Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

Wow, KenPom way less enthusiastic

Denver_sc said:
Wow, KenPom way less enthusiastic for this year's Buffs than most of us:

http://kenpom.com/index.php

63?

Can someone who follows this stuff closely tell me how they rate so low?


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Click to expand...

Tad's success has gone against the grain of what KenPom's numbers say should that CU should be achieving. Metrics say that we've got an outlier program that has had a lot of luck.

I would assume that KP looks at this year's team and says that just like the last part of 2013-14 we don't have a guy who can get to the line at a ridiculous rate like Alec and Mayor could. We don't have a guy who clearly does a lot of "glue guy" stuff like Dre that the stats have trouble quantifying.

Our offensive efficiency has been bad since the NIT Final 4 year. Our defensive efficiency slipped last season. The one thing KP could probably look at favorably in our numbers is rebounding, but he may even see that slipping since Mayor was a plus rebounder from the PG position.
 
Jg is your guy. But as Nik says, we're the anti KenPom. However, 63 is just ridiculous. 20 spots higher at an absolute minimum.
 
Buffnik said:
Tad's success has gone against the grain of what KenPom's numbers say should that CU should be achieving. Metrics say that we've got an outlier program that has had a lot of luck.

I would assume that KP looks at this year's team and says that just like the last part of 2013-14 we don't have a guy who can get to the line at a ridiculous rate like Alec and Mayor could. We don't have a guy who clearly does a lot of "glue guy" stuff like Dre that the stats have trouble quantifying.

Our offensive efficiency has been bad since the NIT Final 4 year. Our defensive efficiency slipped last season. The one thing KP could probably look at favorably in our numbers is rebounding, but he may even see that slipping since Mayor was a plus rebounder from the PG position.
Click to expand...

This is probably the biggest factor. Last 4 yr KP ranks-- '14: #77 '13:#43 '12: #77 '11: #51

Haven't ranked above #123 in Adj Offense since '11 when we were 9th.
 
BuffG said:
This is probably the biggest factor. Last 4 yr KP ranks-- '14: #77 '13:#43 '12: #77 '11: #51

Haven't ranked above #123 in Adj Offense since '11 when we were 9th.
Click to expand...


Stats don't lie.....until they do! And Pom is just pure stats at this point: absolutely no determination of the reality of the teams, just stats as trailing indicators, used to predict .....what? Vegas would fast run away from something like this. UCLA @ #13? Georgetown @ #22? Maryland @ # 33? Oregon @ #35? Meanwhile, CSU, WYO, Cal, UMass and UNLV are all listed below the Buffs in this "ranking", some ridiculously lower.

This is purely a statistical analysis based past performance and is horrible as a predictive tool of any sort. It deserves little credence as anything other than a historical footnote.
 
I think those ratings accurately reflect where the team was at the end of last year.
 
buffaholic said:
This exactly.

I suspect a lot of people not close to this program see our performance in the tourney and wonder how we fix that.
Click to expand...

I suspect a lot of people close to the program see our performance in the tourney and wonder how we fix that.
 
His pre-season rankings by his own omission aren't great, aren't overly complex and are more a baseline of the program and they take limited account into incoming players.

But CU doesn't setup well for KenPom's metrics this year. They aren't overly efficient on offense, the defense efficiency fell off last year and they don't have a player like Alec/SD that gets to the line at a ridiculous rate and can boost/skew offensive efficiency. And the guy that takes the most shots and ends the most possessions isn't very efficient, so something has to change in order for CU to take a leap up KenPom's ratings.

The Luck factor that Nik mentioned is interesting - KenPom thinks that a team is probably going to win as many close games as lose them over time, so he is likely predicting a fall back to the mean as CU was overall 3rd in luck last year. But they were also 19th in 2012, so who knows. In Tad's 4 years, CU has been 246th, 19th, 104th and 3rd in luck. So some regression is likely, winning every close game isn't generally sustainable.
 
Last edited:
love how all the stats keep saying the same thing: someone needs to step up big time on O or this team is merely a bit better than average and will struggle big time to make the tourney.
 
Darth Snow said:
I don't think those ratings accurately reflect the reality of where any team was at the end of last year. Its just made-up sh*t!
Click to expand...

FIFY.

So the national champ UConn ranked, what? 16th? Creighton, with Dougie, was 50 something and a bunch of 12-16 seeds or NIT teams, were better than teams who went to the Sweet Sixteen?

Got it.

This whole list is merely a geek's "wet dream" with stats, all sound and fury, in the end signifying absolutely NOTHING! Doesn't reflect very much of last year's final rankings, nor any of this year's expectations, its kind of silly, really.
 
Goose said:
I suspect a lot of people close to the program see our performance in the tourney and wonder how we fix that.
Click to expand...

The guys in my ticket group are just automatically (blindly?) assuming we will be much better in all aspects. I'd be crazy wild about this team if our SG transfer was eligible this year.
 
buffaholic said:
The guys in my ticket group are just automatically (blindly?) assuming we will be much better in all aspects. I'd be crazy wild about this team if our SG transfer was eligible this year.
Click to expand...

Fortune would solve a lot of our problems. That kid is good. I still think we're dancing, but we have a lot of questions to answer if we're doing anything more than one & done.
 
If we can get stepped-up PG play this team can go far. If we have lots of 'bad Ski' and poor PG play we will lose more games than we expect. If XT can knock them down from deep that opens everything up, especially when Scott gets doubled.
 
89BUFF89 said:
If we can get stepped-up PG play this team can go far. If we have lots of 'bad Ski' and poor PG play we will lose more games than we expect. If XT, XJ, J Hop and Thomas can knock them down from deep that opens everything up, especially when Scott gets doubled.
Click to expand...

FIFY. Ski will be Ski and XT will run the team and be good for about 7-9 pts. and 5-6 assists/game.

The real factor in how far the Buffs go, is the consistency of XJ and whether his mental disappearing act can be overcome by Hopkins, Fletcher and others.
 
From what I saw with XT last year, he's got the stroke to knock them down from 3, just needs to get the ball in his hands a bit more. One thing you left out of the equation is jelly's passing in double teams - lets hope he got that worked out during the off season, because it wont matter who is open if he cant get them the rock.
 
wyobuff said:
From what I saw with XT last year, he's got the stroke to knock them down from 3, just needs to get the ball in his hands a bit more. One thing you left out of the equation is jelly's passing in double teams - lets hope he got that worked out during the off season, because it wont matter who is open if he cant get them the rock.
Click to expand...

If guys are moving, he will have options to pass out of those double teams.
 
I think a lot of the changes to the offense have to do with Jelly. They will try to get him the ball more in face up situations and in the high post. He is a great back-to-the-basket guy, obviously, but he will be harder to double team if he is catching the ball at different places on the floor - rather than always on the block.

Regarding XT, I think he is in line for a really solid year. My hope for him is that he can become the 2014 Nate Tomlinson. Get it done on defense, hit a timely 3, and make the good decisions with the ball in his hands. He is a low-maintenance player, which is a perfect fit for his role.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top