BB: USAC: USA South Athletic Conference

Started by narch, December 30, 2005, 10:58:27 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.

narch

sos is the issue, but it's also that the regional ranking committee doesn't dig deep enough and relies too much on the raw sos number

i'll post records vs. teams with winning records for the regionally ranked teams...i can tell you that the monarchs have 14 wins this season vs. teams with a winning record vs. 5 losses (.737) and i don't think most of the other regionally ranked teams can say that (i've got to do some more research) - the owp and oowp for the monarchs is hurt by playing a lot of games vs. sub .500 teams, but they also played a lot of games (19) vs. teams over .500 and won over 73% of them - millsaps, for one, has a lower regional (.735) and overall (.714) winning % than mu does against above .500 teams - rhodes has a .711 overall and regional win %

if you compare mu to just rhodes and millsaps, you'll see that their overall winning %, regional winning % and winning % vs. teams above .500 are all highest among those three teams...just sayin'

baseballfever

Thanks for the reply.  I'll dig deeper and try to get an understanding of the formulas

Bishopleftiesdad

It is not really formula's making the picks, it is humans. There are criteria they are supposed to follow, primary and secondary. But sometimes it seems like it is the same teams all the time. Best way is to win your conference and get the Pool A bid. Then do well in regionals.

narch

#4413
Quote from: Bishopleftiesdad on April 24, 2015, 04:00:05 PM
It is not really formula's making the picks, it is humans. There are criteria they are supposed to follow, primary and secondary. But sometimes it seems like it is the same teams all the time. Best way is to win your conference and get the Pool A bid. Then do well in regionals.
my contention is that i think the humans rely too heavily on the formulas, though...it is almost mathematically impossible for a usasac team to have a sos rating too much higher than .500, because 3/4ths (30) of their games are played against conference teams, and for every conference opponent win, there is a conference opponent loss - with just 10 ooc games, there just isn't a chance for a lot of movement beyond .500 in owp and oowp - when the evaluators look at that sos ranking in the 220 range, they probably think that the schedule is weak, but the reality is that they played as many games against opponents with winning records (19) as almost any regionally ranked team and have more wins (14) vs. teams with a winning record than any of the regionally ranked teams except rhodes (who also has 14)

here are records vs. teams with winning records for mu, along with all of the ranked teams except frostburg and birmingham southern (there isn't much debate that they are the two best in the region, in my mind)

emory: 13-11, .542 vs. opponents with winning records
rhodes: 14-8, .636 vs. opponents with winning records
millsaps:9-8, .529 vs. opponents with winning records
salisbury: 8-4, .667 vs. opponents with winning records
methodist: 14-5, .737 vs. opponents with winning records

so the monarchs have a higher regional winning % (.806) than all except salisbury and have the most wins against teams with a winning record as well as the highest winning % against teams with winning records, yet they are not ranked - the only metric that the monarchs don't lead these teams in is sos...it's hard to argue that the sos formula isn't what is hurting mu in the regional rankings

Bishopleftiesdad

Narch, I agree with you my comment was to baseball fever. My sons team is in a similar boat as MU. But our SOS is at 150's because we scheduled historically good teams, and those teams bombed, this year. Our record against top 25 teams though is very good.
Our conference schedules 2 DH every weekend. It is icredibly hard to sweep a team 4 games on two days. So you get some losses to average teams. Combine that with a middling SOS, and your in trouble.

narch

the monarchs wrapped up the aq with a sweep of lagrange today and improve to 31-8 on the season - johnson and howard both had complete games as the monarchs won 5-3 and 4-0 - mu will finish off the regular season with one more vs. lagrange tomorrow and then it's a matter of waiting for the regional pairings - go monarchs!

baseballfever

Johnson and Howard pitched 2 great games today. With shortstop injured,  backup Adam Gunn stepped in and played a great game as well. With inman on the mound tomorrow hopefully MU can get the sweep. Conference Champions. Go Monarchs.

narch

the monarchs ride into the playoffs on another nice run (8 straight and 23 of 24), as inman pitches a stellar 6 innings giving up 3 hits, 1 walk, 0 er and striking out 4 - the health of inman has been huge and he's pitched very well down the stretch - 3 quality starters and good arms coming out of the 'pen matched with an offense that is patient and will make all of the little plays - fun team to watch and follow this year and they should make for a difficult matchup for anyone in the regionals - 32-8 on the season with 4 one-run losses...31-7 vs. d3 competition (mcmurry...29-11...is still provisional)

baseballfever

Yes looking forward to the regionals. Exciting baseball at MU.

narch

mu moves to #12 in the latest d3baseball.com poll...i'm a little surprised, but i'll take it :)

narch

i know it only impacts seeding in the regional tournament for the monarchs, but i'm still perplexed by the regional rankings - here are the updated numbers

3. emory: .684 d3 win %, .642 (18-10) vs. opp with winning record
4. rhodes: .744 d3 win %,  .680 (17-8) vs. opp with winning record
5. millsaps: .710 d3 win%, .545 (12-10) vs. opp with winning record
6. salisbury: .867 d3 win %, .733 (11-4) vs. opp with winning record

mu: .820 d3 win %, .737 (14-5) vs. opp with winning record

among this group, the monarchs have the 2nd highest win % and the highest win % vs. teams with a winning record (in a similar number of games vs. teams with winning records), but they aren't ranked?

emory at #3 and millsaps at #5 are particularly vexing - mu and emory split 2 games in the season and vs. common opponents emory was 8-3 (.727) and mu was 10-2 (.833) - millsaps is just above .500 vs. good teams, while mu won at a .737 clip - i can't comprehend why either of these two are ranked above mu if the committee is paying attention to the little things and not just looking at numbers

Bishopleftiesdad

I understand your frustration. My sons team is in a similar situation. Win % vs teams with a winning % is not one of the criteria.

http://www.d3baseball.com/interactive/faq/ncaaTournament

Take a look at point 5

The primary criteria emphasize regional competition (all contests leading up to NCAA championships); all criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order).
• Win-loss percentage against Division III opponents.
• Strength-of-schedule (only contests versus regional competition).
    - Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OWP).
    - Opponents' Opponents' Average Winning Percentage (OOWP).
• In-region head-to-head competition.
• In-region results versus common regional opponents.
In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.
• Ranked opponents are defined as those teams ranked at any time of the rankings/ selection process.
• Conference postseason contests are included.
• Contests versus provisional and reclassifying members in their third and fourth years shall count in the primary criteria. Provisional and reclassifying members shall remain ineligible for rankings and selection.

If the evaluation of the primary criteria does not result in a decision, the secondary criteria will be reviewed. All the criteria listed will be evaluated (not listed in priority order). The secondary criteria introduce results against out-of-region Division III and all other opponents including those contests versus opponents from other classifications (i.e., provisionals, NAIA, NCAA Divisions I and II).
• Out-of-region head-to-head competition.
• Overall Division III win-loss percentage.
• Results versus common non Division III opponents.
• Results versus all Division III ranked teams.
• Overall win-loss percentage.
• Results versus all common opponents.
• Overall DIII Strength of Schedule.
Additionally, input is provided by regional advisory committees for consideration by the men's baseball committee. In order to be considered for selection for Pools B or C, an institution must play at least 50 percent of its competition against Division III in-region opponents. Coaches' polls and/or any other outside polls or rankings are not used as a selection criterion by the men's baseball committee for selection purposes.

The one that gets me is the one in bold above. It must be too low on the totem pole to make up for strength of schedule.

narch

Quote from: Bishopleftiesdad on May 05, 2015, 03:01:58 PM
Win % vs teams with a winning % is not one of the criteria.
i realize this isn't part of the official criteria, but my suggestion is that the committee should look beyond sos, especially when you have a team, like methodist, that plays 75% of it's games against conference opponents and each win is offset by a loss - if you looked solely at sos, you'd think mu had played A LOT fewer games against teams with winning records, but the reality isn't so

Quote from: Bishopleftiesdad on May 05, 2015, 03:01:58 PM
In-region results versus regionally ranked teams.

The one that gets me is the one in bold above. It must be too low on the totem pole to make up for strength of schedule.
...and strength of schedule is apparently one of the primary criteria for regional rankings, so it's a circular equation...you have to have a high sos to get ranked - in my opinion, millsaps should not have been regionally ranked to begin with, but because they are, teams like emory, bsu and rhodes all get a "plus" in that column

being .500 (1-1) vs. regionally ranked teams (as mu is) isn't better than being .363 (4-7) (millsaps) vs. regionally ranked teams in the eyes of the committee -  it will be interesting to see if salisbury jumps millsaps in the next rankings - they've picked up wins vs. washington college and johns hopkins...who were both regionally ranked at some point...since the last rankings

the monarchs are likely going to have to win the regional as a 6 seed....every team that makes this regional is going to be really good, so the seed is just a number...and it can happen if the pitching holds up

Bishopleftiesdad

We were discussing this on the NCAC board as well. There is no particular order to the Primary criteria, except how the individual voters personally rank them. So it depends on the voter. I do think most voters hold SOS in to high of a regard.

narch

so we have the regionals set, and the monarchs are indeed a #6 seed, facing top seed rhodes - i wasn't surprised to see frostburg and salisbury go to another regional location because of proximity, but i didn't even think to see if marietta was within 500 miles (it's 495, per google maps), and i never considered pacific lutheran as an option - there are some really good baseball programs and traditions in this regional...the winner will earn their spot in the d3 world series, that's for sure

rhodes leads the country in team era (2.42), but the monarchs aren't far behind at #12 nationally and 2.89 era...and the lynx have given up just 2 fewer runs on the season than the monarchs (139 vs. 141) and the two teams have an identical 1.31 WHIP (walks and hits/inning pitched) - rhodes is giving up about 7.6 hits/game while monarch pitching gives up around 8.6 hits/game

the rhodes pitchers will walk some guys (165 in 356 innings) and the monarchs will take a walk (14th nationally with 182 walks in 40 games) - mu is also top 15 nationally in runs and runs per game and top 35 nationally in hits, hits/game and batting average

in fact, the monarchs are the only team in this regional ranked that highly in both offensive and pitching statistics - i suspect rhodes will throw adam putnam in the opener...he will be a tall task (literally and figuratively) for the monarchs...

let's go Monarchs!