Top 25 talk

[Gregory Sager]

I found the thread and the person, Jay Murray, who bases his ballot on a points system and claims it "preserves objectivity". pretty ridiculous if you ask me:

I neither defend nor criticize this particular poll ballot submitted by Jay Murry, nor do I defend or criticize his methodology. All I'll say on the matter is that Jay Murry is a great play-by-play broadcaster, and I highly recommend watching a Wash U livestream to hear him in action.

As Ryan Scott said in the back and forth "I wouldn't want objectivity in a human poll. I want subjectivity" And we have Massey, D3 Datacast and others to give us rankings based on objectivity using different factors/stats except an eye test. Should we then just have all 25 voters use their own "system" to just make up the ballots. Takes all subjectivity out of the equation, which I would bet that 99.99 percent of voters in any sport do.

How can it "take all subjectivity out of the equation" when using your own system is itself a subjective act? You choose which set of data points you want to incorporate into your system, and the meta choice to do so is by definition subjectivity on your part, not to mention the selection of each of those particular data points you're using. Heck, even the choice to use someone else's algorithm (e.g., Ken Massey's at masseyratings.com) as a guide is subjective. And I hate to break it to you, but Matt Snyder, who does the D3 Datacast podcast with his brother Zac, is a D3hoops.com poll voter as well, and Matt relies quite a bit upon his own system, which is based upon an algorithm he created himself and whose ratings he publishes online, when putting together his ballot. The only real difference between what Matt's doing and what Jay Murry does is that Matt's system is more sophisticated and casts a wider net for data points. (In fairness, I can't address how much either one of them deviates from his own ratings when constructing a ballot; I'm not getting that far into the weeds with how any voter assembles his ballots.)

And you know what? Relying upon a chosen discrete set of data is pretty much what you did in your post, too, since you're making an argument using data such as SOS, victory margin, and last season's tournament -- in other words, your own "system" based upon a discrete data set of your own design -- as your basis for arguing against Jay.

You're not defending subjectivity at all. You're defending your own subjective interpretation of objective data, a process you approach no differently than does Jay Murry or anybody else, aside from the fact that Jay has spelled out his process as a formula. Nothing wrong with making a data-based argument without using a set formula, of course, as you've done here -- but don't mistake your own subjectivity for some sort of universal principle.

As for this:

Should we then just have all 25 voters use their own "system" to just make up the ballots.

... the answer is that is how the D3hoops.com poll has always operated! That's how Pat wants it!

I think voters have different perspectives on that question, honestly.  Pat doesn't dictate what the Top 25 should signify.

Regarding Tufts vs. Babson:

• At Babson
• Tufts' first game; Babson's third
• NESCAC schools are not allowed to have outside scrimmages

A voter might react in any of a number of ways to that result.

It's all data that some of our 25 voters might deem worthy of consideration.

Looks like you may be looking for us to sort teams by wins and losses -- if so, you might want to look at a standings page.

If you're looking for a poll whose voters are locked into a standardized method of ballot construction (e.g., representing each of what used to be the eight regions in each eight-slot tier of your ballot, which is the old mandated ballot-construction formula the ABCA used in its polls), you're in the wrong place. Pat's poll gives license to the 25 voters to put together their ballots as they see fit, and Jay Murry's ballot is thus just as valid as Ryan Scott's, or Matt Snyder's, or Dave McHugh's, or anybody else's -- including Pat's own ballot.

[D3BBALL]

I found the thread and the person, Jay Murray, who bases his ballot on a points system and claims it "preserves objectivity". pretty ridiculous if you ask me:

I neither defend nor criticize this particular poll ballot submitted by Jay Murry, nor do I defend or criticize his methodology. All I'll say on the matter is that Jay Murry is a great play-by-play broadcaster, and I highly recommend watching a Wash U livestream to hear him in action.

As Ryan Scott said in the back and forth "I wouldn't want objectivity in a human poll. I want subjectivity" And we have Massey, D3 Datacast and others to give us rankings based on objectivity using different factors/stats except an eye test. Should we then just have all 25 voters use their own "system" to just make up the ballots. Takes all subjectivity out of the equation, which I would bet that 99.99 percent of voters in any sport do.

How can it "take all subjectivity out of the equation" when using your own system is itself a subjective act? You choose which set of data points you want to incorporate into your system, and the meta choice to do so is by definition subjectivity on your part, not to mention the selection of each of those particular data points you're using. Heck, even the choice to use someone else's algorithm (e.g., Ken Massey's at masseyratings.com) as a guide is subjective. And I hate to break it to you, but Matt Snyder, who does the D3 Datacast podcast with his brother Zac, is a D3hoops.com poll voter as well, and Matt relies quite a bit upon his own system, which is based upon an algorithm he created himself and whose ratings he publishes online, when putting together his ballot. The only real difference between what Matt's doing and what Jay Murry does is that Matt's system is more sophisticated and casts a wider net for data points. (In fairness, I can't address how much either one of them deviates from his own ratings when constructing a ballot; I'm not getting that far into the weeds with how any voter assembles his ballots.)

And you know what? Relying upon a chosen discrete set of data is pretty much what you did in your post, too, since you're making an argument using data such as SOS, victory margin, and last season's tournament -- in other words, your own "system" based upon a discrete data set of your own design -- as your basis for aruging against Jay.

You're not defending subjectivity at all. You're defending your own subjective interpretation of objective data, a process you approach no differently than does Jay Murry or anybody else, aside from the fact that Jay has spelled out his process as a formula. Nothing wrong with making a data-based argument without using a set formula, of course, as you've done here -- but don't mistake your own subjectivity for some sort of universal principle.

As for this:

Should we then just have all 25 voters use their own "system" to just make up the ballots.

... the answer is that is how the D3hoops.com poll has always operated! That's how Pat wants it!

I think voters have different perspectives on that question, honestly.  Pat doesn't dictate what the Top 25 should signify.

Regarding Tufts vs. Babson:

• At Babson
• Tufts' first game; Babson's third
• NESCAC schools are not allowed to have outside scrimmages

A voter might react in any of a number of ways to that result.

It's all data that some of our 25 voters might deem worthy of consideration.

Looks like you may be looking for us to sort teams by wins and losses -- if so, you might want to look at a standings page.

If you're looking for a poll whose voters are locked into a standardized method of ballot construction (e.g., representing each of the eight regions in each eight-slot tier of your ballot, which is the old mandated ballot-construction formula the ABCA used in its polls), you're in the wrong place. Pat's poll gives license to the 25 voters to put together their ballots as they see fit, and Jay Murry's ballot is thus just as valid as Ryan Scott's, or Matt Snyder's, or Dave McHugh's, or anybody else's -- including Pat's own ballot.

I have listened to the games he does and he does a very good job.

I'm not a voter but if Jay or anyone else just uses limited stats/figures and a fixed formula it doesn't always work and I bet not many if any others use just a formula to come up with their top 25. Especially a limited formula.
If I was a voter I would never have taken Emory out of my top 5 with their one loss. To me they are that good based on watching them and stats. 1 loss doesn't necessarily mean moving a team down as 1 win doesn't mean moving a team up.
Yes you have to look at some set of stats/facts but that's not the only factor. There is the eye test injuries, etc. I have listened to Matt and yes he does use stats/formula etc, but he also talks about what he sees and his feel.
I brought up all those other factors and most would have zero bearing on many teams in the top 25 because they don't have that history, so for most of those teams it would be impossible to rate them the same way or be "fair" to them. So would have to use the eye test, or other factors as who they played home and away, results, winning/losing streaks, healthy players etc.
There is zero subjectivity in Jay's voting zero. No one can say otherwise. And it's his right to do as he wants, just as you say.

I would not just use a formula, just as Matt doesn't just use a formula.

On their own system I was talking about formula. I doubt anyone else is using a formula with zero subjectivity. As good as Massey or d3 datacast is on their ranking they are not perfect but they are way more balance than Jay's.

Trinity won I think 5 games since the last poll and Jay's formula moves them down 4 spots. Sorry but that is ridiculous. He had every right to do it his way, but IMO and many others it's not close to being accurate. And I but some voters have biases against teams and or leagues, so maybe they have some teams higher or lower than most others. But I bet you would be hard pressed to find any of them that  moved a team down 4 spots after winning and being undefeated 1/3 into the season. My point was if it is just going to be based on formulas, come up with 25 different sets of formulas and run the poll that way. Would be no fun because there would be no subjectivity and 1 formula could favor another team and so forth. To me having 25 people vote, you are getting a wide range of opinions based on different view points, watching different teams, being from different parts of the country etc. Yes they all use facts/ stats, as they can't watch every team, but most are not just using a limited, imo, formula.

100% Agree on babson tufts example. But using Jays formula there is zero subjectivity or a way to react to that. I think you make my case here, well maybe lol.

I agree they can put together their ballots anyway they want but that doesn't mean I or others agree and doesn't make Jay's valid or invalid just very inaccurate in this case. He has RM #1 in his formula, so for RM it works as it does for others. But it is so far off on Trinity. I would bet no other formula moves Trinity down including Massey and datacast. Again when have you ever seen a voter move a team down from #2 in an earlier poll they did, all the way down to number 9 with zero losses and no other issues on the team like significant injuries, suspensions coaching issues etc.
Fun to disagree on something so unimportant.

[Pat Coleman]

He does have every right to do it his way.

I'm glad Jay posted his ballot publicly because it's such an outlier that it was bound to lead to questions.

It's not how I would create my ballot.

I think No. 9 is many spots too low for Trinity. Hopefully either Jay's ballot will adjust or Trinity will lose some games or win whatever kind of games are needed for Jay to rank them higher.

[GusD]

Do Top 25 voters serve for a specified term length or is it like the Supreme Court where your appointment is for life? Might it not be worthwhile to bring in fresh blood/new opinions periodically?

[Gregory Sager]

There is zero subjectivity in Jay's voting zero. No one can say otherwise.

I'm saying otherwise, because it is subjective. It's his choice to assemble his ballot any way that he likes, and that alone -- the fact that he chooses to do it that way using that formula he's devised, that no one can force him to do it differently, and that he's free to change his way of filling out his ballot at his discretion -- makes it subjective.

There is nothing in this world more subjective than each of the endless possibilities that are opened up to someone by free will. "Two plus two equals four" is objective; it's a teleological statement that admits no other options that are correct. "Two plus x equals four" is objective as well, because you're limited to one correct answer in solving for x. "Two plus x equals y" is subjective, because you can't force an objective conclusion when two or more variables whose values you get to choose have expanded an entire range of possibilities.

Would be no fun because there would be no subjectivity

But using Jays formula there is zero subjectivity or a way to react to that.

Fun to disagree on something so unimportant.

Agreed.

[D3BBALL]

Do Top 25 voters serve for a specified term length or is it like the Supreme Court where your appointment is for life? Might it not be worthwhile to bring in fresh blood/new opinions periodically?

Lol

[Pat Coleman]

Might it not be worthwhile to bring in fresh blood/new opinions periodically?

Is it your assumption that we don't do this already?

[KnightSlappy]

As a voter, I like to use computer systems (Massey, mine, Jacob Schauer) for two big reasons: (1) to make sure I'm not missing any team I should be looking at and (2) construct a loose order or tier list of teams. From there I will inject my own opinion and finalize a list of teams of which I feel fairly comfortable that #1 would beat #2 would beat #3 would beat #25 would beat #26 (some majority of the time).

[Gregory Sager]

I don't think I've ever seen a link to Jacob Schauer's ratings. Does he make them public, Matt? If so, could you post a link here?

[KnightSlappy]

I don't think I've ever seen a link to Jacob Schauer's ratings. Does he make them public, Matt? If so, could you post a link here?

Yes! He has posted it on his Twitter page: https://schauerstats.github.io/

[Gregory Sager]

Thx!

[GusD]

Might it not be worthwhile to bring in fresh blood/new opinions periodically?

Is it your assumption that we don't do this already?

I am not assuming anything. I don't know if it's done or not. But I'm interested so that's why I asked. I'm a bit surprised my simple question elicited another question rather than a simple yes or no answer. 🤗

[Pat Coleman]

Might it not be worthwhile to bring in fresh blood/new opinions periodically?

Is it your assumption that we don't do this already?

I am not assuming anything. I don't know if it's done or not. But I'm interested so that's why I asked. I'm a bit surprised my simple question elicited another question rather than a simple yes or no answer. 🤗

The poll has been going since November of 1998. Of course voting positions change over. The way you asked the question, however, was absolutely from an assumption that we don't, so you might want to think about how you use words when asking in the future!

[Stretch4]

With Macon and UWL going down last night, maybe Jay Murray will find a way to move Trinity up to 7 or 8 on his ballot next week. 

[Gregory Sager]

With Macon and UWL going down last night, maybe Jay Murray will find a way to move Trinity up to 7 or 8 on his ballot next week. 

It's "Murry", not "Murray".

(I'm sure that Jay has spent his entire life correcting people on the spelling of his name, so I'm happy to step in and do it for him for a change. )