Stanford Rule D1 Women’s Psych Sheet Scored By Collegiate Best Times

by Andrew Mering 7

March 08th, 2018 News

Last week, I scored out the D1 women‘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 California (392 points) who added 25.5 points vs the scored psych sheet. This put their projected swimming point lead over Texas A&M (324 points) for 2nd to 58, up from 28.5 on the regular psych sheet. Stanford remained solidly in 1st place with 539.

One flaw with this methodology is that freshmen’s pre collegiate best times aren’t included, but this isn’t as big a problem as for the men. Nearly all of SwimSwam’s top ranked recruit’s pre collegiate top times are either ranked outside the top 16, or they’ve already bettered them this season. This means the missing times don’t have a large impact on the standings.

Unsurprisingly, Stanford dominate the top of the individual rankings here with the top 3 individual point scorers. Katie Ledecky leads with 60 followed by Simone Manuel and Ella Eastin with 57. Next is Kathleen Baker of Cal with 53, Erika Brown of Tennessee with 50, Mallory Comerford of Louisville with 49, and Sydney Pickrem of Texas A&M with 49. Individual scores are listed below the team scores.

Best Time Scores

Best Time Points Psych Points Diff
Stanford 539 527.5 11.5
California 392 366.5 25.5
Texas A&M 324 338 -14
Michigan 298.5 289.5 9
Tennessee 211.5 195.5 16
Southern Cali 208 185 23
Louisville 162 173.5 -11.5
Indiana 157.5 137.5 20
Texas 153 153 0
Virginia 147.5 160 -12.5
Ohio St 112 124 -12
Minnesota 105.5 114 -8.5
Auburn 105 124 -19
Georgia 104 101 3
Kentucky 90 104.5 -14.5
Wisconsin 88 92 -4
NC State 65 69.5 -4.5
University of Missouri 51 63 -12
UNC 39 37 2
Arizona St 26 16 10
Arizona 23 17 6
Virginia Tech 22.5 23 -0.5
Alabama 22 25.5 -3.5
Florida St 21 13.5 7.5
Penn St 18 20 -2
Denver 18 15 3
Eastern Michigan University 14 15 -1
Purdue 12.5 18.5 -6
South Carolina 9.5 13.5 -4
Hawaii 8 13 -5
Pittsburgh 7 0 7
UCLA 3 6 -3
Florida 3 4 -1
Akron 2 2 0
SMU 2 0 2
Duke 1 4 -3
West Virginia 0 4 -4

Individuals

Team Best Time Points
Ledecky, Katie Stanford 60
Manuel, Simone Stanford 57
Eastin, Ella Stanford 57
Baker, Kathleen California 53
Brown, Erika Tennessee 50
Comerford, Mallory Louisville 49
Pickrem, Sydney Texas A&M 49
Hu, Janet Stanford 48
Hansson, Louise Southern Cali 46
Nelson, Beata Wisconsin 44
Seidt, Asia Kentucky 41
Haughey, Siobhan Bernadette Michigan 41
King, Lilly Indiana 40
Li, Liz Ohio St 40
Howe, Ally Stanford 37
Gastaldello, Beryl Texas A&M 36
Galat, Bethany Texas A&M 36
Goss, Kennedy Indiana 35
Drabot, Katie Stanford 35
Baldwin, Caroline UNC 34
McLaughlin, Katie California 34
Ryan, G Michigan 33
Weitzeil, Abbey California 31
Bi, Rose Michigan 31
Belousova, Anna Texas A&M 29
Tucker, Miranda Michigan 28
Evans, Joanna Texas 27
Bilquist, Amy California 26
Kansakoski, Silja Arizona St 26
Scott, Riley Southern Cali 26
Small, Meghan Tennessee 24.5
Bratton, Lisa Texas A&M 24
Britt, Chelsea Georgia 23
Kozelsky, Lindsey Minnesota 23
Moore, Hannah NC State 20
Forde, Brooke Stanford 20
Thomas, Noemie California 19.5
Stevens, Hannah University of Missouri 19
McHugh, Ally Penn St 18
Andison, Bailey Denver 18
Darcel, Sarah California 18
Szekely, Allie Stanford 17
Banic, Madeline Tennessee 16.5
Adams, Claire Texas 16
Tetzloff, Alyssa Auburn 16
Deloof, Gabby Michigan 16
Harnish, Courtney Georgia 15.5
Pierce, Natalie Florida St 15
Aroesty, Margaret Southern Cali 15
Duncan, Delaney Eastern Michigan University 14
Kingsley, Megan Georgia 14
Black, Haley Auburn 13
Wright, Maddie Southern Cali 13
Deloof, Catie Michigan 13
Byrnes, Megan Stanford 13
Marrkand, Jen Virginia 13
Cooper, Caitlin Virginia 12.5
Meitz, Kaersten Purdue 12.5
Haan, Elise NC State 12
Oglesby, Grace Louisville 12
Millard, Rebecca Texas 12
Stevens, Leah Stanford 12
Murphy, Maddie California 11.5
Stewart, Kylie Georgia 11
Smiddy, Clara Michigan 11
Galyer, Ali Kentucky 11
Quah, Jing Texas A&M 11
Neumann, Robin California 11
Rasmus, Claire Texas A&M 11
Mann, Becca Southern Cali 11
Moroney, Megan Virginia 10
Konopka, Katrina Arizona 9
Caneta, Jorie Texas A&M 9
Gonzalez Medina, Esther Texas A&M 9
Barksdale, Emma South Carolina 8.5
Rathsack, Lina Pittsburgh 7
Bonnett, Bailey Kentucky 7
Pitzer, Lauren Stanford 7
Kowal, Molly Ohio St 7
Brady, Sharli University of Missouri 7
Nack, Danielle Minnesota 6.5
Krause, Vanessa Michigan 6.5
Case, Lauren Texas 6.5
Raab, Meaghan Georgia 6.5
Rockett, Ally Indiana 6
Williams, Kim Stanford 6
Hines, Phoebe Hawaii 6
Madden, Paige Virginia 6
Gyorgy, Reka Virginia Tech 6
Alexander, Bridgette Kentucky 5
Lohman, Kennedy Texas 5
Freriks, Geena Kentucky 5
Schmidt, Sierra Michigan 5
Bailey, Meg Ohio St 5
Nazieblo, Klaudia Virginia Tech 4.5
Perry, Ky-lee NC State 4
Kopas, Emily Michigan 4
Ochitwa, Ann University of Missouri 4
Jernberg, Cassy Indiana 3.5
Cieplucha, Tessa Tennessee 3.5
Hynes, Haley University of Missouri 3
Schanz, Emma UCLA 3
Winstead, Madison Kentucky 3
Jensen, Christie Indiana 3
Meynen, Julie Auburn 3
Weiss, Hannah Southern Cali 2
Samardzic, Matea SMU 2
Scott, Bailey Alabama 2
Weidner, Franziska Hawaii 2
Marrero, Paloma Akron 2
Burchill, Veronica Georgia 2
Eddy, Eryn Virginia 2
Jacobsen, Kirsten Arizona 2
Voss, Erin Stanford 2
Rule, Remedy Texas 1.5
Ball, Emma Florida 1
Armitage, Katie Tennessee 1
Dirrane, Kersten South Carolina 1
Goldman, Leah Duke 1
Ellzey, Ashton Auburn 1
Stinson, Elizabeth Southern Cali 1
Cattermole, Sophie Louisville 1
Carrozza, Quinn Texas 1

 

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

In This Story

7
Leave a Reply

2 Comment threads
5 Thread replies
0 Followers
 
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
6 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Yozhik

It is not clear how your re scoring procedure works. For the top swimmers their in-season times are not good predictors because of tapering/rest factor but because there was no need for them to show their best in season to get qualified. If such a swimmer has a history then times from last year finals can be used adjusted on the difference between some way averaged in-season times from last and current seasons. Comparing in-season times may give some idea if it was improvement in form. If re scoring is based on historical difference between in-season and final times than it will be less reliable, I think because it is not clear what possible real/consistent/biological/tactical/ whatever factor stands behind it.… Read more »

Hannah

I think he takes the swimmer’s best times and scores the meet.

Wahoowah

If you throw out all the relays would be interesting if Katie Ledecky as her own team – if she alone would be a Top Ten “team” – in individual events.

She probably wouldn’t be. I believe Minnesota, 10th at NCAAs, scored 140 points without relays. 9th place USC scored 70. This is just quick math, but I think I’m right. She’d be close. If you threw out diving too, she *might* have a chance.

Don't want to miss anything?

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive our latest updates!