Compiled Rankings

Well, this will be the next-to-last update on the combined rankings from Massey’s site. After the seedings come out, I hope to do one more and finally conclude whether there is any value in piling everyone’s guesses, votes, and calculations together…and then drawing conclusions from the biggest piles.

As usual, here is the frequency graph and the table:

If you’re feeling especially masochistic today, go back and look at the table from the 2/21 update.

Jerry Palm has reported that the AP Top-25 is a better predictor of seeding than the RPI formula. However, the NCAA Selection Committee used to make super-secret “adjustments” to the RPI formula before selecting the bubble teams and seeding everyone. In 2005, the RPI formula was changed and there are not supposed to be any more secret adjustments to the RPI calculation. (Though that certainly doesn’t mean that the Selection Committee blindly follows the RPI ranking.)

So, I looked at just 2005 to see how the new RPI formula compared to the AP Top-25….and the RPI calculations win out. For the top six seeds, 22 of the 24 teams were in the RPI Top-25….while the AP Top-25 had 20 teams. Here is a table comparing how the RPI Top-25 and the AP Top-25 were seeded compared to what you would predict from their ranking:

As you can see, the RPI Top-25 placed more teams within one seeding position than the AP Top-25 did. Of course, one year’s results don’t prove anything…but this comparison looks interesting enough to follow in the future. Hopefully, I will be able to update this comparison early next week while we are waiting for the opening round games.

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

3 Responses to Compiled Rankings

  1. WufPacker 03/09/2006 at 3:21 AM #

    You weren’t kidding about the difference for the worse (“if you’re feeling especially masochistic today….”) since 2/21. To think that it would even be possible to drop that much (FROM: ~70% toward 3/4 seed, heavy lean toward 3 on 2/21 TO: ~70% toward 5/6/7 seed with no strong lean) IN JUST 15 DAYS!!

    Ouch! In just barely over 2 weeks we’ve dropped our seed LIKELY 3 spots (POSSIBLY as much as 4, and LIKELY AT LEAST 2). Thats pretty bad for a 2 week period, especially when we’re playing decent competition to begin with.

  2. Greg 03/09/2006 at 8:51 AM #

    Devils advocate here…

    Didn’t Unc struggle to beat Wisconsin? Wisconsin was a very good team…

  3. Jeff 03/09/2006 at 9:17 AM #

    ^ I think the people in this community who are more witty than myself need to come up with some term or moniker to mock the consistent practice of subjectively self-selecting arbitrary, largely unrelated micro-examples of in an attempt to “prove” a larger point.

    I know that VaWolf wrote an AWESOME entry on general data analysis….but, we need something that can succinctly make the point on this kind of behavior.

Leave a Reply