He throws some water on the fire.

He starts talking about the Aggies at the 4:30 mark. (FYI USU finished last year ranked #39 in his system.)
http://1280thezone.com/ken-pomeroy-prev ... er-season/

https://kenpom.com/

Sounds fair. I would hope we improve from last year. Although, we really need more MW teams to pick it up. We have a lot of potentially (and historically) good teams in the conference. It would be great to get the MWC back up to 3-4 teams in the tournament.

Roy McAvoy wrote: ↑

May 30th, 2019, 10:33 am

He throws some water on the fire.

He starts talking about the Aggies at the 4:30 mark. (FYI USU finished last year ranked #39 in his system.)
http://1280thezone.com/ken-pomeroy-prev ... er-season/

https://kenpom.com/

This is laughable.
Half of the key returning players were freshmen in the 2018-2019 season.
No one really knows on how good recruits are for the most part, so regarding them as nothing is silly. Queta was a late recruit for us last season, and who knows maybe we landed another Queta level of player in this recruiting class.
We still have 1 spot open on the team.
We have 2 players coming back from injury that didn't play in the 2018-2019 season.
Prove me there are 47 teams ahead of us in preseason.

Seems far. His final rankings had us at #38 so to be #48 to start the year is reasonable. I do feel the perception of the MW is down and I'm sure that plays a factor in the formula. Funny he talks about schools like USU having success one year don't usually do as well the next year. It's a complete analytical take based on the statistical history of CBB is all it is. He offers no insight to why he thinks that outside of that take. So I don't put much weight into his opinion.

Sent from my Pixel 2 XL using Tapatalk

According to Ken's site, we were one of, if not the most surprising team last year. Finishing where we did compared to where we were supposed to finish at the start of the season (by his metrics) was nothing short of a miracle.

So if we're starting this year at 48 in his book, who knows? Maybe we'll end up much higher than last year.

And yes, most of what Ken does is simply based on mathematical simulations based on years and years of data. So a the statement that teams like USU who do well one year often don't do as well the next year is just a complete guess based on historical trends.

Pretty much everything leads me to believe that we will be a better team next year than this past year.

treesap32 wrote: ↑

May 31st, 2019, 9:40 pm

And yes, most of what Ken does is simply based on mathematical simulations based on years and years of data. So a the statement that teams like USU who do well one year often don't do as well the next year is just a complete guess based on historical trends.

Pretty much everything leads me to believe that we will be a better team next year than this past year.

If its based of years of data then its not a guess. It's a projection. Stats say we wont be as good. Stats aren't always right but it is more likely.

I said it before, we might be a better team next year but we our record may not be as good. It will depend on who we schedule as well.

This was why I was asking you guys who you have on the schedule, ooc. The MW was the 15th best BB conference last season..Behind the likes of CUSA, the Colonial, The Ivy and the MAC..This despite having two teams finish in the top 30.

While I think you will have a very very very good team next year that will likely remain in the top 20 all season, the MW probably won't be helpful to you at all.

Blitz79 wrote: ↑

June 1st, 2019, 10:51 am

treesap32 wrote: ↑

May 31st, 2019, 9:40 pm

And yes, most of what Ken does is simply based on mathematical simulations based on years and years of data. So a the statement that teams like USU who do well one year often don't do as well the next year is just a complete guess based on historical trends.

Pretty much everything leads me to believe that we will be a better team next year than this past year.

If its based of years of data then its not a guess. It's a projection. Stats say we wont be as good. Stats aren't always right but it is more likely.

I said it before, we might be a better team next year but we our record may not be as good. It will depend on who we schedule as well.

His reasoning was that we were one of the "surprise" teams last year. Often times, surprise teams are a flash in the pan and then they regress to the mean. That's all that was taken into account. The fact that many other "surprise" teams in the past have regressed back down to their usual place.

What is not taken into account is that the recent "mean" was not our usual place in the basketball world. To coin someone's username on this board, we have been "mediocre at best" the last several years under Duryea and a few under Stew.

I believe the resurgence is due mainly to a new coach, new mindset, team play, Neemias Queta, and player development that occurred all last year. I don't think any of those things are going away. Yes, we lost Quinn Taylor and a seldom used Dwayne Brown, Jr, but that's it. We're adding several key pieces and there is no reason we shouldn't be just as good or better than last year.

The only way we aren't (in my opinion) is if some of the new pieces don't buy into the team concept and bring the team down. But with Merrill and Neemy as the leaders, and a no-nonsense Coach Smith at the helm, I think any bad apples would be weeded out and sent to the bench pretty quickly. I don't think Sam and Neemy will let anyone bring the team down.

So that's my opinion.

And, while it would be nice to know who we're playing in OOC play, Utah State has been notoriously late on releasing schedules, so I wouldn't expect anything for at least another month and a half or two months. Usually we determine our schedules by piecing 95% of our games together from all of our opponents who release their schedules prior to ours.

treesap32 wrote: ↑

June 1st, 2019, 12:36 pm

His reasoning was that we were one of the "surprise" teams last year. Often times, surprise teams are a flash in the pan and then they regress to the mean. That's all that was taken into account. The fact that many other "surprise" teams in the past have regressed back down to their usual place.

What is not taken into account is that the recent "mean" was not our usual place in the basketball world. To coin someone's username on this board, we have been "mediocre at best" the last several years under Duryea and a few under Stew.

I believe the resurgence is due mainly to a new coach, new mindset, team play, Neemias Queta, and player development that occurred all last year. I don't think any of those things are going away. Yes, we lost Quinn Taylor and a seldom used Dwayne Brown, Jr, but that's it. We're adding several key pieces and there is no reason we shouldn't be just as good or better than last year.

Well said. Pomeroy's reasoning makes sense in a vacuum, but there are plenty of reasons to believe that more of the Aggies' improvement was legit than the average "surprise team."

Adding Queta and Smith is like a pitcher adding a new pitch. The projections expect the pitcher to regress to the mean because they see the statistical track record. But the new pitch essentially makes the guy a new pitcher.

Advanced stats *loved* Quinn Taylor, though. It wouldn't surprise me if Pomeroy had him as the third best player on the team by nearly as big a margin as Sam & Neemy were 1 and 2. His graduation probably plays a significant role in KenPom's relatively low ranking of the Aggies.