NET

[bac2therac]

look at Northwestern....so their win at Michigan State is a better win than RU's win over Purdue, their overall SOS at 15 is better than RU, yet only a Q2 win over Maryland and 2 Q3 losses, they are at 78 with a 9-10 record but no Q4 wins and handled their OOC wins by double digits 16, 16, 35, 18, 36, 24.

9 of their 10 losses are single digits, including 4 losses in Q1 of 5 or less

 

[bac2therac]

A guy who does NIT bracketology came out with a bracket today and he said in comments that Rutgers isn't even on the NIT bubble.

link please, because whoever said that has no idea what he is talking about

 

[Loyal_2RU]

I understood the fallacy as I wrote it. It still stands as an imperfectly true statement.

I don't like efficiency and margins playing in to the extent they do. No win should hurt you.

 

[Salvi's Headband]

link please, because whoever said that has no idea what he is talking about

 

[kcg88]

I understood the fallacy as I wrote it. It still stands as an imperfectly true statement.

I don't like efficiency and margins playing in to the extent they do. No win should hurt you.

NET is just one tool the committee uses. And in general your record vs. each quadrant matters a lot more than your actual ranking.

Again: If Rutgers had beaten Lafayette and UMass even by a single point I believe they would be in the field as of this moment. They'd have a pretty similar resume to Creighton who is on the 12 line per Bracket Matrix.

 

[bac2therac]

its complete ********, for one, it is Feb 1....schools have at least 10 conference games left to play. All this guy is doing is PROJECTING THE FIELD....he is not doing a NIT bracket based on CURRENT picture. That is why its to be disregarded. It is pointless to predict anything at this point. I even think NCAA bracketology shouldnt be looked until another 10-14 days but at least those are using curresnt resumes.

in addition the NIT extends invites to schools that win their regular season tourney but dont win their conference tournaments, so that isnt even factored in here

 

[kcg88]

@bac2therac Is there a way to show all teams on Warren Nolan and not just the top 100 + conference leaders?

 

[Salvi's Headband]

its complete ********, for one, it is Feb 1....schools have at least 10 conference games left to play. All this guy is doing is PROJECTING THE FIELD....he is not doing a NIT bracket based on CURRENT picture. That is why its to be disregarded. It is pointless to predict anything at this point. I even think NCAA bracketology shouldnt be looked until another 10-14 days but at least those are using curresnt resumes.

in addition the NIT extends invites to schools that win their regular season tourney but dont win their conference tournaments, so that isnt even factored in here

Listen I have never followed NIT bracketology in my life I am just reporting what the guy said. I'm sure if we can scratch our way to a 10-10 conference record we'll be in.

 

[bac2therac]

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2022/net-teamsheets

 

[kcg88]

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2022/net-teamsheets

That shows the top 105 and then skips to 112, 119, 122, 129, 142, 149, 150, etc. I don't see a way to see all 353 on one page. Oh well.

 

[bac2therac]

Listen I have never followed NIT bracketology in my life I am just reporting what the guy said. I'm sure if we can scratch our way to a 10-10 conference record we'll be in.

agree, for RU to make the NIT they need to get to 10-10 and 16-14 and then win one Big 10 tourney game to get to 17-15. I think that puts them in PROBABLY. I dont think 16-15 or 16-16 gets them in.

 

[bac2therac]

yeah apparently the only thing where everything can be seen is the just the overall net rankings but not nitty gritty or team sheets

NET Ranking - Men's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com

2022 Men's College Basketball NET Ranking: NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET) a ranking of teams based on five factors, team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage, and scoring margin.

www.warrennolan.com

 

[bac2therac]

DI Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com

Get NCAA college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today Coaches poll and the NCAA NET Rankings.

www.ncaa.com

 

[RUtrumpet92_rivals498139]

I can understand why Iowa is top 25 still in NET based on the formulas, margin of outcomes, etc. But the eye test and their record clearly tell me they are not a top 25 team right now. I think they are more likely to miss the NCAA than to be a top 7 seed in it.

 

[bac2therac]

also note RU lags in AVG Opp NET rank and AVG opp NET...its going to get better over the course of the next two months but it pretty bad right now, I think 126 and 162

scroll to the bottom and you can hit the link to archive and team sheets

 

[Plum Street]

Bac , do you see a path in at 11-9 and win in conference tourney ?

 

[PiscatawayMike]

Anyone who pays close attention to bracketology like us diehards knew immediately after the Lafayette-DePaul-UMass (K)nightmare the team had to put itself in position for the last 10 regular-season games to mean something. They've done that. That hideous trio of losses put us in a tremendous hole.

Hang on fellas, the ride begins tonight. For all intents and purposes, our NCAA fate will be determined how we fare in the next 10 games.

 

[bac2therac]

https://stats.ncaa.org/selection_rankings/nitty_gritties/23863

 

[Corycord1]

If we want to get back into the tournament picture, we need to get our NET ranking somewhere in the 70s. I believe I read that the lowest rated NET team to make the tournament was in that range. My question is what gets us to make that big jump? Would winning @NW and home vs MSU get us back in it? With all Q1 and Q2 games left can we trend up despite losing some games?

 

[bac2therac]

I can understand why Iowa is top 25 still in NET based on the formulas, margin of outcomes, etc. But the eye test and their record clearly tell me they are not a top 25 team right now. I think they are more likely to miss the NCAA than to be a top 7 seed in it.

they are in the field currently but no sure thing, unlike RU though, they have strong enough computer numbers were if they go 10-10 in league that should do it, right now they are 6-4. A key is no bad losses. They are no top 25 and probably in the 9/10 range right now

 

[Scarlet Blind_rivals]

the chasm between 113 and 322 is far far far greater than that from 113 to 8

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketbal...ts-new-college-basketball-ranking-replace-rpi

The NCAA Division I Men’s Basketball Committee announced that beginning with the 2020-21 season, the NCAA Evaluation Tool will be changed to increase accuracy and simplify it by reducing a five-component metric to just two. The remaining factors include the Team Value Index (TVI), which is a result-based feature that rewards teams for beating quality opponents, particularly away from home, as well as an adjusted net efficiency rating.

Team Value Index, a combination of BPI & Sagarin?
Adjusted Net Efficiency Rating, a combination of Ken Pom & Bart Torvik?
KPI is just the win % metric.

The old RPI was G1 1-50, G2 51-100, G3 101-200, G4 200+, 0.6/1/1.4, 50/25%
RPI was an Adjusted Win % factored until 2017-18 season, out since.
Capped win metric was factored in 2018-19 and 2019-20, but gone last 2.

The NET is an improvement of the old RPI with minor alterations to RPI's old formula, 0.6 Home, 1.0 Neutral, 1.4 Road. 50%oppo, 25% oppo's oppo format is still factored.

Q1 Home 50 × 0.6 = 30-1, Neutral 50× 1 = 1-50, Road 50 × 1.4= 70(75)
Q2 Home 100 × 0.6 = 60(75), Neutral 100 × 1 =51-100, 100 × 1.4= 140(135)
Q3 Home 200 × 0.6= 120(160), Neutral 200 × 1 =101-200, 200 × 1.4= 280(240)
Q4 Home 161-358, Neutral 201-358, Road 241-358

 

[PiscatawayMike]

If we want to get back into the tournament picture, we need to get our NET ranking somewhere in the 70s. I believe I read that the lowest rated NET team to make the tournament was in that range. My question is what gets us to make that big jump? Would winning @NW and home vs MSU get us back in it? With all Q1 and Q2 games left can we trend up despite losing some games?

My advice: don't worry about the NET. Just hope RU wins six of its next 10 games. If it does, the NET will take care of itself and RU will be sitting pretty.

 

[bac2therac]

If we want to get back into the tournament picture, we need to get our NET ranking somewhere in the 70s. I believe I read that the lowest rated NET team to make the tournament was in that range. My question is what gets us to make that big jump? Would winning @NW and home vs MSU get us back in it? With all Q1 and Q2 games left can we trend up despite losing some games?

last year MSU soared.....started 2-6 in league they may have not even been in the top 100 at that point, then they started winning games and move to top 80 and then won a bunch of Q1 games and stablized everything


Lets note the Big 10 nowhere near as good individual NET ratings as they did last season

 

[bac2therac]

My advice: don't worry about the NET. Just hope RU wins six of its next 10 games. If it does, the NET will take care of itself and RU will be sitting pretty.

yes....the wins and Q1 total will end up mattering more than the overall NET which will lag plus RU will be passing eye tests...Warts still on resume but...

 

[bac2therac]

Bac , do you see a path in at 11-9 and win in conference tourney ?

that would be 18-14, I would say certainly talked about on the bubble and again without knowing what other schools resumes look like at that point, its hard to definitely say but really I would say UNLIKELY..not enough...now win 2 games which means a neutral site win over a top 20 NET school, making the Big 10 semis...that 19-14 "could" be good enough..maybe last 4 in last 4 out type line.

 

[Plum Street]

that would be 18-14, I would say certainly talked about on the bubble and again without knowing what other schools resumes look like at that point, its hard to definitely say but really I would say UNLIKELY..not enough...now win 2 games which means a neutral site win over a top 20 NET school, making the Big 10 semis...that 19-14 "could" be good enough..maybe last 4 in last 4 out type line.

Thanks. I think magic number is 12 and would need a win in the tourney and/or some fortunate stuff happening on the bubble

 

[bac2therac]

19 overall wins is the number to shoot for

 

[PiscatawayMike]

19 overall wins is the number to shoot for

Agree. 19 wins on Selection Sunday and we're a lock to be dancing.

It doesn't mean we still could not get in with 18 wins, but 19 means... sit down, enjoy the show, find out our seeding, and see where we're going in our opener.

 

[Scarlet Blind_rivals]

High Major A plays Low Major Z and wins 84-56.

High Major B plays Low Major Y and wins 76-75.

Absent any other information, the conclusion to be drawn is that High Major A is superior to High Major B.

At the very core this is what NET is doing. It measures how you play, home/away, takes into account the quality of your opponent and spits out a number. The committee exists to add the rest of the context and to use these numbers in a meaningful way.

Hence, from a NET perspective, winning 73-70 in OT over Lehigh at home is virtually as damaging as losing 53-51 to Lafayette at home. They're both horrific from a NET standpoint.

Iowa started the season with six straight games against sub-150 teams. Their average margin of victory was 31.6 points. That's the jumping-off point for why a team like Iowa is way ahead of (plus a 20 point neutral court win over a top-45 Utah State team).

High Major A shoots 58% on 65 attempts, 84-56, to Q4 low major 340.
High Major B shoots 40% on 70 attempts, 76-75, to a Q4 low major 180.
It is a big factor.

This new NET is overvalueing good efficiency vs bad teams away over bad efficiency vs good teams at home. It sounds like this "new" adjusted efficiency model is the RPI for offensive and defensive efficiency explains Washington St.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Agree. 19 wins on Selection Sunday and we're a lock to be dancing.

It doesn't mean we still could not get in with 18 wins, but 19 means... sit down, enjoy the show, find out our seeding, and see where we're going in our opener.

NO! Need 21 to be worry free and 20 to feel we have a better than 50/50 shot. That is my guess given things right now. So many things will happen between now ad then.

I like to play this game, but in reality i'd be shocked if we find more than 4 regular season wins.

Even if you want to play the game that the early season team wasn't what we are now (that would assume other teams didn't improve or tweak rotations) we are 85th by bart since AFTER Illinois blow out

165th in adjusted offensive efficiency
39th in adjusted defensive efficiency

We are winning games. We are a terrible offensive team, no other way to say it.

I just don't see where the wins come from. I see 2 to 3 games we win because of hot shooting....I don't see us rock fighting our way to 5 or more 6 games.

 

[Scarlet Blind_rivals]

I think the new adjusted NET efficiency rating adjusts the.efficiency in the Q1-Q4 H/N/R format as opposed to a simple 1/27th-31st efficiency.

Washington St (3-1)
@ Idaho 109-61 125.3 93.7 +21.6
@ ASU 51-29 81.7 47.7 +34
@ Colorado 78-83 113.3 108.4 +4.9
@ Utah 77-61 115.4 87.9 +27.5
+88 efficiency/ 4 games

Rutgers road games(2-6)
DePaul 114.5 108.5 +6
UMass 113.2 109.7 +3.5
Illinois 87.2 104.5 -17.3
SHU 96.5 100.8 -4.3
PSU 82.7 95.4 -12.7
Maryland 105.1 89.3 +15.8
Minnesota 122.9 115.9 +7.0
Nebraska 87.2 85.9 +1.3
-0.7 efficiency/ 8 games

Ken Pom
#35 Wash St Rim 217-367 59.1% Mid 97-266 36.5% 3pt 168-500 33.6%
#103 Rutgers Rim 241-397 60.7% Mid 133-407 32.7% 3pt 127-381 33.3%
I know there are other factors in efficiency, but we shoot about 125 or so more 3s and 125 or so less mid range, we probably aren't in this position we are in.

 

[Rhuarc]

By the way the reason people complain about Pikiell's schedule is because SOS is a part of the NET formula. If you play a crappy non-conference schedule then you need to beat them down like Iowa did or else it's a mark against you in the NET. I'm fairly certain the SOS element is included in part to dissuade teams from playing such crappy schedules.

Say Rutgers played TCU instead of Lafayette, played a similarly dreadful game, and lost by 30 points. That would be very very bad from a NET standpoint but then at least there wouldn't be a Q4 loss on the resume AND the overall SOS component would be higher for us. That's the bone to pick with the scheduling.

Excellent point. You should post this anytime someone says it's ok to just schedule cupcakes in December.

I'm generally optimistic, but I don't see us doing what needs to be done to make it to the dance this year. Nor should we based upon our performance and resume so far. Doesn't mean I'll stop watching or going to games, it just means my expectations have changed and the season is looking like a disappointment.

 

[kcg88]

Excellent point. You should post this anytime someone says it's ok to just schedule cupcakes in December.

I'm generally optimistic, but I don't see us doing what needs to be done to make it to the dance this year. Nor should we based upon our performance and resume so far. Doesn't mean I'll stop watching or going to games, it just means my expectations have changed and the season is looking like a disappointment.

At the end of November, I didn't expect to be talking brackets in February. So there's that.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

A few things about scheduling.......
1. You don't know for sure how good/bad a team will be when scheduling
2. Tougher schedule means higher probability of losses
3. It is important to allow players to play through mistakes early and you need to learn more about your team

Our problem isn't our schedule.

Our problem is losing to Lafayette, UMASS and DePaul. If we win 2 of those only a few would be complaining about schedule

 

[bac2therac]

Its a terrible OOC schedule rated in the 300s

 

[Scarlet Blind_rivals]

The shot teams goad you into taking, you know the low %, low efficiency mid range shot,

Rutgers shoots at a 34.3% Share of all FGs for 324th out of 358th
Rutgers hits those mid range at 32.7% for 318th out of 358th

That is why we are so low in efficiency, the NET and have lost games the way we have.

8 losses, mid range numbers (60% rim, 33.3% from 3)
DePaul(-3) 7-19 36.8%, 11-17 rim, 10-27 from 3, hit last 5
Lafayette(-2) 3-14 21.4%, 4-26 from 3
UMass(-2) 9-20 45%, 3-13 from 3
Illinois(-35) 8-35 22.9%, 6-16 rim
SHU(-14) 7-18 38.9%, 4-18 from 3
PSU(-17) 4-24 16.7%, 5-19 from 3
Minnesota(-3) 4-11 36.4%, 9-16 rim
Maryland(-8) 3-14 21.4%, 11-26 rim

 

[RUJMM78]

19 overall wins is the number to shoot for

If that is the case, doesn't it make sense to play Rider befotre the end of the season?Some other BIG Ten schools have rescheduled games cancelled because of Covid tp increase their win total.

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

The Rider game would not help us at all in my opinion. We play down to bad opponents to boot. I want no part of rescheduling that.

 

[bac2therac]

If that is the case, doesn't it make sense to play Rider befotre the end of the season?Some other BIG Ten schools have rescheduled games cancelled because of Covid tp increase their win total.

That game will not help the resume

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

The problem in the NET isn’t just the losses but also needing OT to beat Lehigh and just squeaking by Merrimack.

But the thing is when you strip the style points and efficiency metrics and just look at the win /loss resume perspective our metrics are even worse. I know RPI isn’t considered anymore but it’s probably still the best system to evaluate resume quality without regard to victory margin. We’re not even in the RPI top 150 and not only because of losses. Purdue is the only team we’ve beaten in the RPI top 50. Plenty of flaws in RPI, but it rightfully exposes Iowa’s body of work (as an example) vs. the other systems this year. They have one win over a likely at large team.