Dolphin Ratings - College Basketball

Explanation: Each team is listed with its record, overall score differential, and six ratings. Brief explanations of the ratings follow.

Schedule The number in this column is the effective opponent strength of a team. In other words, they would be expected to have the same record had they played all games against an opponent of this predictive rating at a neutral site. Because this calculation depends on the strength of the team in question, it is not possible to rank schedules using these values.
Standard Ranks teams in an order such that a team is "probably better" than all teams ranked lower than it. This calculation uses margin of victory only for computing a team's opponents strengths; the team's rating itself is computed using only wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule
Median Likelihood Determines the likely ratings for each team, based on its wins, losses, and ties relative to its schedule. This generally produces the same or similar ratings as the standard ranking.
Predictive Both schedule strength and rating vs. schedule strength are determined considering both the wins and losses and the score differentials. This rating contains none of the biases in the standard rating, but does weight recent games slightly more than past games since those are a better indication of the team's current strength. This rating is the best of the first three for seeing how good teams are, and thus is the best for predicting future results.
Improved RPI Rating The improved RPI formula is similar to the standard RPI, except that the schedule strength is carried out to infinite depth instead of ending with opponents' opponents, thus allows for a better comparison of isolated groups of teams than is given by the standard RPI calculation. It is similar to the simple rating, except that all games are given equal weight.
RPI Rating. Included only because of common real-life usage. The RPI rating has many statistical problems. The football RPI rating is based on the BCS formula, and approximates the schedule, loss, and quality win components.
Pseudo-Poll. A blended ranking based on win-loss and predictive ratings, calibrated to match real-life polls as closely as possible. This gives a rough but unbiased estimate of how typical voters value record vs. impressive wins.
Predictive-Scoring. This value indicates how many points a team would be expected to score if it played an identical team.
Predictive-Offense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team scores. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to score the league average number of points. This does not necessarily rate a team's offensive abilities, as a fast pace in basketball or big-play defense in football can make a team score more points.
Predictive-Defense. This combines the predictive and scoring ratings to measure how many points a team allows. The number is the predictive rating of an opponent against whom the team would be expected to allow the league average number of points. The same caveat in the predictive-offense rating applies here.

Because these ratings contain no prejudices regarding team or conference strengths, they tend to be quite inaccurate early in the seasons. College football appears to take at least 5 games per team before even remotely reasonable ratings are produced; acceptable ratings are produced with 8 games per team; excellent ratings unfortunately require 14 games per team.

Rankings by division: Overall NCAA-I NCAA-II NCAA-III NAIA-I NAIA-II NCCAA-I NCCAA-II USCAA-I USCAA-II CIS CCAA NBCAA Indep

Full Ranking

                                                 STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI     RPI         POLL       OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM                     W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Arkansas Baptist        13 27 2828 3099  0.093    1 -0.384    1 -0.485    1 -0.194    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 14.597    1 -0.033    1 -0.354
Rochester MI            18 12 2232 2120 -1.120    2 -0.908    2 -0.936    3 -0.879    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 12.690    8 -1.051    2 -0.708
Robt Morris-Springfield 13 16 2240 2360 -1.009    3 -1.050    3 -1.090    7 -1.340    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4 12.024    5 -0.907    6 -1.772
Northwest Christian     13 11 1835 1776 -1.076    4 -1.096    4 -1.117    2 -0.826    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3 12.084    4 -0.757    3 -0.894
Johnson & Wales FL      10 14 1688 1762 -1.099    5 -1.319    5 -1.351    6 -1.267    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5 10.973    9 -1.344    4 -1.190
Philander Smith          6 20 1932 2202 -0.559    6 -1.337    6 -1.370    8 -1.352    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6 10.829    3 -0.683    9 -2.022
Florida College          9  9 1424 1416 -1.394    7 -1.345    7 -1.380    9 -1.475    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7 10.654    7 -1.029    8 -1.922
Apprentice               6 20 1898 2028 -0.668    8 -1.472    8 -1.470    4 -1.085    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8 10.546    6 -0.912    5 -1.257
Concordia AL             4 16 1465 1657 -0.582    9 -1.500    9 -1.507    5 -1.146    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9 10.360    2 -0.485    7 -1.807
Marygrove                7 20 2014 2481 -1.524   10 -1.905   10 -2.009   11 -2.293    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  8.738   10 -1.436   12 -3.149
TEAM                     W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Rhema Bible             13 24 2703 2846 -1.767   11 -2.076   11 -2.218   10 -1.865    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  8.291   11 -1.622   10 -2.107
Briarcliffe              4 23 1623 2071 -2.770   12 -3.188   12 -3.538   12 -3.297    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  4.849   12 -3.686   11 -2.907


USCAA-I: strength=-1.576 (#1)
                                                 STANDARD   MED LIKELY  PREDICTIVE  IMPRVD RPI     RPI         POLL       OFFENSE     DEFENSE 
TEAM                     W  L   PF   PA  SCHED  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING  RNK RATING
Arkansas Baptist        13 27 2828 3099  0.093    1 -0.384    1 -0.485    1 -0.194    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    1 14.597    1 -0.033    1 -0.354
Finlandia                9 13 1665 1872 -0.878      -0.880      -0.903      -1.376      0.0000      0.0000      12.554      -0.604      -2.148
Presentation            15 13 2056 2069 -1.050      -0.882      -0.904      -1.033      0.0000      0.0000      12.681      -0.953      -1.114
Rochester MI            18 12 2232 2120 -1.120    2 -0.908    2 -0.936    3 -0.879    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    2 12.690    8 -1.051    2 -0.708
Robt Morris-Springfield 13 16 2240 2360 -1.009    3 -1.050    3 -1.090    7 -1.340    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    4 12.024    5 -0.907    6 -1.772
Northwest Christian     13 11 1835 1776 -1.076    4 -1.096    4 -1.117    2 -0.826    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    3 12.084    4 -0.757    3 -0.894
Principia               12 13 1811 1824 -1.126      -1.159      -1.157      -1.129      0.0000      0.0000      11.868      -1.210      -1.047
LaGrange                 7 19 2046 2204 -0.565      -1.205      -1.212      -1.008      0.0000      0.0000      11.619      -0.149      -1.866
Johnson & Wales FL      10 14 1688 1762 -1.099    5 -1.319    5 -1.351    6 -1.267    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    5 10.973    9 -1.344    4 -1.190
Philander Smith          6 20 1932 2202 -0.559    6 -1.337    6 -1.370    8 -1.352    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    6 10.829    3 -0.683    9 -2.022
Florida College          9  9 1424 1416 -1.394    7 -1.345    7 -1.380    9 -1.475    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    7 10.654    7 -1.029    8 -1.922
Apprentice               6 20 1898 2028 -0.668    8 -1.472    8 -1.470    4 -1.085    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    8 10.546    6 -0.912    5 -1.257
Concordia AL             4 16 1465 1657 -0.582    9 -1.500    9 -1.507    5 -1.146    1 0.0000    1 0.0000    9 10.360    2 -0.485    7 -1.807
Columbia Union           5 22 1844 2265 -1.137      -1.701      -1.754      -1.680      0.0000      0.0000       9.536      -1.501      -1.858
Southern Virginia       10 18 1828 2112 -1.796      -1.820      -1.895      -2.236      0.0000      0.0000       9.016      -2.415      -2.057
Webber Int'l             2 26 1877 2361 -0.651      -1.874      -1.963      -1.654      0.0000      0.0000       9.052      -1.228      -2.080
Marygrove                7 20 2014 2481 -1.524   10 -1.905   10 -2.009   11 -2.293    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   10  8.738   10 -1.436   12 -3.149
William Jessup           6 16 1503 1742 -1.706      -2.052      -2.188      -2.010      0.0000      0.0000       8.277      -2.020      -2.000
Rhema Bible             13 24 2703 2846 -1.767   11 -2.076   11 -2.218   10 -1.865    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   11  8.291   11 -1.622   10 -2.107
Dallas                   3 19 1240 1565 -1.299      -2.169      -2.269      -2.106      0.0000      0.0000       8.091      -2.973      -1.240
Green Mountain           3 13  964 1196 -2.593      -2.745      -2.830      -2.754      0.0000      0.0000       6.470      -3.330      -2.179
Briarcliffe              4 23 1623 2071 -2.770   12 -3.188   12 -3.538   12 -3.297    1 0.0000    1 0.0000   12  4.849   12 -3.686   11 -2.907

Conference Strengths
CONFERENCE                W   L   PCT  RNK RATING
USCAA-I                 188 384 0.329    1 -1.576

Home field advantage amounts to:
     0.295 points in main ratings
     0.032 points in improved RPI
Average of 2.15 points per score

Predict score:






Team Strength vs. Time Plot:





posted: Mon Dec 23 16:22:59 2019

Back to Dolphin rankings main page.