Monday, January 24, 2011

Regional Rankings 1/24/2011

These regional rankings are not official. They are calculated based on in-region RPI, which is not a criteria of the NCAA selection committee. All data comes via d3hoops.com.

You may notice that the 'SOS' and 'RPI' columns are now noted 'wSOS' and 'wRPI'. This is to signify that these numbers are calculated as weighted numbers (using the OWP and OOWP adjustments as described in the NCAA handbook).

Keep in mind that these rankings are really just a starting point. I don't adjust the rankings to account for head-to-head matchups or common opponents or anything, so feel free to adjust as you see fit.

I'm handing out the 'A' bid to the team with the highest rating. I simply can't (and won't) go through every conference to determine the leader at this point in the season. And since the Pool A bid goes to the conference tournament champion (except in the UAA), I'm OK with this shortcut.

1/24/2011 (Games through Sunday, January 23, 2011)

Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
NE1WilliamsNESCAC0.9380.5720.6641AC 15-116-10-017-1
NE2MiddleburyNESCAC1.0000.5380.6533C112-014-00-015-0
NE3Rhode Island CollegeLEC0.6470.6140.62311AC 11-611-60-011-6
NE4WPINEWMAC0.8820.5260.61514AC 15-215-20-015-3
NE5Trinity (Conn.)NESCAC0.5630.6280.61218C49-710-70-010-7
NE6ElmsNECC0.7140.5730.60823AwC10-411-50-011-5
NE7Western ConnecticutLEC0.8750.5130.60428C1014-215-20-015-2
NE8BeckerNECC0.8750.4890.58548C2314-214-20-014-2
NE9Plymouth StateLEC0.5000.6060.58056C287-78-70-08-8
NE10BowdoinNESCAC0.7330.5210.57460C3211-411-40-011-4
NE11TuftsNESCAC0.3850.6350.57363C355-88-80-08-8
NE12Eastern ConnecticutLEC0.7690.4980.56673C4110-311-40-012-4
NE13AmherstNESCAC1.0000.4100.55893C5815-015-00-016-0
NE14Keene StateLEC0.7060.5040.55499C6312-512-50-012-5
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
EA1HobartLL0.8670.5180.60525AwC13-213-30-013-3
EA2SkidmoreLL0.6670.5710.59536C168-48-50-08-5
EA3StevensE80.7330.5420.59042Abub11-411-40-011-4
EA4Oswego StateSUNYAC0.7860.5180.58547Abub11-311-30-011-3
EA5St. John FisherE80.6670.5430.57461C338-49-70-09-7
EA6UnionLL0.6000.5500.56381C486-48-50-08-6
EA7AlfredE80.4000.6130.56085C524-65-60-07-8
EA8NazarethE80.6000.5450.55988C549-69-60-010-6
EA9HamiltonLL0.6360.5270.554100C647-49-40-09-5
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
AT1KeanNJAC0.8130.5420.61020AwC13-314-40-014-5
AT2Staten IslandCUNYAC0.7690.5560.61021AwC10-311-40-011-4
AT3RamapoNJAC0.8750.5200.60922C614-215-30-015-4
AT4Richard StocktonNJAC0.6150.5800.58943C208-59-60-09-6
AT5Merchant MarineLAND0.4290.6140.56769A 6-87-90-08-9
AT6Montclair StateNJAC0.6920.5230.56674C429-412-40-015-4
AT7SUNY-PurchaseSKY0.7140.5080.56087A 10-410-40-010-4
AT8Mount St. MarySKY0.6670.5220.55891C5710-511-50-011-5
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
MA1KeystoneCSAC0.8570.5400.61912AC 12-212-20-012-2
MA2ElizabethtownMACC0.8570.5330.61416AC 12-213-30-013-3
MA3DeSalesMACF0.6670.5710.59538AwC10-510-50-012-5
MA4WesleyCAC0.8330.5020.58549Abub10-212-60-012-6
MA5CabriniCSAC0.7140.5290.57659C3110-410-40-010-4
MA6Delaware ValleyMACF0.6000.5610.57165C369-610-60-010-6
MA7LycomingMACC0.5380.5790.56966C377-69-60-012-6
MA8La RocheAMCC0.9330.4450.56770A 14-114-10-016-1
MA9ManhattanvilleMACF0.6250.5450.56576C4410-611-60-011-6
MA10St. Marys (Md.)CAC0.7860.4900.56479C4711-314-30-014-4
MA11GettysburgCC0.6250.5430.56380A 10-610-70-010-7
MA12SalisburyCAC0.4000.6160.56282C496-97-90-07-10
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
SO1Randolph-MaconODAC0.8820.5250.61415AC 15-216-20-016-2
SO2Texas-DallasASC0.7330.5730.61317AC 11-412-40-012-4
SO3Virginia WesleyanODAC0.9290.5060.61119C513-114-10-016-1
SO4Maryville (Tenn.)GSAC0.5710.6170.60624C78-610-60-010-7
SO5RandolphODAC0.7270.5580.60032C138-38-40-012-4
SO6East Texas BaptistASC0.7500.5350.58944C2112-412-40-012-5
SO7FerrumUSAC0.8670.4950.58845Abub13-215-20-016-2
SO8Christopher NewportUSAC0.6670.5570.58550C248-412-50-012-5
SO9North Carolina WesleyanUSAC0.6920.5460.58351C259-410-40-013-6
SO10CentreSCAC0.7860.4950.56868A 11-312-30-013-3
SO11Hampden-SydneyODAC0.5000.5850.56478C466-67-60-09-7
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
GL1WoosterNCAC1.0000.5060.6307AC 15-016-00-018-0
GL2HopeMIAA0.8890.5370.62510AC 8-18-20-012-5
GL3AdrianMIAA0.5710.6070.59835C154-37-40-09-7
GL4John CarrollOAC0.6670.5710.59537AwC10-511-50-012-5
GL5WabashNCAC0.8750.4990.59340C1814-214-20-015-2
GL6CalvinMIAA0.7500.5260.58254C276-26-50-09-9
GL7ThielPrAC0.8180.5010.58155Abub9-29-20-012-5
GL8BethanyPrAC0.6880.5340.57362C3411-511-50-012-5
GL9WittenbergNCAC0.7690.4990.56672C4010-311-40-012-5
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
MW1AugustanaCCIW1.0000.5030.6289AC 16-016-00-017-0
MW2North Central (Ill.)CCIW0.5000.6390.60427C97-78-80-08-9
MW3Washington U.UAA0.5330.6270.60329AwC8-78-80-08-8
MW4Wheaton (Ill.)CCIW0.5830.6040.59933C147-511-50-012-5
MW5Concordia (Wis.)NATHC0.8750.5060.59834AwC14-214-20-015-2
MW6HanoverHCAC0.7330.5320.58352Abub11-412-40-012-4
MW7EdgewoodNATHC0.7330.5280.57957C2911-411-40-011-6
MW8ManchesterHCAC0.6670.5470.57758C3010-510-50-011-6
MW9Illinois CollegeMWC0.6150.5570.57164A 8-58-50-010-5
MW10BenedictineNATHC0.7500.5050.56771C3912-413-40-013-5
MW11Illinois WesleyanCCIW0.7500.5020.56477C4512-413-40-013-4
Reg.RankTeamConferenceWPwSOSwRPINat.PoolStatusREGD3vRROOVR
WE1UW-River FallsWIAC0.9330.5680.6592AC 14-114-10-016-2
WE2UW-Stevens PointWIAC0.8240.5890.6484C214-315-30-015-3
WE3ChapmanIND0.9330.5480.6445B114-115-10-016-3
WE4St. ThomasMIAC0.9330.5440.6416AC 14-114-10-015-1
WE5WhitworthNWC1.0000.5040.6288AC 17-017-00-017-0
WE6Lewis and ClarkNWC0.8890.5250.61613C38-18-10-014-3
WE7CarletonMIAC0.6920.5750.60426C89-49-40-09-6
WE8WhitmanNWC0.6000.6020.60230C116-47-40-011-6
WE9HamlineMIAC0.5630.6140.60131C129-79-70-09-7
WE10AugsburgMIAC0.6880.5630.59439C1711-511-50-011-5
WE11Gustavus AdolphusMIAC0.7330.5430.59141C1911-411-40-011-5
WE12UW-WhitewaterWIAC0.6880.5530.58746C2211-512-50-012-5

KEY:
WP - Winning percentage
wSOS - Strength of schedule (including home/neutral/away adjustment)

NAT - National rank of in-region RPI

C - "Guaranteed" Pool C (within top 18 RPI in nation)
wC - Within Pool C position (within RPI range of current top 18 Pool C candidates)
bub - Pool C bubble (within RPI range of current top 28 Pool C candidates)
number - Current RPI rank among Pool C candidates.

REG - record versus in-region opponents
D3 - record versus all D3 opponents
vRRO - record versus regionally ranked opponents
OVR - overall record

5 comments:

  1. I'm confused in the South how teams with 5,6,7 losses are ahead of Mary Hardin-Baylor who is 14-3 and 1st in the ASC. I realize that SOS plays a part but shouldn't these losses bring these teams down more?

    ReplyDelete
  2. @Derek
    MHB's in-region RPI ranks them #12 in the south (one off my list). They do have a good winning percentage, but their SOS is 0.471 right now. The teams ahead of them with six (regional) losses (Maryville and Hampden-Sydney) have SOS numbers of 0.606 and 0.585 respectively. That's a significant difference.

    MHB's RPI is so close to that of Hampden-Sydney that it's nearly a tie (0.003 difference).

    ReplyDelete
  3. I see...I know these are just number so it doesn't take into account head-head matchups, etc...I just figured that UMHB's SOS would be similar to UT-Dallas and East Texas Baptist because of the fact that the ASC plays 21 conference games so they are playing basically the same opponents. I guess it will probably even out as the season progresses. Thanks for the info!

    ReplyDelete
  4. @Derek, you are right about the SOS evening out and a quick glance at the schedules of the three teams you mentioned tell me that will begin immediately.

    Matt and I are seeing a lot of variability in the SOS numbers thanks to the weighting system the NCAA has chosen to use this season. Basically, teams get a bump up by playing road games and take a hit by playing home games. UMHB should see their SOS rise since 5 of their remaining 8 regular season games are on the road while UT-D and ETB will be playing more home games than road games.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Thanks for that info Zac. That makes perfect sense

    ReplyDelete