4-3 down the stretch has to get us in

[RUBABY15]

two roads wins, @ Mich and @Indiana while taking care of business at the Rac vs Illinois and Penn state. Sign me up!

 

[bigmatt718]

I think any combo of 4 wins gets us in. You also forgot we play Wisconsin at home as well.

 

[Scarlet Shack]

4 of 7 makes us 18-12 ….need one in the big ten tourney and we will still sweat until 1800
Hours on March 13…

 

[ScarletDave]

12-8 with what would be the amount of Q1 wins would be definitely in. 11-9 is also most likely in given our remaining schedule, but would maybe need one more in the B1G tourney

 

[BellyFullOfWhiteDogCrap]

I think any combo of 4 wins gets us in. You also forgot we play Wisconsin at home as well.

Wisconsin is on the road

 

[richthedentist]

12-8 with what would be the amount of Q1 wins would be definitely in. 11-9 is also most likely in given our remaining schedule, but would maybe need one more in the B1G tourney

How about two in the Big tourney

 

[bigmatt718]

Wisconsin is on the road

We play them home and home in February.

 

[cubuffsdoug_rivals]

two roads wins, @ Mich and @Indiana while taking care of business at the Rac vs Illinois and Penn state. Sign me up!

I want a win @ Wisconsin because that is another Q1 win, and it's on the road.

Overall, I like our chances against Wisconsin (home & away), Indiana, and PSU. I think Rutgers has to blitz Michigan as they did at home if they want to win on the road. I can't get an accurate read on Illinois yet.

 

[bigmatt718]

How about two in the Big tourney

Probably gets us to like the 9/10 line if we at least take care of business at home.

 

[cubuffsdoug_rivals]

Although I don't have a solid read on Illinois, I know I want to beat the pants off them the same way Rutgers did against Michigan. Illinois fans act as if they won every meeting between the teams. They are 2-2 against Rutgers over the last four games.

 

[rob kight]

Sporting News had us as a bubble team before the OSU win. They also have Indiana and Iowa in when we are doing better than them in conference play. They also have Oklahoma in while they sport a 3-7 conference record??? Name recognition goes a long way with analysts not necessarily the committee.

 

[bethlehemfan]

12-8 we are in 11-9 bubble. One game at a time.

 

[bigmatt718]

12-8 we are in 11-9 bubble. One game at a time.

I agree. I truly think 4 is the magic number. 3 we're on the bubble sweating on Selection Sunday.

 

[Loyal_2RU]

4 of 7 makes us 18-12 ….need one in the big ten tourney and we will still sweat until 1800
Hours on March 13…

Disagree, although I think we win one in tourney, I think 12-8 in league with the wins we'll have will get us in. Maybe be sweating just because that's what we do, but in.

Our resume may be unique in the analytics era. According to ESPN we are 3-1 against teams now in top 25.

 

[The RUT]

Top half of the B1G and you’re in - nothing else matters.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

It depends who we’d play in the tourney.

Based on last night’s win, in a hypothetical 12-8 deadlock with OSU and/or Michigan state we would own the tie breakers for the last bye (4th place). We’d have a good chance at 18-13 with a close loss to the 5 seed in the double bye game.

But as the 5 seed though at 18-12 we might need to win the first game - I don’t know that we could afford to close with a neutral loss to NW or PSU.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Top half of the B1G and you’re in - nothing else matters.

There’s no way even if we finish 7th that with 10 or 11 wins we get in without winning a tourney game. Not with that Lafayette loss.

 

[The RUT]

There’s no way even if we finish 7th that with 10 or 11 wins we get in without winning a tourney game. Not with that Lafayette loss.

I disagree

 

[hbr1103]

There’s no way even if we finish 7th that with 10 or 11 wins we get in without winning a tourney game. Not with that Lafayette loss.

Wrong
Andy Katz said in with 11-9 record in big 10
Would be 6 quad 1 wins

 

[HeavenUniv.]

https://www.nj.com/rutgersbasketbal...out-rutgers-comeback-win-over-ohio-state.html

 

[LeapinLou]

Although Illinois manhandled us earlier this year, this is a game where I'd love to see the RAC magic reverse it. And of course they no longer have Giorgi Bezhanishvili to kill us as he always did.

 

[needmorecowbell]

two roads wins, @ Mich and @Indiana while taking care of business at the Rac vs Illinois and Penn state. Sign me up!

4 wins definitely gets us in. Get 3 really good wins and they probably are in.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Wrong
Andy Katz said in with 11-9 record in big 10
Would be 6 quad 1 wins

You do know it’s pretty easy for Michigan State and/or Iowa to become Q2 wins right? Even Ohio State is vulnerable as it doesn’t take that much to move from 18 to 30 with a bad loss.

Also - there are more bubble teams than you think that have 4 Q1 wins right now just like us without the bad losses. Kansas State, BYU, Oklahoma, Creighton, Seton Hall.

We really hurt ourselves with the non-conference. We’re not “in” on any brackets as of right now - and the scenario you are talking about would involve closing out 3-5 down the stretch. No combination of that would put us in better position than we’re in right now (which is not projected to be in the field).

 

[BillyC80]

You do know it’s pretty easy for Michigan State and/or Iowa to become Q2 wins right? Even Ohio State is vulnerable as it doesn’t take that much to move from 18 to 30 with a bad loss.

Also - there are more bubble teams than you think that have 4 Q1 wins right now just like us without the bad losses. Kansas State, BYU, Oklahoma, Creighton, Seton Hall.

We really hurt ourselves with the non-conference. We’re not “in” on any brackets as of right now - and the scenario you are talking about would involve closing out 3-5 down the stretch. No combination of that would put us in better position than we’re in right now (which is not projected to be in the field).

Our OOC losses were so bad that it even hurts the NET of ranked teams that lose to us, which in turn makes it more difficult for us to move up in NET rankings when we beat ranked teams. It’s a vicious cycle.

 

[fluoxetine]

4-3 + 1-1 possible but <50% imo
4-3 + 2-1 good

 

[fluoxetine]

Our OOC losses were so bad that it even hurts the NET of ranked teams that lose to us, which in turn makes it more difficult for us to move up in NET rankings when we beat ranked teams. It’s a vicious cycle.

This is not really how it works.

 

[kcg88]

4-3 + 1-1 possible but <50% imo
4-3 + 2-1 good

I'm more bullish on our chances at 19-14 (66-75% maybe). 20-14 is a lock imo.

 

[bac2therac]

@kcg88 last couple of years, i know you did threads listing impact games for each night. Might be time!

 

[kcg88]

@kcg88 last couple of years, i know you did threads listing impact games for each night. Might be time!

Hoping Bracket Matrix would update but I don't know what time to day they generally do.

 

[PiscatawayMike]

12-8 LIKELY gets us in.
13-7 and we are a LOCK.

 

[BillyC80]

This is not really how it works.

Please explain. Seems logical that when you beat a team with a higher NET, their NET goes down and you may be contributing to them dropping from a Quad 1 to Quad 2, so your win against them doesn’t help you as much. Thus the vicious cycle that started when we lost those OOC games.

 

[fluoxetine]

Please explain. Seems logical that when you beat a team with a higher NET, their NET goes down and you may be contributing to them dropping from a Quad 1 to Quad 2, so your win against them doesn’t help you as much. Thus the vicious cycle that started when we lost those OOC games.

Having a bad rating doesn't (or at least shouldn't, in a correctly implemented rating system) make it more difficult to move up. The bad losses obviously hurt, but they don't have a double effect in the way your post implies there.

(1) If team A #40 beats team B #30
OR
(2) If team A #100 beats team B #30

In scenario (2) both teams would move further than in scenario (1)

There's no cycle involved.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

@kcg88 last couple of years, i know you did threads listing impact games for each night. Might be time!

I thought about that.......was looking at Washington State's weird resume and i thought they better not beat Arizona tonight.

 

[PiscatawayMike]

@kcg88 last couple of years, i know you did threads listing impact games for each night. Might be time!

I know I wasn't happy to see Virginia win at Duke the other night. The Cavs are among the teams we may be battling on the bubble.

 

[kcg88]

I posted it in the bacatology thread but here it is again:

Definitely early for this, but here's your rooting guide from the viewpoint of Rutgers and bubble teams, who mainly want the top 32-36 teams to win every game and for chaos to reign in the 35-55 range:

Purdue at Michigan - Probably better for us if Purdue wins (perception of beating a #1 seed is nice) but we own wins over both so likely not much difference.

Iowa at Maryland - Root for Iowa to win and remain Q1, because I don't think Maryland has what it takes to climb (they'd need to get from 100 to 75 to make our win a Q1 and our loss a Q2). A road loss won't be terrible for Iowa, but a win gives them some breathing room.

Duke at Clemson - Root for Clemson. In addition to our win over the Tigers, Duke is the signature win for two bubbly ACC teams in Miami (in as of now) and Virginia (still kinda far out, but lurking). We'd like those to be cheapened as much as possible.

Arizona at Washington State - Root for Arizona. Wazzu has good computer numbers but a bad resume (0-2 Q1, 2-2 Q2). This Quad 1 win would be huge for them.

Stanford at Oregon - Root for Stanford. They're on a few brackets but even with this road win I don't think they'd move in for most. Oregon is playing well and is safely in but a few bad

BYU at Loyola Marymount - BYU should cruise but this bad loss would knock them out for now.

Morehead State at Belmont - Belmont has the better at-large case than Murray State at the moment. A Q3 loss would be damaging.

 

[BillyC80]

Having a bad rating doesn't (or at least shouldn't, in a correctly implemented rating system) make it more difficult to move up. The bad losses obviously hurt, but they don't have a double effect in the way your post implies there.

(1) If team A #40 beats team B #30
OR
(2) If team A #100 beats team B #30

In scenario (2) both teams would move further than in scenario (1)

There's no cycle involved.

I really wonder if the rating system is properly implemented. And maybe my use of the word “cycle” isn’t an accurate description.

But if a Quad 1 team like team B loses to a Quad 3 team like team A, it may contribute to team B becoming a Quad 2 team, which would make it harder for team A to move up in NET rankings, even with a victory over team B, no?

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

4-3 + 1-1 possible but <50% imo
4-3 + 2-1 good

Less than 50% chance at 19-13 seems too low.

First of all - since we now own tie breakers over Michigan State and OSU, there’s a reasonable chance that 12-8 would be good enough for the 4 seed. Remember - we’re behind a game in the loss column but both of them have played less games. To get to 13-7, OSU has to go 6-3. Sparty has to go 5-3. Neither are a given. In that permutation, a first round tourney win would mean beating the 5 seed and losing in the semis. That’s a lock - probably a 10 seed.

But even if we didn’t get the 4 seed, we still wouldn’t be taking a bad loss by going 1-1 in the BIG tourney. We’d pick up a neutral Q2 win and then we’d be losing in a Q1 game. And we’d be adding 3 more Q1 wins (at least one on the road) at minimum to get to 4-3. With these metrics, we’d have a decent chance - though not a guarantee.

Not less than 50% overall.

 

[Rhuarc]

IF we lose to Penn State, I think we're screwed no matter how many wins we get in the regular season.

 

[fluoxetine]

Less than 50% chance at 19-13 seems too low.

First of all - since we now own tie breakers over Michigan State and OSU, there’s a reasonable chance that 12-8 would be good enough for the 4 seed. Remember - we’re behind a game in the loss column but both of them have played less games. To get to 13-7, OSU has to go 6-3. Sparty has to go 5-3. Neither are a given. In that permutation, a first round tourney win would mean beating the 5 seed and losing in the semis. That’s a lock - probably a 10 seed.

But even if we didn’t get the 4 seed, we still wouldn’t be taking a bad loss by going 1-1 in the BIG tourney. We’d pick up a neutral Q2 win and then we’d be losing in a Q1 game. And we’d be adding 3 more Q1 wins (at least one on the road) at minimum to get to 4-3. With these metrics, we’d have a decent chance - though not a guarantee.

Not less than 50% overall.

Yes you might be right, to be fair I didn't think carefully about who we'd draw in the BTT.

 

[fluoxetine]

I really wonder if the rating system is properly implemented. And maybe my use of the word “cycle” isn’t an accurate description.

But if a Quad 1 team like team B loses to a Quad 3 team like team A, it may contribute to team B becoming a Quad 2 team, which would make it harder for team A to move up in NET rankings, even with a victory over team B, no?

The quads don't actually affect the computation of the NET. So while the kind of effects you describe can impact how the selection committee perceives resumes (by moving games between quads) it doesn't change the actual NET.

The quad classification happens AFTER the computation.