Texas Lead D1 Men’s Psych Sheet Scored By Collegiate Best Times

Yesterday, I scored out the D1 men’s pre selection psych sheet. This exercise gives us some idea of how teams stand heading into the meet, but there are some major flaws. Swimmer’s entry times are based on their best time this season. Many top swimmers haven’t fully rested yet, or have rested some, but not in every event they entered. It’s relatively easy to predict that these swimmers will be faster at the big meet. So I decided to try a projection that factors that in.

I grabbed the top collegiate time for every swimmer* that qualified for the meet individually and re scored. I left relays with their current seed times. Still no diving. This resulted in the biggest point jump for Texas who went from 4th with 322 to 1st with 398.5.  NC State remained 2nd with 372.5. Indiana are 3rd with 337.5, Florida 4th with 323, and Cal are 5th with 319.

Before anyone jumps to conclusions and declares Cal are out of contention, it’s useful to discuss the flaws of this method. Mainly that it severely underrates top freshmen. For example, Cal’s Ryan Hoffer is scored at 0 points by his collegiate best times. However, if swims his lifetime best times in the 50 and 100 free (18.71, 41.23) suddenly he scores 31 points. Even a small improvement in his third event, the 100 fly, will bump him into the points there as well. Accounting for Hoffer’s ability bumps Cal to 350 points and he isn’t Cal’s only freshman with big potential. Sean Grieshop, Bryce Mefford, Daniel Carr, and Trenton Julian were all ranked in SwimSwam’s top 20 recruits in this year’s class and have qualified for the meet. Texas and Florida also have multiple freshmen at the meet that were highly ranked coming into the year.

In the same way that a scored psych sheet isn’t a straight forward prediction of the outcome, this isn’t either. It’s missing diving. Some swimmers are likely to go much faster or much slower than the times used here. This is one more data point that can help us set expectations.

In this version, Caeleb Dressel of Florida leads individuals with 60 points followed by Joseph Schooling of Texas with 52, Ryan Held of NC State with 49.5, Mark Szaranek of Florida with 49.5, Ian Finnerty of Indiana with 49 and Felix Auboeck of Michigan with 49. Individual scores are listed below the team scores.

Best Time Scores

Best Time Points Psych Points Difference
Texas 398.5 322 76.5
NC State 372.5 385 -12.5
Indiana 337.5 350.5 -13
Florida 323 302 21
California 319 340.5 -21.5
Michigan 207 218.5 -11.5
Southern Cali 185 166 19
Stanford 147.5 129.5 18
Louisville 136 152 -16
South Carolina 114 84 30
Auburn 109 144 -35
Alabama 107 101 6
Minnesota 90 95 -5
Tennessee 88 80.5 7.5
Georgia 79.5 49.5 30
Texas A&M 70.5 83 -12.5
Harvard 60 77 -17
Ohio St 59.5 75 -15.5
Florida St 48 53 -5
Arizona 47 60.5 -13.5
Missouri 45 47 -2
Arizona St 43 43 0
Virginia 31 46 -15
Grand Canyon University 26 27 -1
Notre Dame 25.5 37.5 -12
Cornell 22 27 -5
Denver 15 9 6
Purdue 11 0 11
Georgia Tech 9 9 0
Missouri St. M 6 12 -6
Pacific 6 6 0
West Virginia 4.5 8 -3.5
Virginia Tech 3 7 -4
Utah 2 7 -5
Loyola University Maryland 2 5 -3
Kentucky 0 2 -2
Penn 0 2 -2
UNLV M 0 2 -2

Individuals

School Best Time  Points
Dressel, Caeleb Florida 60
Schooling, Joseph Texas 52
Held, Ryan NC State 49.5
Szaranek, Mark Florida 49.5
Finnerty, Ian Indiana 49
Auboeck, Felix Michigan 49
Seliskar, Andrew California 46
Bentz, Gunnar Georgia 45
Lanza, Vini Indiana 42.5
Haas, Townley Texas 42
Vazaios, Andreas NC State 40.5
Shebat, John Texas 40
Stewart, Coleman NC State 36
Gonzalez, Hugo Auburn 33
Pieroni, Blake Indiana 32
Mahmoud, Akaram South Carolina 32
Ipsen, Anton Oerskov NC State 32
Switkowski, Jan Florida 31.5
Quah, Zheng California 31
Roberts, Jonathan Texas 31
DeVine, Abrahm Stanford 30.5
Becker, Bowen Minnesota 30
Apple, Zachary Auburn 29
Carter, Dylan Southern Cali 29
Farris, Dean Harvard 29
McHugh, Conner Minnesota 28
Shoults, Grant Stanford 26
Kaliszak, Luke Alabama 25
Wich-Glasen, Nils South Carolina 25
Jackson, Tate Texas 25
Brock, Levi Indiana 24
Katz, Austin Texas 23
Minuth, Fynn South Carolina 23
Evdokimov, Alex Cornell 22
Yeadon, Zach Notre Dame 22
Ringgold, Brett Texas 20.5
Ress, Justin NC State 20.5
Vargas Jacobo, Ricardo Michigan 20
Acosta, Marcelo Louisville 19
Sweetser, True Stanford 19
Litherland, Jay Georgia 19
Castillo Luna, Mauro Texas A&M 18.5
Stuart, Hennessey NC State 18
Mulcare, Patrick Southern Cali 17
Vissering, Carsten Southern Cali 17
Lynch, Justin California 17
Craig, Cameron Arizona St 17
Ransford, Pj Michigan 17
Nikolaev, Mark Grand Canyon University 16
Hoppe, Connor California 16
Tribuntsov, Ralf Southern Cali 15
Loncar, Anton Denver 15
Josa, Matthew California 15
Acevedo, Javier Georgia 14.5
Samy, Mohamed Indiana 14
Stevens, Peter Tennessee 14
Montague, Jacob Michigan 14
Claverie, Carlos Louisville 14
Condorelli, Santo Southern Cali 14
Wright, Justin Arizona 14
Powers, Paul Michigan 14
Lense, Noah Ohio St 13.5
Fantoni, Gabriel Indiana 13
Baqlah, Khader Florida 13
Albiero, Nicolas Louisville 12
Sendyk, Pawel California 12
Egan, Liam Stanford 12
Pomajevich, Sam Texas 12
Khalafalla, Ali Indiana 11
Amaltdinov, Marat Purdue 11
Perry, Sam Stanford 11
Rooney, Maxime Florida 11
Almeida, Brandonn South Carolina 11
Harty, Ryan Texas 11
Schubert, Ted Virginia 10
Glinta, Robert Southern Cali 9
Norman, Nick California 9
Swanson, Charlie Michigan 9
Somov, Evgenii Louisville 8
Peribonio, Tom South Carolina 8
Reid, Christopher Alabama 7
White, Evan Michigan 7
Thomas, Mike California 7
Bish, Blair Missouri St. M 6
Kaleoaloha, Kanoa Florida St 6
Grieshop, Sean California 6
Novak, Brennan Harvard 6
Newkirk, Jeff Texas 6
Cope, Tommy Michigan 6
Dobbs, Chatham Arizona 5
Holoda, Peter Auburn 5
Bekemeyer, Cody South Carolina 5
Ogren, Curtis Stanford 5
Delakis, Paul Ohio St 5
Armstrong, Jake West Virginia 4.5
Poti, Zachary Arizona St 4
Bonetti, Brock Texas A&M 4
Molacek, Jacob NC State 4
Loschi, Moises Georgia Tech 4
Ferraro, Christian Georgia Tech 4
Wielinski, Jacob Missouri 4
Lawless, Ben Florida 4
Szabo, Norbert Virginia Tech 3
Howard, Robert Alabama 3
Schreuders, Mikel Missouri 3
Wieser, Chris Arizona 3
McHugh, Sam Tennessee 3
Thorne, Nick Arizona 3
Plaschka, Justin Notre Dame 2.5
Ungur, Paul Utah 2
Cono, Ben Loyola University Maryland 2
Tybur, Jonathan Texas A&M 2
Gurevich, Etay Louisville 2
Clark, Joe Virginia 1
Whitacre, Robert Notre Dame 1
Babinet, Jeremy Michigan 1
Pumputis, Caio Georgia Tech 1
Coetzee, Ryan Tennessee 1
Higgins, Walker Georgia 1
Harting, Zach Louisville 1

*I didn’t get times for transfers from their previous school, only their current school. Shouldn’t change much

In This Story

27
Leave a Reply

Subscribe
Notify of
27 Comments
oldest
newest most voted
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments
gator
3 years ago

How did you handle the relay times – same as psych sheet?

meeeeee
3 years ago

fun. doesn’t look like you credited Purdue with their 11 points scored by Amaltdinov in the 200 breast

Paul
3 years ago

Would it be possible to re-run this analysis including freshman by using their best time, or best time +- X% where X represents the historical average change from pre-NCAA lifetime bests to NCAA performances as a freshman? I think it would make the prediction model a little more robust

wethorn
Reply to  Andrew Mering
3 years ago

No, they’re actually really easy to get. Use the best times by event/SCY filter.
https://www.usaswimming.org/Home/times/individual-times-search

Paul
Reply to  Andrew Mering
3 years ago

I agree. The data wouldn’t be worth it, thanks for making that clear.

Admin
Reply to  Paul
3 years ago

Especially because as soon as he did the work, every swimmer, parent, and alumni from every team that didn’t come out on top would bolt over here to tell him that his effort was meaningless ;-).

JimSwim
Reply to  Andrew Mering
3 years ago

I would assume all the yards times swim are in the swims database same as the colleges use

IM FAN
3 years ago

My men’s Prediction
50 free
1. Dressel 18.08
2. Held 18.40
3. Hoffer 18.52
100 free
1. Dressel 39.73
2. Pieroni 40.81
3. Hoffer 40.90
200 free
1. Haas 1:29.98
2. Pieroni 1:30.22
3. Farris 1:30.94
500 free
1. Auboeck 4:06.56
2. Haas 4:06.88
3. Shoults 4:09.55
1650 free
1. Auboeck 14:15.12
2. Ipsen 14:28.93
3. Shoults 14:30.20
100 back
1. Shebat 44.16
2. Stewart 44.37
3. Katz 44.57
200 back
1. Katz 1:36.44
2. Shebat 1:37.89
3. Gonzalez 1:38.65
100 breast
1. Finnerty 50.39
2. Mchugh 51.42
… Read more »

Go Bearcats
Reply to  IM FAN
3 years ago

I’m surprised you received 15 downvotes… for what?

I think you’re accurate on some except I fully believe Pieroni will win the 200 and break 1:30. I also think you’re overestimating Shebat.

Foreign Embassy
Reply to  Go Bearcats
3 years ago

I agree on both points above and also on hoffer, Hugo and Katz. I *hope* I’m wrong but expecting a 40.9 and 18.5 from hoffer and 1:36 2back and 3:33 4im from frosh seems a bit lofty. Actually most of the times I think are a bit fast but the placing I could get behind. ??

2 Cents
Reply to  Go Bearcats
3 years ago

Probably because he has Schooling winning the 2 Fly. Didn’t he not even score in this event last year, or was it the year before? My other thought is because those times are sooo fast. Although, every year it become more and more ridiculous how fast this meet has become. Or, maybe not having Dean Farris winning every event?? There seems to be a lot of his fans around here.

IM FAN
3 years ago

My men’s Prediction
50 free
1. Dressel 18.08
2. Held 18.40
3. Hoffer 18.52
100 free
1. Dressel 39.73
2. Pieroni 40.81
3. Hoffer 40.90
200 free
1. Haas 1:29.98
2. Pieroni 1:30.22
3. Farris 1:30.94
500 free
1. Auboeck 4:06.56
2. Haas 4:06.88
3. Shoults 4:09.55
1650 free
1. Auboeck 14:15.12
2. Ipsen 14:28.93
3. Shoults 14:30.20
100 back
1. Shebat 44.16
2. Stewart 44.37
3. Katz 44.57
200 back
1. Katz 1:36.44
2. Shebat 1:37.89
3. Gonzalez 1:38.65
100 breast
1. Finnerty 50.39
2. Mchugh 51.42
… Read more »

Bear Squad
3 years ago

Yale wasn’t scored yet have three people going to NC’s?

Admin
Reply to  Bear Squad
3 years ago

They don’t have anyone whose best time would put them in the top 16.

marklewis
3 years ago

Pile on more expectations on Ryan Hoffer. Can he surpass his high school records at his first NCAAs?

Every tenth of a second counts in his events. Getting to the finals is Step 1 for Ryan.

He Gets It Done Again
3 years ago

Thanks Mr. Mering for another interesting article. Also, when you came out with your article predicting NCAA cut times, people were criticizing them as being too fast, but they were remarkably accurate. https://swimswam.com/estimating-ncaa-d1-nationals-cut-times/