2017 Louisville Invitational Tournament

[Smallhoops]

The way they select now is much fairer. It takes politics almost completely out of the equations. The teams in the city are ranked based on how they finished last year in the SETH rankings at the end of the year. The top team being a 80.0 the last team being a 70.0. It then trickles down by .25 every team.

Example if the season ended today, the start of next season would look like

 

Fern creek 80.0

Trinity 79.75

Doss 79.5

Ballard 79.25

Every other team team

Brown 70.0

The top 1-7 teams are ranked as an A

Teams 8-14 B

Teams 15-22 C

Teams 23-29 D

Teams 30-36 E

 

You get more points for a road win and loss, less point for a home wins. Ever AD knows the formula and most coaches should also. You know where you are ranked before the season starts. As mention already in the post every week a new updated ranking is sent. Every few weeks a new state ranking is sent out also. (Now this is hard to rank every team in the state, but at least you know what they are) and much better than just a blanket every team is a C outside 6th and 7th region.

If you were to go by the LIT ranking a team can start out more than 60 points ahead of another team. No one knows the formula and was never released. A team could be horrible the year before and be in the 60’s with the LIT rankings then be 12-0 with wins over Dunbar and Christian county and be too far down to make up ground. This was a major flawed system and cannot be used.

If you allow a committee to make the selection then you have bias when schools start getting money for making it. (The gate is divided up amongst the field.), I do not know if its evenly or just the day you play. In all honesty we only complain about the team’s 18-22, those teams are not making a run and winning the LIT or at least have not to date.

 

Case in point someone brought up Collegiate should be in over Manual. So I looked at both teams

 

Collegiate

11-5

Wins over teams with winning record 2

Played 5 teams with winning record

Combine win loss of teams played 79-106

Avg record of teams played 4.9-6.6

Best win Beth Haven or Bethlehem

 

Manual

2-10

Wins over 1 team with winning record

Played 11 teams with winning record

Combine win lose of teams played 92-56

Avg record of teams played 7.6- 4.6

Best win Lex Sayre

 

Now you cannot tell who is better but the one thing that stands out is Manual as played a much tougher schedule, what would Collegiate have done against Manuals schedule?

best record 3-9

Worst record 1-11

Win

Portland Christian.

 

Maybe

Scott

Sayre

 

lose to

Trinity

Ballard

Waggener

Jtown

Oldham Co

Bryan Station

Central

Lafayette

Eastern

 

Manual playing Collegiate schedule

Worst 11-4

Best 14-1

Wins

Whitefield

Fort Knox

St. Francis

Bullitt Central

Shawnee

Hart Co.

Metcalfe Co.

Allen Co-Scottsville

Evangel

Beth haven

Bethlehem

 

Maybe

Desales

Western

CAL (1st round LIT game)

 

Lose

ST X

 

 

I give Collegiate credit for playing Western, Desales, and CAL. St. X is district game. If they were to win one of those games they are in. And lets be honest does a team with 2 wins need to be in? I don't think so.

 

The system is a lot better than it was and I like that it is just Louisville schools, just wish they would move it back to the Garden like it use to be.

 

Very much appreciate this analysis. As a non-coach, I have never seen an explanation of the SETH ratings. This is very helpful. Thank you very much.

 

I must say, it appears to be a flawed measuring stick, both in terms of the starting point being based on last year (which may or may not have any relation to whether a team is good the following year) and by using arbitrary numbers (increments of .25) to differentiate between teams (my older son, who has a masters degree in statistics, would have a field day with that one). Perhaps it measures something, I'm just not sure that it measures anything with any degree of accuracy.

 

Let me also mention that I am the one who brought up Collegiate and KCD being left out while 2-9 Manual made the field. I totally agree that neither Collegiate nor KCD should get in because they have a realistic shot at winning the LIT because they simply don't. But neither does 2-9 Manual. I hope that whatever system is used, the 20 best teams make the field because for a lot of schools making the LIT field is an accomplishment.

 

Again, thanks for the information about the SETH ratings. Perhaps they are better than the old system. And perhaps there is no better system for trying to differentiate between the teams that end up 18-22 in the ratings. I am not sure that is the case, but it is what it is. And the LIT is a great event that I look forward to every year, even if I think it perhaps could use a few improvements.

[6thregionguy]

Very much appreciate this analysis. As a non-coach, I have never seen an explanation of the SETH ratings. This is very helpful. Thank you very much.

 

I must say, it appears to be a flawed measuring stick, both in terms of the starting point being based on last year (which may or may not have any relation to whether a team is good the following year) and by using arbitrary numbers (increments of .25) to differentiate between teams (my older son, who has a masters degree in statistics, would have a field day with that one). Perhaps it measures something, I'm just not sure that it measures anything with any degree of accuracy.

 

Let me also mention that I am the one who brought up Collegiate and KCD being left out while 2-9 Manual made the field. I totally agree that neither Collegiate nor KCD should get in because they have a realistic shot at winning the LIT because they simply don't. But neither does 2-9 Manual. I hope that whatever system is used, the 20 best teams make the field because for a lot of schools making the LIT field is an accomplishment.

 

Again, thanks for the information about the SETH ratings. Perhaps they are better than the old system. And perhaps there is no better system for trying to differentiate between the teams that end up 18-22 in the ratings. I am not sure that is the case, but it is what it is. And the LIT is a great event that I look forward to every year, even if I think it perhaps could use a few improvements.

 

We can both agree on this, really only the top 12 teams have a shot hard to see someone winning four in a row but maybe one day. I also do not have the answer to which is the best way and do enjoy that it is 20 so the smaller schools can make it and have a shot.

 

The only issue I have with not ranking the teams is at the beginning of the season you can not award the same number of points for someone that beats Ballard and someone who beats Walden. so you have to have a starting point which you will never find one everyone likes.

[PurplePride92]

Looks like SETH got it right in 2017.