessee and Kansas State out
Gonzaga and Marquette in



_________________
It kills me when people talk about California hedonism. Anybody who talks about California hedonism has never spent a Christmas in Sacramento.
pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 65578
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 2:29 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RPI is starting to look sorta normal

1 Connecticut
2 Creighton
3 Notre Dame
4 Iowa State
5 South Carolina
6 NC State
7 North Carolina
8 UCLA
9 Penn State
10 Utah



_________________
It kills me when people talk about California hedonism. Anybody who talks about California hedonism has never spent a Christmas in Sacramento.
undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2687
Location: indianowa


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 3:58 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Kinda crazy that Ohio State and Indiana originally got big bumps by beating Tennessee while Tenn was still ranked way too high. Now Tennessee has fallen out of the rankings, but voters haven't retroactively devalued (if you will) OSU's and IU's wins over Tenn. To me that seems to be one of the main problems with the AP voters' methodology year after year.



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
myrtle



Joined: 02 May 2008
Posts: 32015



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 4:15 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
Kinda crazy that Ohio State and Indiana originally got big bumps by beating Tennessee while Tenn was still ranked way too high. Now Tennessee has fallen out of the rankings, but voters haven't retroactively devalued (if you will) OSU's and IU's wins over Tenn. To me that seems to be one of the main problems with the AP voters' methodology year after year.


Correction, not OSU but OhSU or tOSU. Their are two other OSU's - OrSU and OkSU


Howee



Joined: 27 Nov 2009
Posts: 15050
Location: OREGON (in my heart)


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 5:13 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RPI has always befuddled me, especially when it comes to utilizing a team's opponents' opponents' winning percentages. Didn't the men's side switch to implenting the NET for determining tourney placements?

Quote:
The RPI lacks theoretical justification from a statistical standpoint. Other ranking systems which include the margin of victory of games played or other statistics in addition to the win/loss results have been shown to be a better predictor of the outcomes of future games.



_________________
Oregon: Go Ducks!
"Inévitablement, les canards voleront"
linkster



Joined: 27 Jul 2012
Posts: 5137



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 6:11 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

Howee wrote:
RPI has always befuddled me, especially when it comes to utilizing a team's opponents' opponents' winning percentages. Didn't the men's side switch to implenting the NET for determining tourney placements?

Quote:
The RPI lacks theoretical justification from a statistical standpoint. Other ranking systems which include the margin of victory of games played or other statistics in addition to the win/loss results have been shown to be a better predictor of the outcomes of future games.


The women use the NET also as their primary measurement tool, but the RPI is still published and it's interesting to look for discrepancies.


pilight



Joined: 23 Sep 2004
Posts: 65578
Location: Where the action is


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/28/22 10:50 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

RPI is more interesting now that teams aren't trying to game it



_________________
It kills me when people talk about California hedonism. Anybody who talks about California hedonism has never spent a Christmas in Sacramento.
undersized_post



Joined: 01 Mar 2021
Posts: 2687
Location: indianowa


Back to top
PostPosted: 11/29/22 9:52 am    ::: Reply Reply with quote

pilight wrote:
RPI is more interesting now that teams aren't trying to game it


Say more about this? Examples, etc. If you're willing



_________________
RebKell's 2021-2022 NCAA Fantasy League Regular Season Champion 🏆
GEF34



Joined: 23 Jul 2008
Posts: 13965



Back to top
PostPosted: 11/29/22 1:44 pm    ::: Reply Reply with quote

undersized_post wrote:
pilight wrote:
RPI is more interesting now that teams aren't trying to game it


Say more about this? Examples, etc. If you're willing


RPI is basically about who is the highest ranked (RPI) team you can beat, it doesn't take into account home/road, score, statistics, so team will try to schedule games against mid majors that will win their conference that they know they can beat, or theoretically they should beat, they will pay guarantee money to get it done, now with the NET road wins and neutral site wins mean more, point margin makes a different, other stats are taken into account. Home wins are for lack of a better phrase the worst type of win you can get, road wins are the best, and if you can get a road win my double figures even better. So they way coaches put together their schedules, teams they reach out to, tournaments they enter bring about a whole new philosophy. Part of the reason you see some bigger names all in the same tournament, something you didn't see as much before, for example UCLA will earn more points so to speak in the NET will a neutral site win over Tennessee than they would hosting Tennessee and winning.


Display posts from previous:   
Post new topic   Reply to topic    RebKell's Junkie Boards Forum Index » NCAA Women's Basketball - General Discussion All times are GMT - 5 Hours
Goto page Previous  1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8  Next
Page 2 of 8

 
Jump to:  
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum


Powered by phpBB 2.0.17 © 2001- 2004 phpBB Group
phpBB Template by Vjacheslav Trushkin