Why has our RPI dropped to 64th?
- Thread starter DAWG61
- Start date
Calculating your RPI if you had won games vs X, Y, or Z is easy enough. Your record counts 25% of your RPI. Your wins and losses are adjusted based on whether the game is home, away, or at a neutral site (home win = 0.6 win, home loss = 1.4 loss, road win = 1.4 win, road loss = 0.6 loss, and neutral games are not factored). Calculate your "adjusted" winning percentage and take 25% of it. Add the difference between that and 25% of your current win percentage to your current RPI and you have your "potential" RPI.
All that said...
Our current RPI is ranked #64 (rating = 0.5713) according to Warren Nolan.
If we had only won the two home games we should have won (Akron and Georgia), our RPI would be ranked #33.
If we had won those two home games and either @LSU or @Auburn, our RPI would be #28.
If we had won those two home games and both @LSU and @Auburn, our RPI would be #20.
You could even say the last scenario above should have been likely. But even with only the two home games, we're comfortably in the tournament. Instead, we get the SSDD.
All that said...
Our current RPI is ranked #64 (rating = 0.5713) according to Warren Nolan.
If we had only won the two home games we should have won (Akron and Georgia), our RPI would be ranked #33.
If we had won those two home games and either @LSU or @Auburn, our RPI would be #28.
If we had won those two home games and both @LSU and @Auburn, our RPI would be #20.
You could even say the last scenario above should have been likely. But even with only the two home games, we're comfortably in the tournament. Instead, we get the SSDD.
I am interested in what OM's rpi would be if we had won our two overtime games @ bama and @ auburn.
You have to go through and determine your "adjusted" winning percentage vs what it would be in the changed scenario...
Your current adjusted win %: 14.8w-9.6l = .60656 * .25(25% of total rpi) = 0.15163934 total RPI contribution
Your proposed adjusted win %: 17.6w-8.4l = .67692 * .25 = 0.16923007 total RPI contribution
Difference: + .01759143
Current total RPI: 0.5735
Adjusted total RPI: 0.5911
Current RPI ranking: 60th
New RPI ranking; 36th
Your current adjusted win %: 14.8w-9.6l = .60656 * .25(25% of total rpi) = 0.15163934 total RPI contribution
Your proposed adjusted win %: 17.6w-8.4l = .67692 * .25 = 0.16923007 total RPI contribution
Difference: + .01759143
Current total RPI: 0.5735
Adjusted total RPI: 0.5911
Current RPI ranking: 60th
New RPI ranking; 36th
If we make one more play against LSU and UGA, we're comfortably in the tournament, have a bye in the first round of it, and are probably looking at 7-8 seed right now with opportunity to improve.
On the other hand, if we lose to UGA in the SEC tourney, we're probably out, and we may be out even if we beat them.
On the other hand, if we lose to UGA in the SEC tourney, we're probably out, and we may be out even if we beat them.
Sorry but when you have teams like USM at 17th and Colorado St. at 22nd this year it just makes the whole thing a joke. That would basically make USM a 4 to 5 seed and CSU a 6 seed which is ridiculous on both counts. One change they should make is just treating all teams below RPI 200 as the same. Right now it seems like a win over an RPI 75 team plus a win over an RPI 325 team EQUALS wins over 2 RPI 200 teams and it just plain doesn't. Some of these schools end up manipulating SOS by playing teams that are easily beatable but not SO low in the RPI system that it drags down their RPI. In my book beating an RPI 225 team is no more or less impressive than beating an RPI 325 team.
If we had won that game, we would easily be in the top 50 right now, I bet. Maybe you RPI geniuses can back me up... but I bet that one game alone has impacted us more than @AU and @LSU combined. <div>engie said:
</div><div>Even if that isn't true, we lost a lot of ground by not defending our home court against a team like Georgia. Losing on the road doesn't hurt near as much as losing to a bad team at home. </div>
We SHOULD be punished for losing to UGA and Akron at home, and we SHOULD be punished for losing to Auburn on the road. So when you really look at it, it did what it was supposed to do. What I hate the most about it is that a team like USM can play a CUSA schedule and teams like 17ing Belhaven and still have an rpi of 17....that's not right, nor fair. Recently they have lost several games against bad bad teams, yet they are still in the top 20 rpi? It just seems like the rpi is inconsistent between teams. USM hasn't lost too many bad games at home, but they have lost several bad ones on the road. Meanwhile, we have lost a few bad ones at home, but we also have beaten two tourney teams in their gym. So how does that not balance us out? Do you not get just as much good credit by beating Vandy on the road, as you do bad credit when you lose to Georgia at Home?
I don't understand it, but just looking at the teams near the top and some of their schedules makes you realize how flawed it is.
I don't understand it, but just looking at the teams near the top and some of their schedules makes you realize how flawed it is.
flipped us roughly 25 spots in the RPI since we lost that GA game in OT. Yea, that makes a lot of logical sense.
the snapshot that I'm showing here doesn't really tell the whole story. They just give you a good basic idea, while being valid enough to be applicable, but are not intended to be taken as fACTUAL. We are changing wp, one facet(25% of the RPI formula), without analyzing how changes applied to that facet effect the other 75%, as far as SOS goes. Basically, my numbers will show a team gaining more ground than they actually are(because beating someone causes their wp to drop, which in turn hurts our own SOS in a small way, unless I'm mistaken in how that portion of RPI is calculated). This is where my numbers break down...because you'd literally have to do weighted WP for all 340ish teams and the application of that becomes a nightmare. I just don't want to know that badly.
Using the data in the manner in which I am(only focusing on weighted wp, not SOS), the Kentucky, Georgia, and Akron losses all hurt us identically bad. They all count as 1.4 loss (at home) against our weighted WP. So, taking away any one of the 3, ends up effecting us identically in the RPI in my(not totally correct) method. Where their actual effect is felt is on the SOS, and that effect is based on the strength of the team played MUCH moreso than the actual win or loss. It'd be impossible to quantify, but I'd bet that if the numbers were taken into actuality, the UGA win would have put us ~47th in the RPI, and Kentucky would have put us ~41st...
Using the data in the manner in which I am(only focusing on weighted wp, not SOS), the Kentucky, Georgia, and Akron losses all hurt us identically bad. They all count as 1.4 loss (at home) against our weighted WP. So, taking away any one of the 3, ends up effecting us identically in the RPI in my(not totally correct) method. Where their actual effect is felt is on the SOS, and that effect is based on the strength of the team played MUCH moreso than the actual win or loss. It'd be impossible to quantify, but I'd bet that if the numbers were taken into actuality, the UGA win would have put us ~47th in the RPI, and Kentucky would have put us ~41st...
I think "Math Wiz" is a good title for you 
. Basically with two wins we should have had (UGA, UK) our RPI would be cut in half at around 32. We'd be looking at a 6th seed as opposed to an 11-12th seed. So basically we'd be flip-flopping our seed with the matchup we play in the first round. A 5 playing a 12 or a 6 playing an 11. We will steal that seed though with a win in the first game. Of course that's IF we still get in.
. Basically with two wins we should have had (UGA, UK) our RPI would be cut in half at around 32. We'd be looking at a 6th seed as opposed to an 11-12th seed. So basically we'd be flip-flopping our seed with the matchup we play in the first round. A 5 playing a 12 or a 6 playing an 11. We will steal that seed though with a win in the first game. Of course that's IF we still get in.Our game against Belhaven does not count for anything. You notice our RPI record is -2 wins from our official record.
That is a much wiser idea to play a non-D1 team than to play a terrible D1 team. In all likelihood, playing those two games instead of playing Alabama State or something is what has us in as a lock.
Did we manipulate the RPI? You're damn right. You don't look at the RPI of your opponent. You look at the record. Your OWP is 50 percent of your RPI. You want opponents that have good records. How they got that good record doesn't mean a damn thing. For us, playing Murray State was better for our RPI than playing North Carolina. Playing New Mexico State? About as good as playing Florida State.
On the flip side, Colorado State played a brutal schedule. They have a high RPI, but a not so great record. Playing #63 UCF was about the same for us.
You're fu... (ahem...17'ing) kidding yourself if you think mid-majors are the only one doing this.. The SEC is the king of RPI manipulation--especially in baseball. Have all of your teams play weak OOC schedules so that everyone's OWP shoots up in conference season. Smart approach.
The committee is well aware of this flaw (at least in basketball). That's why the criteria of
"Wins vs. Top 25, Wins vs. Top 50" are just as important as your actual RPI--if not more
important.
That is a much wiser idea to play a non-D1 team than to play a terrible D1 team. In all likelihood, playing those two games instead of playing Alabama State or something is what has us in as a lock.
Did we manipulate the RPI? You're damn right. You don't look at the RPI of your opponent. You look at the record. Your OWP is 50 percent of your RPI. You want opponents that have good records. How they got that good record doesn't mean a damn thing. For us, playing Murray State was better for our RPI than playing North Carolina. Playing New Mexico State? About as good as playing Florida State.
On the flip side, Colorado State played a brutal schedule. They have a high RPI, but a not so great record. Playing #63 UCF was about the same for us.
You're fu... (ahem...17'ing) kidding yourself if you think mid-majors are the only one doing this.. The SEC is the king of RPI manipulation--especially in baseball. Have all of your teams play weak OOC schedules so that everyone's OWP shoots up in conference season. Smart approach.
The committee is well aware of this flaw (at least in basketball). That's why the criteria of
"Wins vs. Top 25, Wins vs. Top 50" are just as important as your actual RPI--if not more
important.
Actually,a team's opponents' winning percentage (OWP) is calculated after removing the results against the team in question. So, our OWP does not take into consideration whether we beat them or not. Which makes sense because, as you suggested, beating a team would otherwise hurt your SOS (and that wouldmake the RPI even more ludicrous).engie said:
So,the "what if..."calculations aboveshould be accurate as far as changing past results because the OWP is essentially how your opponents did against everybodyelse.
That's the thing about RPI. It doesn't know who you beat. All it knows is your record against your schedule (with adjustments for game location). We're 21-10 against the schedule we've faced (15-3 at home, 3-6 away, and 3-1 on a neutral court). You could take our 18 home games and pick any 15 wins and it wouldn't affect our RPI over picking any other 15 wins. Same goes for our 9 road games. Pick any 3 for wins and our RPI wouldn't change.engie said: