Rankings Through January 1, 2012 & Post

 Click here for full rankings.

Adjusting the MCBR

Why this was done: 

After reviewing the original ranking model, we determined there was a portion of a team’s performance that was being unintentionally excluded from the calculation. The original MCBR was built to rank a team based on the outcome of the game, the quality of the opponent and the location of the game. The missing component was the quality of play each team exhibited during the game. We believe this adjustment corrects the oversight.

How quality of play is estimated:

The reader should know that the ideas used for the quality-of-play estimation come from Ken Pomeroy and Dean Oliver. In many circles, Pomeroy is regarded as one of the top college basketball data analysts, and his work in advanced statistics has been discussed by ESPN and in publications such as the Wall Street Journal. The Misix quality-of-play estimation takes the ideas discussed by Pomeroy and tweaks them using regression analysis rather than then the Pythagorean calculation for expected winning percentage. We admire Pomeroy’s work, which is why it is the basis for our estimation, and we encourage our readers to follow Pomeroy and his analyses.

The overall formula:

The Misix quality-of-play estimation is a function of a model that forecasts a team’s winning percentage based on specific offensive and defensive statistics. The basic model structure, which comes from Oliver, is:

WinPct_t=f(EffectiveFieldGoalPct,TurnoverPct,OffensiveReboundPct,FreeThrowRate)

Each team’s results are then put in order and indexed using the team with the highest value as 100.

The logic behind the formula: 

As discussed by Oliver and Pomeroy, four factors measure how good a team is when they have the ball and how well they defend when they don’t have the ball. The regression model we’re using estimates a team’s winning percentage based on its performance in each offensive and defensive statistic. Here are the definitions of each variable used in the model:

• Effective field-goal percentage – basically the same as regular field-goal percentage, except three-pointers get weighted heavier (50%) than two-pointers (because three is 50% more than two).

Effg% = (0.5*3FGM + 2FGM)/FGA

• Turnover percentage

TO% = (Turnovers/Possessions)

• Offensive rebounding percentage

OR% = (OR/(OR+DR_opponent)

• Free-throw rate

FTR = (FTA/FGA)

Final rankings:

The final rankings combine the results of the original MCBR Index values with this new quality-of-play estimated index. We feel the combination of these two indices gives a more accurate ranking of a team’s quality of play and quality of opponent.

For further clarification or answers to other questions, please contact Andy Martinelli at amartinelli@misixinc.com. 

Comments

[Billy Betts]

The top 15 is starting to shape up like I expected it to, though I'm still a big fan of having St. Mary's, UNLV and New Mexico in that bracket...quality teams. I am sad to see the Badgers and Teach Me How To Golden Eagles have been dropping like flies, something I expected from Marquette when they faced real competition, but not so much from the Badgers. The game of the week should go in favor of Baylor, they have to future NBA players in their frontcourt and K-State has not recruited the same talent as they have in the past. Murray State is still one of the few undefeated teams this year and rumor has it, Shaka is leaving VCU to guide them for a deep run come tourney time, but that's only speculation at this point. Another fine written article with humor and vast knowledge, keep up the good work and I look forward to reading more next week!