[quote=“UncleLar, post:10, topic:968”]In fact, when you look closer at both of those performance systems you start to understand how much different our play was from our record. Sagarin has multiple rating systems. One of them, the ELO-Chess system is based entirely on wins and losses, it does not reflect margin of victory (or loss) at all. The other one, his Predictor system that I have charted above takes the opposite perpective. It’s based entirely on
performance and not wins and loses. When you compare how Penn State ranks under the two systems, it turns out that the Predictor systems has us 81 places higher than the ELO-Chess system. That is the biggest delta of all 347 teams that Sagarin tracks.
A similar thing shows up under Pomeroy’s ranking. His Pythagorean System is supposed to predict a team’s winning percentage. When you compare Penn State’s winning percentage with what Pomeroy says it should be PSU ranks 346th of the 347 teams (we were 347th before Thursday’s game butslipped behind Holy Cross after the loss).
So Curley has actual data to support his view that the teams efforts on the floor aren’t relected in their won-loss record.
Thanks for putting this all together, Lar. It’s interesting to see all of the data. As for the above comments, I think an argument can be made that this is a coaching issue. If the team is playing well, but losing tough game after tough game, and having close loss after close loss, at some point it has to fall on the coach. Why can’t the team get over the hump? What is the coach doing that is creating a situation where the team is losing over and over? Or, asked differently, what isn’t the coach doing to put the team in a better position to win at the end of games based on how well they’re playing throughout the games?
It’s been a pretty consistent thing for the team under ED. There is inevitably a 6-8 minute stretch in the last 10-12 minutes of games where the team just dies and the buckets won’t go in. Whether it’s misuse (or non-use) of timeouts, or poor offensive gameplanning, or misuse of personnel, it doesn’t really matter. After this long of time, it’s on the coach.
What I do think you can read from the numbers though is that ED has done a better job of putting together some talent than people tend to acknowledge. That’s why the team has progressively improved it’s play during his tenure, there has been a deeper collection of players who can play.