My computer ratings

[NovaBall]

stever is too funny. SMU in the top 10 means his formula probably has a built in +X pts to all Conference of Americans teams or something.

What a clown.

[FormulaX]

[Westbrook#36]

You're giving him an awful lot of credit...

You might not be giving him enough. I don't know what is more obnoxious on this board, Stever's off-the-reservation posts or the reflexive negative reactions when he might be making a worthwhile point. If the original post had another name next to it, it would be greeted with a much more level-headed response.

That's the problem with the boy who cried wolf, when he does have a valid point no one believes he's actually being genuine. It's hard to with all his passive aggressive disingenuous posts. There's an easy solution, if he actually has an algorithm just show proof of it.

[stever20]

SteverrrrPom? Lol.

U r the wily coyote of haters...luv it.

He created an algorithm that allowed him to sneak an AAC team into the top 10.

SMU is 20th in KenPom, 11th in Sagarin, 13th in RPI, 12th in Massey.

My personal favorite on that list is #7 Pittsburgh: 27th in KenPom, 23rd in Sagarin, 14th in RPI, 36th in Massey

So how is a team being tied 10th in my thing so much different than 11/12/13?

Their SOS is pretty good(in RPI right now #95). MOV right now is +20.4 points(in my system not quite as good as I cap individual games at 30). Also just looked and RPI has them at #11 right now as well.

Pitt- #23 RPI SOS along with MOV being +21.6. Closest game 10 points.

Also- here's my other AAC ratings-
Cincy 31/22 in sagarin
UConn 55/31 in sagarin
Tulsa 61/72 in Sagarin
Memphis 64/66 in Sagarin
Houston 74/85 in Sagarin
UCF 133/141 in Sagarin
Temple 139/132 in Sagarin
East Carolina 161/174 in Sagarin
Tulane 194/212 in Sagarin
USF 234/272 in Sagarin

yeah some are better in Sagarin- but then again, I don't have Cincy/UConn/or Temple as good.

It's still pretty early in the entire season. I mean taking the AAC and Big East into account- only 9 of 21 have played 10 games or more.

Billyjack- to your question, I do take MOV into account(capping at 30 points). Generally speaking in blowouts, the margin with 10 minutes is the same as end of game. Also, no real way to account for something like the PC/Mich St game where 10 point swing in last minute. I'll check when I get home but MOV and SOS are from what I remember the 2 biggest components. Also take into account actual record and your offense/defense....

AS far as Georgetown being low- first off, I'm using JUST this year. Then you have Bryant, UMES, and Brown that are a total of 5-24 that hurts the SOS some. Then MOV is only 8.9(which is pretty low).
Butler- not much difference between 27 and 25 now?
PC- a lot of them again is MOV. they've had a lot of single digit games.

AS far as X not being #1? Are you serious? top 20 SOS and they've dominated it.

[Edrick]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=X6WHBO_Qc-Q

[XUFan09]

You're giving him an awful lot of credit...

You might not be giving him enough. I don't know what is more obnoxious on this board, Stever's off-the-reservation posts or the reflexive negative reactions when he might be making a worthwhile point. If the original post had another name next to it, it would be greeted with a much more level-headed response.

That's the problem with the boy who cried wolf, when he does have a valid point no one believes he's actually being genuine. It's hard to with all his passive aggressive disingenuous posts. There's an easy solution, if he actually has an algorithm just show proof of it.

I can sympathize with the boy who cried wolf logic to an extent, and Stever is responsible for that. It gets out of hand, though, with how quickly people will slam him for any perceived transgression. The reaction to SMU's ranking is a perfect example: 11, 12, and 13 in other major metrics is fine, but 10 is apparently crazy and "Stever being Stever." It's one thing to be a bit suspicious of him, but it's another to not use your head when evaluating a controversial poster.

In this case, I don't really need to see his algorithm as proof, as his numbers don't differ that significantly from other common metrics. If he's making this stuff up, then there would be notable differences convenient to some argument that he's trying to make.

[FDS]

You might not be giving him enough. I don't know what is more obnoxious on this board, Stever's off-the-reservation posts or the reflexive negative reactions when he might be making a worthwhile point. If the original post had another name next to it, it would be greeted with a much more level-headed response.

That's the problem with the boy who cried wolf, when he does have a valid point no one believes he's actually being genuine. It's hard to with all his passive aggressive disingenuous posts. There's an easy solution, if he actually has an algorithm just show proof of it.[/quote]

I can sympathize with the boy who cried wolf logic to an extent, and Stever is responsible for that. It gets out of hand, though, with how quickly people will slam him for any perceived transgression. The reaction to SMU's ranking is a perfect example: 11, 12, and 13 in other major metrics is fine, but 10 is apparently crazy and "Stever being Stever." It's one thing to be a bit suspicious of him, but it's another to not use your head when evaluating a controversial poster.

In this case, I don't really need to see his algorithm as proof, as his numbers don't differ that significantly from other common metrics. If he's making this stuff up, then there would be notable differences convenient to some argument that he's trying to make.[/quote]

Credibility and Respect are both earned attributes. They are also attributes that can be lost and can be very difficult to earn back. Sometimes when people lose so much credibility and respect that merely trying to be reasonable once is not going to undue the damage. If people are slamming Stever that quickly, it isn't a situation where things are "out of hand". It just demonstrates what he has earned and what he hasn't. Obviously Stever has more credibility with you than most on this site but you can't really expect people see things in a completely objective manner when dealing with someone whom they deem to lack any credibility.

[XUFan09]

Stever doesn't really have any extra credibility with me, but I can evaluate the message separate from the messenger and thus can see that his posts are a mixture of normal, rational posts and "not normal" posts (to put it lightly).

Maybe it is too much though to expect people to actually glance at a post before replying because they don't like a poster.

[stever20]

I think part of things as well is folks here don't think SMU is all that good. If someone didn't pay that much attention, they would never think SMU is remotely close to being in the top 10.. So they thought I was pulling it out of my arse.

I'd say look at what I have for UConn. Sagarin has them at 31 but I have them at 55. Some benefit for the AAC.

[FormulaX]

Sorry, I'm "stevernoid" Smu? because they wont be in the tourney this year. It's a good AAC team, that will have a nice grey area at the end of the season.