NCAA Teams' Bench Impact

Bench Impact = estimated total Bench Rating per 100 possessions x %Minutes - estimated Starters' Rating per 100 possessions x %Minutes

-Wyoming/Colorado's bench impact is low because of true disparity between their starting 5 and their bench.
-Ohio State's bench is actually decent, but their starting 5 is significantly better....
-Grambling suffers immensely by not playing Quincy Roberts more -- EDIT -- this was because of the transfer rules that prevented Q-Rob from playing the first half of the season, so technically he was on their "bench" when I ranked his minutes played back in January. His presence was definitely the most notable discrepancy in minutes played and overall value because of that.



Bottom 25

	team	bench impact
1	Wyoming	-10.35
2	South Carolina Upstate	-10.31
3	Colorado	-9.36
4	Green Bay	-9.14
5	Alabama State	-9.08
6	Florida International	-9.01
7	Ohio State	-8.96
8	Northern Iowa	-8.90
9	Maryland	-8.78
10	Evansville	-8.75
11	Cal Poly	-8.62
12	Monmouth	-8.61
13	Texas State	-8.56
14	Tennessee State	-8.18
15	South Carolina	-7.94
16	Lehigh	-7.87
17	Lamar	-7.85
18	Jackson State	-7.84
19	Southeast Missouri State	-7.78
20	Rider	-7.76
21	Tennessee-Martin	-7.74
22	Xavier	-7.67
23	Pepperdine	-7.63
24	St. Francis (NY)	-7.57
25	Utah	-7.35

Top 25

	team	bench impact
1	Grambling	5.87
2	South Alabama	2.79
3	Vermont	2.54
4	Colorado State	2.50
5	Loyola Marymount	2.46
6	North Carolina-Greensboro	1.75
7	Texas Southern	1.53
8	Oklahoma State	1.39
9	Western Carolina	1.03
10	William & Mary	1.00
11	Cornell	0.97
12	Marist	0.94
13	California-Santa Barbara	0.85
14	Maryland-Eastern Shore	0.68
15	Western Michigan	0.51
16	IPFW	0.49
17	Southern Mississippi	0.41
18	Alcorn State	0.35
19	Southeastern Louisiana	0.35
20	Southern Methodist	0.28
21	Canisius	0.26
22	Rhode Island	0.26
23	Miami (FL)	0.24
24	Toledo	0.15
25	East Tennessee State	0.13

Top 25 Players as of 1/18/2011

I have adjusted minutes% for teammate quality and injuries (I factor back in minutes played above or below what we would expect a coach to play them with a number I call SQZ: how much more or less a coach squeezes out of a player over the course of a game.)

True Impact per Game = Efficiency Impact x (expected min% while healthy, with average teammates)

rank	player	team	ORTG	usage%	DRTG	True Impact per Game
1	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	129.6	24.2	92.5	9.6
2	Jared Sullinger	Ohio State	128.9	26.3	76	9.4
3	Damian Lillard	Weber State	136.1	32.2	99.2	9.4
4	Marcus Denmon	Missouri	140.5	23.2	93.9	8.6
5	Thomas Robinson	Kansas	117.3	28.2	78.7	8.5
6	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	140.5	18	73.6	8.1
7	Doug McDermott	Creighton	127.7	31.6	102	7.9
8	Kenny Boynton	Florida	135.9	24.6	102.8	7.6
9	Dominique Morrison	Oral Roberts	131	25.4	103.1	7.4
10	Will Barton	Memphis	119	26	94.4	7.3
11	Cody Zeller	Indiana	134	22.2	90	7.2
12	J'Covan Brown	Texas	122.6	28.2	100.7	7.1
13	John Shurna	Northwestern	117.5	27.4	102.4	7.0
14	Mike Scott	Virginia	127.1	28.7	82.3	6.9
15	Jae Crowder	Marquette	124.6	23.3	84.6	6.7
16	Isaiah Canaan	Murray State	130.3	26.4	95.8	6.6
17	Deshaun Thomas	Ohio State	124.8	23.8	89.7	6.6
18	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	129	21.3	93	6.6
19	John Jenkins	Vanderbilt	127.1	26.3	101	6.6
20	Nate Wolters	South Dakota State	121.2	30	101.9	6.4
21	Ricardo Ratliffe	Missouri	138.2	22.4	91.5	6.3
22	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	120.9	23.6	100	6.2
23	Drew Crawford	Northwestern	119.1	25.5	104.7	6.2
24	Jordan Taylor	Wisconsin	115.8	24.5	86.7	6.2
25	Jason Clark	Georgetown	117.5	26.1	89.8	6.0

Top 25 Freshies, as of 1/11/2012

EDIT: Misleading title. This only includes games through 1/11, not 1/13.

By team impact (estimated efficiency margin impact times % of possessions played).

rank	player	team	conf	ORTG	usage%	DRTG	Eff Imp.	Team Imp.
1	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	SEC	134	18	71	9.37	6.79
2	Cody Zeller	Indiana	Big Ten	134	22	86	9.63	6.50
3	Kevin Pangos	Gonzaga	WCC	132	21	97	7.75	5.88
4	Michael Kidd-Gilchrist	Kentucky	SEC	120	21	85	5.96	4.60
5	Sheldon McClellan	Texas	Big 12	132	21	96	7.17	4.58
6	Spencer DinWiddie	Colorado	Pac-12	127	21	96	5.96	3.76
7	Trey Burke	Michigan	Big Ten	110	25	97	4.30	3.67
8	D'Angelo Harrison	St. John's (NY)	Big East	116	24	102	3.81	3.32
9	Austin Rivers	Duke	ACC	108	26	103	4.47	3.32
10	Seth Tuttle	Northern Iowa	MVC	123	19	89	6.14	3.23
11	Kentavious Caldwell-Pope	Georgia	SEC	109	27	99	4.15	3.18
12	Adam Smith	North Carolina-Wilmington	CAA	116	27	111	4.08	3.09
13	Jonathan Holmes	Texas	Big 12	126	19	94	5.53	3.06
14	Anthony Drmic	Boise State	MWC	123	24	98	4.66	3.06
15	Omari Grier	Florida Atlantic	Sun Belt	130	21	105	6.58	3.04
16	Justin Edwards	Maine	AEC	120	26	99	3.97	3.01
17	Otto Porter	Georgetown	Big East	116	16	88	4.19	2.85
18	Jordan Tolbert	Texas Tech	Big 12	113	31	96	4.68	2.76
19	Rodney Hood	Mississippi State	SEC	125	17	100	3.19	2.69
20	Andre Drummond	Connecticut	Big East	112	20	94	3.83	2.59
21	B.J. Young	Arkansas	SEC	117	27	94	4.32	2.56
22	P.J. Hairston	North Carolina	ACC	124	26	93	7.68	2.50
23	Quinn Cook	Duke	ACC	137	20	102	7.87	2.48
24	Quincy Miller	Baylor	Big 12	109	25	88	4.02	2.34
25	Michael Caffey	Long Beach State	Big West	120	15	98	4.34	2.33

Top 51 Overall NCAA Players as of 1/10

Games through 1/10.
Team Impact = (Estimated Efficiency Impact per 100 possessions) x (% of Possessions played in)
Where offensive and defensive efficiency impacts are estimated* by using offensive and defensive rating (& offensive usage%) at sports-reference.com, and strength of schedule from kenpom.com.

rank	player	team	conf	Offensive Impact (100)	Defensive Impact (100)	Total Impact (100)	Team Impact	Min%
1	Damian Lillard	Weber State	Big Sky	13.5	-0.4	13.1	11.0	84%
2	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	Big East	7.9	2.2	10.1	9.1	90%
3	Doug McDermott	Creighton	MVC	11.1	-0.6	10.5	8.1	77%
4	Dominique Morrison	Oral Roberts	Summit	9.0	-0.1	8.9	7.9	89%
5	Jared Sullinger	Ohio State	Big Ten	8.0	4.8	12.8	7.8	61%
6	Marcus Denmon	Missouri	Big 12	9.1	0.7	9.8	7.8	80%
7	Isaiah Canaan	Murray State	OVC	8.9	0.6	9.5	7.5	79%
8	Will Barton	Memphis	CUSA	6.7	1.7	8.4	7.3	87%
9	Thomas Robinson	Kansas	Big 12	4.8	4.5	9.3	7.2	77%
10	Kenny Boynton	Florida	SEC	10.0	-0.8	9.2	7.2	78%
11	Mike Scott	Virginia	ACC	7.5	2.1	9.6	7.0	73%
12	Jae Crowder	Marquette	Big East	6.7	2.6	9.3	7.0	75%
13	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	SEC	4.2	5.2	9.4	6.8	73%
14	Cody Zeller	Indiana	Big Ten	7.1	2.5	9.6	6.5	68%
15	Nate Wolters	South Dakota State	Summit	8.2	-0.6	7.6	6.4	85%
16	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	Big East	6.1	0.9	7.0	6.3	90%
17	Noah Hartsock	Brigham Young	WCC	5.5	2.4	7.9	6.3	79%
18	Colt Ryan	Evansville	MVC	6.8	0.1	6.9	6.2	90%
19	Jarrod Jones	Ball State	MAC	6.8	1.2	7.9	6.2	78%
20	Larry Anderson	Long Beach State	Big West	5.0	2.0	7.1	6.2	87%
21	John Jenkins	Vanderbilt	SEC	7.7	0.4	8.1	6.2	76%
22	Doron Lamb	Kentucky	SEC	7.0	1.1	8.1	6.1	76%
23	Ryan Broekhoff	Valparaiso	Horizon	7.0	0.6	7.6	6.1	80%
24	Ryan Kelly	Duke	ACC	7.8	1.9	9.6	6.0	62%
25	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	Big East	6.4	1.5	7.9	5.9	76%
26	Deshaun Thomas	Ohio State	Big Ten	6.0	2.4	8.4	5.9	70%
27	Kevin Pangos	Gonzaga	WCC	6.7	1.0	7.7	5.9	76%
28	Drew Crawford	Northwestern	Big Ten	6.9	-0.1	6.8	5.7	85%
29	Steven Pledger	Oklahoma	Big 12	7.4	0.3	7.7	5.6	74%
30	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	Big East	5.6	1.9	7.5	5.6	74%
31	C.J. McCollum	Lehigh	Patriot	6.9	0.3	7.2	5.6	77%
32	Jordan Theodore	Seton Hall	Big East	4.7	1.5	6.2	5.5	90%
33	Brian Conklin	Saint Louis	A-10	6.3	1.4	7.7	5.5	71%
34	J'Covan Brown	Texas	Big 12	5.9	0.8	6.7	5.5	82%
35	Reggie Hamilton	Oakland	Summit	7.8	-1.2	6.6	5.5	84%
36	Chase Tapley	San Diego State	MWC	5.3	1.6	6.9	5.5	80%
37	Langston Galloway	Saint Joseph's	A-10	5.6	0.8	6.4	5.5	85%
38	Allen Crabbe	California	Pac-12	5.4	1.2	6.6	5.4	82%
39	John Shurna	Northwestern	Big Ten	6.0	0.1	6.1	5.4	88%
40	Deonte Burton	Nevada	WAC	6.5	0.5	7.0	5.4	77%
41	Zack Rosen	Pennsylvania	Ivy	6.1	-0.3	5.7	5.4	94%
42	Erick Green	Virginia Tech	ACC	6.2	0.7	6.9	5.3	77%
43	Julian Mavunga	Miami (OH)	MAC	4.7	1.0	5.6	5.3	94%
44	Draymond Green	Michigan State	Big Ten	3.2	3.4	6.6	5.3	80%
45	Chace Stanback	Nevada-Las Vegas	MWC	6.5	1.5	8.0	5.3	66%
46	Anthony Raffa	Coastal Carolina	Big South	4.7	1.8	6.5	5.2	80%
47	Robbie Hummel	Purdue	Big Ten	5.4	1.4	6.8	5.1	76%
48	Trevor Releford	Alabama	SEC	4.5	2.5	7.0	5.1	73%
49	Ricardo Ratliffe	Missouri	Big 12	7.3	1.4	8.7	5.1	59%
50	Robert Covington	Tennessee State	OVC	6.8	0.2	7.0	5.1	73%
51	Tyler Zeller	North Carolina	ACC	4.9	3.0	7.8	5.1	65%

So, Lillard is the primary reason that an otherwise-extremely-mediocre offensive team (Pomeroy subscribers only) is #57th in the Pomeroys for offense. Weber's second-best offensive player (Scott Bamforth) uses 10% usage less, and is 10 points per 100 less efficient.

When I sum up all of Weber State's offensive contributions, we get +14.4. Their adjusted offensive rating is only +8 or so on kenpom.com, so it's my guess that (but if we just fit players' performances to their team ratings, we get some extremely ugly results, so I don't do that...I am basing it on last year's fit for Strength of Schedule, however). Even if we multiply each player's offensive value by 0.6 (which is roughly the same as 8/14.4), Lillard is still a top-25 player.



Mike Scott is still also an extremely good player as far as the eye can see, and is even underrated by his minutes (like Sullinger).





* Not going to reveal the regression equation just yet. Or ever :-)

No Apologies, Just Numbers

Okay, some apologies.


My prior post has sparked a little bit of interest/intrigue/outrage/fear among college basketball fans.
Never fear! Happier numbers are on the way.

First, let me reiterate that these are based on advanced stats only, such as offensive rating and defensive rating, from Sports-Reference.com. There are no plus-minus stats involved.

I realized that there were some pretty important adjustments that needed to be made. First, that players with extremely high numbers in any one category were being skewed.* Second, that the strength of schedule adjustment was a little counter-intuitive, and a little too strong. I adjusted my ratings thusly.

Unfortunately, the sample size for this season does not produce very intuitive results at the moment, which I should have mentioned in my last post (so please don't destroy me for anything that looks strange...just chew on it). For example, that Weber State's Damian Lillard is number one in the system. While I am a huge fan of Lillard and would have no problem listing him up there at the end of the year if things remain the same, I am wary of the fact that his team impact is two full points higher than the next-highest (and his per-possession impact is higher than Sullinger's). As major-conference teams improve their strength of schedules during conference play and players get more minutes, things will even out.

As proof that things will even out, here is last year's top-10 in terms of overall Team Impact (efficiency impact times minutes-on-the-floor%). We can call this the Holy Grail 3.0

Player	School	Impact(100)	Team Eff. Impact
Kemba Walker	Connecticut	13.1	12.1
Jordan Taylor	Wisconsin	12.4	11.2
Talor Battle	Penn State	10.3	9.8
Jimmer Fredette	Brigham Young	11.0	9.7
Jared Sullinger	Ohio State	12.2	9.6
JaJuan Johnson	Purdue	10.4	9.2
Derrick Williams	Arizona	11.8	8.7
Jon Leuer	Wisconsin	10.4	8.7
Ben Hansbrough	Notre Dame	9.7	8.4
Jon Diebler	Ohio State	9.3	8.3

I hope most people wouldn't have a problem with this list.

So here are the current numbers, which are now split into offense and defense...separated by the Top-26 Major Conference Players and the Top 26 not-so-Major Conferences. (Had to include the older Zeller. It's the law.)

Major:

Not-So-Major:

Notice I refrained from ranking players by their per-possession numbers...I think these are more intuitive and represent Player-of-the-Year candidates (if your coach didn't play you enough, you unfortunately didn't impact your team enough).

And look, Hummel is on a list! Now everyone can be happy. Even me!



* My method involved dividing advanced statistics such as Steal%, Assist%, or Offensive Rating by their league average. My NBA numbers had extremely high sample sizes and didn't have any problem with skewed numbers...here we have that problem a lot more, especially in smaller categories (such as Steal%) rather than larger categories (the more all-encompassing "Offensive Rating").

The Holy Grail 2.5: NCAA Player Ratings (1/4/2012)

EDIT: I have updated my methodology and made things a little easier to understand, I hope: http://www.thebasketballdistribution.com/2012/01/no-apologies-just-numbers.html

Now that Sports-Reference.com uses the same advanced stats for NBA and College players, it has become very simple and straightforward to create a statistical +/- based on advanced stats for college players.

BORING STUFF:

In order to adjust for college, I simply use each advanced stat* divided by its league average. Then, applying the same to college works well. I fit the 2010-2011 season's worth of raw statistical +/- data to each team's efficiency margin, and then to their adjusted efficiency margin. I then built a model that combines raw statistical +/- and team strength of schedule (simply Adjusted Efficiency Margin mins Raw Efficiency Margin, via kenpom.com) to give us an "adjusted Statistical +/-" that we will call (as we have before) Efficiency Impact.

/END BORING STUFF

For each player, we can look at Efficiency Impact per 100-possessions, and Team Efficiency Impact(their efficiency impact times the % of their team's possessions they played in).

Here are the top 100 players in both of those categories. First, efficiency impact per 100 possessions (25% of teams' minutes played to qualify)

rank	player	team	Efficiency Impact/100
1	Jared Sullinger	Ohio State	19.4
2	Russ Smith	Louisville	16.8
3	Thomas Robinson	Kansas	15.8
4	Damian Lillard	Weber State	15.8
5	Mike Scott	Virginia	14.9
6	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	14.7
7	James Southerland	Syracuse	14.0
8	JaMychal Green	Alabama	13.9
9	Cody Zeller	Indiana	13.7
10	C.J. McCollum	Lehigh	13.6
11	Marcus Denmon	Missouri	13.4
12	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	13.2
13	Jae Crowder	Marquette	13.2
14	Jared Berggren	Wisconsin	13.1
15	Isaiah Canaan	Murray State	12.9
16	Jarrod Jones	Ball State	12.8
17	Brian Conklin	Saint Louis	12.5
18	Jamaal Franklin	San Diego State	12.4
19	Ryan Pearson	George Mason	12.1
20	Herb Pope	Seton Hall	11.7
21	Doug McDermott	Creighton	11.5
22	Arsalan Kazemi	Rice	11.4
23	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	11.4
24	Anthony Raffa	Coastal Carolina	11.3
25	Miguel Paul	East Carolina	11.3
26	Chase Tapley	San Diego State	11.2
27	Ricardo Ratliffe	Missouri	11.2
28	Ryan Evans	Wisconsin	11.1
29	Henry Sims	Georgetown	11.1
30	Draymond Green	Michigan State	10.9
31	Cody Ellis	Saint Louis	10.8
32	Luke Martinez	Wyoming	10.6
33	Jereal Scott	Stephen F. Austin	10.6
34	Noah Hartsock	Brigham Young	10.5
35	Mike Moser	Nevada-Las Vegas	10.5
36	Tyler Zeller	North Carolina	10.4
37	Carlos Lopez	Nevada-Las Vegas	10.4
38	Quinn Cook	Duke	10.3
39	Will Barton	Memphis	10.3
40	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	10.3
41	Rob Jones	Saint Mary's (CA)	10.2
42	Dominique Sutton	North Carolina Central	10.2
43	Jordan Taylor	Wisconsin	10.2
44	Jason Clark	Georgetown	10.2
45	Ian Hummer	Princeton	10.2
46	Steven Werner	Sam Houston State	10.1
47	Leonard Washington	Wyoming	10.1
48	Robert Covington	Tennessee State	10.1
49	Drew Gordon	New Mexico	10.0
50	P.J. Hairston	North Carolina	10.0
51	Trevor Releford	Alabama	9.9
52	Tony Mitchell	Alabama	9.9
53	Ryan Kelly	Duke	9.8
54	William Buford	Ohio State	9.8
55	Terrell Holloway	Xavier	9.7
56	Kenny Boynton	Florida	9.7
57	Harrison Barnes	North Carolina	9.7
58	John Henson	North Carolina	9.7
59	Terell Parks	Western Illinois	9.6
60	Victor Oladipo	Indiana	9.6
61	Carl Hall	Wichita State	9.5
62	Deshaun Thomas	Ohio State	9.4
63	Davante Gardner	Marquette	9.4
64	Ken Horton	Central Connecticut State	9.4
65	Javon McCrea	Buffalo	9.4
66	Joe Ragland	Wichita State	9.4
67	D'Aundray Brown	Cleveland State	9.4
68	Michael Kidd-Gilchrist	Kentucky	9.3
69	Steven Pledger	Oklahoma	9.3
70	Donte Poole	Murray State	9.3
71	Robbie Hummel	Purdue	9.3
72	Brandon Fortenberry	Southeastern Louisiana	9.3
73	Doron Lamb	Kentucky	9.3
74	Khris Middleton	Texas A&M	9.2
75	Evan Smotrycz	Michigan	9.1
76	Jackie Carmichael	Illinois State	9.1
77	Jorge Gutierrez	California	9.0
78	Chace Stanback	Nevada-Las Vegas	9.0
79	Velton Jones	Robert Morris	9.0
80	Jaquon Parker	Cincinnati	9.0
81	Kenton Walker	Saint Mary's (CA)	8.9
82	Kevin Pangos	Gonzaga	8.9
83	Erick Green	Virginia Tech	8.9
84	Quincy Acy	Baylor	8.8
85	Nate Wolters	South Dakota State	8.8
86	Mark Lyons	Xavier	8.8
87	Arnett Moultrie	Mississippi State	8.8
88	D.J. Cooper	Ohio	8.7
89	Sheldon McClellan	Texas	8.7
90	Jamar Samuels	Kansas State	8.7
91	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	8.7
92	Trevor Mbakwe	Minnesota	8.7
93	Reggie Bullock	North Carolina	8.7
94	Tony Snell	New Mexico	8.7
95	Jamal Fenton	New Mexico	8.7
96	Brad Waldow	Saint Mary's (CA)	8.6
97	Scott Saunders	Belmont	8.6
98	Mike Dixon,	Missouri	8.6
99	Maurice Kemp	East Carolina	8.5
100	Jamar Gulley	Missouri State	8.5

rank	player	team	Team Efficiency Impact	Efficiency Impact/100	Min%
1	Thomas Robinson	Kansas	12.3	15.8	77.7%
2	Damian Lillard	Weber State	12.1	15.8	76.8%
3	Jared Sullinger	Ohio State	11.8	19.4	61.0%
4	Jarrod Jones	Ball State	11.3	12.8	88.6%
5	Mike Scott	Virginia	10.7	14.9	72.2%
6	Marcus Denmon	Missouri	10.5	13.4	78.6%
7	C.J. McCollum	Lehigh	10.4	13.6	76.3%
8	Kevin Jones	West Virginia	10.1	11.4	88.8%
9	Isaiah Canaan	Murray State	9.8	12.9	76.1%
10	Herb Pope	Seton Hall	9.7	11.7	83.2%
11	Anthony Davis	Kentucky	9.5	13.2	72.3%
12	Anthony Raffa	Coastal Carolina	9.5	11.3	84.1%
13	Cody Zeller	Indiana	9.2	13.7	67.1%
14	Chase Tapley	San Diego State	9.0	11.2	80.7%
15	Jae Crowder	Marquette	9.0	13.2	68.2%
16	Draymond Green	Michigan State	8.8	10.9	80.9%
17	Jordan Taylor	Wisconsin	8.8	10.2	86.4%
18	Ryan Pearson	George Mason	8.8	12.1	72.9%
19	Brian Conklin	Saint Louis	8.7	12.5	69.6%
20	Jared Berggren	Wisconsin	8.7	13.1	66.7%
21	Ian Hummer	Princeton	8.6	10.2	84.5%
22	Will Barton	Memphis	8.6	10.3	83.2%
23	Miguel Paul	East Carolina	8.5	11.3	74.7%
24	Rob Jones	Saint Mary's (CA)	8.4	10.2	82.2%
25	Noah Hartsock	Brigham Young	8.3	10.5	78.6%
26	Doug McDermott	Creighton	8.2	11.5	71.1%
27	William Buford	Ohio State	8.2	9.8	83.5%
28	Russ Smith	Louisville	8.2	16.8	48.4%
29	Dominique Sutton	North Carolina Central	8.1	10.2	78.9%
30	Tony Mitchell	Alabama	7.9	9.9	80.0%
31	Dion Waiters	Syracuse	7.8	14.7	53.2%
32	Nate Wolters	South Dakota State	7.8	8.8	88.6%
33	Ryan Evans	Wisconsin	7.7	11.1	68.8%
34	Robert Covington	Tennessee State	7.6	10.1	75.5%
35	Mike Moser	Nevada-Las Vegas	7.6	10.5	72.5%
36	Kenny Boynton	Florida	7.6	9.7	78.0%
37	Ken Horton	Central Connecticut State	7.6	9.4	80.4%
38	JaMychal Green	Alabama	7.5	13.9	54.0%
39	D'Aundray Brown	Cleveland State	7.5	9.4	80.4%
40	Jason Clark	Georgetown	7.5	10.2	73.6%
41	Arsalan Kazemi	Rice	7.5	11.4	65.2%
42	Drew Gordon	New Mexico	7.4	10.0	74.0%
43	Kris Joseph	Syracuse	7.4	10.3	72.2%
44	Terrell Holloway	Xavier	7.4	9.7	76.0%
45	Jordan Theodore	Seton Hall	7.4	7.7	95.9%
46	Jereal Scott	Stephen F. Austin	7.4	10.6	69.8%
47	Jamaal Franklin	San Diego State	7.2	12.4	57.7%
48	Trevor Releford	Alabama	7.1	9.9	71.9%
49	Michael Kidd-Gilchrist	Kentucky	7.1	9.3	76.2%
50	Doron Lamb	Kentucky	7.1	9.3	76.2%
51	Robbie Hummel	Purdue	7.0	9.3	75.5%
52	Deshaun Thomas	Ohio State	7.0	9.4	74.2%
53	Larry Anderson	Long Beach State	6.9	7.9	87.1%
54	Tim Frazier	Penn State	6.9	7.7	89.2%
55	Terell Parks	Western Illinois	6.9	9.6	71.8%
56	D.J. Cooper	Ohio	6.8	8.7	78.2%
57	Jeremy Lamb	Connecticut	6.8	8.1	84.1%
58	Kevin Pangos	Gonzaga	6.8	8.9	76.7%
59	Langston Galloway	Saint Joseph's	6.8	7.9	85.8%
60	Edwin Fuquan	Seton Hall	6.8	7.6	89.7%
61	Greg Mangano	Yale	6.8	8.0	85.2%
62	J'Covan Brown	Texas	6.8	8.0	84.6%
63	Ricardo Ratliffe	Missouri	6.8	11.2	60.5%
64	Henry Sims	Georgetown	6.8	11.1	61.0%
65	Ryan Broekhoff	Valparaiso	6.7	8.5	79.2%
66	Erick Green	Virginia Tech	6.7	8.9	75.4%
67	Tyler Zeller	North Carolina	6.7	10.4	64.3%
68	Velton Jones	Robert Morris	6.7	9.0	74.0%
69	John Henson	North Carolina	6.6	9.7	68.8%
70	Luke Martinez	Wyoming	6.6	10.6	62.9%
71	Donte Poole	Murray State	6.6	9.3	71.3%
72	Isaiah Wilkerson	NJIT	6.6	7.8	84.6%
73	Jared Cunningham	Oregon State	6.5	7.7	84.5%
74	Dominique Morrison	Oral Roberts	6.5	7.3	88.6%
75	Julian Mavunga	Miami (OH)	6.4	5.9	108.9%
76	Steven Pledger	Oklahoma	6.4	9.3	68.7%
77	Drew Crawford	Northwestern	6.4	7.6	83.8%
78	Quincy Acy	Baylor	6.3	8.8	71.9%
79	Javon McCrea	Buffalo	6.3	9.4	67.4%
80	Bradford Burgess	Virginia Commonwealth	6.3	7.9	80.0%
81	Hollis Thompson	Georgetown	6.3	8.7	72.5%
82	Leonard Washington	Wyoming	6.3	10.1	62.3%
83	Harrison Barnes	North Carolina	6.3	9.7	65.0%
84	Jorge Gutierrez	California	6.2	9.0	68.8%
85	John Jenkins	Vanderbilt	6.2	8.2	76.0%
86	Ryan Kelly	Duke	6.2	9.8	62.9%
87	Aaron Craft	Ohio State	6.2	8.0	77.7%
88	Victor Oladipo	Indiana	6.2	9.6	64.6%
89	Matthew Dellavedova	Saint Mary's (CA)	6.2	6.8	91.1%
90	Reggie Hamilton	Oakland	6.1	7.2	85.9%
91	Andre Roberson	Colorado	6.1	8.5	71.8%
92	Joe Harris	Virginia	6.1	8.0	75.9%
93	Colt Ryan	Evansville	6.0	7.5	80.7%
94	Sean Kilpatrick	Cincinnati	6.0	7.1	84.4%
95	Mike Muscala	Bucknell	6.0	7.6	78.8%
96	Kerron Johnson	Belmont	6.0	8.4	71.4%
97	Tony Snell	New Mexico	5.9	8.7	68.3%
98	Chace Stanback	Nevada-Las Vegas	5.9	9.0	65.8%
99	Jeffery Taylor	Vanderbilt	5.9	7.7	77.0%
100	DeAndre Kane	Marshall	5.9	7.2	81.9%

Quite a few mid-majors at the top here, but the strength-of-schedule adjustment is well-calibrated. These will probably match somewhat closely to Pomeroy's "KPOY."





* - My raw regression involves Defensive Rating, Offensive Rating, Usage%, Assist%, and Steal%.

NCAA Power Ratings

I now have my own usually-updated NCAA power ratings. (Located at the top of the page).

These are simply based on point margin, and I adjust for consistency, recency, and which teams appear to play up or down to their opponents (i.e. fixing the issue of cupcake-killers), in the spirit of the work of DSMok1 aka Daniel.

"Original Rating" is basically SRS, simply adjusting a team's point differential by their opponent's point differential several layers down.

"Quality Rating" weighs each opponent/game by their "original rating" and whether or not a game was at home or away. The final result of a very difficult game is worth the most in this average, and the final result of a very easy game impacts this the least.

"Cupcake Rating" does the exact opposite of "quality rating."

Finally, each team is ranked by using my expected outcome (from Quality/Cupcake/Original ratings) against the top-25 "Original" teams. This gives us a basic idea of how teams might fare come March.