Inspired by a similar thread on the Illinois subforum on the national board, I decided to take a crack at some stat-based, Morlan-lite comparisons for Ohio so far. Obviously with how close everybody in the top-15 conversation is, the statistical differences are minimal, but I guess it never hurts to have more fuel on the fire.
I ended up doing two sets of statistical rankings, one based on adjusted points per bonus (aPPB) and one based on power percentage (P%). Obviously that means that these are tossup-bonus ranks only, since OAC results don't track those sorts of stats (apologies to teams like Brecksville-Broadview Heights, etc., who play OAC almost exclusively). If detailed scoresheets were available, one could probably do an OAC team comparison on different sets by measuring team round question conversion + alphabet rounds (since like PPB, those stats are independent of your opponent). I know in the past there have been team and category conversion breakdowns for the OAC postseason, and I've always enjoyed reading those and admire the effort they must take.
Question sets included in this ranking were IS-157A, IS-159A, IS-161A, IS-160, WHAQ, and MSNCT-16 (teams using MSNCT-16 had to play the set this season). Now that I have the spreadsheet set up, it's relatively easy to add more data, so as the season progresses there can be updates (for sets like GSAC, for example). If a stat report on the tournament database doesn't list PPB for some reason, it couldn't be included, which does mean some teams that have played these sets didn't have their tournament performances included. The rankings only include results from Saturday tournaments right now, but as league seasons wrap up and stats are uploaded I can create entries for those. I only included results if, according to my estimation, a team was at ~80% full strength or above (I know that's a squishy measurement...essentially if most of a team's scoring was there, I counted the data point since I was trying to avoid having a smaller sample size than I already did).
To calculate adjustments, IS-160 was used as the baseline, since it had the most data associated with it and it represents high school regular difficulty according to NAQT. Rather than take a team's best single performance, I averaged the adjusted points per bonus across the entire season. The spreadsheet, which I will link to at the end of this post, shows each individual data point as well as a separate column listing each team's best aPPB on the season.
Adjusted Points Per Bonus Ranking1. Dublin Scioto (22.95)
2. Miami Valley A (21.83)
3. Westlake A (21.42)*
4. Aurora A (21.25)*
5. Fisher Catholic A (21.04)
6. Sidney A (20.79)
7. Beavercreek A (20.63)
8. Ottawa Hills A (20.57)*
9. Olmsted Falls A (20.07)
10. Solon A (20.04)
11. Copley A (19.92)
12. Olentangy Liberty (19.14)*
13. Boardman (18.96)
14. Dublin Jerome A (18.86)
15. Northmont A (18.85)
*Notes:
Westlake & Aurora only have one tournament in the database (IS-157A).
Ottawa Hills has only one tournament associated with them since their other question sets have not been used by any other teams in the ranking, so no adjustment can be calculated (they played IS-154 in Michigan and IS-158 in their league).
Olentangy Liberty's ranking is actually for their B team, but they've switched lineups so much this year I have no idea what their actual best squad is, so I just ranked the program. Again, these rankings are for entertainment purposes only.
Adjusted Power Percentage Ranking*1. Dublin Scioto (61.1%)
2. Copley A (46.4%)
3. Fisher Catholic A (46.1%)
4. Beavercreek A (46.0%)
5. Sidney A (45.5%)
6. Westlake A (44.2%)
7. Tippecanoe A (43.9%)
8. Miami Valley A (42.2%)
9. Solon A (41.9%)
10. Brush A (40.8%)
11. Dublin Jerome A (40.1%)
12. Northmont A (38.2%)
13. Ottawa Hills A (37.8%)
T14. Boardman, Olmsted Falls (36.6%)*
*Technically Boardman ranks higher by 0.05 percentage points, but that was too much hair-splitting even for me. I went back and forth about whether to have more ties. You can look at the raw data and decide where you draw the line.
Just to take things one step further, I decided to try and see what a "combined" ranking would look like. This was calculated by adding a team's position in the aPPB ranking to their position in the aP% ranking (lower is better). For example, Scioto ranks 1 on both lists, so their combined score is 1+1, or 2.
Combined Rankings1. Dublin Scioto (2)
2. Fisher Catholic A (8)
3. Westlake (9)
4. Miami Valley A (10)
T5. Sidney A, Beavercreek A (11)
7. Copley A (13)
8. Solon A (19)
9. Aurora (20)
10. Ottawa Hills (21)
11. Olmsted Falls (23)
12. Dublin Jerome A (25)
13. Boardman, Northmont (27)
14. Brush (28)
15. Olentangy Liberty (29)
If you are interested in seeing all the data, view the spreadsheet here. I apologize if there are errors, please let me know if you spot any:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/ ... sp=sharing