Analyzing College Basketball Rankings: Humans vs. Computers

College basketball has returned, sparking both excitement and debates about team rankings. As the new season begins, varied perspectives emerge from polls and analytics models, shedding light on the preseason expectations for different teams. This exploration involves comparing the AP Top 25 and KenPom rankings, further complemented by TeamRankings’ predictive ratings and the Coaches Poll.

The KenPom Influence

KenPom’s predictions often differ from traditional polling, as seen with Vanderbilt last season. KenPom ranked the Commodores 19th in the preseason compared to the AP’s 36th position. Vanderbilt’s season ended with a commendable 27-9 record, ending as a No. 5 seed with an NCAA Tournament win. Yet, KenPom also placed Baylor 17th, a ranking that resulted in a less impressive 17-17 finish, missing the tournament entirely.

Disagreements and Surprises

Early predictions brought surprises, particularly with traditional powerhouses like Kansas. Both the AP and Coaches Polls ranked Kansas outside the top 15, yet KenPom placed them fifth, and TeamRankings sixth. Similarly, Iowa State, a No. 2 seed in the last tournament, saw contrasting placements: 18th by the AP, tied 14th by the coaches, and sixth by KenPom, with TeamRankings slotting them at 11th due to their strong projected defense.

Optimistic Models and Skeptical Polls

The analytics models cast Alabama in a favorable light, ranking the Crimson Tide higher than the human polls did. KenPom placed Alabama ninth and TeamRankings 16th, contrasted by the AP’s 20th placement and the Coaches Poll’s 18th. KenPom predicts a fourth-best offense for Alabama nationwide.

Houston followed suit with high rankings in KenPom and TeamRankings, being third and seventh, respectively. However, humans ranked them lower, with the AP and Coaches Poll placing them 10th and eighth, despite receiving top defensive projections by KenPom.

Human Polls Show Favor to Certain Teams

USC and Tennessee demonstrated a reverse pattern. The Trojans received a Top 25 designation by human polls, unlike any placement within the top 35 by analytics models. KenPom and TeamRankings assigned them 37th and 40th, respectively. Tennessee, ranked top ten by both human polls, stood significantly lower in analytic models. Previously a KenPom favorite, now human optimism seems to favor them.

Arkansas is another example. Although 12th and 13th in the human polls, they are placed 19th by KenPom and 25th by TeamRankings. Similar trends occurred with BYU, found 25th in both human polls yet outside the Top 25 in models.

Vanderbilt and UConn Seen Differently

The Commodores, frequently a KenPom favorite, again found themselves at variance with human polls. KenPom placed them 12th, whereas the AP and coaches ranked them 24th and 21st. UConn, fresh from a national championship appearance, displayed different dynamics. High rankings by human polls were met with an 11th place by KenPom, despite TeamRankings positioning them third.

Observations and Future Updates

These differences demonstrate diverse expectations across different evaluation methods. Observers will track whether human predictions or analytic models better forecast the season’s outcomes, providing insight into the evolving nature of rankings. This ongoing analysis will illuminate which entities better capture the performances and successes as the season progresses.