Very rough first crack at Bacatology
- Thread starter bac2therac
- Start date
Yes but the slim odds get slimmer and if we lose both games the fat lady will be heard warming up.
if we lose the next 2 games we probably have a better chance making the dance by winning B1GT than being at large team.
tonight is either our 2nd easiest or 3rd easiest game left on the schedule.
Point differential is a big part of this new NET established for the 20-21 season and it doesn't matter who against.
Washington St 73.1 pts for, 62.2 pts against, +10.9 34th, 95th- SOS, #30 KP
Florida 71.1 pts for, 63.9 pts against, +7.2 87th, 41st- SOS, #50 KP
Rutgers 68.3 pts for, 64.8 pts against +3.5 169th, 87th- SOS, #88 KP
6 teams in the 300s are weighing our SOS down, the inefficiency of Lehigh, Lafayette, Illinois, Penn St and home vs Md weighing us down.
Next 7 vs top 50 will move our schedule of strength up and even if we lose, we have to lose efficiently.
Why is Iowa so firmly in the bracket? They don’t have a great win, maybe Virginia or Indiana but at home.
Sorry to steal your job here bac but I'm not ready to sleep just yet.
Rutgers-specific: UMass lost at home by 9 to a bad George Washington team. I don't THINK they will slip 70 or so more spots by the end of the season but suffice to say that loss becoming Q4 would be a disaster.
SMU wins at home over Houston. They're up to 5-3 in Q1/Q2 but they have a Q3 and Q4 loss. They have a favorable schedule to get the AAC a second bid.
Seton Hall and Wake Forest (10s) and Miami (11) all won. The ACC second tier is doing a good job of beating up the worse teams and they could get more bids than that conference deserves.
Oklahoma (12 seed on the matrix) got a top 10 win over Texas Tech.
Notre Dame (also a 12) also won, over Louisville.
Loyola Chicago lost at Bradley (Q2/Q3 border). They still have an at large resume for now but if they pick up another loss in the regular season plus one in the conference tournament I'd be a little nervous. Both of their Q1 wins are close to slipping to Q2. Northern Iowa now leads that conference in the standings.
Florida (1st team out) held serve at home against Georgia. Doesn't help them but they couldn't afford a loss.
Mississippi State (6th team out) missed a Q1 opportunity, lost at home to Tennessee. They're now 1-6 in Q1.
Any faint hope for Florida State is gone with a home loss to Pitt.
Rutgers-specific: UMass lost at home by 9 to a bad George Washington team. I don't THINK they will slip 70 or so more spots by the end of the season but suffice to say that loss becoming Q4 would be a disaster.
SMU wins at home over Houston. They're up to 5-3 in Q1/Q2 but they have a Q3 and Q4 loss. They have a favorable schedule to get the AAC a second bid.
Seton Hall and Wake Forest (10s) and Miami (11) all won. The ACC second tier is doing a good job of beating up the worse teams and they could get more bids than that conference deserves.
Oklahoma (12 seed on the matrix) got a top 10 win over Texas Tech.
Notre Dame (also a 12) also won, over Louisville.
Loyola Chicago lost at Bradley (Q2/Q3 border). They still have an at large resume for now but if they pick up another loss in the regular season plus one in the conference tournament I'd be a little nervous. Both of their Q1 wins are close to slipping to Q2. Northern Iowa now leads that conference in the standings.
Florida (1st team out) held serve at home against Georgia. Doesn't help them but they couldn't afford a loss.
Mississippi State (6th team out) missed a Q1 opportunity, lost at home to Tennessee. They're now 1-6 in Q1.
Any faint hope for Florida State is gone with a home loss to Pitt.
Last edited:
Doesn’t deserve 56 spot decline when Florida lost by 15 points at home . Most reasonable people would say 2 bad , bad losses and would not differentiate between Texas Southern and Lafayette but they would say F lost by 15 . WTF? When they look at the how , they are equally bad , one is no worse than the other.
the committee seems to like making sure that AAC has two bids...not good news that SMU has a win like this..but they still have to do well down the stretch
Notre Dame really making a case but still time to play their way out.
Florida is at Kentucky and A&M next two
yeah not totally sold on Loyola keeping that spot as an at large
Not a fan of Missisissippi State and their resume
I like the vast majority of your posting but you keep posting NET misinformation.
The point differential existed in the original version of the NET and was removed this season.
The NET is now just:
(1) adjusted efficiency margin ( ~= Kenpom )
+
(2) team value index (an RPI-like thing that only considers W/L)
It's not clear what the weights are of the two components.
I really think we want to get to 20 overall wins to feel safe, unless we by some miracle manage to get to 19 in the regular season. I don't know who we will play in the BTT but:
5-2 + 0-1 => 19-12 (13-7) => probably in
4-3 + 1-1 => 19-13 (12-8) => sweating
3-4 + 2-1 => 19-14 (11-9) => praying
6-1 + 0-1 => 20-11 (14-6) => in
5-2 + 1-1 => 20-12 (13-7) => in
4-3 + 2-1 => 20-13 (12-8) => in
Just imo of course
5-2 + 0-1 => 19-12 (13-7) => probably in
4-3 + 1-1 => 19-13 (12-8) => sweating
3-4 + 2-1 => 19-14 (11-9) => praying
6-1 + 0-1 => 20-11 (14-6) => in
5-2 + 1-1 => 20-12 (13-7) => in
4-3 + 2-1 => 20-13 (12-8) => in
Just imo of course
To quantify the difficultly of this task..
Currently I have us ranked at #83 and have us projected for 2.46 additional regular season wins, so a projected record of 16.46-13.54 (10.46-9.54)
In order to make our projection 17-14 (11-9) we would have to play like the #50 team.
In order to make our projection 18-13 (12-8) we would have to play like the #16 team.
In order to make our projection 19-12 (13-7) we would have to play like the #3 team.
In order to make our projection 20-11 (14-6) we would have to play like the #1 team (3.25 points/40 min better than the current #1 Gonzaga)
Currently I have us ranked at #83 and have us projected for 2.46 additional regular season wins, so a projected record of 16.46-13.54 (10.46-9.54)
In order to make our projection 17-14 (11-9) we would have to play like the #50 team.
In order to make our projection 18-13 (12-8) we would have to play like the #16 team.
In order to make our projection 19-12 (13-7) we would have to play like the #3 team.
In order to make our projection 20-11 (14-6) we would have to play like the #1 team (3.25 points/40 min better than the current #1 Gonzaga)
Explain why Washington St is #37 NET team if not for point differential playing a role. Their OOC SOS is one of the weakest, bottom 50 309-358. It's not wins, they have no Q1 wins(0-1), 2-3 vs Q2. It's not win %, 14-7. Providence is 20-2 and only #25, guess what their biggest win is 28 pt win Home vs 325 7-14 Sacred Heart. Providence has 2 big losses, 18 pt neutral loss vs 80 Virginia and a 32 pt road loss @ Marquette. That's it. Q1 5-1, Q2 5-1 why are they 12 spots away from each other if point differential of wins aren't playing a part in the NET. Providence 70.7 for, 64.2 against, Washington St 73.1 for, 62.2 against
WSU's most efficient game, 126.1, biggest point differential, 48 pt blowout win @ NET #323 3-17 Idaho, 95.0, checks all the boxes for metrics, why is a P6 on the road vs a Big Sky team, a low major, 25th out of 32, if not for metrics and NET. 34 point home win vs #134 16-6 Weber St, 117.3/94, and 26 pt home win vs #208 10-10 N.Colorado 101.6/80.2, all from the Big Sky. They also lost at home to 218 9-12 Eastern Washington from the Big Sky 71-76. Their best non conference win was at home vs 120 14-6 Seattle, an 18 pt win vs WAC, 16th out of 32. Are they getting credit for losing close H vs 32 Boise St, N vs 79 South Dakota St., H vs 77 New Mexico St, Their lone impressive wins in conference 51-29 @ 137 7-14 ASU, 82.1/47.1, 70-43 win home vs 93 14-9 Colorado team, sweeping 9-15 Utah. Their lone Q1 loss was home vs 30 USC 61-63 is about to become Q2 if they don't beat 14 UCLA. I know efficiency plays a part in point differential, why are they being credited more with efficiency against mostly bad teams. This is why the old RPI was eliminated. Explain why Washington St is being rewarded for metrics and point differential vs bad teams which to me is worse than the old RPI now. I think some teams, like Washington St figured out something in last year's Colgate NET ranking last year.
#25 Providence 20-2 Q1 5-1 Q2 5-1 Q3 5-0 Q4 5-0 ???
#37 Wash St 14-7 Q1 0-1 Q2 2-3 Q3 7-2 Q4 5-1 ???
How is that even a close ranking without point differential playing a part???
Washington St +258 in 14 wins
Providence +193 in 20 wins
Washington St -29 points in 7 losses
Providence -50 points in 2 losses
Washington St SOS 139, OOC SOS 335
Providence SOS 7, OOC SOS 131
It's wacky.
They are #32 in kenpom..
To be clear, point differential is an input into adjusted efficiency. I'm not saying how much you win by doesn't matter. But RAW, UNADJUSTED point differential is no longer included.
Nope. And it was technically an exhibition game. The point I was making is that even the best teams can have a bad day.
https://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/news/story?id=4620949
That 'Cuse team only went to the sweet 16 not the finals, but they were a 1 seed and 30-5 on the year. #3 in kenpom
Rutgers didn't have a bad day, they had a bad month. We're still climbing out of that hole.
Thanks - I knew they were a good team but didn’t recall the specifics. Point still being they had no business losing a game like that.
I’m curious if we get any consideration at all for the fact that Geo missed the last 12 minutes of Lafayette and didn’t play in the UMass road game. A player who averages 34 mpg is not insignificant to be missing.
I really dont think that Rutgers deserves or will get any mercy for losing that Lafayette game with Geo for a 1/4 of the game. We were losing WITH Geo..check his stats
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 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. Clemson is Q3 right now but if they win they'd move to Q2.
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 losses would change it.
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.
Purdue at Michigan - Probably better for us if Purdue wins 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. Clemson is Q3 right now but if they win they'd move to Q2.
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 losses would change it.
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.
Last edited:
Id root for Oregon over Stanford. Stanford actually has a decent amount of quality wins already just a bad NET. I think Oregon is headed to tourney anyhow when all is said and done
So does the eye test only work with the CFP and not the NCAAs?
If they can keep us out for tanking at the end of the season why doesn't it work the other way if we have a great February? Then again, we almost tanked down the stretch last season, iirc, and still got in.
Hopefully, it will at least be a fun watch down the stretch. Hopefully, we keep things interesting for a long time to come.
BEAT WISCONSIN!
Anyone know the lowest NET ranking team given an at-large to teh NCAA tourney?
I found NET 73 St. Johns in 2019... they were 21-12
this might help.. but I have to find a way to find at-large bids.. maybe @bac2therac has prior years predictions/results and can find the last few at-large bids easily?
Oh, damn.. that's RPI.. I searched for NET.. my bad.. okay I'll leave the link anyway
HERE WE GO.. this site might have it... the date in hte middle is a pull-down list of prior NET rankings...
bracketologists.com
mehhh.. that site had the old NET rankings.. but doesn't show much other than that about the teams in the old rankings. If you click on a team in the old rankings you get this year's teams results.
While not NET rankings.. I found a trivia site that had a section of trivia based on a period from 1994 to 2004.. as for lowest-ranked teams getting in..
I found NET 73 St. Johns in 2019... they were 21-12
this might help.. but I have to find a way to find at-large bids.. maybe @bac2therac has prior years predictions/results and can find the last few at-large bids easily?
Oh, damn.. that's RPI.. I searched for NET.. my bad.. okay I'll leave the link anyway
HERE WE GO.. this site might have it... the date in hte middle is a pull-down list of prior NET rankings...
Bracketologists :: NCAA Tournament Resumes with NET Rankings.
bracketologists.com
mehhh.. that site had the old NET rankings.. but doesn't show much other than that about the teams in the old rankings. If you click on a team in the old rankings you get this year's teams results.
While not NET rankings.. I found a trivia site that had a section of trivia based on a period from 1994 to 2004.. as for lowest-ranked teams getting in..
- The highest rated team ever left out: #33 Oklahoma (1994).
- The lowest rated teams to get at-large bids (ALB): #74 New Mexico (1999) and #70 Air Force (2004).
Last edited:
I know it is and isn't at the same time but the optics say broken...
#25 (20-2) Q1 5-1 Q2 5-1 Q3 5-0 Q4 5-0, Q1/2 10-2 #25 Q3/4 10-0
Wins @ 19 Wisc by 5, Vs 14 Texas Tech by 4, Won @ 17 UConn by 4, Won @ 21 Xavier by 4, Vs 23 Marquette by 2, *Lost @ 23 Marquette by 32*
Q2 wins N 66 NW, 65 Vermont, 33 SHU, @ 109 Depaul, @ 88 St John's, L N 80 Virginia by 18, H 13-0 Road 6-1 N 1-1
Q1/2 +59/-50 =+9 pts in 12 gm(10-2), Q3/4 +133 in 10 games(10-0)
#37 (14-7) Q1 0-1 Q2 2-3 Q3 7-2 Q4 5-1, Q1/2 2-4 #37 Q3/4 12-3
Q1 Loss Home 29 USC by 2, Q2 win @ 124 Utah by 16, win @ 88 Stanford by 6, lost N 79 S. Dakota St by 3, lost home 34 Boise St by 6, Lost @ 92 Colorado by 5
Home 9-5, Road 5-1 N 0-1
Q1/2 +22/-16 = +6 points in 6 gm(2-4), Q3/4 +253/-13 = +240 15 gm(12-3)
2 bad losses by 50 points combined to Marquette and Virginia doesn't equate to 12 spots difference to Washington St resume including a 48 pt road win @ 3-17 Idaho without point differential & efficiency in play. Wash St doesn't scream NCAA in any year including this year to date. This will add to the confusion than solves any problem the NCAA has of ranking teams correctly and getting the right 68 in. I suspect changes in the off-season again.
Last edited:
He didn’t play at all at UMass though. Do you honestly think our perimeter defense gives up 16 3s to them with Geo available?
There’s no excuse for the Lafayette loss - especially the -13 rebounding margin. I try to forget about it and don’t remember specifics on Geo other than it was a bad shooting day. On his worst day though, our defense still takes a big hit with him unavailable.
Adjusted efficiency is in play. They are #32 in Kenpom. Raw point differential is not in play. I'm not sure where the disconnect is here. All these lists of quad W/L are completely irrelevant..
Anyone know the lowest NET ranking team given an at-large to teh NCAA tourney?
I found NET 73 St. Johns in 2019... they were 21-12
this might help.. but I have to find a way to find at-large bids.. maybe @bac2therac has prior years predictions/results and can find the last few at-large bids easily?
Oh, damn.. that's RPI.. I searched for NET.. my bad.. okay I'll leave the link anyway
HERE WE GO.. this site might have it... the date in hte middle is a pull-down list of prior NET rankings...
Bracketologists :: NCAA Tournament Resumes with NET Rankings.
mehhh.. that site had the old NET rankings.. but doesn't show much other than that about the teams in the old rankings. If you click on a team in the old rankings you get this year's teams results.
While not NET rankings.. I found a trivia site that had a section of trivia based on a period from 1994 to 2004.. as for lowest-ranked teams getting in..
- The highest rated team ever left out: #33 Oklahoma (1994).
- The lowest rated teams to get at-large bids (ALB): #74 New Mexico (1999) and #70 Air Force (2004).
Last year Michigan State was 76
What’s your point? I’m not saying we haven’t played well for stretches without him (Purdue). But 16 threes is a lot to give up and his perimeter defense is much better than Jaden’s and Hyatt’s. So is his ball handling.
You say this after Geo's best game of the season. If all his games looked closer to this you wouldn't see anyone questioning his value with references to being up by 17 on UMASS or beating Purdue. So I ask you, whose fault is that.. is if the fans who see it or the player who built the record to which the fans refer?
Geo's great... sometimes.. sometimes often. We need him... but as "they" say.. you are what your record says you are.
No disconnect. Yes being a consistent team is important, and I get how efficiency dictates rank in the NET, but result also seems to dictate rank
Same conference
Oregon #50, 14-7, Q1 2-4 Q2 3-1, 3-2, 6-0
Home 9-3, Away 5-1, N 0-3
Wash St #37, 14-7, Q1 0-1 Q2 2-3, 7-2, 5-1
Home 9-5, Away 5-1, N 0-1
Oregon won @ UCLA by 3, won @ USC by 10(Wash St lost home by 2), won H SMU by 23, won @ Colorado by 15(Wash St lost by 5), won @ Utah by 3(Wash St won by 16)
Oregon lost N BYU by 32, lost N Houston 28, lost N Baylor by 8, H St Mary's by 12, lost @ Stanford by 3(Wash St won by 6), 2 Q3 lost @ASU by 3(won @ ASU by 22), lost H Colorado by 4(won by 27), total of 90 pts better opponents vs 29 pts to lesser opponents.
Common sense say Oregon is the better team despite the 2 losses to BYU and Houston, but because Washington St loses more efficiently they are ranked 13 places higher. That is wrong, that is broken.
I still don't understand the confusion, or if you're even disagreeing with me at this point?
Washington St is significantly ahead of Oregon in adjusted efficiency which completely explains why they are ahead in NET. You don't have to like the NET (I don't particularly like the NET) but it is working as advertised. There is no mystery here, it's clear why Washington St is ranked higher (better efficiency).
I don't really agree that it is "common sense" that Oregon is a better team. If they played on a neutral court tonight Washington St would be favored. But that's sort of a separate discussion.
Latest
-
01
The Knight Report Basketball
How to watch Rutgers / LIU; Pregame Info, More: Gameday Central
-
02
The Knight Report
Join The Knight Report TODAY and get it for 60% off!
-
03
The Knight Report
Rutgers vs Wisconsin odds: Point spread released on Scarlet Knights, Badgers
-
04
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football PFF Grades + Snap Counts versus Michigan
-
05
The Knight Report
Rutgers Football versus Wisconsin Game Time Announced