Tracking KenPom, Round 2

Submitted by stubob on
Or, why my bracket is a mess.

To follow up on the previous KenPom charts and graphs, I decided to pick my NCAA tourney bracket based on Ken's predictions and see how accurate he is.  The way I used the data is as follows:  I assumed that M = (AdjOffence - AdjDefense)* (AdjTempo)/100 gives an average margin of victory for the dataset.  Then, M1 - M2 = margin of victory difference between the two team playing.  To apply to the Michigan/Ohio State games gives
Michigan = (107.0 - 92.7) * (62.7/100) = 8.99
Ohio State = (118.9 - 89.8) * (65.8 / 100) = 19.1
Which predicts a 10.1 point margin of victory for OSU, pretty close to the actual KenPom prediction.

I'll save you all the eye chart of the data table.  If you're interested, it's here: 
http://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=0AtVjC1g8WVJfdFFJR0F4ZEhRNGQyVTZ…
The relevant data:





predictedactual
teamadjusted tempoadjusted offenseadjusted defensedifferencerd1
Duke66.6852121.4790385.9001523.7258472928.7159663229
Kansas68.3863121.4486586.0724624.1924674224.8436921416
Wisconsin60.2126116.4583787.2872617.5646837811.297685394
Ohio St.65.8254118.9520689.8188519.1770520217.9964483517
Syracuse70.746117.8663689.0853920.3613850417.332284623
Kentucky69.4046115.49987.6796119.3079363517.3746209429
Brigham Young72.8212117.3974189.5869820.251888858.8891083477
West Virginia63.4144117.4504990.0302217.388399715.971273827
Kansas St.71.0506115.8034288.8545619.1473267218.9265012120
Maryland70.1779119.0843291.7219119.2023647314.603275112
Georgetown66.568117.5544390.8662117.7658142912.0774709-14
Baylor65.821119.5535692.7428217.6470971812.017820689
Purdue67.1526109.8204486.4384115.701641085.3319538138
California68.4634121.0334695.6132317.403553754.20580585915
Villanova72.8674118.697393.8715118.089907719.061298353
Clemson69.0581110.3949887.6507315.706746910.240145928
Texas72.7178113.3985990.2358416.843442225.30461363-1
Temple61.2054107.4901685.7048513.333786134.035245019-13
Florida St.66.8561105.1644583.8863814.225687762.918960477-7
Utah St.61.5388116.4215992.955614.44068865

Missouri70.5163109.7667587.8333815.46660099

Xavier70.7384115.8201192.6914616.360836951.67739501911
Texas A&M65.6301111.8943889.9055414.43129768-0.00939097316
Michigan St.67.1182112.0397290.2629214.6161961810.017106553
Minnesota66.6113114.1447792.101314.68344193

Butler65.1637109.6083188.4432113.791962270.48302958418
Georgia Tech69.6931109.4943788.6748914.509741022.1272208315
Marquette63.7768114.288192.5804213.84446366-1.604015104-2
Washington73.212112.6214691.5204415.44847876

Pittsburgh61.8641111.6930490.8734412.8798581610.7028796523
Virginia Tech69.215107.4044887.8222313.55385434

Northern Iowa59.905107.3392287.8731911.66112527-0.9833655983
Old Dominion64.0632107.9184588.531912.4196443

Texas El Paso69.45107.4714388.308113.30893269

Tennessee69.4899106.1559187.339313.075643470.8738024253
Vanderbilt69.7518114.0159394.103413.88934813.130584581-1
Nevada Las Vegas67.3486109.4697490.6950512.64449087

Notre Dame63.7293119.8218999.2915513.083841970.66419767-1
Louisville67.2914114.9258695.3130313.19774789

San Diego St.64.6273110.9738392.0935112.20184105

Mississippi St.67.3041109.2883990.9057412.37227714

Arizona St.62.2639110.1087691.6221811.51046568

St. Mary's67.99114.9271695.7006213.07212455

Oklahoma St.68.0078112.2073693.9998612.38252019

Dayton66.2161105.9727788.8386911.34551955

Miami FL66.4123113.3738695.1057512.13227202

New Mexico68.6401114.3142795.9648812.595039657.9205668615
Richmond64.1081108.3604891.1812911.0132523-2.058872242-9
Florida65.4107112.2769694.9055211.3627805

Wake Forest70.2826106.58290.1642411.53882859



Calculating the probable winners in this fashion gave a win/loss of 24/8.  And, four of those that are wrong were predicted to be 3 point games, and ended up +/- 3.  Here's the corresponding chart.



I calculated the total average margin of error (absolute value) for all games at 7.44, and margin of error in games correct at 7.07, and margin of error in games wrong at 10.6.

I next calculated the distribution of error.  Since I used absolute value in the previous calculation, I ended up with half a bell-curve distribution.  Data:
+/-5+/-10+/-15+/-20+/-25
149440


Chart:


What's interesting is that this is a better prediction than just using KenPom as a relative rating.  By picking solely based on the higher ranked team, the record is 23/9.

Conclusion:
If you can draw any conclusion from all this, it is that Ken is pretty accurate, except when he's not.  I didn't expect to be 100%, because I don't think any system out there will predict Georgetown, or Kansas or Villanova to lose, based on the numbers.  But, by this point in the season, the system is remarkably accurate in predicting probable outcomes.  It has some margin for error in predicted close games, but I don't think there's any system that would be able to predict close games, either.  They just come down to the luck of the draw.

Comments

WorldBPelekoudas

March 23rd, 2010 at 1:46 PM ^

I was a film major so I'm not even capable of digesting your (excellent, I'm sure) chart. But here's my Ken Pom experience. I stopped following basketball closely a couple of years ago and only really follow M until tourney time. Then, because I'm an American dammit, I throw a little money into a "bracket" pool. This year, I decided to just put myself in Ken Pom's hands and used his rankings straight up. In my pool, extra points are awarded for correctly picking upsets so in a couple of cases if the teams were closely ranked I went with the 'dog. In the first round I blew away the competition. Then came the weekend. In round 2, everything just went to shit and after going 3 for 8 on Saturday I just stopped paying attention. I don't blame Ken Pom. But round two just seemed in a lot of ways kind of random.

U of M in TX

March 23rd, 2010 at 2:16 PM ^

If you look at KenPom ranking history, no one outside the top 5 in his rankings has won the NCAA tournament. The majority of the time it's the 2 ranked team that takes it down. Last year MSU became the lowest ranked team to make the finals at the number 8 slot. KenPom does a pretty good job of "getting it right", he may just take the "wrong" way to get there.