ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

What follows are power ratings for ACC men's
basketball teams based solely on the results of games
among conference members through Thursday, January
15th 1998.  Following the ratings will be a brief
explanation of methodology.

Team           Rating      Record       Previous
Conf    Total

1)Duke          85.30   5-0     15-1    1)86.31
2)UNC           74.77   4-1     17-1    2)74.81
3)Clemson       73.28   2-2     11-5    3)73.35
4)Maryland      68.46   3-2     10-5    4)68.43
5)FSU           67.13   1-4     12-4    5)67.10
6)Ga Tech       65.67   2-2     12-4    8t)59.83
7)NC State      64.58   1-3     10-5    7)63.36
8)***ia      60.81   1-3      9-8    6)66.81
9)Wake          59.52   1-3      8-6    8t)59.83

Recent Games:

Thursday, 1/15/98

Georgia Tech at ***ia
Prediction: ***ia by ~7
Result:     Tech by 18

Predictions, immediate & cumulative: 0-1, 7-5

Upcoming Games:

Saturday, 1/17/98

Clemson at Duke
Prediction: Duke by ~13
Maryland at Wake Forest
Prediction: Maryland by ~1

Methodology:

These ratings are derived by finding a least-
squares approximation of a set of linear equations of the
form TeamA-TeamB=AdjMargin.  One finds the minimum
solution (expressed by eight equations of the form
TeamA-TeamH=Margin for TeamA through TeamG, with
TeamH fixed) of the sum of (TeamA-TeamB-AdjMargin)^2
over all games for the variables TeamA through TeamH.
This is done by taking the derivative and then gathering
the terms containing each variable, setting those sums of
terms equal to zero, and finding the solution of *that* set
of equations.

Fortunately in practice this can be done fairly
mechanically.  Since the solution will invariably have at
least one dimension, one can actually set up a matrix
with only eight, rather than nine, rows and columns, set
the value for the ninth variable arbitrarily, and then treat
the resultant single solution for the other eight variables
as their offset from the ninth.

The matrix looks like this:

-                     - -           -
|       .         .   | |     .     |
|       .    ...  .   | |     .     |
|       .         .   | |     .     |
-                     - -           -

where m_A_A equals the total games played by
A, m_A_B = -n where n equals the total games played
between A and B (so m_A_B=m_B_A), and
games (including games against TeamH) played by A;
for this rating, the margin is adjusted for a blowout factor,
so points between ten and twenty are worth .75, points
between twenty and thirty are worth .5, points between
thirty and forty are worth .25, and points above forty are
advantage, which is set at 4.5 (based on a study of ACC
games over the last four years) and then four points are
added [subtracted] for a win [loss].  Thus, three one-point
wins would be worth +15, while one five-point win and
two one-point losses, while having the same point
differential, would be worth -1.  Solving this matrix gives
values for TeamA through TeamG which is their
difference from TeamH; I arbitrarily set the average of the
nine power ratings to seventy.

One can use this method to predict the outcome
of future games by taking the difference in the power
the difference is greater than four, taking the team with
the higher value and a margin (adjusted back up for the
blowout factor if desired) of the difference minus four; if
the difference is less than four, then the team with the
higher value with a margin of one (the game is really too
close to call).

The accuracy of such predictions has not been
tested, but will be presented over the course of this
season.  Presumably as more games are played, the
ratings will become more accurate.

--
Real men don't need macho posturing to bolster their egos.

George W. Harris  For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

Quote:

>         What follows are power ratings for ACC men's
> basketball teams based solely on the results of games
> among conference members through Thursday, January
> 15th 1998.  Following the ratings will be a brief
> explanation of methodology.

> Team           Rating      Record       Previous
>                        Conf    Total

> 1)Duke          85.30   5-0     15-1    1)86.31
> 2)UNC           74.77   4-1     17-1    2)74.81
> 3)Clemson       73.28   2-2     11-5    3)73.35
> 4)Maryland      68.46   3-2     10-5    4)68.43
> 5)FSU           67.13   1-4     12-4    5)67.10
> 6)Ga Tech       65.67   2-2     12-4    8t)59.83
> 7)NC State      64.58   1-3     10-5    7)63.36
> 8)***ia      60.81   1-3      9-8    6)66.81
> 9)Wake          59.52   1-3      8-6    8t)59.83

> Recent Games:

Huh...

Duke throttles Wake by 36 and *lose* a whole power point?!?

Just out of curiosity, how much did Duke have to win by in order
for them to retain their previous ranking? Can you calculate that?

Ping

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

Quote:

> Huh...

> Duke throttles Wake by 36 and *lose* a whole power point?!?
> On the road, no less.

> Just out of curiosity, how much did Duke have to win by in order
> for them to retain their previous ranking? Can you calculate that?

> Ping

I have a similar remark.  Maryland beat North Carolina and their rating
increased by 0.03, about 7 points behind Clemson.  By your system, does
this mean it is basically impossible for Maryland to move out of 4th in
your rankings?  I don't get it.  Better have Armstrong check the code.

*----------------------------------------------------*
| Stan and Julie Plante, University of Maryland 1984 |
|            USDA Zone 7, Burke ***ia             |

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

thusly:

=>
=>         What follows are power ratings for ACC men's
=> basketball teams based solely on the results of games
=> among conference members through Thursday, January
=> 15th 1998.  Following the ratings will be a brief
=> explanation of methodology.
=>
=>
=> Team           Rating      Record       Previous
=>                        Conf    Total
=>
=> 1)Duke          85.30   5-0     15-1    1)86.31
=> 2)UNC           74.77   4-1     17-1    2)74.81
=> 3)Clemson       73.28   2-2     11-5    3)73.35
=> 4)Maryland      68.46   3-2     10-5    4)68.43
=> 5)FSU           67.13   1-4     12-4    5)67.10
=> 6)Ga Tech       65.67   2-2     12-4    8t)59.83
=> 7)NC State      64.58   1-3     10-5    7)63.36
=> 8)***ia      60.81   1-3      9-8    6)66.81
=> 9)Wake          59.52   1-3      8-6    8t)59.83
=>
=> Recent Games:
=>
=
=Huh...
=
=Duke throttles Wake by 36 and *lose* a whole power point?!?

No, actually, the Duke victory over Wake was on
the 14th, and was taken into account in the previous
ranking.  The only game that was a difference in this ranking
was Georgia Tech unexpectedly beating UVa as handily as
they did, which bumped Tech up nearly six points, and UVa
down exactly six.  Since Duke has played ***ia, but not
Tech, that drops the strength of Duke's opponents, and thus
the 'impressiveness' of Duke's performance.  Similarly, since
NCState has played Tech but not ***ia, their power rating
jumped over a point.

It's easier to analyze these things when there's only
one game.  Ordinarily the effects would be so complex and
interrelated that I wouldn't have a clue.

=Ping

--
Real men don't need macho posturing to bolster their egos.

George W. Harris  For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

In Sat, 17 Jan 1998 10:24:31 -0500 of yore, Stan and Julie Plante

=I have a similar remark.  Maryland beat North Carolina and their rating
=increased by 0.03, about 7 points behind Clemson.  By your system, does
=this mean it is basically impossible for Maryland to move out of 4th in
=your rankings?  I don't get it.  Better have Armstrong check the code.

Again, Maryland's defeat of UNC was taken into
account in the previous ranking, and actually jumped
them up from sixth, IIRC.  There isn't actually any code yet;
I just cobbled together a spreadsheet.  I'll have a more
expandable version next season, with a larger group of
teams (maybe the Big Six conferences).

=| Stan and Julie Plante, University of Maryland 1984 |

--
Real men don't need macho posturing to bolster their egos.

George W. Harris  For actual email address, replace each 'u' with an 'i'.

ACC Power Ratings - Games Through 1/15/98

Quote:
>Predictions, immediate & cumulative: 0-1, 7-5
>Upcoming Games:
>        Clemson at Duke
>                Prediction: Duke by ~13

I think you missed the decimal point between the 1 and 3 on
this one.

--
Woods....................................woods_AT_eagle_SPAMME_quest.com
========================================================================
"And the Visor Boy said to the Almighty, 'Who do you think I am --
Bear Bryant?' And the Almighty answered 'No, he's here with me.'

When in doubt, Dive! Dive! Dive! and don't forget to feed the fish.