At this point in the season, every player is looking at 15-20 games a week, many of them against other players, with 25-30 points possible. Lets face it - those who win the big games are going to win the big points.
Take last week for example. Babblemur's teams went 14-5, most wins of anyone. Value = 14 points. Sure, only three games against other players, but all losses.
On the other hand, NotaTurtle suffered 8 losses last week, with only 11 wins, but led the league in scoring last week with 23 points. 5 points for knocking off West Virginia, 3 each for four other wins over other players, and this despite 6 losses to other players!
The top 3 players last week were:
NotaTurtle (23) who rose from the bottom dwellers to the playas division.
Gunz (22) who went 5-1 against other players, 12-4 over all, and passed Boaris to move from 4th place to 3rd in the standings.
Akaoni (21) who claims it was a "miserable week" - he went 11-5, 5-2 against other players.
Least amount of points earned: Some Guy in Illinois, who lost all three games against other players (including a loss to UCLA) but went 10-6 overall for...10 points.
Best W-L record of the week: Jutdog, turned in an 11-3 performance for 17 pts, his only losses to #4 Purdue, New Mexico St, and Maine.
* * *
If we assume that 20+ points is a "good week", and 10 points is about as bad as one can get, any movement on the leader board will involve a slow and steady series of good weeks, average (15) at worst, while other teams turn in a slow and steady series of bad weeks. Am I just trying to make the case that I can catch Akaoni? Sure! But I would have to have 5 good weeks of 20+ points per week while he would need 5 bad weeks. (Note: There are only about 9 more weeks of the regular season...)
So what this is really saying is that while slow and steady wins the race, time is running out for the sleeping rabbits who aren't knocking down the big games. That includes Babblemur, Some Guy in Illinois, Phunmunki, and The CEO.
* * *
Week Nine Preview
Best chance anyone has to knock of a Top Ten Team:
Wisconsin (Gunz) vs. Purdue (Turtle) on Saturday - Purdue is going to a tough road game in Mad-town, where the Badgers knocked off Top 10 Duke earlier (as well as Ohio State and Marquette).
Potentially fun games to watch:
Tuesday: #2 Texas (Akaoni) vs. Arkansas (CEO) - this one is at Arkansas, and I just have a feeling that the Razorbacks just might come out to play ball.
Wednesday: #1 Kansas (Boaris) vs. Cornell (Jutdog) - lets just all admit that Cornell has been playing some pretty good ball this year. Beating Kansas at Kansas? I'm just expecting a fun game!
Friday: Butler (Babs) vs. Wright St (Some Guy) - this is the first of the two match ups between the only two player owned Horizon League teams. OK it might not be fun to watch, but if you do you might see why Butler was ranked in the top 12 in pre-season polls...
Saturday: Gonzaga (Turtle) vs. Portland (Babblemur) - first of two matchups between two very good WAC teams. Gonzaga: beat Wisconsin, Illinois, Oklahoma, & Cincinnati. Portland: beat Minnesota, UCLA, and Oregon.
Saturday: Illinois St (Gunz) vs. UNI (CEO) - Showdown for the Missouri Valley, both teams have exceeded expectations so far...
Saturday: Siena (Boaris) vs. Niagara (Phun) - Showdown for the ______ Conference, Siena comes very highly recommended, Niagara comes with a cool nickname, the Purple Eagles.
Sunday: #1 Kansas (Boaris) vs. Tennessee (Jut) - Gotta love inter-conference play! Tennessee better be packing heat for this game! Ha ha ha!
* * *
Standings after Week Eight
# 1. AKaoni - 147 (87-18)
# 2. Jaybird - 126 (81-22)
# 3. Gunz - 124 (84-25)
# 4. Boaris - 122 (84-24)
# 5. Jutdog - 113 (78-24)
# 6. NotaTurtle - 111 (73-32)
# 7. The CEO - 104 (76-32)
# 8. Some Guy in Illinois - 102 (78-33)
# 9. Phunmunki - 101 (70-34)
# 10. Babblemur - 100 (70-35)
19 comments:
And consider that come conference title time, each team could earn another BUNCH of points - with a player scoring over 30 just in conference titles.
This might be my worst late selection season yet - common Utah St. They must be watchin Boston College. I need Minnesota to produce tomorrow.
Although I've been conditioned since starting this league to make no attempts at comity or serious comments, here are my two cents.
I think that victories in the tournament are worth too many points. It has been noted by many (or noted many times by Babs, perhaps) that it doesn't matter who is winning during the season unless that person can build such an enormous lead that he can withstand the points given to the ultimate winner of the tournament. It is kind of like Family Feud -- it doesn't matter who wins the first two rounds; as long as you win the third round you get to play for the money. If this is the case with our league, it is essentially reduced to a gamble of who gets one of the top picks. That's boring. Even this season, I'm not deluded enough to think that Purdue could eventually win it all. I think UNC stands a better chance. I therefore have resigned myself to not having a chance to win.
Now, that said, I'm not sure that this is actually the case. Both of our previous winners (the brothers Mitchell) not only won the tournament but also had very good teams all around. Had Musashisan won either of those years I think we'd all be in agreement that the scoring system was stupid. But that didn't happen. Both Jutdog and Jaybird had good, deep teams, and were clearly deserving of the titles.
Nevertheless, it's hard to care to much about the first five months of the season (Babblemur BBall league-wise) if it is true that it doesn't really matter. The person who happens to win the lottery (got to pick Kentucky) shouldn't be able to then pick Michigan, UCLA, and Arizona and still win the league. Winning the league should at least have something to do with accurately predicting who the good teams will be beyond the consensus, preseason, top 5.
The tournament is exciting enough on its own -- we can all fill out brackets. I think that this league would be more exciting if the games played in March weren't the only ones that mattered.
Now . . . let the skewering of my idiotic argument begin!
--nat, obvs.
I agree that the ncaa tourney is worth too much, as advancing each round is crazy: 12 pts for one round, another 16 for the next! so on and so on.
You'll note that it was in your thinking (rare for an Iowan to have valid considerations I know) and mine that I reduced (I think) 3 or 4 of the point totals for NCAA rounds by 1 or 2 points. Not huge, but a slow movement towards what I think makes a better challenge. Note that any larger changes would have had Akaoni up in arms.
Just as a side note - the current setup does to a challenging degree provide for victory with accurate picks. For instance, if Babs had not taken Charlotte last year, and instead selected the likes of, well, any team that would have won 2 more games, Bab's would have won the league outright. HE LOST BY ONE POINT. Hahahaaahaa that sucker.
And while you did clarify and state top 5, it should just be noted that Kansas was the 4th pick in 07/08. It just happened to be with our league, I was able to snag huge squads late, including UCONN, PITT, and several others I can't recall.
Anyway, we'll see how this year pans out, and again look at a few "improvements", also know by some Iowans as "clustering the fvck out of the league". I would be in favor of reducing rounds 2 through championship by 1-2 points each round.
And as one final side note - I don't think conference tourneys are overpriced. These things really end up being open to anyone with a wide variety of teams winning. It also provides an opportunity for teams in smaller point producing leagues to snag some additional points, making our later rounds a bit more valuable.
~ J
Time for some "deconstruction" - an ugly process.
The first year of this was truly experimental - and it can only barely be compared to the second year due to the major changes in point structure. The first year, most of the emphasis was on player-vs-player games - you win +2 you lose -2! I finished the season with negative points! Also regular wins against non-player teams were practically inconsequential - 1 point for every 5 wins! So Jut's victory in year one really needs a big ASTERISK because that was a pilot year.
Year two was much better in my opinion, although I was resistant to some of the changes (until I started winning). In year two I didn't have the most stellar squad of teams, but I got lucky here and there, got good draws in the tournament, and of course Michigan State made it to the championship game - barely! But remember that the Final Four last year consisted of Michigan State (me - first place at the time), North Carolina (Jaybird - second place at the time), Villanova (CEO - third place by that time), and UCONN (HippieD - last place).
UCONN could have knocked off Michigan St in the semis, and gone on to defeat North Carolina in the Championship game. Who would have won? Babblemur! Yes, I was that far ahead of Jaybird in points.
Okay - I've digressed.
The intention of this through the regular season is for players to earn points based on how well their teams played - wins, wins against other players, wins against top 10 teams, winning tournaments. Frankly if your teams played well, they should be going to the NCAA Tournament.
The intention of this at Tournament Time is: #1 your teams either get selected or not; #2 your teams advance = you get more points; #3 the farther they advance, the more points you get; #4 if your teams get knocked out of the tournament, you don't get any more points.
The question that deserves an answer is "how many points?"
I would argue that the NCAA Tournament IS half the Basketball season! Its March Madness! The regular season is just a 4 month qualifying contest for the Big Dance. Sure, for the Radfords and Utah States their conference tournaments may be a larger part of their season glory, but they all want in the BIG DANCE.
So this goes back to the question: how many points should the NCAA Tournament be worth?
Dammit - I have to get to work.
But on a more serious note:
North Carolina lost to Charleston last night. (ha ha).
And Louisiana Tech is looking more and more appealing for an expansion team...
I concur, each part of the season has a key aspect to consider when drafting:
In the early season, do you want to draft Oakland (knowing they'll wreak havoc on most teams in their conference, and have upside of winning one game potentially, but likely get pounded by Memphis, Syracuse, Michigan State, Kansas, etc? Do you draft teams that could win preseason tourneys, or have cake walks in the preseason (Clemson)?
For midseason, do you position yourself well to get conf head to head pts (Michigan State, Purdue, Duke, Carolina, Texas, etc) or poorly (Jacksonville, Arkansas...)
And of course, do you draft well to position yourself for winning conferences, conf tourneys, and NCAA bids (i.e. without those three, why would anyone draft Oakland, they wouldn't, but it's the fact that you have a shot at those year end bonuses based on your risk.
Duke and Nova got hot late last year, and had me contending into the final four, Babs had a shot, Jaybird was there, and I want to say into the great 8 all but 2 teams still had a chance.
It's obviously a learning process, and I like the thought of shaving a pt here or there to see if it makes it better vs making drastic changes.
I suspect we'll see this thing tighten up over the next few weeks, although with Cincinatti losing at home to all of a sudden good Pitt, I'm not sure I'll be part of that tightening,
Thanks to Ron and Jut for all of their time to run this and give us this competitive outlet
-THE CEO
Oh - another interesting note:
San Diego State (my team) last year made it to the NIT final four for 2 points, but lost to Baylor. If they would have beat Baylor (worth 4 more points) I woulda won!
On the other hand, if Jacksonville last year woulda won the A-Sun Tourney as they were supposed to, I would have had another 4 points for a NCAA Tourney team and I woulda won!
But probably the biggest burn, Creighton last year was 27-8 and won (co-shared?) the MVC but was denied a bid to the NCAA Tournament. If Creighton would have been given a bid, I woulda won!
Here is a little experiment.
I took last year's spreadsheet and changed the NCAA tournament scores by basically cutting them all in half. Last year, depending on if a team just got a bid versus advancing to various levels, their final points were: 4,6,11,19,32,49,70. (i.e. North Carolina got 70 pts for the entire tournament all 6 games, Purdue got 11 pts total for making the tourney and winning the first two rounds, while Stephen A Austin got 4 pts for losing in the first round).
For this exercise, I cut their values to: 2,3,6,10,16,24,35. (I also cut the NIT values to 2x1,3,6)
Here were the real final standings:
1. Jaybird 476
2. Babblemur 475
3. Jutdog 442
4. Boaris 437
5. The CEO 433
6. Akaoni 431
7. Phunmunki 383
8. ProgressMedia 382
9. Gunz 370
10. NotaTurtle 348
11. Musashisan 340
12. HippieD 332
Here are the *Modified* final standings with reduced points for the NCAA Tournament:
1. Babblemur 439
2. Jaybird 427
3. Jutdog 421
4. Boaris 415
5. Akaoni 414
6. The CEO 402
7. ProgressMedia 366
8. Phunmunki 361
9. Gunz 351
10. NotaTurtle 335
11. Musashisan 324
12. HippieD 310
Take whatever you want from this, but I think my argument at the time was that the NCAA Tournament, being worth more points, made it possible for an underdog to suddenly swoop up out of the middle of the pack and challenge the Big Dogs for the Crown.
Given that going into the Tournament I was leading the pack with 403 points, to Jutdog (399), Akaoni (396), Boaris (391), Jaybird (377), The CEO (370), and poor HippieD (288) in the basement.
Really it was quite close at that point! And it was the higher point values that allowed Jaybird to surpass a 26 point deficit and defeat me, while Jut, who was only down by 4, could only get one team past the first round of the tournament.
So I guess it is what it is. You set the points, pick your teams, and hope for the best!
And let's all keep in mind, the difference between pro ball (people taking nights off) and college, is that in pro ball, you can say everyone makes the playoffs (at least everyone who deserves to), in the NCAA's only the 65 best teams make the field (I'm including the play-in game) out of 320+ D1 schools. You are picking a team for their output of the whole season, with the tournament the icing on the cake. If a team manages to pick a roster that gets all of their teams to the NCAA tourney, good for them. I have resigned to the fact that Oklahoma will win the NIT this year, so don't anyone get any fancy thoughts about those pts.
I guess my point is, the NCAA tourney should have more value, teams have to earn it, it's not a birthright. I got in the running because my Nova team came through, Siena sprung a first round upset, and yes Ron, my Northern Iowa stole Creighton's NCAA bid by winning the tourney.
-THE CEO
What I really want to know is what the dirty no good boys from Illinois thinks
-THE CEO
Good to see San Diego State holding on their homecourt against New Mexico, with it would have been player to player, but certainly helps in their quest for an NCAA bid getting that quality win, and helps in the conf title bid. Go Sparty (hard to say as a Wisconsin fan, but you know, last year as a huge Carolina fan I had to draft Duke, and let's just say with both of my bro's in the hall of fame, there is a little sibling pressure on here)
-THE CEO
Please call me Mr OnceLer you you you Lorax
Next year I'm drafting all Big Ten teams other than the Illini, guaranteeing Coach Weber an undefeated conference record. I mean, seriously, every team I picked reaaallly sucks. Bad. Pathetic. Go Wright State.
SGII
That North Carolina loss to Charleston really got you down! I thought Tulsa was a good pick, and Ole Miss and Missouri are going to net points.
But then again, my teams suck.
I was going to try to console you by pointing out that UCLA's losses have mostly been to other players' teams, like Butler, Portland, Notre Dame, etc, and that they really aren't that bad. Then I realized that Cal was your first pick. Ouch.
WTF: Oregon State, 48 Seattle, 99
Well hopefully California can take down Oregon State... Man the Pac 10 is a mess. Two bid conference I predict. Good year for mid-majors - Rhode Island can practically start selling Tourney tickets. -Babblemur
let it be noted that mighty Oakland went to Seattle and won
-The CEO
Hey, I'm looking for an address to send my settlement to.
Gunz
Post a Comment