|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 12, 2019 11:04:23 GMT -5
Rank (Prior) School (record)
_81 (83) Bucknell (26-5)
110 (95) Boston College (14-16)
120 (121) American (21-9)
141 (151) Lehigh (21-9)
191 (191) Rider (19-12)
196 (178) Boston University (15-14)
200 (202) Holy Cross (18-12) Interesting that 3 wins over BU and a better overall record did not get HC to their level in the top 200
248 (242) Rhode Island (8-21)
249 (255) Colgate (12-17)
263 (256) Hofstra (9-20)
252 (258) Albany (13-18)
271 (273) Manhattan (12-19)
274 (267) Navy (10-19)
279 (270) Army (11-19)
280 (300) Loyola MD (7-24)
282 (281) Brown (9-21)
294 (290) Vermont (11-18)
304 (301) Bryant (11-19)
312 (313) Lafayette (8-23)
323 (323) MA-Lowell (7-22)
326 (325) New Hampshire (6-24)
Out of 351 D-1 teams
|
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 12, 2019 11:41:47 GMT -5
Rank (Prior) School (record)
_81 (83) Bucknell (26-5)
110 (95) Boston College (14-16)
120 (121) American (21-9)
141 (151) Lehigh (21-9)
191 (191) Rider (19-12)
196 (178) Boston University (15-14)
200 (202) Holy Cross (18-12) Interesting that 3 wins over BU and a better overall record did not get HC to their leveling the top 200
Not surprising. Boston U had a better record in PL play and they played a more difficult OOC schedule. The three games between HC and Boston U have no more significance in the rankings than any other games either team played. Just three data points out of 30. HC lost to Lafayette, Navy, and Lehigh - teams that Boston U swept - which are equally important data points.. |
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 12, 2019 13:29:53 GMT -5
Bison, factually true, but if THREE wins by one team over another have no meaning for the rank of those two teams, then this list has, IMHO, less importance as well.
|
|
bkny
Junior
Posts: 39 
|
Post by bkny on Mar 12, 2019 13:41:34 GMT -5
This is not the same roster that lost close games in the first half of the season.— Faulkner missed 15 games, some which were very close losses and Demski is now contributing in all facets of the game.—- If you check their losses, you can count the lopsided ones on one hand.— This is a good team with a bright future.
|
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 12, 2019 14:05:05 GMT -5
Quite true, and if HC keeps winning, they may also be able to beat BU. Wait, they already did that THREE TIMES this year (even at less than 100%).
|
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 14, 2019 22:56:58 GMT -5
Bison, factually true, but if THREE wins by one team over another have no meaning for the rank of those two teams, then this list has, IMHO, less importance as well. Three wins doesn't have "no meaning". It carries the same weight as other wins and other losses. |
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Mar 15, 2019 12:48:36 GMT -5
If you are looking at those two teams, it should not be "the same weight." Saying that a school is rated behind a team that they beat three times because the other team beat (or lost to) a tougher school makes little or no sense.
|
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Mar 22, 2019 23:32:40 GMT -5
If you are looking at those two teams, it should not be "the same weight." Saying that a school is rated behind a team that they beat three times because the other team beat (or lost to) a tougher school makes little or no sense. It makes perfect sense, and is used by every rating systme. When teams play 30+ games, it is impossible to give extra weight to certain wins. But for a moment, let's assume the three HC wins over Boston mean something more than they do. Let's assume that makes HC superior to Boston U. And Boston U beat Lehigh both times they met, so Boston is obviously better than Lehigh. And Lehigh beat HC both times they met, so Lehigh is clearly better than HC. So the obvious conclusion, if we cherry-pick certain games, is: HC>Boston>Lehigh>HC>Boston>Lehigh>HC ad infinitum. Perfect circular reasoning. |
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Mar 23, 2019 6:42:06 GMT -5
The transitive property of championship basketball . . . Why the Holy Cross men would have beaten Tennessee, e.g.
Or Duke . . .
And why the HC women would beat Notre Dame
A great comfort for the irrationally and terminally optimistic
|
|
