Another Win. Another Drop in the NET?

[Red2003]

I'm much pissier (not a word?) about the Mountain West's NETs than Big 12 personally. At least I know Houston, Kansas, BYU, Baylor, etc are legit teams.

The MWest's best OOC wins are 1 win over Creighton and 2 wins over St Mary's...then they just beat each other...uh ok?

There’s a mountain west guy somewhere on these threads that thinks they deserve like 10 bids.

 

[OCESIP]

It means we won games we weren't expected to win based on our bad rating (i.e. beat teams ranked better in KP). Another explanation for what KP calls "luck" or lucky wins, is that we're underrated based on efficiency/margin sinking the ship and it's not actually luck, it's that we're better than the rankings suggest. "Luck, which is the deviation in winning percentage between a team’s actual record and their expected record using the correlated gaussian method. The luck factor has nothing to do with the rating calculation, but a team that is very lucky (positive numbers) will tend to be rated lower by my system than their record would suggest."

So any metric that uses the "correlated gaussian method"
has to be unquestionably reliable. I can sleep better now
knowing the NET uses whatever the hell that is!!

 

[jncuse]

What does luck in Kenpom mean then ? We are 6th in the league out of 360 teams. +.136.

The answer was in my post that you quoted.

It takes a look at your calculated efficiency (based purely on how you actually performed on a per possession basis over the year), looks at your schedule strength, and calculates a probable W/L record. If your actual wins are higher, you are a positive in the Luck Stat.

It has nothing to do with how he viewed our team at the beginning of the year.

 

[Niastri]

I've never seen a single useful post from you on any subject. Sit down little boy

I was actually going to say the same thing about you.

You make obviously incorrect assertions, then when proven wrong make no attempt to support yourself, you just make insults or non sequitur comments to distract from how incorrect you are.

If you feel you are correct about something, please provide supporting evidence, say at least something of value, or shut up about it.

It's very annoying having you in threads I'm reading.

But, with a little work, I imagine you could become a better poster. And I like your avatar, so possibly there's hope for you.

Post better.

 

[Orangezoo]

The MWC had a better Q1+Q2 OOC Win% as a conference, then the Big 12, SEC and the ACC. True they don't play much against the P6. They do play quite a number of games against fairly good schools from other conferences, including more road games - which the P6 avoids.

It's always been my thing to dry to dive into things (as the MWC was a talking point at the time(, which i did in early February,

2024 Conference Analysis (Post #1)

There have been many various discussions recently on various conference issues. 1) The Big 12 is gaming the NET with Q4's. Is that why they are ranked so highly. 2) The MWC has 5 teams in? What are we missing? 3) Why is the ACC getting hammered? Should they be? Back in early January I had...

syracusefan.com

What’s interesting is how much you could say that plays into their struggles in the tournament. They ultimately are less prepared and in years with larger bid numbers disappoint. The portal may have helped their fortunes of late and it’s something to watch but that formula boosts them in the metrics for sure even if performance isn’t there. Besides SD St and then Nevada several years back they’ve not done much that I recall.

 

[djcon57]

The MWC had a better Q1+Q2 OOC Win% as a conference, then the Big 12, SEC and the ACC. True they don't play much against the P6. They do play quite a number of games against fairly good schools from other conferences, including more road games - which the P6 avoids.

It's always been my thing to dry to dive into things (as the MWC was a talking point at the time(, which i did in early February,

2024 Conference Analysis (Post #1)

There have been many various discussions recently on various conference issues. 1) The Big 12 is gaming the NET with Q4's. Is that why they are ranked so highly. 2) The MWC has 5 teams in? What are we missing? 3) Why is the ACC getting hammered? Should they be? Back in early January I had...

syracusefan.com

Right, but IMO "fairly good schools" cast a wide net.

Like to your point, San Diego State wins an OOC "road game" over an overmatched SAN DIEGO team and it's a Q2 win.

That's equivalent to if we went to Cornell or Colgate. Sure, it's a quality win. But calling it a resume builder type win is where I think the system is being gamed.

 

[jncuse]

Right, but IMO "fairly good schools" cast a wide night.

Like to your point, San Diego State wins an OOC "road game" over an overmatched SAN DIEGO team and it's a Q2 win.

That's equivalent to if we went to Cornell or Colgate. Sure, it's a quality win. But calling it a resume builder type win is where I think the system is being gamed.

You sure we go to Cornell and Colgate and get a win?

 

[Wrinkle]

I was actually going to say the same thing about you.

You make obviously incorrect assertions, then when proven wrong make no attempt to support yourself, you just make insults or non sequitur comments to distract from how incorrect you are.

If you feel you are correct about something, please provide supporting evidence, say at least something of value, or shut up about it.

It's very annoying having you in threads I'm reading.

But, with a little work, I imagine you could become a better poster. And I like your avatar, so possibly there's hope for you.

Post better.

Check out my post history -- it speaks for itself

 

[djcon57]

You sure we go to Cornell and Colgate and get a win?

No comment. :|

But, regardless, it's not the point. If we win, it's not a resume building win or shouldn't be. Those teams are historical 14-16 seeds

 

[Niastri]

Agreed. Calling it Luck removes the blame from the system. When really its faultiness with the algorithm. Calling it what it is, deviation, would undermine the NET system. Now they wouldn't want to do that...

It's a bit of a holdover from baseball SABR metrics.

In baseball, everything can be boiled down to single events, in a way no other sport can.

With sophisticated ball teaching tech, even things like spin on the ball is being quantified.

Basically, if you have a teams pitching results and hitting results, you have their run differential. How many runs they score and how many they allow. If you have those, you can predict their record almost exactly over a full season. Yet, sometimes teams are significantly better or worse than their predicted record. While some teams are aberrations, 95% of records are within a few games of the prediction. Once in a while, a team is far outside this predicted range.

If you can't determine why this is, you call it luck.

Syracuse has far more wins than they should when looking at how many points we score vs. how many we give up.

The obvious answer is "who cares? We beat who we beat!"

Apparently, huge amount of weight to margin of victory and these efficiency metrics when calculating the NET.

Every year, some teams are given preferential treatment by the NET, and some are screwed over.

The NET has always sucked this way, we just weren't good enough to have to worry about it. This year, we have to worry about it, and simultaneously, WE are the team getting screwed over. Historically. I imagine in the history of the net no team has been ranked as far below their actual quality as Syracuse is right now.

With our current win streak, ever since beating UNC, we haven't moved up at all. We were probably slightly under ranked a week or two ago, but now it's getting ridiculous.

It would be humorous if it didn't matter so much.

 

[Niastri]

Check out my post history -- it speaks for itself

Right, more evidence you're pretty much an idiot who just argues without merit? Who would want to read that? Yuck

I was just asking you to post better. Thank you in advance.

 

[jncuse]

No comment. :|

But, regardless, it's not the point. If we win, it's not a resume building win or shouldn't be. Those teams are historical 14-16 seeds

Actually I wasn't even focusing on the "resume builder" element of it, but you are 100% correct that is a way that the MWC is able to get their Q2 wins since they can't get P6 teams to play them on their home floor.

My focus is actually how MWC performed in OOC as a conference as a whole - and their performance basically held up to the ACC across all quadrants (very close) - they entered conference play with good NETS because their teams did well in OOC play.

As I mentioned in my other post, the MWC seems to have been less impacted by cannibalization this year... their 3 terrible teams "Did their role" and continued to do so in conference.

 

[djcon57]

Actually I wasn't even focusing on the "resume builder" element of it, but you are 100% correct that is a way that the MWC is able to get their Q2 wins since they can't get P6 teams to play them on their home floor.

My focus is actually how MWC performed in OOC as a conference as a whole - and their performance basically held up to the ACC across all quadrants (very close) - they entered conference play with good NETS because their teams did well in OOC play.

As I mentioned in my other post, the MWC seems to have been less impacted by cannibalization this year... their 3 terrible teams "Did their role" and continued to do so in conference.

Right, their teams "did well" in OOC play because they played a bunch of San Diego types on the road. Again, their BEST wins aren't that great. That's my point.

 

[Orangezoo]

You sure we go to Cornell and Colgate and get a win?

With the growth from that part of the season for coaches and players to now I’ll bite and say absolutely.

 

[Wrinkle]

Right, more evidence you're pretty much an idiot who just argues without merit? Who would want to read that? Yuck

I was just asking you to post better. Thank you in advance.

No it's in fact evidence that I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. And if you think the fact that the ACC is 9-3 against Big 10 and 12 this season is indisputable proof that it is not a significantly worse conference -- I don't know what to tell you. Literally every single other metric you could look at would tell you otherwise

 

[Orangezoo]

No it's in fact evidence that I'm right far more often than I'm wrong. And if you think the fact that the ACC is 9-3 against Big 10 and 12 this season is indisputable proof that it is not a significantly worse conference -- I don't know what to tell you. Literally every single other metric you could look at would tell you otherwise

Every single other metric? Hmmm. You should cite your work to make a point. It’s a fair ask.

There has been a number of posts pointing out fallacies in your argument and your response is I’m often right and we should look at other metrics. Maybe take some time to respond to the posts that disagreed with you and mentioned why and then substantiate your argument with more than inflammatory conjecture. Just a suggestion/idea.

 

[Wrinkle]

Every single other metric? Hmmm. You should cite your work to make a point. It’s a fair ask.

There has been a number of posts pointing out fallacies in your argument and your response is I’m often right and we should look at other metrics. Maybe take some time to respond to the posts that disagreed with you and mentioned why and then substantiate your argument with more than inflammatory conjecture. Just a suggestion/idea.

I don't care to. When this board is met with a dissenting opinion, it is they who lob the first Molotov cocktail -- not me

 

[jncuse]

Apparently, huge amount of weight to margin of victory and these efficiency metrics when calculating the NET. Every year, some teams are given preferential treatment by the NET, and some are screwed over.

The NET has always sucked this way, we just weren't good enough to have to worry about it. This year, we have to worry about it, and simultaneously, WE are the team getting screwed over. Historically. I imagine in the history of the net no team has been ranked as far below their actual quality as Syracuse is right now.

With our current win streak, ever since beating UNC, we haven't moved up at all. We were probably slightly under ranked a week or two ago, but now it's getting ridiculous.

It would be humorous if it didn't matter so much.

1. Regarding the first bolded comment, I looked through 2019, 2022 and 2023, and it's very hard to find any team that got screwed purely by the NET. Every team that got in / out seemed to be based more on the number of Q1, Q2 wins, overall Q1+Q2 %, bad losses. Something got them out other than NET.

Now of course, their is conference OOC performance element which drives NET as well. But the NET has generally has rewarded the conferences that were superior in OOC play. So that either helped teams or not depending on where they played/ Had to do the strikethough for 2024 BIg 12... which is not like 2023 Big 12, which was legitimately great in OOC. But it still generally holds true - the ACC got rewarded when the conference did well, and it gets punished when it sucked in 2022 and 2023.

2. Regarding the second bolded comment. We are still lacking in quality wins but not far off. Assuming we do there with another Q1 or two, you are correct in that Syracuse is very unique. Hard to find any comparables to us where a team has managed to outdo themselves so much in one direction regarding margin, compared to pure W-L record.

 

[Orangezoo]

I don't care to. When this board is met with a dissenting opinion, it is they who lob the first Molotov cocktail -- not me

So being challenged to support your view is lobbing a Molotov ? That’s quite the analogy but ok.

 

[Orangezoo]

1. Regarding the first bolded comment, I looked through 2019, 2022 and 2023, and it's very hard to find any team that got screwed purely by the NET. Every team that got in / out seemed to be based more on the number of Q1, Q2 wins, overall Q1+Q2 %, bad losses. Something got them out other than NET.

Now of course, their is conference OOC performance element which drives NET as well. But the NET has generally has rewarded the conferences that were superior in OOC play. So that either helped teams or not depending on where they played/ Had to do the strikethough for 2024 BIg 12... which is not like 2023 Big 12, which was legitimately great in OOC. But it still generally holds true - the ACC got rewarded when the conference did well, and it gets punished when it sucked in 2022 and 2023.

2. Regarding the second bolded comment. We are still lacking in quality wins but not far off. Assuming we do there with another Q1 or two, you are correct in that Syracuse is very unique. Hard to find any comparables to us where a team has managed to outdo themselves so much in one direction regarding margin, compared to pure W-L record.

Yep- NCSt needs to do their part and we ours and get to that 5 or 6 q1 wins and we are very unique

 

[jncuse]

Right, their teams "did well" in OOC play because they played a bunch of San Diego types on the road. Again, their BEST wins aren't that great. That's my point.

The ACC won 10 of 35 Q1 games - 28%.
The MWC won 6 of 16 Q1 games - 38%.

It's not like the ACC accomplished much in quality games either. They got 4 more wins in 19 more games.

 

[Wrinkle]

So being challenged to support your view is lobbing a Molotov ? That’s quite the analogy but ok.

No, and I posted nothing 'inflammatory' to those who asked that. I'm talking about the idiotic snark that gets thrown around on here all the time. If I encounter that, yes I will often respond in a hostile manner lol

 

[Niastri]

I don't care to. When this board is met with a dissenting opinion, it is they who lob the first Molotov cocktail -- not me

It's your complete conviction you are right without any evidence that is frustrating.

You have been given clear examples of how you could be better, but are choosing to act like a child instead.

If you think the other conferences mentioned are better by other metrics, please cite those metrics. Otherwise you're like my 7 year old, with your hands over your ears, "I can't hear you."

It's just as exhausting on a message boards as it is in my living room. At this point, I don't think you're a troll, just trying to irritate people.

But you should probably stop arguing the point unless you want to make better posts about it.

Please try harder or stop posting.

Have a nice day.

 

[djcon57]

The ACC won 10 of 35 Q1 games - 28%.
The MWC won 6 of 16 Q1 games - 38%.

It's not like the ACC accomplished much in quality games either. They got 4 more wins in 19 more games.

AGAIN...name the actual teams beaten. You are missing my point, it seems

MWC's 6 Q1 wins:
SD State - St Mary's (N), Gonzaga (A)
Boise St - St Mary's (N)
Colorado St - Creighton (N)
Nevada - Washington (A) ......WASHINGTON!!!, TCU (N)

Whoop-de-dam-doo.

I get the numbers. I'm taking about the context behind the numbers.

1 of the 6 wins is a win over a terrible Washington team
1 of 10 ACC wins is Clemson winning at Alabama

Yet they are both "Q1" wins

 

[Wrinkle]

It's your complete conviction you are right without any evidence that is frustrating.

You have been given clear examples of how you could be better, but are choosing to act like a child instead.

If you think the other conferences mentioned are better by other metrics, please cite those metrics. Otherwise you're like my 7 year old, with your hands over your ears, "I can't hear you."

It's just as exhausting on a message boards as it is in my living room. At this point, I don't think you're a troll, just trying to irritate people.

But you should probably stop arguing the point unless you want to make better posts about it.

Please try harder or stop posting.

Have a nice day.

I have attempted to defend my assertions with hard data on here before. See the Kadary thread, if you care to. Even presented with hard data that satisfied every stipulation these posters asked, they would not budge an inch. This is just one example. Such people cannot be dealt with, and why would I attempt to, at this point?

I'm not complaining, here. I am simply defending against your characterization of my posting which is really off-the-wall brother