Efficiency margin (which is what KenPom tracks) is a component of the NET. So in that sense it does help to lose by 3 rather than 13.
30 NET/27 Kenpom/30 BART
- Thread starter sport2231
- Start date
Efficiency margin (which is what KenPom tracks) is a component of the NET. So in that sense it does help to lose by 3 rather than 13.
Right, because losing by 13 would be a “bad loss” and would go against you. Where as a “close loss” doesn’t hurt you. (Which isn’t the same thing as boosting your resume)
Top 10 in AdjD at 8th in Ken Pom
1) Virginia
2) WVU
3) Kansas
4) Baylor
5) Duke
6) Purdue
7) Maryland
8) Rutgers
9) Butler
10) Seton Hall
We need to work on our AdjO only #111, been dropping bad last 2 games. If we want a long run in the tourny, our offensive efficiency has to get better. Teams that make long runs are teams that are top 50 in both AdjO and AdjD. Like last year,
Virginia #2 #5 Texas Tech #25 #1
MSU #5 #9 Auburn #6 #36
1) Virginia
2) WVU
3) Kansas
4) Baylor
5) Duke
6) Purdue
7) Maryland
8) Rutgers
9) Butler
10) Seton Hall
We need to work on our AdjO only #111, been dropping bad last 2 games. If we want a long run in the tourny, our offensive efficiency has to get better. Teams that make long runs are teams that are top 50 in both AdjO and AdjD. Like last year,
Virginia #2 #5 Texas Tech #25 #1
MSU #5 #9 Auburn #6 #36
Last edited:
up to #22 in NET!!!!!!
With St Bonaventure starting to close in on being Q2, resume is getting better by the day.
These are current numbers as we head into busy weekend
Kenpoms preseason rankings should be fully out of the data by the end of this weekend. But the impact is minimal at this point
https://kenpom.com/contact.php
Kenpoms preseason rankings should be fully out of the data by the end of this weekend. But the impact is minimal at this point
https://kenpom.com/contact.php
We have a second chance to crack the AP 25 tomorrow. We might not get a third. Would love to see a number by our name at least once.
I have questions for people who know these rankings, let's focus on NET for now, better than I do:
1) Once the OOC is over, is there effectively a set amount of ranking capital to go around between the members of each conference, or can the efficiency stats change that significantly? As an extreme example, if there are three teams in a conference, and they comprise the top 3 in the NET as of the beginning of conference play, is there anything that can happen in conference play that could knock one of them out of the top 3? How about two of them out of the top 3? How far could they fall, realistically?
2) In conference play, it seems like we should effectively be rooting for the teams we play twice to beat the teams we play once, regardless of our performance against each. True?
3) Later in the season, should we be rooting for the teams we beat twice (knock on wood that there will be a couple) to beat the teams against whom we went 1-1, who we should be rooting for over teams that swept us? I suppose it depends more on whether the game has the potential to knock one of them into a different quadrant, but if that's not the case, should we be rooting for, e.g., PSU over Illinois later in the year? Indiana over MSU now? Or, within a quadrant, is the betterment of an existing win fully offset by the deterioration in an existing loss in that case?
1) Once the OOC is over, is there effectively a set amount of ranking capital to go around between the members of each conference, or can the efficiency stats change that significantly? As an extreme example, if there are three teams in a conference, and they comprise the top 3 in the NET as of the beginning of conference play, is there anything that can happen in conference play that could knock one of them out of the top 3? How about two of them out of the top 3? How far could they fall, realistically?
2) In conference play, it seems like we should effectively be rooting for the teams we play twice to beat the teams we play once, regardless of our performance against each. True?
3) Later in the season, should we be rooting for the teams we beat twice (knock on wood that there will be a couple) to beat the teams against whom we went 1-1, who we should be rooting for over teams that swept us? I suppose it depends more on whether the game has the potential to knock one of them into a different quadrant, but if that's not the case, should we be rooting for, e.g., PSU over Illinois later in the year? Indiana over MSU now? Or, within a quadrant, is the betterment of an existing win fully offset by the deterioration in an existing loss in that case?
Every remaining league game has ranking consequences as teams watch road losses move them out of the top eight positions .There will be bunching of teams with similar records and a real battle in February to maintain or move upward in B1G rankings.
Up to 27 in KenPom, which is still only 8th in the B1G, as they have teams like Purdue (10-8) and Wisky (11-7) ahead of us.
I know KenPom rankings are primarily based on the offensive efficiency to defensive efficiency split, but it’s kind of ridiculous that Purdue is ahead of us.
But whatever, I’m not that broken up about it.
I know KenPom rankings are primarily based on the offensive efficiency to defensive efficiency split, but it’s kind of ridiculous that Purdue is ahead of us.
But whatever, I’m not that broken up about it.
I know less specifically about NET but more about computer rankings in general and will take a crack at this.
Generally yes. Once all of the OOC games are complete the average ranking of the conference is basically set and then the teams will just move around relative to that average.
Depends what you mean by realistically. If they just lose to each other and beat the other teams in their conference they will likely stay very high. But if they finished at the bottom of their conference they could certainly fall quite a long ways. These falls would be offset by gains for the other teams in the conference such that the overall strength of the conference remains the same.
True.
I don't think there is one answer to this, it depends on specific situations and how specific ranking systems work. It also depends on how good YOUR team is. For example, consider two different schedules:
Schedule A:
vs #2 team
vs #300 team
Schedule B:
vs #150 team
vs #151 team
which schedule is tougher? It actually depends on how good you are.
If you are the #1 team, for example, schedule A is clearly harder. You have ~ no chance of losing to #150, #151, or #300, so the only thing that makes a schedule hard is playing other top teams.
If you are the #320 team, however, schedule A is clearly EASIER. You have ~ no chance of beating #2, #150, or #151 and so the only thing that makes a schedule "easy" is a chance to play other bad teams.
If you are the #149 team, the schedule are of approximately equal difficulty, but there is a lot more variance in schedule B (where you are expected to go 1-1, but any outcome is plausible) vs schedule A (where you basically always go 1-1).
In general, I think it is PROBABLY better for us to have some top teams on the schedule and some worse ones rather than to have the whole Big Ten clustered at good but not great, so I would think we should root for the better team in any matchup between teams we've played the same number of times. But this effect is small and I might not even be right about that, it's very complicated.
I’d say we need it more, and not saying as a Homer. If RU is indeed making the jump then holding serve at home is an absolute must to avoid any slip ups later...
Yep where are all the complainers now that Pike scheduled too soft, blah blah there were some that were sharpening their pitchforks. #18 SOS !! Out of 350 something schools in D1 ! #18/350 how much harder do you want it !! Lol
yeah I thought there was an error since it's only showing 13 but somebody pointed out that it doesn't reflect Caldwell. I guess it's just the closer we get to the top the harder it is to move anywhere