LOUMFSG2;842649020 said:

---

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 2/15/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(22)____15___14___14___13_____14
UO_____(4)____12___20___26___24_____21
USC___(24)____22___26___33___22_____26
CAL___(23)____47___32___37___32_____37
UTAH__(16)____35___40___36___47_____40
CU____(25)____50___63___53___50_____54
UCLA__(68)____86___56___52___63_____64
UW____(61)____70___72___58___59_____65
OSU___(38)____61___71___66___73_____68
ASU___(83)____95___77___65___57_____74
STAN__(75)____90__112___97___98_____99
WSU__(188)___195__163__159__150____167[/FONT]

Here are the Pomeroy percentages for our 6 remaining games (the Sagarin %'s are very similar):

UW - 49%
WSU - 74%
UCLA - 73%
USC - 63%
UA - 24%
ASU - 50%

Running the math, here are the percentages (incl. cumulative) for how that translates:

6-0 (13-5): 2.0% (2.0%)
5-1 (12-6): 13.0% (15.0%)
4-2 (11-7): 29.8% (44.8%)
3-3 (10-8): 32.2% (77.0%)
2-4 (9-9): 17.7% (94.7%)
1-5 (8-10): 4.8% (99.5%)
0-6 (7-11): 0.5% (100.0%)

So 3-3 is the most likely outcome, with slightly better odds of finishing above .500 than below. 3-3 would give us a 10-8 record overall, and based on RPI Wizard.com, that translates to an RPI~31 before the conference tournament. We have a 94.7% chance of finishing 9-9 or better, a 77.0% of finishing 10-8 or better, and a 44.8% chance of 11-7 or better.

---

Great info. I love this stuff. Thanks for posting.

If we go 4-2, what would our seeding be? if we're approxinately an 8 seed if we go 3-3, something like a 5 or 6 seed?

A couple things about seeding:

First, RPI is only an approximate starting point for the S-curve. It'll really be interesting to see what the committee does with Cal's extreme strong-home, weak-road/neutral profile. My gut tells me if we are 3-3, with 2 home wins and only 1 road win (therefore, finishing 2-11 away from home), we won't get an 8-seed, even if that's what the RPI suggests.

Second, the above is all before the P-12 Tournament in Vegas. A couple of neutral-site wins there could help our profile quite a bit, and a quick-loss could really hurt..

TheSouseFamily;842649023 said:

---

Great info. I love this stuff. Thanks for posting.

If we go 4-2, what would our seeding be? if we're approxinately an 8 seed if we go 3-3, something like a 5 or 6 seed?

---

Hear, hear! Thanks for this Lou! As stated above, going 4-2 probably means winning 2 of 4 on the road (WSU & ASU?) and the p12 tourney will have a dramatic impact on seeding. I could see us getting a 7 (maybe a six seed) finishing 4-2 with a win or two in the P12 tourney. But still too much could happen to change any of that.

BeachedBear;842649073 said:

---

Hear, hear! Thanks for this Lou! As stated above, going 4-2 probably means winning 2 of 4 on the road (WSU & ASU?) and the p12 tourney will have a dramatic impact on seeding. I could see us getting a 7 (maybe a six seed) finishing 4-2 with a win or two in the P12 tourney. But still too much could happen to change any of that.

---

Really good info.

So looks like 4-2 should be our reasonable goal. Assuming we get one win in Vegas, we should have a good shot at a 7 seed or better. The difference between a 7 and 8 seed is immense as none of the projected 2 seeds scare me.

LOUMFSG2;842649020 said:

---

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 2/15/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(22)____15___14___14___13_____14
UO_____(4)____12___20___26___24_____21
USC___(24)____22___26___33___22_____26
CAL___(23)____47___32___37___32_____37
UTAH__(16)____35___40___36___47_____40
CU____(25)____50___63___53___50_____54
UCLA__(68)____86___56___52___63_____64
UW____(61)____70___72___58___59_____65
OSU___(38)____61___71___66___73_____68
ASU___(83)____95___77___65___57_____74
STAN__(75)____90__112___97___98_____99
WSU__(188)___195__163__159__150____167[/FONT]

Here are the Pomeroy percentages for our 6 remaining games (the Sagarin %'s are very similar):

UW - 49%
WSU - 74%
UCLA - 73%
USC - 63%
UA - 24%
ASU - 50%

Running the math, here are the percentages (incl. cumulative) for how that translates, as well as the forecasted RPI in each scenario:

6-0 (13-5) RPI~14: 2.0% (2.0%)
5-1 (12-6) RPI~18: 13.0% (15.0%)
4-2 (11-7) RPI~23: 29.8% (44.8%)
3-3 (10-8) RPI~29: 32.2% (77.0%)
2-4 ( 9-9) RPI~45: 17.7% (94.7%)
1-5 (8-10) RPI~65: 4.8% (99.5%)
0-6 (7-11) RPI~75: 0.5% (100.0%)

So 3-3 is the most likely outcome, with slightly better odds of finishing above .500 than below. 3-3 would give us a 10-8 record overall, and based on RPI Wizard.com, that translates to an RPI~29 (depends on road/away) before the conference tournament. We have a 94.7% chance of finishing 9-9 or better, a 77.0% of finishing 10-8 or better, and a 44.8% chance of 11-7 or better.

---

Man. Looking at the numbers, ucla really got screwed by those refs. A win at Arizona could have put them squarely on the bubble.

LOUMFSG2;842649020 said:

---

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 2/15/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(22)____15___14___14___13_____14
UO_____(4)____12___20___26___24_____21
USC___(24)____22___26___33___22_____26
CAL___(23)____47___32___37___32_____37
UTAH__(16)____35___40___36___47_____40
CU____(25)____50___63___53___50_____54
UCLA__(68)____86___56___52___63_____64
UW____(61)____70___72___58___59_____65
OSU___(38)____61___71___66___73_____68
ASU___(83)____95___77___65___57_____74
STAN__(75)____90__112___97___98_____99
WSU__(188)___195__163__159__150____167[/FONT]

Here are the Pomeroy percentages for our 6 remaining games (the Sagarin %'s are very similar):

UW - 49%
WSU - 74%
UCLA - 73%
USC - 63%
UA - 24%
ASU - 50%

Running the math, here are the percentages (incl. cumulative) for how that translates, as well as the forecasted RPI in each scenario:

6-0 (13-5) RPI~14: 2.0% (2.0%)
5-1 (12-6) RPI~18: 13.0% (15.0%)
4-2 (11-7) RPI~23: 29.8% (44.8%)
3-3 (10-8) RPI~29: 32.2% (77.0%)
2-4 ( 9-9) RPI~45: 17.7% (94.7%)
1-5 (8-10) RPI~65: 4.8% (99.5%)
0-6 (7-11) RPI~75: 0.5% (100.0%)

........

---

LOU, I eagerly await your updated numbers. Thanks in advance, buddy! :p

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 2/22/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(25)____12___12___12____8_____11
UO_____(4)____15___18___24___24_____20
UTAH__(10)____24___27___30___36_____29
CAL___(19)____34___26___36___27_____31
USC___(30)____31___39___37___31_____35
UCLA__(69)____87___52___48___54_____60
CU____(34)____59___72___58___56_____61
UW____(71)____77___66___57___55_____64
OSU___(35)____63___63___65___69_____65
ASU___(81)___102___80___73___67_____81
STAN__(77)____99__106___94___97_____99
WSU__(196)___209__187__169__174____185[/FONT]

Here are the Pomeroy / Sagarin percentages for our 4 remaining games:

UCLA - 75% / 71%
USC - 70% / 64%
UA - 25% / 24%
ASU - 55% / 57%

Running the math, here are the percentages (incl. cumulative) for how that translates, using the average of the two predictors, as well as the forecasted RPI in each scenario:

4-0 (13-5) RPI~12: 6.7% ( 6.7%)
3-1 (12-6) RPI~17: 31.7% (38.4%)
2-2 (11-7) RPI~24: 39.9% (78.3%)
1-3 (10-8) RPI~32: 18.7% (97.0%)
0-4 ( 9-9) RPI~47: 3.0% (100.0%)

A couple of notes. Not surprisingly, given the results this last week, Utah and USC have flip-flopped, with Utah now just ahead of us after their sweep down in SoCal, and USC dropping behind us after their home loss to Utah while we swept up in Washington.

It's pretty interesting to see the difference in Power Ratings vs RPI for Colorado and Oregon State. Colorado dropped behind UCLA in the power ratings after getting swept in SoCal, despite maintaining an RPI in mid-30's. And Oregon State actually improved their RPI and Power ratings, despite the road loss to Oregon (ah, the power of strength-of-schedule).

Hopefully, we can keep the good mojo going this week at home - I'm looking forward to the White-Out and Senior Day at Haas this week!

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 2/29/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(29)____12___16___14___12_____14
UO_____(4)____11___18___25___21_____19
UTAH___(8)____21___24___23___29_____24
CAL___(16)____28___22___29___23_____26
USC___(43)____39___50___43___44_____44
CU____(28)____47___62___53___48_____53
OSU___(32)____54___60___62___61_____59
UW____(76)____88___65___58___57_____67
UCLA__(83)___106___56___52___64_____70
STAN__(65)____78___78___72___74_____76
ASU___(87)___116___97___85___87_____96
WSU__(201)___223__198__175__179____194[/FONT]

Here are the Pomeroy / Sagarin percentages for our 2 remaining games:

UA - 31% / 27%
ASU - 63% / 65%

Running the math using the average of the two predictors, here are the odds for how we finish up, as well as the forecasted RPI in each scenario:

2-0 (13-5) RPI~11: 18.6% ( 18.6%)
1-1 (12-6) RPI~15: 55.9% ( 74.4%)
0-2 (11-7) RPI~21: 25.6% (100.0%)

Looking at the power ratings (and RPI's), there seem to be four distinct tiers in the conference:

1) UA, UO, UTAH & CAL
2) USC, CU, OSU
3) UW, UCLA, STAN
4) ASU, WSU

Arizona has had a weird season. Their per-possession and scoring-margin numbers, and therefore power-ratings, have been the best in the P-12 all year, but they've managed to lose almost all of their close games, which killed their RPI. In their 10 conference victories, they've won by an average of 17.1 ppg, and in their 6 conference loses, they've lost by 3.8 ppg. They are one of the few teams in the P-12 whose power rankings are better than their RPI.

The other interesting team to watch this week is Stanfurd. Although their odds of winning both in Arizona this week are not good, if they somehow pull it off, they'll be sitting at 10-8 in conference, with a projected RPI of 48, which would not necessarily get them in, but it would put them on the bubble, and might give them a shot at an at-large bid with a couple of wins in Vegas.

I don't pay attention to all the speculation about who makes the NCAA tourney, but I would imagine it will be enough to get Stanford into the tourney if it sweeps in the desert and just splits two games in the Pac-12 tourney.

A friend who is a rabid Cal fan is telling me that he hopes we don't have to play Stanford in the conference tourney...

In any event, Go Bears!

south bender;842656415 said:

---

A friend who is a rabid Cal fan is telling me that he hopes we don't have to play Stanford in the conference tourney...
In any event, Go Bears!

---

Wait, aren't *WE* rabid cal fans?

LOUMFSG2;842656390 said:

---

UPDATED Rankings as of 2/29/16.....

Here are the Pomeroy / Sagarin percentages for our 2 remaining games:

UA - 31% / 27%
ASU - 63% / 65%

Running the math using the average of the two predictors, here are the odds for how we finish up, as well as the forecasted RPI in each scenario:

2-0 (13-5) RPI~11: 18.6% ( 18.6%)
1-1 (12-6) RPI~15: 55.9% ( 74.4%)
0-2 (11-7) RPI~21: 25.6% (100.0%)

.......

---

Thanks for updating the numbers again, Lou.

I like to think that Cal's chances against Zona are a little bit better, due to our recent improvement in form. E.g., if you use Sagarin's "RECENT" ratings instead of the "PREDICTORS", then the line improves from Zona-6 to Zona-3.

For Saturday's game, the line is either Cal-4 or Cal-6.5, depending upon whether you prefer whole season vs. late-season stats.

Thus, I'm guessing/hoping that our chances are closer to:

2-0 25%
1-1 55%
0-2 20%

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 3/7/16

Team___________Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___RTR__POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(25)____16___13___13___11_____13
UO_____(4)_____9___14___25___20_____17
UTAH___(8)____12___25___24___27_____22
CAL___(15)____24___22___27___21_____24
USC___(45)____61___53___44___44_____51
CU____(29)____42___61___52___47_____51
OSU___(30)____62___59___61___62_____61
UW____(82)____87___69___63___57_____69
UCLA__(98)___113___64___58___66_____75
STAN__(74)____96___94___86___89_____91
ASU___(95)___115___92___84___78_____92
WSU__(202)___229__188__170__172____190
[/FONT]

Here are the final rankings at the end of the regular season. Interesting that RealTimeRPI's power ranking (the RTR column) is pretty different than the other three power rankings. I think I may take that out of the table if I do this again next year - they don't really say on the website how they do their power rankings, and they are definitely not quoted like the other three.

Interesting that if you did that, the order would switch for some teams. For example, ASU would actually be rated better than Stanfurd, based just on Sagarin, Pomeroy and BPI.

[FONT=Courier New]UPDATED Rankings as of 3/7/16

Team_______Average_Power_Rankings
Team_(RPI)___POM__SAG__BPI____AVG
UA____(25)____13___13___11_____12
UO_____(4)____14___25___20_____20
CAL___(15)____22___27___21_____23
UTAH___(8)____25___24___27_____25
USC___(45)____53___44___44_____47
CU____(29)____61___52___47_____53
OSU___(30)____59___61___62_____61
UCLA__(98)____64___58___66_____63
UW____(82)____69___63___57_____63
ASU___(95)____92___84___78_____85
STAN__(74)____94___86___89_____90
WSU__(202)___188__170__172____177
[/FONT]

Thanks for running this exercise all season, Lou. I think it's yielded a lot of insight.

Do you think the NCAA selection committee will defer a lot to RPI (as opposed to other power ratings)? If you look at bracketmatrix.com, the consensus appears to be leaning heavily on RPI.

Historically, they have leaned towards RPI, but I've read that power ratings are becoming more important. The thing is that the committee has always seeded teams on their "profile" more than any single rating. That's what makes it art, not science.

Road/neutral record, record against the top 50, SOS, good wins and bad losses, they are all factors. The thing for really all the P-12, not just Cal, is that for teams with such good profiles, we all tend to lack quality road wins. Washington, RPI 82, is our best. The best teams in our conference were all undefeated or near-undefeated at home.

It'll be interesting to see how the committee deals with it on Sunday

LOUMFSG2;842659999 said:

---

Historically, they have leaned towards RPI, but I've read that power ratings are becoming more important. The thing is that the committee has always seeded teams on their "profile" more than any single rating. That's what makes it art, not science.

Road/neutral record, record against the top 50, SOS, good wins and bad losses, they are all factors. The thing for really all the P-12, not just Cal, is that for teams with such good profiles, we all tend to lack quality road wins. Washington, RPI 82, is our best. The best teams in our conference were all undefeated or near-undefeated at home.

It'll be interesting to see how the committee deals with it on Sunday

---

In general, it's best to think of RPI as forming a team's "baseline" expectation for making the tournament. As in, if you're below a certain number, just forget it. If you're above a certain number, virtually guaranteed.

But after forming that baseline, there are a lot of other factors that come into play.

BGGB2;842659975 said:

---

Do you think the NCAA selection committee will defer a lot to RPI (as opposed to other power ratings)? If you look at bracketmatrix.com, the consensus appears to be leaning heavily on RPI.

---

If the committee relied on measures like BPI, Sagarin and Pomeroy, they'd be strongly encouraging teams to run up scores and overplay their starters in blowouts. Those measures more accurately gauge the relative strength of teams, but RPI is used because it only relies on wins, losses and strength of schedule.

That said, the committee has enough "selection criteria" to rationalize any selection or seeding they want. Politics matters in the committee room.

R90;842660014 said:

---

If the committee relied on measures like BPI, Sagarin and Pomeroy, they'd be strongly encouraging teams to run up scores and overplay their starters in blowouts. Those measures more accurately gauge the relative strength of teams, but RPI is used because it only relies on wins, losses and strength of schedule.

That said, the committee has enough "selection criteria" to rationalize any selection or seeding they want. Politics matters in the committee room.

---

I'd like to see that be the case. Style points make everything more interesting.