Ken Pom
- Thread starter mugrat86
- Start date
Because the Lafayette, UMass and DePaul losses are like swimming in the ocean with cinder blocks tied to your ankles. It's going to be really hard to make the tournament with those weighing on our rankings.
Its not about Kenpom..its about the NET
Lafayette yes. UMass was a bad loss but it was by a point at their place, and UMass not horrible. DePaul beat Seton Hall, so that was not a bad loss at all.
They beat Purdue, Michigan and Iowa and MD on road. Doesn’t these rankings take into account recent play. Rutgers is definitely a different team now than a month ago
Penn State didn't lose to the #312 team.
If it makes you feel better, our conference-only efficiency margin (which is what KenPom uses to rate teams) is higher than theirs: -0.2 for us, -3.5 for them.
If it makes you feel better, our conference-only efficiency margin (which is what KenPom uses to rate teams) is higher than theirs: -0.2 for us, -3.5 for them.
Beating us is worth a lot.
Interesting Bart info of teams since 2008 with a similar profile of Rutgers so far this year.
Last edited:
| NET | PREV | ROAD | NEUTRAL | HOME | Q1 | Q2 | Q3 | Q4 | |||
| 7 | 7 | Purdue | Big Ten | 15-2 | 2-1 | 4-0 | 9-1 | 4-1 | 2-1 | 2-0 | 7-0 |
| 11 | 11 | Illinois | Big Ten | 13-4 | 3-1 | 2-1 | 8-2 | 1-3 | 3-1 | 6-0 | 3-0 |
| 17 | 17 | Wisconsin | Big Ten | 15-2 | 4-1 | 3-0 | 8-1 | 5-1 | 5-1 | 1-0 | 4-0 |
| 22 | 22 | Ohio St. | Big Ten | 12-4 | 2-3 | 1-1 | 9-0 | 3-4 | 1-0 | 4-0 | 4-0 |
| 24 | 25 | Michigan St. | Big Ten | 14-3 | 3-0 | 3-2 | 8-1 | 2-2 | 3-0 | 5-1 | 4-0 |
| 25 | 21 | Iowa | Big Ten | 13-5 | 2-4 | 1-0 | 10-1 | 0-4 | 4-1 | 2-0 | 7-0 |
| 33 | 33 | Indiana | Big Ten | 13-4 | 1-4 | 1-0 | 11-0 | 1-2 | 1-2 | 4-0 | 7-0 |
| 53 | 54 | Michigan | Big Ten | 8-7 | 1-4 | 2-1 | 5-2 | 0-4 | 1-2 | 4-1 | 3-0 |
| 81 | 80 | Northwestern | Big Ten | 8-7 | 2-2 | 1-1 | 5-4 | 1-5 | 1-0 | 0-2 | 6-0 |
| 84 | 82 | Minnesota | Big Ten | 10-5 | 3-2 | 2-0 | 5-3 | 2-5 | 0-0 | 3-0 | 5-0 |
| 85 | 85 | Penn St. | Big Ten | 8-7 | 1-3 | 1-1 | 6-3 | 0-5 | 2-1 | 2-1 | 4-0 |
| 105 | 113 | Rutgers | Big Ten | 11-6 | 1-5 | 0-0 | 10-1 | 2-2 | 2-2 | 1-1 | 6-1 |
| 111 | 114 | Maryland | Big Ten | 9-9 | 1-3 | 2-1 | 6-5 | 1-4 | 2-1 | 2-4 | 4-0 |
| 200 | 201 | Nebraska | Big Ten | 6-13 | 0-5 | 0-1 | 6-7 | 0-6 | 0-6 | 0-0 | 6-1 |
PSU did lose to UMass by more than 20. I know the margin of points, whether a win or loss, is a factor in these rankings. So I think recent games haven't caught up to early-season games. Truthfully, I believe the human impact still weighs in these ranks regardless of computer numbers.
Umass is terrible..they current winless in a mediocre league
There is no recency bias input in computer rankings..all the data matters
It's a shame that a bad loss has ten times the value (impact) than a win against the top team in the nation. 312th isn't 355th, but 1st is 1st regardless. Rutgers has more quality wins than bad losses.
It's going to be hard but not impossible to make tourney. Our next 3 games are very winnable. Let's start there.
Agreed, one Q4 loss should not have that much impact and certainly shouldn't hugely outweigh our good Q1 wins relative to PSU. They always say committees don't just look at the computer rankings - well let's hope they discount an early bad loss at least a bit.
I’m an analytics *****, but struggle to match RU’s numbers to what eyeballs show.
However, early in the season the team looked *nothing* like its former or current self and I suppose that’s going to take time (so long as the trend remains) to shake that off.
One of the conundrums of the selection process is the whole “body of work” requirement (which is defensible) vs the teams that are playing best at the end of the year.
Teams that dig themselves into a big hole but get it together by December and perform well thereafter shouldn’t pay too high a price, IMO.
However, early in the season the team looked *nothing* like its former or current self and I suppose that’s going to take time (so long as the trend remains) to shake that off.
One of the conundrums of the selection process is the whole “body of work” requirement (which is defensible) vs the teams that are playing best at the end of the year.
Teams that dig themselves into a big hole but get it together by December and perform well thereafter shouldn’t pay too high a price, IMO.
I read somewhere where the committee looks at the entire season instead of snapshots here and there. The further Rutgers gets away from Layfette and continues to win, they should be in a great position to survive the ugly part of the season.
its a horrific loss and we lost to them at home. The difference from Rutgers to Purdue is much less than the difference from Rutgers to Lafayette
Rutgers currently has quality wins over Purdue and Iowa. Michigan and Clemson are solid wins but most schools have them. RU certainly is building their resume but they do not exist in a vacuum.
Rutgers also has a 2nd bad loss to Umass...its OOC schedule is like 269 and its best OOC win is just Clemson who is probably not going to the make the NCAA
Rutgers has plenty of opportunities to build their resume. In the end its not the Lafayette and UMass losses that will kill them, its that they wouldnt have beat enough top tier Big 10 schools.
We are only at January 20....plenty of weeks ahead for not only Rutgers but for other schools around the country to make their case and many of them will be falling by the wayside
now this I agree with, body of work and as I said plenty of opportunities to stack quality wins and avoid more bad losses. I think the latter is important as well. RU cannot afford to lose at Nebraska.....they simply cannot
Roughly yes 12-8 gets us to 18-12, if we win one game in B10 Tourney that would be 19-13.
We need to go 7-6 rest of the way, doable but not a forgone conclusion.
It’s an eyeballs/emotion call in the end (the selections are made by people, not computers), and bad losses by non-power teams make it easy for the human beings to rationalize leaving them out.
Duke or MSU have a bad loss and the same selectors are no doubt subconsciously “Yes, but they’re Duke | MSU”.
Just my opinion.
Duke or MSU have a bad loss and the same selectors are no doubt subconsciously “Yes, but they’re Duke | MSU”.
Just my opinion.
Lafayette and Umass were put on the schedule because they were supposed to be easy out of conference wins.The consequence of those losses are seen in the NET with a current score of 105.The next three games against Minnesota, Maryland and Nebraska all hav mediocre NET scores which would further impact Rutgers with losses.
I don’t think UMass was put there to be a complete cupcake. Lafayette on the other hand..
Those 3 losses are bad. They keep us out of the NCAA tournament if we're a 19 or less win team.
#322 Lafayette(3-11) won @ #105 Rutgers(11-6) 53-51 (before NET)
#317 SEMO(4-11) won @ #79 Missouri St(13-6) 99-94 (before NET)
#307 Lehigh(6-12) won @ #128 Navy(11-6) 69-61 (dropped 17)
#303 Austin Peay(2-9) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 89-81 (before NET)
#284 Western Carolina(7-11) won @ #46 Chattanooga(12-4) 70-59 (dropped 8)
#281 Lipscomb(5-12) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 78-59 (before NET)
#263 Wright St(8-8) won @ #122 NC St.(9-10) 84-70 (dropped 45)
#250 UMass-Lowell(7-7) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 59-58 (before NET)
#247 UC-San Diego(6-8) won @ #127 Cal(9-9) 80-67 (before NET)
#238 UC-Bakersfield(4-6) Won @ #52 Boise St(12-4) 46-39 (before NET)
#75 Dayton lost 3 Q4 games at home to 3 bad teams early, but since have won N #8 Kansas by 1 , N #39 Belmont by 2, home #41 VA Tech by 5, N #66 Miami Fla by 16 and H #69 St Louis by 5. Very odd resume.
Q1 2-1 Q2 3-2 Q3 2-0 Q4 5-3, lost @ SMU by 8, @ Ole Miss by 8, and H VCU by 1
It should be interesting to see how many of these Q4 losses will prevent any team getting in or not from an at large that will finish with a good NET.
Florida St is playing a non conference against a 1-14 #325 North Florida team, leads 48-35 end of 1st half, a lot of teams that have miss non conference games will be paying attention to see how a game like this will move FSU.
#317 SEMO(4-11) won @ #79 Missouri St(13-6) 99-94 (before NET)
#307 Lehigh(6-12) won @ #128 Navy(11-6) 69-61 (dropped 17)
#303 Austin Peay(2-9) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 89-81 (before NET)
#284 Western Carolina(7-11) won @ #46 Chattanooga(12-4) 70-59 (dropped 8)
#281 Lipscomb(5-12) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 78-59 (before NET)
#263 Wright St(8-8) won @ #122 NC St.(9-10) 84-70 (dropped 45)
#250 UMass-Lowell(7-7) won @ #75 Dayton(12-6) 59-58 (before NET)
#247 UC-San Diego(6-8) won @ #127 Cal(9-9) 80-67 (before NET)
#238 UC-Bakersfield(4-6) Won @ #52 Boise St(12-4) 46-39 (before NET)
#75 Dayton lost 3 Q4 games at home to 3 bad teams early, but since have won N #8 Kansas by 1 , N #39 Belmont by 2, home #41 VA Tech by 5, N #66 Miami Fla by 16 and H #69 St Louis by 5. Very odd resume.
Q1 2-1 Q2 3-2 Q3 2-0 Q4 5-3, lost @ SMU by 8, @ Ole Miss by 8, and H VCU by 1
It should be interesting to see how many of these Q4 losses will prevent any team getting in or not from an at large that will finish with a good NET.
Florida St is playing a non conference against a 1-14 #325 North Florida team, leads 48-35 end of 1st half, a lot of teams that have miss non conference games will be paying attention to see how a game like this will move FSU.
Looking at this season as a whole, we're just wildly inconsistent.
- There are games where our offense went MIA (Merrimack, Lafayette, Illinois, Penn State, Iowa all at 51 pts or less), and others where we lit it up (Nebraska, Michigan, Maine, CCSU)
- There are games where our defense went MIA (UMass, Illinois, Seton Hall) and games where it was stifling (Iowa, CCSU, Merrimack)
- There are games where we looked like world beaters (Purdue, Michigan, Nebraska) and games where we looked hapless (Lafayette, Illinois)
- We were Jekyll/Hyde vs. Maryland with two entirely different teams showing up to play each half
I don't know what team I'm going to get when I tune in. We could blow the doors off Minnesota, or lose 64-46.
Lafayette yes. UMass was a bad loss but it was by a point at their place, and UMass not horrible. DePaul beat Seton Hall, so that was not a terrible loss, penn State lost to UMass by 25 points. We lost by 1. They have no quality wins on their schedule. We beat Purdue, Michigan and Iowa which are all in the top 30 in Kenpom. Yes, they beat us at home, but that is kind of expected. My question is why does a loss to Lafayette early in the season mean so much more than a win over #1 team in the country. We are tied for fourth in conference, yet 11 BIG1G teams higher in Kenpom
Last edited:
We were Jekyll/Hyde at the beginning of the season (5-5). Since then, Rutgers has won 6 of 7 games by playing their style of tough defense.
Magin of points is everything with bart or ken. W and L are irrelelvant.
With the Lafayette and Depaul loses I really think we need to get to 20 wins.
Even though it means little, i would do whatever it takes to get that Rider game on the schedule. Every little bit is going to help.
Not so sure 20 wins gets us in based on the fact that getting in top 50 of the Net rankings seems almost impossible
I don't know the exact formula of the NET, but it is possible any game vs. Rider would hurt out NET rankings.
Texas A&M (first 4 out according to CBS) has a 150 NET.
St. Bonaventure (first 4 in according to CBS) has a 100 NET.
We just need to stack up wins and we'll be fine. I can't see them leaving out a 20 win Big Ten team that is playing well.
www.cbssports.com
St. Bonaventure (first 4 in according to CBS) has a 100 NET.
We just need to stack up wins and we'll be fine. I can't see them leaving out a 20 win Big Ten team that is playing well.
Bracketology 2026 - NCAA Tournament Predictions
CBS Sports is helping you get ready for March Madness with the latest news, picks, and predictions for the 2026 NCAA Basketball Tournament Bracket.
www.cbssports.com
Just looking at those 7 games, though...
- two were Maine and CCSU. Hard to judge the quality of a team by soundly beating the NET 354 and 341 teams.
- Nebraska we beat with an offensive explosion while allowing them to shoot above their average from the field and the arc.
- NET 85 Penn State beat us by 17 when we suddenly couldn't find our offense
- Michigan we showed up on both sides of the ball
- Iowa had a stellar defensive performance paired with a poor offensive performance
- Maryland we were Jekyll/Hyde between two halves
That's still not consistent. It's winning basketball - "finding ways to win" - but it's still hard to get a bead on what we'll see out of Rutgers from game to game, especially on the offensive side of the ball.
was never a fan of this series because a home game vs them at the rac is like a Q3 generally. We need to schedule tougher smarter or just go all out with the cupcakes then
good post, Rutgers is finding ways to win and seem to know how to win which is a big plus going forward. We are getting by but our performances from game to game and half to half are showing inconsistencies. This 4 game stretch is important because its all vs teams that RU is better then but 3 are on the road. To be successful we need to show consistency here.
Texas A&M (first 4 out according to CBS) has a 150 NET.
St. Bonaventure (first 4 in according to CBS) has a 100 NET.
We just need to stack up wins and we'll be fine. I can't see them leaving out a 20 win Big Ten team that is playing well.
Bracketology 2026 - NCAA Tournament Predictions
CBS Sports is helping you get ready for March Madness with the latest news, picks, and predictions for the 2026 NCAA Basketball Tournament Bracket.
palm having Indiana out right now is total absurdity, thats why I dont think any of these projections in January matter, cant starting doing this until a week into February
Texas A&M net is 56 so thats another big goof by Palm
I agree 20 wins is a mortal lock, I think 19 is likely a good number to shoot for
probably wont do much. I think when you get on the cut line you want to be a certain games above 500...if RU finished 16-14 yeah it would be nice to have that Rider win for percentages but I dont think it would move the needle much in the computer, it would actually drop our overall sos