New Nav
|
|
Pac-10 Basketball: 5-Year Ranking
November 4th, 2009
by Shawn Siegel
» Tags
Pac-10 Basketball
PAC-10 5-YEAR STANDINGS
CHN's annual 5-year ranking answers a simple question is in a simple manner: Who has been the best team in the Pac-10 over the last five years?
Teams get points for league wins, making the postseason (NIT or NCAA) and winning games in the Big Dance. NIT wins are meaningless here, as are non-conference wins. Also, league tournaments wins are not taken into account. (An original trial-scoring system included points for conference tourney wins. But the flukish nature of these tourney's did more harm than hurt: ie, 2008 Georgia, 2006 Syracuse, and 2004 Maryland ended up getting too much credit despite the reality that they were mediocre to sub-par teams.)
100 total points is set up to be the equivalent of batting .300 in baseball.. anything above and beyond is all-world stuff. 50 points is mediocre and you only start to get bad below 40 points.
| Pos. | Was | Team | 2005 | 2006 | 2007 | 2008 | 2009 | Wins | Gms. | Points | |
| 1 | 1 | UCLA | 11 | 14 | 15 | 16 | 13 | 69 | 90 | 77 | Win % |
| 1st Round | Finals | Final 4 | Final 4 | 2nd Round | 39 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 116 | |||||||||||
| 2 | 3 | Arizona | 15 | 11 | 11 | 8 | 9 | 54 | 90 | 60 | Win % |
| Elite 8 | 2nd Round | 1st Round | 1st Round | Sweet 16 | 22 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 82 | |||||||||||
| 3 | 4 | Washington | 14 | 13 | 8 | 7 | 14 | 56 | 90 | 62 | Win % |
| Sweet 16 | Sweet 16 | X | X | 2nd Round | 16 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 78 | |||||||||||
| 4 | 2 | Stanford | 11 | 11 | 10 | 13 | 6 | 51 | 90 | 57 | Win % |
| 1st Round | NIT | 1st Round | Sweet 16 | X | 11 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 68 | |||||||||||
| 5 | 7 | USC | 5 | 8 | 11 | 11 | 9 | 44 | 90 | 49 | Win % |
| X | X | Sweet 16 | 1st Round | 2nd Round | 12 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 61 | |||||||||||
| 6 | 6 | Wash St | 7 | 4 | 13 | 11 | 8 | 43 | 90 | 48 | Win % |
| X | X | 2nd Round | Sweet 16 | NIT | 11 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 59 | |||||||||||
| 7 | 8 | California | 6 | 12 | 6 | 6 | 11 | 41 | 90 | 46 | Win % |
| X | 1st Round | X | NIT | 1st Round | 5 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 51 | |||||||||||
| 8 | 5 | Oregon | 6 | 7 | 11 | 9 | 2 | 35 | 90 | 39 | Win % |
| X | X | Elite 8 | 1st Round | X | 10 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 49 | |||||||||||
| 9 | 9 | Arizona St | 7 | 5 | 2 | 9 | 11 | 34 | 90 | 38 | Win % |
| NIT | X | X | NIT | 2nd Round | 6 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 44 | |||||||||||
| 10 | 10 | Oregon St | 8 | 5 | 3 | 0 | 7 | 23 | 90 | 26 | Win % |
| NIT | X | X | X | X | 1 | Post Pts. | |||||
| 27 | |||||||||||
-Ties are broken by favoring conference winning %
Pac-10 Thoughts
- Oregon tumbles after a disastrous 2 win season.
- Stanford is slowly fading down the list.
- UCLA dominates the league with 13 more wins then the closest team.
- 3rd place Washington actually has more league wins than Arizona, but has had less postseason success.
Postseason Points
NIT = 1
NCAA 1st Round = 2
NCAA 2nd Round = 4
Sweet = 6
Elite 8 = 8
Final Four = 10
Final = 11
Champs = 12
Other 5-Year Rankings
ACC
Big 12
Big East
Add comment
Relevant Content
New Articles
Cheerleader of the Day
| >> |
 |
>> |
 |
>> |
 |
..All |
CHN SPONSORS
Latest Top 144 Preview
|
1 |
|
2 |
|
3 |
|
|
About Shawn Siegel
Columnist
Shawn Siegel - CHN President & Head Editor
Contact
shawn@collegehoops.net
Background
CHN Editor
Shawn Siegel is the self-proclaimed "hardest working man on the internet." He created CHN back in the summer of 2002, and it has since grown into the web's largest independent college basketball site. Besides designing and maintaining the site, Shawn also deals with advertising, marketing, editing.. and virtually all other aspects of running the site. Shawn's college basketball and NBA Draft commentary has appeared across the web, print, and radio media. Please email him with any and all media requests.
Location
New Jersey
Favorite Links
CollegeHoops.net (obviously)
