I think you might be confused.This is ridiculous. CU is
better than every one of those teams. How the **** is Iowa better odds?
I think you might be confused.This is ridiculous. CU is
better than every one of those teams. How the **** is Iowa better odds?
The lower the negative number, the better.This is ridiculous. CU is
better than every one of those teams. How the **** is Iowa better odds?
Minus odds is a good thing. They’re the leading odds to make the tournament of that list of teams.This is ridiculous. CU is
better than every one of those teams. How the **** is Iowa better odds?
Apparently I had an epic brain fart. Which is wildly inexcusable because I'm not foreign to sports bettingMinus odds is a good thing. They’re the leading odds to make the tournament of that list of teams.
Negative lines mean Colorado is favored to get in and not favored to miss.This is ridiculous. CU is
better than every one of those teams. How the **** is Iowa better odds?
I honestly might have a stroke at this point. Since Lunardi's last major update:Lunardi still has us the fourth team out behind Utah.
BPI discounts our home wins by at least 40% and ESPN folks like Lunardi use it as their main computer number.I honestly might have a stroke at this point. Since Lunardi's last major update:
and Lunardi moved CU DOWN to his fifth out team and Utah UP to his 2nd team out. JFC. Also:
- CU won two games in pretty convincing fashion, moved up to 30 in NET and 29 in KenPom
- Utah notched victories against the same opponents
Those teams all still "in" according to Lunardi
- Wake Forest lost to bad VT and ND teams
- Virginia beat BC and got blown out against Duke
- FAU lost to Memphis
View attachment 70228
Something really weird happening there. Why are CU and CSU penalized so much heavier than any of the other teams?BPI discounts our home wins by at least 40% and ESPN folks like Lunardi use it as their main computer number.
BPI is a joke and I hate that it’s used as a ‘valid’ metric. (It’s also very opaque and not clear at all how it’s calculated.)BPI discounts our home wins by at least 40% and ESPN folks like Lunardi use it as their main computer number.
Also. Par for the course for ESPNBPI is a joke and I hate that it’s used as a ‘valid’ metric. (It’s also very opaque and not clear at all how it’s calculated.)
If I remember right I believe BPI over emphasizes past season performances. While most do this (as it’s the only thing available in November), other metrics like Ken Pomeroy’s are clear how this is a flawed way to anticipate future performance and accordingly give it little weight.
(Personally, I like Ken’s rankings the most - he puts out great blog posts on how and why he values the metrics he uses. And for the fire Tad group he has a great piece on why the timeout to stop the run is overvalued )
KP leans heavily on preseason prediction and past performance at season start. As the in-season data comes in, that 'old' data is weighted less and less, until, by now, it's not included at all.BPI is a joke and I hate that it’s used as a ‘valid’ metric. (It’s also very opaque and not clear at all how it’s calculated.)
If I remember right I believe BPI over emphasizes past season performances. While most do this (as it’s the only thing available in November), other metrics like Ken Pomeroy’s are clear how this is a flawed way to anticipate future performance and accordingly give it little weight.
(Personally, I like Ken’s rankings the most - he puts out great blog posts on how and why he values the metrics he uses. And for the fire Tad group he has a great piece on why the timeout to stop the run is overvalued )
Wyoming is also penalized. Teams that play at altitude have their home wins discounted in BPI because of the advantage that altitude theoretically gives.Something really weird happening there. Why are CU and CSU penalized so much heavier than any of the other teams?
I'm well aware of the theory dude. I'm saying how BPI is applying it is wildly inconsistent based on what we are seeing.Wyoming is also penalized. Teams that play at altitude have their home wins discounted in BPI because of the advantage that altitude theoretically gives.
He got in early, predicted a perfect bracket almost 20 years ago, coined the word "bracketology", and is located in the ESPN HQ region as a St. Joe's guy. When ESPN put up his "bracketology" the first year it created millions of additional hits for the website. None of the above have anything to do with whether I think he has any more credibility than 100 other guys who do this, but I give him credit on timing and seizing opportunity. He's made a mint off this stuff.Lunardi gets way more credit than he deserves. He's like the signature that I think Gramburgler had about geology - just liquor and guessing.
As someone that doesn’t follow/understand this net/kenpom thing does this mean that we’re 31 ranked team in the country?31 NET
31 KenPom
Yes. Based on the computer formula the NCAA Selection Committee uses to evaluate team resumes (NET). KenPom also used to a lesser extent and basically gives a ranking on team performance weighted to the factors of play most correlated to winning basketball.As someone that doesn’t follow/understand this net/kenpom thing does this mean that we’re 31 ranked team in the country?
I honestly might have a stroke at this point. Since Lunardi's last major update:
and Lunardi moved CU DOWN to his fifth out team and Utah UP to his 2nd team out. JFC. Also:
- CU won two games in pretty convincing fashion, moved up to 30 in NET and 29 in KenPom
- Utah notched victories against the same opponents
Those teams all still "in" according to Lunardi
- Wake Forest lost to bad VT and ND teams
- Virginia beat BC and got blown out against Duke
- FAU lost to Memphis
View attachment 70228
Lunardi is equivalent to Mel Kiper Jr. for basketball. Both are horrible at what they do.Lunardi gets way more credit than he deserves. He's like the signature that I think Gramburgler had about geology - just liquor and guessing.
I honestly might have a stroke at this point. Since Lunardi's last major update:
and Lunardi moved CU DOWN to his fifth out team and Utah UP to his 2nd team out. JFC. Also:
- CU won two games in pretty convincing fashion, moved up to 30 in NET and 29 in KenPom
- Utah notched victories against the same opponents
Those teams all still "in" according to Lunardi
- Wake Forest lost to bad VT and ND teams
- Virginia beat BC and got blown out against Duke
- FAU lost to Memphis
View attachment 70228
The NET likes road wins, even over bad teams?With Tuesday night results, I understand the NET ,Florida move from 34 to 26 and the Nevada move from 40 to 32. But how does a St John’s win over Depaul 3-27 (0-19) and a #38 to #34 jump work? As well as Texas Tech jumping from #42 to #35 with a win over Oklahoma State 12-18 (4-13) . Also, I second and third, Joe Lunardi Bracketology is a waste of time read.
I had the same reaction. Let's just face it-- Lunardi is an old washed up scrub. He uses ESPN metrics (BPI). Think he got the gastric band surgery to reduce his fat gut/ass. Other than screw CU, he does not change his bracket much throughout the year. He hates PAC12 Hoops and is terrified of Prime, who gives him nightmares... Lunardi suffers Tim McCarver flashbacks!
There's also an efficiency component there -- the NET incentivizes beating the piss out of your opponent, regardless of quality. The Johnnie's won by 27, and broke 100 in doing so, on the road.The NET likes road wins, even over bad teams?