Big Ten Power Rankings

[leroyjenkins]

@ MSU
@ Marquette
@ Minnesota
Minnesota
Marquette
@ Northwestern
@ Iowa
1 of Texas and Purdue

They played MU in Milwaukee & Madison this year?

 

[gracelhink]

Are people noticing how Wisconsin is losing games? It's unbelievable. They've squandered late 2nd half leads in all but about 3 of their losses this season (@ Purdue, UCONN, and @ Illinois). I mean if they had any semblance of killer instinct they'd have about 5 losses this season and looking at a 3 seed. Instead they're going to be nail biting, watching the selection show, unless they at least pull off an impressive win in the BTT.
games Bucky absolutely should have won:

@ MSU
@ Marquette
@ Minnesota
Minnesota
Marquette
@ Northwestern
@ Iowa
1 of Texas and Purdue

That would have made for a pretty impressive resume.

I feel for you Bernini, Romeo Crennel, John Cooper, and Lenny Wilkens were masters at projecting the "should have been victories" to restore my hopes and fan allegiance for teams after tough losses.
Three points:
1. I am always a sucker for this "if only, could have done this, almost there" optimistic line of thinking.
2. Yes, Wisky has had some tough losses that shoulda coulda been wins, OTOH those are balanced and matched by some wins which shoulda coulda been losses

Iona,
Virginia Tech,
Iowa State,
PSU and
tOSU

3. The 2002 tOSU national championship team reminded me that this analogy and retrospection works both ways.
The defining mark of a truly special team is traced to winning games they should have lost, not the other way around.

 

[buckeyesin07]

Are people noticing how Wisconsin is losing games? It's unbelievable. They've squandered late 2nd half leads in all but about 3 of their losses this season (@ Purdue, UCONN, and @ Illinois). I mean if they had any semblance of killer instinct they'd have about 5 losses this season and looking at a 3 seed. Instead they're going to be nail biting, watching the selection show, unless they at least pull off an impressive win in the BTT. I'll never be able to support a strategy of sitting on a lead with which you can't run out the clock, for as long as I live. But yet, that's what they've been doing. Lateral passes 35 feet away from the basket and dribbling the air out of the basketball.

games Bucky absolutely should have won:

@ MSU
@ Marquette
@ Minnesota
Minnesota
Marquette
@ Northwestern
@ Iowa
1 of Texas and Purdue

That would have made for a pretty impressive resume.

So you want to count as wins the close losses UW has had this year? I'm sure you want to ignore UW's close wins, however, and just keep acting like UW deserved to win those games, and that UW's opponents couldn't make the same argument you're making. UW has close wins against:

Long Beach St.
Iona
Va. Tech
Idaho St.
Penn St.
Ohio State
UM

Instead of 18-11, you may see a team that could very easily be 26-3. But I see a team that could very easily be 11-18.

My point is that you can't use the "if the ball had only bounced our way one or two more times" when it comes to your close losses, while denying your opponents the same argument in your close wins.

UW is a middle of the road (#4-#9 out of 11) Big Ten team this year. Sorry.

 

[LitlBuck]

Are people noticing how Wisconsin is losing games? It's unbelievable.

That would have made for a pretty impressive resume.

I noticed how they lost to Minnesota last night that should really help their r?sum?:!

 

[MaxBuck]

Are people noticing how Wisconsin is losing games? It's unbelievable.

I guess I'll add my comments to all those others who are bashing your couldashouldawoulda remarks.

Look, the middle of the pack in the Big 11 this season is a confusing clusterfuck. Penn State and Northwestern are, IMO, nowhere near as good as their league records indicate them to be. Wisconsin, Ohio State and Minnesota are pretty indistinguishable from one another, also IMO, and they're all a quantum step less competent than Illinois, which is itself well below Purdue, which is well below Sparty. But others can disagree and have perfectly logical reasons for doing so.

Bottom line is that if I were on the committee, Bucky would be NIT-bound this year; they're no better than the 2007-08 edition Buckeye team, and deserve the same outcome. "You are what your record says you are." Your record says you've lost 11 games.

 

[LitlBuck]

I don't know where to put this and I am too lazy to do the research but what happens if 3-4 teams finished tied for the fourth and fifth spots at the end of the season. How will the seething work for the Big 10 tournament I know that it cannot be head to head because certain teams have not played other teams twice. Maybe record against common opponents but that doesn't make any sense

 

[Bernini]

You just described most of the league.

Maybe other teams in the league have struggled in close games, but it's all relative. Ken Pomeroy tracks luck factor which measures how good a team's record is compared to their point differential and these are the rankings among Big Ten teams.

1. Michigan St.
2. Penn State
3. Minnesota
4. Ohio St.
5. Illinois
6. Michigan
7. Northwestern
8. Indiana
9. Purdue
10. Wisconsin
11. Iowa

And Iowa is more of that game opponent who just doesn't have quite enough firepower to win, making scores closer than they actually are. Wisconsin actually is in position to win and are blowing leads. In fact, Iowa was one of the teams who they blew a lead against. They've had the biggest problem closing games of anyone in the league. I know there are some Packers' fans here. For context, it's of the magnitude of their issues blowing leads this season.

However, I don't agree with Pomeroy that Wisconsin or anybody that losing close games that frequently boils down to luck. It's their idiotic strategy of sitting on even the most modest leagues and lack of players with killer instinct. The upper classmen like Krabbenhoft, Landry, and Bohannon just don't have that mentality. Hughes possesses some killer instinct, but he can't do everything by himself, and when the strategy isn't giving him optimum opportunity to succeed, it's going to limit his and his team's successes.

I have no problem with someone making the argument that Wisconsin shouldn't make the NCAA's unless they pick up an impressive win on a neutral court in the BTT. As frustrating as it is that the Badgers should have a lot more of an impressive resume, they don't. Much like the case I made about OSU not deserving an invite last season, they don't have a win over a sure tourney team in a tourney or tougher situation.

 

[Bernini]

So you want to count as wins the close losses UW has had this year? I'm sure you want to ignore UW's close wins, however, and just keep acting like UW deserved to win those games, and that UW's opponents couldn't make the same argument you're making. UW has close wins against:

Long Beach St.
Iona
Va. Tech
Idaho St.
Penn St.
Ohio State
UM

Instead of 18-11, you may see a team that could very easily be 26-3. But I see a team that could very easily be 11-18.

My point is that you can't use the "if the ball had only bounced our way one or two more times" when it comes to your close losses, while denying your opponents the same argument in your close wins.

UW is a middle of the road (#4-#9 out of 11) Big Ten team this year. Sorry.

It shows your incredible bias pointing out Wisconsin could have lost many of the games you listed. They led the majority of all those games but maybe Iona. They maybe could have but they certainly shouldn't have lost any of those games but maybe Iona. I mean they dominated Va Tech but they closed the gap at the very end on a barrage of 3's. But did they ever even lead at any point?

It's not like UW should be expected to blow everyone out. That's not even their style. Everyone needs to win some relatively close games. It's not like I pointed out how Wisconsin should have won games they just hung around in like against Illinois. All the games I listed the Badgers led for most of the game and/or held significant leads late.

 

[MaxBuck]

...I don't agree with Pomeroy that Wisconsin or anybody that losing close games that frequently boils down to luck...

Actually, the metric Pomeroy calls "luck" is somewhat misunderstood. My favorite hoop blogger John Gasaway has explained it a little bit:

What's your take on Pomeroy's "Luck" statistic? Is it just a fudge factor for things that aren't measured, or is it truly just the proverbial "way the ball bounces"?

The aforementioned Pomeroy would of course be the first to note that it's really Bill James's stat, honed and repurposed for our own vastly superior sport. Anyway, the problem here is with the English language, not with the stat. "Luck" is just too pejorative. When I was a kid and I'd make a good play on my baseball team, my older brother was always quick to dismiss it as pure luck. Drove me crazy, which of course was precisely the point.

Take Penn State. (Please--har!) Last year the Nittany Lions had what very well might have been the single "luckiest" conference season of any major-conference team over the past three years. PSU was outscored by their conference opponents by 0.14 points per possession. Historically speaking, teams that do that over an 18-game schedule will typically finish 3-15 or perhaps 2-16. Penn State went 7-11. Luck, right?

It's just not the best word. The Nits weren't making half-court bank shots the whole year--nor, for that matter, were they involved in a lot of close games. It's just that when they played good teams they were very soundly beaten on more than one occasion; when they played bad teams, conversely, they usually won but by a much smaller margin. Luck would be one way of putting it. Another would be simply to say they had an extremely funky point distribution.

 

[gracelhink]

I don't know where to put this and I am too lazy to do the research but what happens if 3-4 teams finished tied for the fourth and fifth spots at the end of the season. How will the seething work for the Big 10 tournament I know that it cannot be head to head because certain teams have not played other teams twice. Maybe record against common opponents but that doesn't make any sense

Don't know about your sense of humor but the seeding in the B10/11 tourney can leave some teams seething. This is the formula for seeding and breaking ties that will be used for this year's tourney.

http://bigten.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/spec-rel/100606aae.html
http://www.bigtennetwork.com/Championships/Big-Ten-Basketball-Tiebreaker.asp

<H3>2009 Big Ten Men's Basketball Tournament

Dec. 4, 2008

Section 30. Seeding Participants

I. Teams shall be seeded No. 1 through No. 11 in the tournament bracket based on the final regular-season Conference standings.

II. A team's seed shall correspond to its regular-season finish (i.e., the champion shall be the No. 1 seed, the runner-up the No. 2 seed, etc.).

III. Teams that finished Nos. 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5 in the regular-season shall receive a "bye" on the first day.

IV. In case of a tie for any place finish in the regular-season standings, the following tie-breaking procedure shall be followed in order to seed teams in the tournament bracket:

A. Two-team tie:

1. Results of head-to-head competition during the regular-season.

2. Each team's record vs. the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings (or in the case of a tie for the championship, the next highest position in the regular-season standings), continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams.

b. When comparing records against a single team or a group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).

3. Won-loss percentage of all Division I opponents.

4. Coin toss conducted by the Commissioner or designee.

B. Multiple team tie:

1. Results of head-to-head competition during the regular-season. a. When comparing records against the tied teams, the team with the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).

b. After the top team among the tied teams is determined, the second team is ranked by its record among the original tied teams, not the head-to-head record vs. the remaining team(s).

2. If the remaining teams are still tied, then each tied team's record shall be compared to the team occupying the highest position in the final regular-season standings, continuing down through the standings until one team gains an advantage.

a. When arriving at another pair of tied teams while comparing records, use each team's record against the collective tied teams as a group (prior to their own tie-breaking procedures), rather than the performance against the individual tied teams.

b. When comparing records against a single team or group of teams, the higher winning percentage shall prevail, even if the number of games played against the team or group are unequal (i.e., 2-0 is better than 3-1, but 2-0 is not better than 1-0).

3. Won-loss percentage of Division I opponents.

4. Coin toss conducted by Commissioner or designee.

</H3>

 

[buckeyesin07]

It shows your incredible bias pointing out Wisconsin could have lost many of the games you listed.

You're whining that 18-11 UW "could very easily be 26-3" and I'm the biased one?

Pot, meet Kettle.

 

[jwinslow]

Maybe other teams in the league have struggled in close games, but it's all relative. Ken Pomeroy tracks luck factor which measures how good a team's record is compared to their point differential and these are the rankings among Big Ten teams.

The point is much of the b10 has a lot of 'yeah but' excuses they could use.

NW lost 3 straight. 2 were tied at the end, 1 was an epic collapse vs Ill.
Before that they lost 5 of 6, 3 of which were tied or close at the end.

IU has lost an unbelievable amount of close games.

OSU lost 3 straight, 1 at the buzzer, the other two very close at the end.

Purdue has 8 losses. 3 in OT, 2 others were lost very late.

 

[LitlBuck]

Don't know about your sense of humor but the seeding in the B10/11 tourney can leave some teams seething. This is the formula for seeding and breaking ties that will be used for this year's tourney.


Big Ten Basketball Tiebreaker - Big Ten Network
</H3>

I am not a corporate lawyer and try to figure out that tiebreaker is hurting my head. The best I can figure is the following:

Well, Penn State has Illinois and Iowa left so I will assume that they go 1/1 and Minnesota has Michigan left at home so I will assume that they win that game. Assuming that Ohio State beats Northwestern all three of these teams will be tied at 10-8 and it looks like both Penn State and Minnesota will be seeded Above Ohio State so I am seething.:!

 

[gracelhink]

I am not a corporate lawyer and try to figure out that tiebreaker is hurting my head. The best I can figure is the following:

Well, Penn State has Illinois and Iowa left so I will assume that they go 1/1 and Minnesota has Michigan left at home so I will assume that they win that game. Assuming that Ohio State beats Northwestern all three of these teams will be tied at 10-8 and it looks like both Penn State and Minnesota will be seeded Above Ohio State so I am seething.

If Wisconsin beats Indiana, 4 teams will finish at 10-8 by your scenario,
according to my quick calculations Wisky and Minny will hold the tie breaking advantage and receive the 4 and 5 seeds respectively.
This will cause tOSU to play on Thursday as a #6 seed play in game.
Head to head among the 4 tied opponents.
Minnesota is 4-2
Wisconsin is 4-3.
tOsu is 2-2
and Psu is 1-4.

 

[LitlBuck]

If Wisconsin beats Indiana, 4 teams will finish at 10-8 by your scenario,
according to my quick calculations Wisky and Minny will hold the tie breaking advantage and receive the 4 and 5 seeds respectively.
This will cause tOSU to play on Thursday as a #6 seed play in game.
Head to head among the 4 tied opponents.
Minnesota is 4-2
Wisconsin is 4-3.
tOsu is 2-2
and Psu is 1-4.

That would mean Indiana again:( so I hope that Minnesota or (Wisconsin loses a close one) this weekend.