NET and KenPom Tracker 23-24 (SU = 84 3/9/24)

[sufan59]

I think it’s a very good position to be in where the fact that we have zero losses atm below Q1. Is that we can really reap the entire benefit of any Q1/2 win we get moving forward. I’ll assume it’s a lot easier to rise up the ranks when you don’t have any bad losses. Of course that changes if we do lose to a team like Louisville.

 

[althea]

I watched Louisville last night. They looked a lot better against UNC than we did. It was actually a 5 point game in second half.
There is not a game left that we can pencil in a win.

 

[kingtidge]

I watched Louisville last night. They looked a lot better against UNC than we did. It was actually a 5 point game in second half.
There is not a game left that we can pencil in a win.

Yeah, watched as well and thought the same thing.

We seem to be a confidence team - as in, when we lose confidence that we can win, the effort drops on D and we get boatraced...

Hence we have a penchant for getting our doors blown off by better teams, unfortunately... Others have described us as "soft".

Red has his hands full with this team in getting consistent effort from them.

You can't win them all, but you never want to see the level of focus and effort drop to a noncompetitive level in losses like we saw in our Sat UNC game.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Yeah, watched as well and thought the same thing.

We seem to be a confidence team - as in, when we lose confidence that we can win, the effort drops on D and we get boatraced...

Hence we have a penchant for getting our doors blown off by better teams, unfortunately... Others have described us as "soft".

Red has his hands full with this team in getting consistent effort from them.

You can't win them all, but you never want to see the level of focus and effort drop to a noncompetitive level in losses like we saw in our Sat UNC game.

yeah. i dont think the margin of victory vs quad 1 is a true indication of the gulf between this team and the top 25.

there is a gap there ...not a gulf like the scores might indicate.

few teams are undefeated vs quad 2, 3, 4...it says something about this team being good.

really need to not collapse even if victory seems unlikely.

 

[im4cuse]

yeah. i dont think the margin of victory vs quad 1 is a true indication of the gulf between this team and the top 25.

there is a gap there ...not a gulf like the scores might indicate.

few teams are undefeated vs quad 2, 3, 4...it says something about this team being good.

really need to not collapse even if victory seems unlikely.

Well we will know soon with the upcoming 3. Each presents unique challenges but it can be done. Just can’t get killed on the boards. All three are more physical than us

 

[Cstate]

Syracuse Basketball Midseason Recap & Predictions

A look at the Orange to date and what's ahead.

www.si.com

 

[SwagSocks]

https://x.com/ESPNLunardi/status/1748708545984389211?s=20

We have a lot of work to do. Need to win all home games and then win the road games we should (BC,LVILLE,GT) to even be considered

 

[bnoro]

https://x.com/ESPNLunardi/status/1748708545984389211?s=20

We have a lot of work to do. Need to win all home games and then win the road games we should (BC,LVILLE,GT) to even be considered

Lunardi is notoriously terrible at this sort of thing, especially during the season.

 

[Charbroil]

https://x.com/ESPNLunardi/status/1748708545984389211?s=20

We have a lot of work to do. Need to win all home games and then win the road games we should (BC,LVILLE,GT) to even be considered

I get that Syracuse isn’t currently projected in the tournament. And would probably guess isn’t even particularly close to an at large bid right now.

But with how wide of a bubble net Lunardi is casting here, I can’t believe Cuse isn’t even mentioned. They are 1 quality win away from having an interesting resume.

 

[jncuse]

https://x.com/ESPNLunardi/status/1748708545984389211?s=20

We have a lot of work to do. Need to win all home games and then win the road games we should (BC,LVILLE,GT) to even be considered

I doubt we need to go 10-4, to "EVEN" be considered.

Things are very fluid right now because most teams have played somewhere around 40% of their Q1 and Q2 games at this point and almost all less than 50%. There is a lot of "junk" in resumes right now because of excessive % of Q3 and Q4 games in almost every teams schedule.

So thinks can be very fluid with a few good back to back results at this point. If we win today, two Q2 wins while not huge, it will start putting us on people's outside radars. Or at least people who know what they are doing - that's not really Joe, but he might even mention us.

That being said Lunardi's bracket does reflect the reality that the ACC will get a decent amount less than the B12 because the strucuture of the tournament is heavily determined by how a conference did OOC>

 

[SwagSocks]

I doubt we need to go 10-4, to "EVEN" be considered.

Things are very fluid right now because most teams have played somewhere around 40% of their Q1 and Q2 games at this point and almost all less than 50%. There is a lot of "junk" in resumes right now because of excessive % of Q3 and Q4 games in almost every teams schedule.

So thinks can be very fluid with a few good back to back results at this point. If we win today, two Q2 wins while not huge, it will start putting us on people's outside radars. Or at least people who know what they are doing - that's not really Joe, but he might even mention us.

That being said Lunardi's bracket does reflect the reality that the ACC will get a decent amount less than the B12 because the strucuture of the tournament is heavily determined by how a conference did OOC>

Cuse has no "big" wins. Besides UNC, no other games besides at Clemson are "high quality " potential wins. Def need to go 10-4 before ACC tournament

 

[OrangeYaGladi]

Currently ranked number 1 in "Luck" per KP

 

[orangefog]

Currently ranked number 1 in "Luck" per KP

“Luck” seems like an incredibly lazy way of saying “my algorithm sucks”.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

“Luck” seems like an incredibly lazy way of saying “my algorithm sucks”.

His algorithm seems particularly bad this year.

 

[jncuse]

Currently ranked number 1 in "Luck" per KP

That stat is driven by the fact that our 5 losses are by such a large margin and we have not lost any close games (won the 2 of them within 5) This causes our overall margin not to look like that of 13-5 level team.

There are two factors that could cause positive luck -- having more blowout losses than blowout wins, and winning most of your close games. The opposite is for bad luck.

Personally I wouldn't call this factor luck, but that is what it represents. It can sometimes have meaning, sometimes not -- when its caused by your record in close games, the stat has value. But winning or losing close games is also a skill not just luck,

 

[storange]

Without a doubt that’s the stupidest rating stat in the history of sport . Every fing team that has a championship year has good luck ….. bite me

 

[orangefog]

His algorithm seems particularly bad this year.

I don’t think there is an algorithm that accounts for a sophomore laden team with many new pieces and a first year coach growing over the course of a season. So, this one calls it “luck”, because it defies his logic. I see growth. I’ve been watching sports long before these geeks started trying to ruin sports. It is simply a young team improving. It’s the best thing about college basketball, in my opinion. It’s even more fun when it’s your team improving. I’m not going to sweat the analytics, because they could never account for the things that really matter in sports.

 

[CardiacCuse]

I doubt we need to go 10-4, to "EVEN" be considered.

Things are very fluid right now because most teams have played somewhere around 40% of their Q1 and Q2 games at this point and almost all less than 50%. There is a lot of "junk" in resumes right now because of excessive % of Q3 and Q4 games in almost every teams schedule.

So thinks can be very fluid with a few good back to back results at this point. If we win today, two Q2 wins while not huge, it will start putting us on people's outside radars. Or at least people who know what they are doing - that's not really Joe, but he might even mention us.

That being said Lunardi's bracket does reflect the reality that the ACC will get a decent amount less than the B12 because the strucuture of the tournament is heavily determined by how a conference did OOC>

yeah ooc matters too much in the current format

alas, the ACC didnt do themselves any favors this season in the ooc

20 wins was always the benchmark for a decent season...that seems almost a lock at this point...

but yeah,...def need some big wins, too

beat UNC and they are in, imo

 

[Sbucketball]

All luck means is that Kenpom undervalues Syracuse. Luck is how Kenpom explains a team winning games against teams with better metrics. The real explanation is Kenpom is undervaluing Cuse this year, which we knew from Day 1 as Kenpom deducts points for not being good last year, having a new coach, and other things that don't necessarily mean the team isn't good

 

[jncuse]

Without a doubt that’s the stupidest rating stat in the history of sport . Every fing team that has a championship year has good luck ….. bite me

It doesn't impact his rating - its more of a point of general interest.

He would probably be better to call it "VAR" or variance, because there are many moving factors in there that sometimes are luck and sometimes not.

 

[Sbucketball]

All luck means is that Kenpom undervalues Syracuse. Luck is how Kenpom explains a team winning games against teams with better metrics. The real explanation is Kenpom is undervaluing Cuse this year, which we knew from Day 1 as Kenpom deducts points for not being good last year, having a new coach, and other things that don't necessarily mean the team isn't good

Further to this, during our losing season I recall Luck was high 200s or low 300s or thereabouts, and that was because Cuse went to the Sweet 16 the year prior, so Kenpom overvalued them without taking into account all the guys who transferred.

 

[JustPherU]

yeah ooc matters too much in the current format

alas, the ACC didnt do themselves any favors this season in the ooc

20 wins was always the benchmark for a decent season...that seems almost a lock at this point...

but yeah,...def need some big wins, too

beat UNC and they are in, imo

A lock?

 

[Sbucketball]

Further to this, during our losing season I recall Luck was high 200s or low 300s or thereabouts, and that was because Cuse went to the Sweet 16 the year prior, so Kenpom overvalued them without taking into account all the guys who transferred.

And further to my "further to this", Kenpom isn't as good of a predictor anymore due to the instant transfer portal and going pro early. Some of the baseline assumptions are no longer reliable since so many teams change drastically from year to year. I don't think Kenpom has come up with a good way to deal with the player movement. It would be a lot more accurate if players stayed at one college for 4 years.

 

[jncuse]

All luck means is that Kenpom undervalues Syracuse. Luck is how Kenpom explains a team winning games against teams with better metrics. The real explanation is Kenpom is undervaluing Cuse this year, which we knew from Day 1 as Kenpom deducts points for not being good last year, having a new coach, and other things that don't necessarily mean the team isn't good

That's not correct.

The luck factor at least by this point of the season has nothing to do with our preseason ranking.
It is driven by not having proportional levels of blowouts, or winning or losing an abnormal amount of close games. We can see that in our results.

At this point of the season the opening KP is probably irrelevant in his system (which we started around #100) Around Christmas, his system has drawn down the "preseason weight" to around 20% of his score based on his prior comments. So at that point we were probably weighed down by 5-7 spots. I would imagine by January 20 his preseason weights are either worth 0% or very close to it.

 

[Cuse181]

I get that Syracuse isn’t currently projected in the tournament. And would probably guess isn’t even particularly close to an at large bid right now.

But with how wide of a bubble net Lunardi is casting here, I can’t believe Cuse isn’t even mentioned. They are 1 quality win away from having an interesting resume.

Why would he give them credit for that? They haven’t been able to compete with a quality team yet, let alone beat them. If you take off the orange colored glasses, this team is not anywhere close to the tournament.