Big Ten Aggregate Projections

They only played one head to head game and it was in Columbus and Ohio St. had an easier conference strength of schedule. Since both of those barometers are unbalanced, it’s better to look at objective metrics.

You can’t admit that Michigan was objectively better last year? Kenpom, BPI, and RPI are all in agreement. Are there any metrics that put Ohio St. ahead?

1 Like

Yes lets look at objectives that suit your point of view. I guess conference record and head to head record are no longer suitable metrics. I did notice you totally ignored the fact that OSU is actually returning more minutes/points/rebounds/assists than Michigan which totally throws your narrative that Michigan returns more production, losing less depth out the window. Keep on keeping on though

And you are trying to throw out the metric rating systems he’s providing. You can get on him all you want for ignoring the stuff you posted but don’t go right around and do the same thing yourself.

Not necessarily OSU had a horrible non conference losing to UTSA and La Tech and that certainly impacts Kenpom BPI etc… I just don’t understand how he can laugh at the idea of them being 10-8 or 11-7 since they were actually 11-7 last year and return most of the team.

I have a hard time ignoring what the B1G standings say and what happened in the head to head meeting.

He’s not laughing at the idea of them being 10-8 or 11-7. He’s laughing at the idea of you putting Michigan, a team that went 10-8 and has a very similar profile in terms of returning production, at 8-10 while also saying OSU will be 11-7.

1 Like

Conference record can be a pretty poor indicator of who is the best team if only because of how different the schedules can be. I wish we could bump up the conference schedule to 22 games or so and remove some buy games.


Yup. And Head to Head is a poor indicator when the only head to head game was played at one team’s home arena. Objective ratings are better in these cases.

Exactly. I thought that was pretty clear. The logic he is using for Ohio St. should be able to be applied to Michigan. Not in Albrecht’s case, though. I’m just trying to get some consistency here.

Also, Michigan actually returns more in terms of conference-only production, where they went 10-8, but slightly less when you factor in LeVert’s OOC production and minutes.

It would never happen, but I’d love a true round robin for conference schedule. Sucks when we only play our rivals once. And Rutgers - even though they’re terrible - are still a better draw than a South Carolina St (assuming we don’t schedule mostly crap schools in a more limited non-conference schedule). Helps get rid of some of those really crummy schools that weight down your RPI

But I’d love the schedule to look like:

  • one preseason tournament (3-4 games)
  • one home and one away quality opponent
  • cupcakes (3-4 cupcakes)

Very good point. If the prediction is about conference record he shouldn’t be counting LeVert’s production. Unless he went through every conference game himself and added up every state I think this pretty much invalidates his sole numerical reason for putting OSU so far ahead of us.

1 Like

I said I have them between 8-10 to 10-8. It’s not far fetched either considering Michigan only faced IU Wisconsin and MSU once each, this year it’s 2x each. I would be surprised if Michigan was favored in any game against MSU/Wisconsin/IU. I guess it depends on your point of view how Michigan matches up with those 3 teams. If they went 1-5 or 0-6 there’s a very good chance it’s 9-9 or 8-10.

In conference only play, Michigan returns

85% of minutes played
85% of their scoring
86% of their rebounding
92% of their assists

That’s a good chunk of contributing players returning from a 10-8 conference team.

But yeah, 8-10 makes sense.


I think you guys are both making fairly flawed arguments, but something to consider.

There’s not really a flaw in asking him to be consistent with his logic. If Ohio St. should be solid because they won 11 games and return a lot, then Michigan should be solid because they won 10 games vs a harder schedule and return more (conference only).

I just want to see consistency in logic.

A full round robin is just too many, unfortunately. We play 31 regular season games this year (plus an exhibition). A full round robin conference schedule is 26 games.



That’s the dream!

You’re right. Forgot we were at 14 total. Unrealistic.