D1 boys GlenOak sectional

F

fantastic50

Well-known member
Do the following rankings in the D1 GlenOak boys sectional seem plausible? I am a numbers guy looking at a potential future project on ranking XC teams, and want to know whether a quick proof-of-concept attempt is giving believable results, versus generating garbage. Thanks!

1 Jackson
2 Louisville
3 GlenOak
4 Aurora
5 Perry
6 Hoover
--gap--
7 Canfield
8 Hudson
9 Boardman
10 Wooster
11 Stow
--gap--
12 Green
13 Cuyahoga Falls
14 Austintown-Fitch
15 Firestone
--gap--
16 Lake
17 Hoban
18 Wadsworth

(Teams not included in data set: Roosevelt, Alliance, Barberton, McKinley, Akron East, Ellet, Kenmore-Garfield, Akron North, Norton)
 
 
You might be in the ballpark. Even if it's not perfect, you gotta start somewhere with your modeling.

Admittedly, I don't spend much time trying to figure out the 15th best team in the district, haha. The hardest part in XC might be accounting for the absence of a top 5 performer since that can have a greater impact on a team's performance than missing a run-of-the-mill starting player on a football team when you do those rankings and projections. It's hard to know who everybody's top runners are and how to build that into a model. Do you model based on who actually has competed in each race, or do you model based on how a team might do if at full strength?

BTW, this would be a district meet. I have not seen the term "sectional" applied to HS XC in NE Ohio since the end of the 1984 season.
 
Mr. Slippery said:
You might be in the ballpark. Even if it's not perfect, you gotta start somewhere with your modeling.

Admittedly, I don't spend much time trying to figure out the 15th best team in the district, haha. The hardest part in XC might be accounting for the absence of a top 5 performer since that can have a greater impact on a team's performance than missing a run-of-the-mill starting player on a football team when you do those rankings and projections. It's hard to know who everybody's top runners are and how to build that into a model. Do you model based on who actually has competed in each race, or do you model based on how a team might do if at full strength?

BTW, this would be a district meet. I have not seen the term "sectional" applied to HS XC in NE Ohio since the end of the 1984 season.
Click to expand...
This is helpful context, thanks. In a first attempt, I am using (only) average time of the top five runners, relative to the other teams on the same course. This isn't a perfect measuring stick, as a slightly slower average with a smaller spread of times might still lead to a better finish placement, but it's simple and decently effective.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top