- This topic has 8 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated 11 years, 4 months ago by
.
-
Posts
-
I have to admit that I’m skeptical of this approach if it led you to reach this conclusion last year:
Last year entering the NCAAT I kept beating the “We are better than our record indicates” drum.
That looks much better… The columns across are:
Game / Pace / Result / FF Projected Result / NCSU Offensive Rating / Opponent Offensive Rating / NCSU eFG% / Opp. eFG% / NCSU Turnover % / Opp. TO% / NCSU Off. RB % / Opp. ORB % / NCSU Free Throw Rate % / Opp. FTR%
Source data comes from: http://www.sports-reference.com/cbb/schools/north-carolina-state/2014-schedule.html
Then click on the date of an individual game to see the game data.
Re: Your comment about last year’s team – Basically, using the FF criteria, we lost one game that we ‘should have won’ (home against Maryland) and we had three ‘toss-up games’ – which we lost all of them. So in other words, our individual game FF numbers justified at least a 12-6 conference record; or better with any toss-up games going our way.
But trust me, I think I get your drift.
1. If a team has an eFG% +2% better than the other, it is considered a clear advantage.
2. If a team has a TO% +3% better than the other, advantage.
3. If a team has an ORB% +4% better than the other, advantage.
4. If a team has a FTR +5% better than the other, advantage.There are statistical packages that might be able to help correlate these factors into projected wins and losses….much like the professors behind the Dance Card analyze the NCAAT selection process. However, I have no experience with any of these packages.
The real trick would be to turn these calcs into point spreads.
Sorry got quite busy this afternoon. Yes! The blanks mean toss-ups just like you have it in the updated table.
And it would be very cool to know if statistics could be applied. I’m not the best for that. My margins basically came from staring at the ceiling and speculating on what point/TO/RB/FTR differential over a 100-possession range would become “significant enough” to potentially drive the outcome of a game. So for example, if you shoot +2% eFG better than your opponent over 100 possessions, that translates to 4 points which the other team would have to overcome in some other way (say – by dominating the offensive boards).
VaWolf,Thank you for fixing that table.
Looking at the last 2 nights by the same criteria:
The Miami game was a toss-up, but our clear advantage in TO% would suggest a win.
The Syracuse game would chart as a ‘should loss’ as they held the advantage in 3 factors… But similarly we had a very clear advantage in eFG% where their 3 advantages were much closer to being washes. But still… That one could have gone the other way.
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
