Thank you. The more I read of it, the less I think I like it, particularly early in the season. I’m more of a results based guy. Predictions mean little unless one is gambling, and I don’t gamble.
That’s not to suggest that KenPom doesn’t have its place, but it certainly means little as some sort of predictor on how we’ll do because it doesn’t appear to take into account that players and teams can improve.
I also think margin of victory or loss is overrated. A loss is a loss whether by 3 or by 33. It isn’t necessarily predictive of what happens next. An example from today is that UVA struggled and only beat a horrible FSU by 5 at home. Looks like KenPom would penalize them for that margin of victory. Do you think Tony Bennett cares that they won by only five points? I’m pretty sure he doesn’t. He cares more about whether they won and how they executed his game plan rather than by how much they won.
Also, shouldn’t a factor be whether a coach emptied his bench and played all freshmen because his team was up big, and the margin of victory got smaller as the subs played?
That being said, I do think this make sense. In KenPom’s words, “It likes a team that loses a lot of close games against strong opposition more than one that wins a lot of close games against weak opposition.” So, strength of schedule does matter, but as 2012 said, it may look at metrics from the previous season, which makes little sense, especially given the massive turnover in college basketball due to the transfer portal.
I guess in the end I come back to what I’ve heard the head of the NCAA Selection Committee say year after year, “Who’d you play, where’d you play, and how’d you do?” It really is that simple.
