RPI and the Final Four

General NCS Basketball Stat of the Day61

To me, it was always intuitively obvious that a team’s record versus the RPI Top-50 was a key stat to use when evaluating a team or when evaluating a coach over time. Anyone can beat the Stetsons of the world (current RPI – 326), but it takes something more to beat good teams. However, some people claim that my use of this stat is misleading. So, let’s look a little closer at RPI rankings and won/loss records against the RPI Top-50.

From the NCAA, I have the Final Four teams from 1999 through 2005. From Ken Pomeroy’s site, I have the final RPI for each team and their record versus the RPI top-50. Let’s see if we can find any correlation:

 

1999

RPI

Record vs
Top 50

Champion

Connecticut

3

10-2

Runner-Up

Duke

1

16-0

 

Michigan St.

2

12-4

 

Ohio St.

20

9-3

 

 

 

 

 

2000

 

 

Champion

Michigan St.

13

10-6

Runner-Up

Florida

18

6-7

 

North Carolina

41

3-8

 

Wisconsin

32

8-8

 

 

 

 

 

2001

 

 

Champion

Duke

1

15-4

Runner-Up

Arizona

8

9-4

 

Maryland

22

7-8

 

Michigan St.

3

10-4

 

 

 

 

 

2002

 

 

Champion

Maryland

2

9-3

Runner-Up

Indiana

13

7-7

 

Kansas

1

7-1

 

Oklahoma

5

7-4

 

 

 

 

 

2003

 

 

Champion

Syracuse

9

8-4

Runner-Up

Kansas

6

7-6

 

Marquette

10

5-3

 

Texas

4

8-6

 

 

 

 

 

2004

 

 

Champion

Connecticut

5

10-6

Runner-Up

Georgia
Tech

16

8-7

 

Duke

1

10-4

 

Oklahoma St.

6

8-2

 

 

 

 

 

2005

 

 

Champion

North Carolina

6

6-3

Runner-Up

Illinois

2

11-0

 

Michigan St.

21

6-4

 

Louisville

12

7-2

Observations from these seven years:

– 18 of the 28 Final Four teams were ranked in the RPI Top-10 (64%).
– 26 of the 28 Final Four teams were ranked in the RPI Top-25 (93%).
– 10 of the 14 teams in the championship game were ranked in the RPI Top-10 (71%).
– All 14 teams in the championship game were ranked in the RPI Top-25.
– All seven NCAA champions had winning records versus the RPI Top-50.
– Only 3 Final Four teams had losing records versus the RPI Top-50.
– The worse rated team to make the Final Four was UNC in 2000 with a RPI ranking of 41 and a 3-8 record against teams in the Top-50.
– The worse rated team to make the championship game was Florida in 2000 with a RPI ranking of 18 and a 6-7 record against teams in the Top-50. This was the only time that a team appeared in the championship game with a losing record versus the RPI Top-50.

Conclusions
Good teams (by any measure you want to use) lose early in the NCAA tournament every year. However, bubble teams and those with poor records against the Top-50 do not make the Final Four either. I think that we remember the big upsets, but forget that the bracket-busters usually lose rather quickly after their big win.

The RPI is not the end-all and be-all of college basketball statistics. It may not even be the best computer formula to use when ranking teams. However, the RPI calculation is far from useless. It is no surprise to me that teams that do well in the Big Dance also have a good record against teams in the RPI Top-50. Doing well in the NCAA tournament is a function of good coaching and good players…not lucky bounces, getting “hotâ€? at the right time, or by getting breaks from the refs.

The idea that any team in the NCAA tournament can “get hot� at the right time and make the Final Four is a fairy tale just like Cinderella. Somehow, too many people forget that Cinderella stumbled and fell at midnight…just like every March when Cinderella teams stumble and fall right after their big entrance. Those addicted to predicting brackets might want to keep all of this in mind next March.

About VaWolf82

Engineer living in Central Va. and senior curmudgeon amongst SFN authors One wife, two kids, one dog, four vehicles on insurance, and four phones on cell plan...looking forward to empty nest status. Graduated 1982

General NCS Basketball Stat of the Day

61 Responses to RPI and the Final Four

  1. choppack 12/12/2005 at 11:16 AM #

    I didn’t say the improvement was substantial, I just said that it was there.

    Here’s a question, if we hadn’t won 11 games 2 years ago and gone to the sweet 16 last year, how would you feel about the program? IMHO, in that way you could say “we’ve reached our peak” – because clearly we weren’t achieving things that we hadn’t in the past – right?

    Now, given that’s this college basketball and if you’re an ACC team, you basically have 3 areas where you can claim some kind of progess – you could say, “Well, we haven’t been to the ACC championship since 2003” and you’d be right.

    I’m a glass full kind of guy – and if I was AD I wouldn’t have changed coaches unless I had a Roy Williams type out there with the results we’ve had the last 4 years. Now, would I have changed after year 5 – definitely. Would I change if we didn’t make the tourney this year? Yep.

  2. choppack 12/12/2005 at 11:22 AM #

    “Chop,
    If you look at each statistic for all four years, instead of choosing which one is best for that year then I think you get a better pciture.
    ACC wins – 9,9,11,7
    RPI – 31,53,17,65
    NCAA wins – 1,0,1,2
    Overall record – 21-9,18-12,20-9,19-13

    What this looks like is a coach that has hit a ceiling. A good coach that does not seem to have the ability to be a great one. IMO the worst kind you can have because there is little hope of ever being better.”

    You’re right. I’m definitely picking and choosing. NCAA b’ball in a major conference lends itself to more flexibility than say football – where you basically toss more dirt on your grave w/ every loss. I mean, would we care if went into the tourney this year w/ a 53rd RPI and won the ACC Championship or went to the Final 4? Would we be happy if we won the regular season title, finishing iwith a Top 10 RPI, then lost in the first or second round of the tourney?

    I think the best possible reason you can give to force Sendek out of the door if we don’t acheive substantial goals this year is that here, in year 10 of his tenure – we still don’t know if we have the right guy – and you should have the question answered by then.

  3. Class of '74 12/12/2005 at 11:38 AM #

    The reality is, short of a complete collapse something on the order of a 12-18 season, Herb is entrenched in Raleigh for a minimum of 4 more years. Fourth or fifth place conference finishes seem to be just fine for our adminstration. To them that’s good enough and doesn’t warrant any critical scrutiny. We wouldn’t want to derail the tremendous progress the program has made.

  4. BJD95 12/12/2005 at 12:16 PM #

    I tend to agree with chop here – the fact is…we just don’t know. After a certain period of time, if you STILL don’t know – you make a move for that reason. I think the next 2-3 years are critical (for MY evaluation of him) – either he’ll get over the hump and achieve something substantial, or last year’s Sweet Sixteen will be his high water mark.

    The unfortunate thing, as referenced by 74, is that the administration’s vantage point is very different. The “don’t know” position will never prompt a change. In fact, not only does Fowler require affirmative evidence that a coach is not the right man or woman for the job, he seems to require evidence “beyond a reasonable doubt.”

  5. VaWolf82 12/12/2005 at 1:21 PM #

    After a certain period of time, if you STILL don’t know – you make a move for that reason.

    The only reason that you would not know whether you had the right coach or not is if there were no standards of performance established. Obviously Fowler is not going to come out and say what his standards are…..however if you judge him by his actions in all sports at NC State, his standards are extremely low.

  6. Jeff 12/12/2005 at 1:25 PM #

    When standards constantly change from year to year then who is to know what they are? One year it is “put together great recruiting classes” and the next year it is “make the NCAA Tournament”. Who can keep up?

  7. choppack 12/12/2005 at 1:27 PM #

    VaWolf – I think that’s a fair statement – if they have clearly defined goals, these aren’t shared w/ anyone.

    Like I said, college b’ball is a bit of an odd bird – where you really have 3 areas in which you can be judged – regular season conference, conference tournament and NCAA tourney. Do you use benchmarks in all three – if one great, but the others are appalling, do you fire the coach? At least in football, if one is bad, you usually don’t get the other.

  8. Cardiac95 12/12/2005 at 1:37 PM #

    Let’s go out a limb here on this peak debate and mash Herb’s best regular season (ACC 2nd Place) with his best postseasons (ACC runnerup & Sweet 16). That’s a blend of 3 different seasons….but let’s run with it for a minute.

    Now let’s see where that stacks up in NC STATE History….

    54 – ACC Title
    55 – ACC Title, ACC 1st Place Regular Season
    56 – ACC Title, ACC 1st Place Regular Season
    59 – ACC Title, ACC 1st Place Regular Season
    65 – ACC Title
    70 – ACC Title
    73 – ACC Title, ACC 1st Place Regular Season
    74 – ACC Title, ACC 1st Place Regular Season, National Title
    83 – ACC Title, National Title
    85 – Final 8
    86 – Final 8
    87 – ACC Title
    89 – ACC 1st Place Regular Season

    That’s 13 seasons that are clearly better in their own right than a combined best effort of 9 seasons of Herb Sendek.

    Forget comparing Herb to Duke or unc……Herb doesn’t even BEGIN to measure up at NC State!

  9. Jeff 12/12/2005 at 2:09 PM #

    ^ I have an analysis that I did last year about taking each of Herb’s best 4 years (since that is the new mantra) and comparing them to the best 4 years of each of our other coaches. I never posted it. Perhaps I should go back and find that.

  10. Rick 12/12/2005 at 2:46 PM #

    I think you could take Herb’s best 4 years and compare it to any consecutive 4 years of the other coaches and they would be better.
    Wasn’t Les’s first year better than any Herb has had? Granted it was not his players but still.

  11. choppack 12/12/2005 at 2:48 PM #

    I don’t think that’s necessary…you’ve Case, Maravich, Sloan, V, Robinson and Sendek, right? (I’m sure I’m missing at least one.)

    Sendek certainly doesn’t compare favorably to Case, Sloan or V. He’s also much better than Robinson, but then only Bob Staak’s tenure of terror can rival that of Les’s.

    Sendek should have been let loose after year 5, but he wasn’t. Since then, he’s had tolerable results. These results are probably tolerable in large part because of the depths to which our program sunk during the Les year’s and even Sendek’s first 5.

    Question though – if he is able to do something positive he hasn’t done to date – say, an ACC tournament, 1st place in the regular season, or an elite 8 – how do you feel about him then? (Of course, we know that these 3 things aren’t likely, much more likely is the 3rd-6th place in the conference, no ACC championship, 1st or 2nd round exit.)

  12. PACDADDY 12/12/2005 at 2:55 PM #

    Vawolf82…I haven’t created a new statisitcal catagory…I’m just saying by strictly looking at top 50 W-L records is unfair. Common sense will tell you that Final 4 teams tend to have more success against top 50 teams. Your stats don’t measure up, or was a waste of time. Again…We played more top 5 teams last season alone than many top teams played top 25.

    Jeff broke these stats down nicely, and I agree that teams that have a solid w-l records against top 50 teams will normally be competitive during the NCAA…but what does this really mean if you don’t compare?

    Had Herb played mostly 11-50 teams he may of had a much different record over the last 4-5 seasons.

    I didn’t pull this out of the sky http://teamrankings.com/ncb/9powerratings.php3

    I don’t have the time to look all this up but I grazed thru(didn’t guess) the last 4 seasons and found FEW teams have winning records against top 25(not top 50)….and very few had winning records against top 10. (you have to look at each teams schedule to figure this out and these records include NCAA, which yours and Jeff don’t).

    There’s no new statsical catagory required, only someone willing to take the amount of time required to compare to rest of ours peers…isn’t that the reasonable approach?

    After you compare all the teams record against top 25, then you must focus on which teams were top 10(or top 5)… unless fairness isn’t the goal.

    How can we debate whether we have peaked as a program? What a waste of time..because nobody knows. Few if any Herb detractors would have thought we’d be a Sweet 16 last season, and NO HERB detractor gives Sendek any credit for playing so well in ACC tourneys…they only focus on our meltdowns. We have only scratched the surface for what the program is capable of doing, and nobody has a crystal ball to say anything negative…my god…we’ll have another NCAA tourney team this season and probably next year…with opportunity comes achievement.

  13. choppack 12/12/2005 at 3:45 PM #

    pacdaddy – While I agree we may not have peaked, the elephant in the living room is the fact that Herb has been here 10 years and hasn’t accomplished anything spectacular. Basically, in 10 years, he can hang one banner – 2005 Sweet 16. I think we both know that’s why there’s still such a large amount of discontent in the Wolfpack ranks.

    Think of Amato going into year 10 w/out anything but that Gator Bowl victory over Notre Dame and no better than a 5-3 conference mark.

    I think it’s a legit gripe to say, year 10, the best Herb has done is a “Meets Expectations” for a season. In 10 years, you’d like to see him really do something at least once to make a statement that he carries the weight and accomplishments worthy of an ACC school that has 2 national championships and is 3rd all time in the # of ACC Championships.

  14. PACDADDY 12/12/2005 at 3:51 PM #

    Here’s a quick example…I randomly selected one team from 2000-2001(Herb’s worst season) season….Oklahoma(ranked 15th) was 4-4 against top 25 opponents…well they only played 1 team in top 10 and lost(Maryland was #7)…while NCSU was 2-11 against “top 25″…well…7 of those teams were top 10. 3 were #1 and 2 #6…then we played #7 Maryland twice!

    All I’m saying is simple…these “facts” are true, but extemely misleading.

  15. Rick 12/12/2005 at 3:59 PM #

    “Question though – if he is able to do something positive he hasn’t done to date – say, an ACC tournament, 1st place in the regular season, or an elite 8 – how do you feel about him then? ”
    I have such doubts about his ability to win tournament games that if he did any of the things you stated (other than elite eight, I would put final four here) I would be fine with him.
    I have seen to many meltdowns by such a variety of players that I have to think the only constant is the coaching.

  16. VaWolf82 12/12/2005 at 4:00 PM #

    There’s no new statsical catagory required, only someone willing to take the amount of time required to compare to rest of ours peers…isn’t that the reasonable approach?

    The conversation has wondered far afield from my entry. So far no one has compared Herb to his “peers”….that entry is in progress (but for some reason my manager still thinks that I need to work for him for eight hours).

    The table I put together shows that in general, Final Four teams have high RPI rankings (top 25) and winning records against teams ranked in the Top-50. The purpose of this table is to give some validity to the final RPI calculations, which are done before the NCAA tournament.

    Jeff’s table simply lists facts about how State has performed over Sendek’s best four years. Any reasonable person would have to admit several things:

    1) There has not been significant improvement over the last four years. Thus they represent the peak of Sendek’s first nine years.
    2) No one can seriously claim that Sendek might not do better in the future, thus the last four years are not necessarily the peak of Sendek’s career. By the same token, there is no guarantee that we haven’t already seen Sendek’s best.

    Now if you want to do the work and attempt to show Sendek in a different light, then have a ball. I do not intend to do your study, nor do I want to debate opinions about what a given study might or might not show. If you are trying to say that you have to be a top-10 team to have a good record against top-10 teams, then I’ll conceed your point.
    – However, you have provided no reason to expect that Sendek will do in the future what he has not been able to accomplish over the last nine years.
    – You have also given no reason why it is acceptable to not have had at least one team that could compete with top-10 teams (after nine years).
    – You also choose to ignore the fact that only one of the Herb’s losses in the NCAA tournament was to a top 10 team (UConn in 2002).

  17. Rick 12/12/2005 at 4:02 PM #

    “We played more top 5 teams last season alone than many top teams played top 25. ”
    That was because we were playing Wake, Duke and UNC (our in state rivals) two of which have gotten rid of coaches that out performed Sendek. We are playing “top 5” teams because their administration wants to be the best while we simply want to make the tournament. I would imagine we will always be playing top five teams instead of being a top five team while Sendek is here.

  18. PACDADDY 12/12/2005 at 4:11 PM #

    Here’s an interesting example…Eventual National Champion UCONN was 4-5 against TOP 25 in regular season(they went on to win 4 straight against top 25 in post season)…they played 3 top 10 teams in regular season…lost to GT and beat Pitt twice.

    We finished 11th and went 6-5 in regular season against top 25 and went 2-2 against top 10….while 2 of those loses were to #1 Duke.

  19. Class of '74 12/12/2005 at 4:26 PM #

    Thank god for the ACC otherwise we would not have any games against the top 25.

  20. VaWolf82 12/12/2005 at 5:24 PM #

    We finished 11th and went 6-5 in regular season against top 25 and went 2-2 against top 10….while 2 of those loses were to #1 Duke.

    What year are you talking about? What did State finish 11th in?

  21. PACDADDY 12/12/2005 at 6:28 PM #

    Rick…that’s a solid point and believe me…I agree with your view, but I’m not saying I’m in favor of removing our coach at this point of his tenure(i don’t know if that’s your view). I do expect us to be a top 10 program and can only HOPE(like everyone else in the Nation), that we can compete with UNC and Duke EVERY YEAR.

    Is it reasonable to expect a coach at NCSU to recruit the type of classes UNC and DUke have EVERY YEAR? DId Herb create the great divide that exsist between the perceptions nationally of these programs?

    I will agree, that during the coaching search by our admin when Herb was hired they could have done a better job selling the program to a top level coach, but for whatever reason, nobody took the job. I’ve heard we could have possibly gotten Barnes from Clemson, or more probable Barnes from Providience, but it didn’t happen. So we had to settle on an up and coming coach that was only 33 years old in hopes that he could take this program back to a level we hadn’t seen since V. Through many bumps and turns, Herb has managed to keep the ship moving forward with obstacles the size of the Bermuda Triangle. Much to the dismay of many “fans” his resolve has been remarkable. He has now taken us to 4 straight NCAA tourney…3 of 4 final top 25 finishes and by the end of this season, I bet we’ll see the top 10.

    Simply firing a coach and replacing him with a pecieved “better coach”, isn’t always that easy, and could make us go back to the basement. I’ve been waiting for someone smarter than me and LF, to suggest a candidate that can compete with K and Roy. Maybe Pitino or Barnes…who else would be that person?

    We’ve given Herb plenty of time to prove he’s worthy…he’s proving it! Outside of Duke and UNC, he’s among the top of the league. WHat more do you really expect? Is it so narrow minded for us HSSSers to suggest it may take a little confidence building and tenure for a young coach to compete at the HIGHEST level. Look at Donovan…he’s coaching in the up and down SEC and still hasn’t done squat accept for a final 4…with all the talent he’s had!

    Look at Kanas…Does anyone think Illnois will be dominate every year? Look at WF…are they a top notch program comparable to UNC and Duke?

    I’m not saying we couldn’t hire a perfect coach for this school, but I’m suggesting it’s a gamble, and the direction we are currently heading is the BEST OPTION….provided we continue to move forward.

    We’re recruiting solid student athlete’s with character and solid work ethic…over the long haul, the program will be rewarded for the higher standard Herb has set.

    Huggins is looking for a job…does anyone want him?

  22. PACDADDY 12/12/2005 at 6:49 PM #

    What year are you talking about? What did State finish 11th in?

    2003-2004
    Follow link provided on my post. I prefer this RPI because it also factors home and away. I don’t pretend to know much about the RPI’s formula’s, but I will say if it has no factor for home and away…it’s useless

    “Thank god for the ACC otherwise we would not have any games against the top 25.” Our schedule is incredibly difficult enough in most seasons.

    I prefer you guys to take your on time and look up the link I provided and come to your on cunclusions. Based on what I see, there’s clearly a difference between the numbers of top 5 teams we play and top 50 teams others teams play.

    VA…I understand what your point was and(respectfully) I still have know idea why you would waste your time proving the obvious. Final 4 teams beat top 50 teams! Nobody should say the RPI has no validity…but…there’s a huge difference between playing top 50 and top 5!

    If Jeff wants to further prove a point and make it valid, I shouldn’t have to break it down for you…simple fact…look it up with the link I provided. Most top 25 teams in the final RPI have losing records against top 25 teams. Sure…the very top have winning records but it quickly drops off from there.

    If they have losing records against top 25, can you imagine what most of the teams recored would look like if they played the number of top 10 teams? Many of these teams don’t play any until they reach the tourney, and few play top 5 at all.

    Such Herb quit playing the worst of the worst on the RPI?…hell yes! That is whats killings his RPI.

  23. Cardiac95 12/12/2005 at 6:59 PM #

    ^^I believe Donovan won the SEC Championship last year FWIW…..

  24. VaWolf82 12/12/2005 at 8:10 PM #

    Through many bumps and turns, Herb has managed to keep the ship moving forward with obstacles the size of the Bermuda Triangle.

    Define “moving forward”.

  25. VaWolf82 12/12/2005 at 8:21 PM #

    VA…I understand what your point was and(respectfully) I still have know idea why you would waste your time proving the obvious. Final 4 teams beat top 50 teams! Nobody should say the RPI has no validity…but…there’s a huge difference between playing top 50 and top 5!

    My point with this entry was not to instigate another thread on the Great Herb Debate. My point was to illustrate that for the most part, only great teams reach the Final Four. Too many State fans are happy with just qualifying for the NCAA tournament. They mistakenly think that all State has to do is to get hot at the right time and Herb can make a run to the Final Four. It just doesn’t happen that way.

    If State wants a legitimate shot at reaching the Final Four, then State has to have a real, top 25 program and most likely a top 10 program. Herb has only had one year that would give any realistic hope at reaching that level. That season ended with a record-setting collapse in the ACC tournament and a near record one in the NCAA tournament.

1 2 3

Leave a Reply