Ultimate College Softball
Register Calendar Latest Topics
 
 
 


Reply
  Author   Comment   Page 1 of 2      1   2   Next
RPI_Guy

Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #1 
The NCAA is preparing to release it's RPI on next Monday March 20.
However, using actual calculations here is the likely Top 50 as of games through Mar 13.
Two notes: 1) Of course a weeks worth of games will change these a bit for next week's actual release and 2) The NCAA does not publicly produce their bonus point values so there is no way to calculate those in and those will likely change this top 50 slightly.
Here is the Top 50:

1

Florida St

2

Baylor

3

Alabama

4

Texas A&M

5

James Madison

6

Auburn

7

UCLA

8

Arizona

9

Washington

10

Oregon

11

Florida

12

Oklahoma

13

Tennessee

14

Wisconsin

15

BYU

16

Minnesota

17

Georgia

18

LSU

19

Illinois

20

Ohio St

21

Kentucky

22

Fordham

23

Ole Miss

24

South Carolina

25

Texas St

26

Michigan

27

Cal

28

Arkansas

29

North Carolina

30

Texas

31

Cal Poly

32

North Texas

33

Utah

34

Arizona St

35

UCF

36

Northwestern

37

Louisville

38

Mississippi St

39

McNeese St

40

Fresno St

41

Pittsburg

42

Ohio

43

SIUE

44

South Ala.

45

ULL

46

Fullerton

47

S. Florida

48

Notre Dame

49

Belmont

50

Oklahoma St



G8terfan23

Registered:
Posts: 2,301
Reply with quote  #2 
Why is Florida #11 in your prediction?
RPI_Guy

Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #3 
Quote:
Originally Posted by G8terfan23
Why is Florida #11 in your prediction?


RPI is not a poll, they are #11 because 10 other teams have RPI values higher than Florida's.

The biggest culprit right now would be their #96 Strength of Schedule.
RPI_Guy

Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #4 
Also, if Baylor wins all their games this week and Florida State win all their games this week. I would guess that mathematically it is likely that Baylor would be the #1 RPI team when the first RPI is released next Monday.
G8terfan23

Registered:
Posts: 2,301
Reply with quote  #5 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPI_Guy


RPI is not a poll, they are #11 because 10 other teams have RPI values higher than Florida's.

The biggest culprit right now would be their #96 Strength of Schedule.
whoa #96. Don't think it's been that low since I've started cheering for the team. How did you find out strength of schedule?
RPI_Guy

Registered:
Posts: 13
Reply with quote  #6 
It will not stay that low. Likely will be in the top 10-20 by Selection Sunday time, due to SEC play.

You can find the SOS on the NCAA Stat site, the NCAA has started posting it each week starting with week 1 the last few seasons.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #7 
Sounds like a committee dream scenario with the Pac 7 through 10, ensuring two of them get eliminated in SR
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #8 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPI_Guy
It will not stay that low. Likely will be in the top 10-20 by Selection Sunday time, due to SEC play.

You can find the SOS on the NCAA Stat site, the NCAA has started posting it each week starting with week 1 the last few seasons.
96 SoS for UF seems low... Massey's 35 seems more in line. You gotta link?
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #9 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPI_Guy
Also, if Baylor wins all their games this week and Florida State win all their games this week. I would guess that mathematically it is likely that Baylor would be the #1 RPI team when the first RPI is released next Monday.

why would that be?
AleDawg

Registered:
Posts: 401
Reply with quote  #10 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
96 SoS for UF seems low... Massey's 35 seems more in line. You gotta link?


It's here:

http://stats.ncaa.org/rankings/ranking_summary

Edit: actual link
http://stats.ncaa.org/reports/toughest_schedule?id=15942


Hope the link works.

The long and short of it is that NCAA ranks only by wins/losses. Paying no account to the fact of quality of opponent. Playing Murray St. Means more to their SoS than UCLA. It would have Florida topping out at #18 SoS.

I also trust Massey more in this respect.


__________________
"Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience."
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #11 
Thanks, aledawg

So, opponents' opponents win percentage (a quarter of RPI) is largely unaccounted for at the top of this thread?
Bama_CF

Registered:
Posts: 1,379
Reply with quote  #12 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AleDawg



The long and short of it is that NCAA ranks only by wins/losses. Paying no account to the fact of quality of opponent.



This is factually inaccurate, or misleading at best. The RPI takes into account your record, the record of your opponents (so by definition this relates to the quality of your opponents), and the records of your opponents opponents, adjusted by certain bonus measures which vary sport to sport.

It is far from a perfect measure of strength of schedule and quality of opponents, but it accounts for it. And history says that ultimately it works pretty well.

__________________

 

Bama_CF

Registered:
Posts: 1,379
Reply with quote  #13 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
Thanks, aledawg

So, opponents' opponents win percentage (a quarter of RPI) is largely unaccounted for here?



If so, this is not going to be an accurate estimation of the actual RPI. I appreciate someone posting it and not meant towards them, but I've followed the RPI formula in several sports for many years and there are too many "doesn't makes sense" things in this.

__________________

 

3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #14 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF



If so, this is not going to be an accurate estimation of the actual RPI. I appreciate someone posting it and not meant towards them, but I've followed the RPI formula in several sports for many years and there are too many "doesn't makes sense" things in this.
Agreed. UF at 96 SoS is a canary in the coal mine
AleDawg

Registered:
Posts: 401
Reply with quote  #15 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF


This is factually inaccurate, or misleading at best. The RPI takes into account your record, the record of your opponents (so by definition this relates to the quality of your opponents), and the records of your opponents opponents, adjusted by certain bonus measures which vary sport to sport.

It is far from a perfect measure of strength of schedule and quality of opponents, but it accounts for it. And history says that ultimately it works pretty well.


You are confused. I was responding to 3leftturns question:

"96 SoS for UF seems low... Massey's 35 seems more in line. You gotta link?"

I was remarking only to the NCAA stats ranking for softball strength of schedule. This is where RPI Guy says he got his numbers. Found here:

http://stats.ncaa.org/reports/toughest_schedule?id=15942

As far as I can tell, what I say is factually accurate. If you see another way to interpret their methodology, then let me in on it.

What you say about the methodology for RPI is true. But not the focus of 3leftturns question about the low SoS for Florida.

RPI Guy may do additional calculations for Strength of opponents schedule, home vs away... I don't know.

__________________
"Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience."
Bama_CF

Registered:
Posts: 1,379
Reply with quote  #16 
Quote:
Originally Posted by AleDawg


You are confused. I was responding to 3leftturns question:

"96 SoS for UF seems low... Massey's 35 seems more in line. You gotta link?"

I was remarking only to the NCAA stats ranking for softball strength of schedule. This is where RPI Guy says he got his numbers. Found here:

http://stats.ncaa.org/reports/toughest_schedule?id=15942

As far as I can tell, what I say is factually accurate. If you see another way to interpret their methodology, then let me in on it.

What you say about the methodology for RPI is true. But not the focus of 3leftturns question about the low SoS for Florida.

RPI Guy may do additional calculations for Strength of opponents schedule, home vs away... I don't know.



OK, I will amend my comment. The method used to state Florida's strength of schedule is 96 is not legit IMO. My overall observation about the simulated RPI is that knowing what actually makes up the formula, this ranking list doesn't look correct to me. RPI guy simply says "using actual calculations" with no other link or explanation. Heck, I hope they are right because Bama is #3, but I don't think so.




__________________

 

southpaw

Registered:
Posts: 84
Reply with quote  #17 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF



If so, this is not going to be an accurate estimation of the actual RPI. I appreciate someone posting it and not meant towards them, but I've followed the RPI formula in several sports for many years and there are too many "doesn't makes sense" things in this.


From what I know about RPI and from some calculations it looks pretty accurate. I would guess that due to the challenges associated with calculating each teams opponents SOS (last of the 3 RPI pieces) there there was some assumptions made there, but I am not sure. I would guess that for the most part each team in these rankings may be either 1-2 spots higher or even 1-2 spots lower, but not off by much.

Just looking at the Top 15 and calculating the first two parts of RPI for all of them and this is very accurate. Looking at 2 teams I was shocked by: Baylor at 2 and Florida at 11. For Florida to be higher than Baylor in RPI, Florida would have to be a 262 spots higher in Opponent SOS (there would have to be a .1344 difference in OOSOS). So although Baylor may really be anywhere from 1-5 likely and Florida may be anywhere from 9-13 likely, Florida is not above Baylor.

Now of course a week of games will likely change this, just like it does typically. I am anxious to see how close these rankings are.
Bama_CF

Registered:
Posts: 1,379
Reply with quote  #18 
Quote:
Originally Posted by southpaw


From what I know about RPI and from some calculations it looks pretty accurate. I would guess that due to the challenges associated with calculating each teams opponents SOS (last of the 3 RPI pieces) there there was some assumptions made there, but I am not sure. I would guess that for the most part each team in these rankings may be either 1-2 spots higher or even 1-2 spots lower, but not off by much.

Just looking at the Top 15 and calculating the first two parts of RPI for all of them and this is very accurate. Looking at 2 teams I was shocked by: Baylor at 2 and Florida at 11. For Florida to be higher than Baylor in RPI, Florida would have to be a 262 spots higher in Opponent SOS (there would have to be a .1344 difference in OOSOS). So although Baylor may really be anywhere from 1-5 likely and Florida may be anywhere from 9-13 likely, Florida is not above Baylor.

Now of course a week of games will likely change this, just like it does typically. I am anxious to see how close these rankings are.



Yeah, after reading your post and looking more closely I'm starting to come around. The surprises to me are Bama and JMU being so high and UF so low. But not as surprising upon reflection. I'm not at all surprised by Baylor. I've been saying for awhile they have more quality wins and opponents than anyone -- Arizona, Ariz St, Michigan, Washington, UCLA, Fullerton, ULL and 5 of those wins.

__________________

 

AleDawg

Registered:
Posts: 401
Reply with quote  #19 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF



OK, I will amend my comment. The method used to state Florida's strength of schedule is 96 is not legit IMO. 





I agree entirely. Opponent win % at this point of the year is fraught with artifact. But the projections seem to come more back into the realm of reasonability at the end of the year.

__________________
"Never argue with a fool, they will lower you to their level and then beat you with experience."
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 16,779
Reply with quote  #20 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Bama_CF



Yeah, after reading your post and looking more closely I'm starting to come around. The surprises to me are Bama and JMU being so high and UF so low. But not as surprising upon reflection. I'm not at all surprised by Baylor. I've been saying for awhile they have more quality wins and opponents than anyone -- Arizona, Ariz St, Michigan, Washington, UCLA, Fullerton, ULL and 5 of those wins.


With losses to Harvard, Boston, St Johns, and Utah State you can remove CSUF off that list.  Granted they have had some solid wins, but too many bad losses as well.
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 2,527
Reply with quote  #21 
On the NCAA link, if you sort by Cumulative Opposition: Florida is #21.

1. S. Carolina
2. UCLA
3. Washington
4. Texas A&M
5. Alabama
6. Florida St
7. Kentucky
8. LSU
9. Arizona
10. Northwestern
11. Baylor
12. Auburn
13. Georgia
14. Tennessee
15. Stanford
16. BYU
17. Missouri
18. Oregon
19. Utah
20. LBSU
21. Florida

23. Oklahoma



southpaw

Registered:
Posts: 84
Reply with quote  #22 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa
On the NCAA link, if you sort by Cumulative Opposition: Florida is #21.

1. S. Carolina
2. UCLA
3. Washington
4. Texas A&M
5. Alabama
6. Florida St
7. Kentucky
8. LSU
9. Arizona
10. Northwestern
11. Baylor
12. Auburn
13. Georgia
14. Tennessee
15. Stanford
16. BYU
17. Missouri
18. Oregon
19. Utah
20. LBSU
21. Florida

23. Oklahoma





There are 3 different values on the NCAA site (Past Opposition, Future Opposition, and Cumulative Opposition). The past opposition would tell you what their current SOS would be and the Cumulative Opposition would give you a future look at what their ending SOS could possibly be. Of course there is a lot of wiggle room left for these values to change.
Prowler

Registered:
Posts: 1,385
Reply with quote  #23 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Kurosawa
On the NCAA link, if you sort by Cumulative Opposition: Florida is #21.

1. S. Carolina
2. UCLA
3. Washington
4. Texas A&M
5. Alabama
6. Florida St
7. Kentucky
8. LSU
9. Arizona
10. Northwestern
11. Baylor
12. Auburn
13. Georgia
14. Tennessee
15. Stanford
16. BYU
17. Missouri
18. Oregon
19. Utah
20. LBSU
21. Florida

23. Oklahoma





OK, I'll bite: why is there a team missing, and which team is it?
olddawg

Registered:
Posts: 760
Reply with quote  #24 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowler
OK, I'll bite: why is there a team missing, and which team is it?


Could it possibly be Louisiana Lafayette?  If so, the reason should be self explanatory.  If not, oh well...
midwestfp

Registered:
Posts: 477
Reply with quote  #25 
Just curious if anyone knows or is able to guess how many RPI points Wichita State gave away by losing that game to LSU tonight??  Not trying to pile on the pitcher  She pitched a great game and I felt badly for her.  Hoping that the difference between one win over LSU as opposed to the loss vs LSU isn't that big of a deal, but I am worried that it might be.  
Prowler

Registered:
Posts: 1,385
Reply with quote  #26 
Quote:
Originally Posted by midwestfp
Just curious if anyone knows or is able to guess how many RPI points Wichita State gave away by losing that game to LSU tonight??  Not trying to pile on the pitcher  She pitched a great game and I felt badly for her.  Hoping that the difference between one win over LSU as opposed to the loss vs LSU isn't that big of a deal, but I am worried that it might be.  


So that's a road win for LSU and a home loss for Wichita State, right?

If some had their way, it should be much more costly for the Shockers.
3leftturns

Registered:
Posts: 10,432
Reply with quote  #27 
MUCH more costly? I must have missed that
jayrot

Registered:
Posts: 16,779
Reply with quote  #28 
Quote:
Originally Posted by 3leftturns
MUCH more costly? I must have missed that


A 30% increase in the value of the loss could be considered much more costly.
Kurosawa

Registered:
Posts: 2,527
Reply with quote  #29 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prowler
OK, I'll bite: why is there a team missing, and which team is it?


I believe it was Texas, but might have been UCF.

The list has since shuffled, with UCLA and Washington #1 and #2.
gonegolfin

Registered:
Posts: 353
Reply with quote  #30 
Quote:
Originally Posted by RPI_Guy
The NCAA is preparing to release it's RPI on next Monday March 20.
However, using actual calculations here is the likely Top 50 as of games through Mar 13.
Two notes: 1) Of course a weeks worth of games will change these a bit for next week's actual release and 2) The NCAA does not publicly produce their bonus point values so there is no way to calculate those in and those will likely change this top 50 slightly.

Sure there is ... I have posted the bonuses (and penalties) on this forum a number of times.

.0028/.0021/.0014 Base RPI Top 25/50/75

Apply the reverse for penalties.

Brian
Previous Topic | Next Topic
Print
Reply

Quick Navigation: