Daily Tracking the NET: now 102

[RUChoppin]

Again the bullshit with Seton Hall. They demolish St. John’s Net 32 to their 66. They were up 28 and 20 plus most of second half and St. John’s scores last 5 points to lose by 15 not 20. But if game control is not part of the NET then it should be. Other teams go up 10-16 with that win at home and 16-22 on the road. Seton Hall only 8. That NET formula needs tweaking.
Unless we get it in gear starting tonight against Nebraska , it will not matter . But our 1-7 Quad 1 , with no Quad 2 games so far and perfect Quad 3 and 4 , is not as terrible as it looks , 4 road , 2 neutral, 1 home in the losses and a road win .

It's not a linear progression from 1 to 350 in NET, but they don't publish the actual metric only the rank.

Look at kenpom. It's a 1.47 difference between 18 and 19, and a 1.44 difference between 69 and 79. You could improve by 1.45 and jump 10 spots, or no spots.

 

[Plum Street]

Sure but the question is, why isn’t Vegas sold on Nebraska?

Aren’t their metrics and composite ratings/ranking better than ours?

RU is favored by either 3 or 3.5. If we get 3 points for playing at home, that means Vegas thinks we’re even on a neutral court. What is it that’s supporting that conclusion?

(I’m not actually asking you, just thinking out loud)

No Vegas doesn’t think about what the spread is at another venue. Vegas just wants equal number of money bet on both sides

 

[Scangg]

This is not about the Big Easr or SHU.....Seton Hall thought they had a quality neutral win by burying Missouri in Kansas City.....well, since then Missouri got destroyed by Illinois in St Louis and Missouri is about to fall to 8-8 & 0-3 in conference, with a home loss to South Carolina.....Missouri is down 3 in OT with a minute left

Back to back reasonable word count posts 👏🙏💪😍

 

[fatsam98]

Again the bullshit with Seton Hall. They demolish St. John’s Net 32 to their 66. They were up 28 and 20 plus most of second half and St. John’s scores last 5 points to lose by 15 not 20. But if game control is not part of the NET then it should be. Other teams go up 10-16 with that win at home and 16-22 on the road. Seton Hall only 8. That NET formula needs tweaking.
Unless we get it in gear starting tonight against Nebraska , it will not matter . But our 1-7 Quad 1 , with no Quad 2 games so far and perfect Quad 3 and 4 , is not as terrible as it looks , 4 road , 2 neutral, 1 home in the losses and a road win .

Idk, at this point in season moving up 8 for a big home win doesn't seem unreasonable to me.

 

[Zak57]

Fell back to 93 in the NET after the Nebraska W.

 

[fatsam98]

Pretty hard to take a ranking seriously when it drops you for beating a team 40 places higher in said ranking

 

[NickRU714]

Pretty hard to take a ranking seriously when it drops you for beating a team 40 places higher in said ranking

Not saying your wrong, but were we impacted by other teams moving up and such?
It's not like there was just our game played yesterday.

 

[bac2therac]

RUTGERS falls to 93

Nebraska falls 5 to 58.


RU was favored and probably wasnt very efficient last night in taking 78 shots

Mississippi St and Boston U lost last night

Its probably a tight pack in the 80s and 90s


Road wins by double digits are the coveted Wonka ticket

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

Pretty hard to take a ranking seriously when it drops you for beating a team 40 places higher in said ranking

Yeah - I don’t like that either. The old RPI system punished you for playing bad teams even if you blew them out big so I guess it’s pick your poison?

I usually like to compare the metric output for NET with the pure results based system but the Real-time RPI site isn’t correct. For some reason it’s not including our wins over Indiana, Nebraska and St Peters (has us at 125 without those games). Not sure if another RPI site with the right info still exists.

 

[bac2therac]

RU is 89 in the rpi per warren nolans site which is 4 spots higher than Sunday where they were 93

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

NET is a great tool for SOS. I know the WAB is not on anyone's radar come selection Sunday. We went from a -1.4 games to a -1.1 games with the win.

If we lose to Illinois we go back to -1.3. NET is mainly interested in the score. Losing by 3 vs illinous will help us much more in the NET than a 3 point win over nebraska

 

[bac2therac]

NET is a great tool for SOS. I know the WAB is not on anyone's radar come selection Sunday. We went from a -1.4 games to a -1.1 games with the win.

If we lose to Illinois we go back to -1.3. NET is mainly interested in the score. Losing by 3 vs illinous will help us much more in the NET than a 3 point win over nebraska

absolutely on your last point

 

[PSAL_Hoops]

absolutely on your last point

Yeah that’s the part about NET that I dislike the most. 1-1 should always be better than 0-2 in my book.

 

[RUChoppin]

NET is now more closely aligned to kenpom then it had been, so it looks like it weighs efficiency more so than just score.

Take our win against Indiana for instance. We won, but we had low efficiency.... It's just that Indiana happened to play worse on that day.

Of course, that cuts both ways. Our defensive efficiency looked great against Indiana.

 

[PhillyRU]

NET is now more closely aligned to kenpom then it had been, so it looks like it weighs efficiency more so than just score.

Take our win against Indiana for instance. We won, but we had low efficiency.... It's just that Indiana happened to play worse on that day.

Of course, that cuts both ways. Our defensive efficiency looked great against Indiana.

Yea efficiency margin is the only thing that matters in that sense. BartTorvik has Indiana as our highest-rated B1G game despite it being our least efficient offensive night in conference, just because our defense was so elite.

 

[BillyC80]

NET is now more closely aligned to kenpom then it had been, so it looks like it weighs efficiency more so than just score.

Take our win against Indiana for instance. We won, but we had low efficiency.... It's just that Indiana happened to play worse on that day.

Of course, that cuts both ways. Our defensive efficiency looked great against Indiana.

Choppin, is there a metric that combines only offensive and defensive efficiency (no other factors) and if so, is there a team by team ranking for that (not sure if Kenpom or Bartorvik already do this)? I’m assuming it’s not as simple as adding the two rankings (offensive and defensive efficiency) and dividing by two, lol.

Last question, is there any evidence that shows which is preferable, offensive or defensive efficiency, in terms of outcomes?

I would think defensive efficiency is preferable because it’s more consistent game to game, while offensive efficiency can be more of a crapshoot (especially when you run into a team like Rutgers). TIA

 

[biazza38]

This has been my biggest issue with the NET, you don’t get much credit for a home win outside of NET 30.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Choppin, is there a metric that combines only offensive and defensive efficiency (no other factors) and if so, is there a team by team ranking for that (not sure if Kenpom or Bartorvik already do this)? I’m assuming it’s not as simple as adding the two rankings (offensive and defensive efficiency) and dividing by two, lol.

Last question, is there any evidence that shows which is preferable, offensive or defensive efficiency, in terms of outcomes?

I would think defensive efficiency is preferable because it’s more consistent game to game, while offensive efficiency can be more of a crapshoot (especially when you run into a team like Rutgers). TIA

Your bart ranking and kenpom ranking is just adjusted OE - adjusted DE.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

This has been my biggest issue with the NET, you don’t get much credit for a home win outside of NET 30.

you do if you win by 90

 

[BillyC80]

Your bart ranking and kenpom ranking is just adjusted OE - adjusted DE.

Ok, thanks. So where does RU rank in that metric?

 

[BillyC80]

Ok, thanks. So where does RU rank in that metric?

Oops, sorry. You already gave me the answer.

 

[BillyC80]

Your bart ranking and kenpom ranking is just adjusted OE - adjusted DE.

Nvm on my last question

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Take a look how tight WAB was with who got in....

https://barttorvik.com/trank.php?sort=34&begin=20221101&end=20230313&conlimit=All&year=2023&top=0&venue=All&type=All&mingames=0&quad=5&rpi=#

 

[bac2therac]

i dont like it...santa clara and sam houston were not close to at large bids

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

i dont like it...santa clara and sam houston were not close to at large bids

looks like Sam Houston got a 3 seed NIT and Santa Clara didn't get a seed.

I think it is a good metric for majors to see if they are in the ballpark.

 

[goru7]

It's not a linear progression from 1 to 350 in NET, but they don't publish the actual metric only the rank.

Look at kenpom. It's a 1.47 difference between 18 and 19, and a 1.44 difference between 69 and 79. You could improve by 1.45 and jump 10 spots, or no spots.

The algorithm somehow started Seton Hall very low. I understand it is not linear but the initial value was flawed and therefore the subsequent values are also flawed. No team with Seton Hall’s wins home and away should be in the 50’s

 

[bac2therac]

The algorithm somehow started Seton Hall very low. I understand it is not linear but the initial value was flawed and therefore the subsequent values are also flawed. No team with Seton Hall’s wins home and away should be in the 50’s

9, 11, and 13 wins in Quad 4 are playing a role. If you schedule these teams have to beat them by 20 or more

 

[robjknight]

NET is a great tool for SOS. I know the WAB is not on anyone's radar come selection Sunday. We went from a -1.4 games to a -1.1 games with the win.

If we lose to Illinois we go back to -1.3. NET is mainly interested in the score. Losing by 3 vs illinous will help us much more in the NET than a 3 point win over nebraska

How about winning by 3?

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Not much different than losing by 3

 

[biazza38]

Not much different than losing by 3

And that’s the flaw with NET.
Winning matters

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

And that’s the flaw with NET.
Winning matters

Winning is everything. I think/hope NET is important because it creates SOS and quads. I think/hope committee ignores teams NET rankings

 

[MCKnight2004]

Rutgers really only has 5 more sure fire Quad 1 opportunities. Purdue 2x, Wisconsin 2x, and at Illinois. I’d think if we want any at large chance, we’d need to win 3 of these 5 games. And still somehow get to 10 conference wins, likely 11.

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

10-10 would put our WAB in the positive

 

[Scarlet Blind]

Georgetown went up 17 with a close loss @ Xavier 91-92, 189 to 172
2 of our 6 Q4 wins may get to and stay in Q3, to join Bryant at #145, before the end of the season, St. Peter's at #168 and Georgetown at #172.
Every little bit helps if we get near the bubble and win a few upsets.

 

[Knight Owl]

Rutgers really only has 5 more sure fire Quad 1 opportunities. Purdue 2x, Wisconsin 2x, and at Illinois. I’d think if we want any at large chance, we’d need to win 3 of these 5 games. And still somehow get to 10 conference wins, likely 11.

Hold serve at home against Purdue and Wisconsin and steal a couple road wins and you’re at 11-9…19-12 overall going into the BigTen tournament. I think 21 wins and you’re an absolute lock for March Madness J Williams and even Ogbole might have enough of a positive impact to get on/over the bubble.

 

[bac2therac]

RUTGERS up to 92

 

[RUBlackout]

10-10 would put our WAB in the positive

I think this matters in conjunction with the NET.

You need to have a high enough NET but WAB is the icing on the cake for the selection committee

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

I think this matters in conjunction with the NET.

You need to have a high enough NET but WAB is the icing on the cake for the selection committee

I think if i said WAB in front of Bac he would sucker punch me.

 

[bac2therac]

I think if i said WAB in front of Bac he would sucker punch me.

I would tell Sweet Pea to pee in your Cheerios!

 

[Greene Rice FIG]

Oatmeal