CardiacCuse
All American
- Joined
- Oct 18, 2018
- Messages
- 4,119
- Like
- 7,959
that iowa state 2nd half obliterated SUs NET
KenPom Rankings
- Thread starter OrangeXtreme
- Start date
LAorange44
2nd String
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2011
- Messages
- 549
- Like
- 1,735
on the bubble for the conference tournament again. Just like last year
LAorange44
2nd String
- Joined
- Oct 25, 2011
- Messages
- 549
- Like
- 1,735
As I understand it, NET caps point differential at 10 pts
jncuse
I brought the Cocaine to the White House
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 21,088
- Like
- 38,044
Last edited:
kirbivore
2024 Iggy (ACC Record & NCAA Record)
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 16,121
- Like
- 16,468
That is the Red ceiling. Really need to move on from this guy. He's another Echerick / Coach Gut
DomeHolmes
2nd String
- Joined
- Sep 3, 2024
- Messages
- 929
- Like
- 3,159
Looking at the net. A couple questions for you.
Belmont: their NET is 33. all of their wins are either quad three or quad four. The toughest game they will play non conference will be Richmond. They are not even beating the type of teams that the mountain West usually beats to inflate their NET. Any thoughts on why they is so high?
Yale: NET of 25. has only beaten two quad three/four teams by 20 or more. Has five wins of less than 11 points, and lost to the only team with a pulse they have played. (Rhode Island). Any thoughts. 25 seems crazy
St John’s. NET 22: like us, they lost all of their quad 1 games. (0-3). The only difference in their resume is that they beat Baylor in a quad two game. But that (plus the Iowa st margin) makes them 69 spots ahead of us? By that logic, we should be ahead of them if we beat Quad 1 Tennessee tonight. With such similar resumes how could they be so far ahead?
USC: Net 23. Looking at their schedule, they played a few Good teams. Arizona State, Seton Hall, Boise, and have close wins, but nobody near the top 25, and that’s all there is to their non conference schedule.
I feel like if we scheduled like USC and won them all, there would be more talk like “North Carolina coming to Syracuse” and beating “quad one Syracuse” gives the conference more credibility, and thus gives us more credibility. Perception of our ranking would outweigh the “Syracuse hasn’t really played anybody” that might keep us out of the tournament. If USC goes 10-10 in the BIG and makes the tournament, It will show that we way over scheduled by playing in Vegas. Playing in Hawaii would have been better.
Last edited:
I think JN has been pretty consistent: its about margin. If you blow people out you move up, if you get blown out or play close games against inferior competition you get dropped. No one to blame but themselves for this. They shouldn't have quit on the Iowa state game and shouldn't have missed 14 Fts versus Monmouth.
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,777
- Like
- 37,205
It is not. Margin is part of the overall equation, but the bulk of the rankings is about efficiency. How many points does the team score and give up per possession. Good teams who score more points per possession tend to win more. Teams who don't score a lot points can be very good teams because they control the pace and score a lot per possession (e.g., Bennett's UVA teams).
2nd, NET in early December is not really accurate, there is still noise in there. As the season progresses and teams play each other more and there are more common opponents the rankings will start to stabilize more. I think of it like batting averages in baseball, hitting .400 in April is great, but it's not a great predictor of who the top-10 in batting average over the course of the season will be. No one will be saying that Yale should be in the tourney as an at large in March because their NET was 25 in December.
So margin? If you are super efficent offensively and super efficent defensively, you win by big margins? Its a self feeding system
Surfan06001
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2025
- Messages
- 446
- Like
- 1,869
I get what your saying but Gut made two final fours before the floor fell out
We're #90 because all of our wins are #208 or lower (#208 Monmouth, #275 Drexel, #362 Delaware State, #364 Binghamton). Its hard to understate how horrible our wins are. Couple that with all of the losses/Iowa State blowout and we're right where we deserve to be unfortunately
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,777
- Like
- 37,205
If a team is super efficient on both ends then they're going to be highly ranked regardless of their margin of victory. And just because they're very efficient doesn't necessarily mean they're going to win by huge margins because they may not be scoring that many points (lower tempo/pace) overall. MOV is more to delineate between the pile of mediocre teams in the mushy middle.
Wins are still the most important thing. Do that and don't get embarrassed by good teams and the rankings will reflect that. It's not a conspiracy against Syracuse.
Yale has a Quad 1 win and has beaten 5 other teams in the top 200. Our best win is #208 monmouth. Its pretty clear
Does NET use pts at all? From what I read its only ratings blended with Quadrant and location?
So yes you can be more in blow outs and get credit for it, which in itself can cause more bias than the quadrant rankings being arbitrary . I mean 1-30, 31-75, etc. thats just random bias built in.
They should give out a tool that lets people tweak the quadrants and see how it skews numbers.
really once you go beyond like the top 50-75 teams any decent team should be winning 95% or more anyway. But the reward for playing that next tier vs others is huge if you can schedule it.
Does anyone thing anyone Yale has beaten is really a good win?
Im just saying that if you dumb it down, margin is a decent way to think about how the system works. If you have a great defense and terrible offense, or vice versa, odds are you aren't blowing people out, so that means you will be ranked below those who are. You're right its a differentiator between the pile of teams in the middle, but that is the vast majority of D-1 thus that makes it clear why some teams are ranked higher than others at this point.
Also, I dont think anyone claimed it is a conspiracy against Syracuse, its pointing out that we knew what the game was and couldn't play it: Win against good times, win by a lot against bad teams, and dont lose by much to good teams.
I do think Akron is a really good MAC team that is likely to make the tournament this year. Idk what to tell you, they have way better wins than us.
Same with USC. They've beaten 2 in the Top 50 and 4 total #109 or higher. Wayyy better wins than us and zero losses.
jncuse
I brought the Cocaine to the White House
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 21,088
- Like
- 38,044
What do you mean pts? Like Syracuse has 42 points, LSU has 56 points, and they just rank them like that. If that is what you mean, then no NET does not work like that.
It has a few moving parts (they have never disclosed the full formula), but adjusted efficiency per possession is a big part based on what they published. And that is essentially schedule adjusted margin.
The Quadrants are just the outputs. It takes the NET Ranks of your opponent, and spits out your record by quadrant. It's not a circular calcation... i.e where it starts with quadrants and then tries to come up with value / points off that..
jncuse
I brought the Cocaine to the White House
- Joined
- Feb 19, 2012
- Messages
- 21,088
- Like
- 38,044
I agree, but also disagree. You are correct NET uses adjusted per possession efficiency instead of margin.
But in the end the output of good efficiency (delta between offence and defence), or at least the highly correlated output is margin. You do have to build in pace of play, and not everyone has the same pace, but most teams are in the 65 to 72 range, so margin will not heavily distort efficiency.
If I am looking at from a perspective of a sample of 18 teams and multiple games against varied opponents, pace will also tend to equalize over the sample which is why I ignore it. (which I do in my tracking conference analysis). So margin over such a sample becomes almost 100% correlated with efficiency, and it makes it much easier to track things.
I read its all on off/def efficiency then looks at quadrant and opps. Nothing about caring how many pts.
so scoring in a 50-45 game thats played slow could be the same as a 90-85 game played fast.
then it uses the quadrants to decide the value of the opp/opp opp stuff.
So if you played better teams that is worth more than the same stats vs worse teams and also worth more home/away/neutral
so scoring in a 50-45 game thats played slow could be the same as a 90-85 game played fast.
then it uses the quadrants to decide the value of the opp/opp opp stuff.
So if you played better teams that is worth more than the same stats vs worse teams and also worth more home/away/neutral
kirbivore
2024 Iggy (ACC Record & NCAA Record)
- Joined
- Sep 1, 2011
- Messages
- 16,121
- Like
- 16,468
Unlike most legends that drive their programs into the ground before retirement Dean Smith left a full cupboard for Coach Gut. Here's the roster for that 1998 UNC Final Four team in the first year of Guthridge.
Men's Basketball Roster - University of North Carolina Athletics
The official Men's Basketball Roster for the North Carolina Heels
Nothing against Coach Gut but almost any continuity hire could take Vince Carter and Antawn Jamison to a Final Four. You are correct once Dean's recruits went pro / graduated the bottom fell out.
Fly Rodder
Hall of Pretty Good
- Joined
- Mar 26, 2012
- Messages
- 11,777
- Like
- 37,205
These type of threads have been on here for the last decade that SU hasn't been better necessarily, but that they haven't gotten the benefit from "gaming the system" and therefore it looks worse than it really has been so people shouldn't complain so much. Which is a whole trainload of copium.
SU needs to win games. PERIOD. The NET and KenPom are just fluff as far as SU is concerned at this point. They need to win games and stop getting absolutely pummeled by any team with a pulse.
I have no idea what you're talking about. The originally post simply pointed out that Syracuse knows how to play the game and fails to do it. That includes winning games and it includes big margins against bad teams... No one is claiming its rigged against them.
Surfan06001
Scout Team
- Joined
- Aug 11, 2025
- Messages
- 446
- Like
- 1,869
Unlike most legends that drive their programs into the ground before retirement Dean Smith left a full cupboard for Coach Gut. Here's the roster for that 1998 UNC Final Four team in the first year of Guthridge.
Men's Basketball Roster - University of North Carolina Athletics
The official Men's Basketball Roster for the North Carolina Heelsgoheels.com
Nothing against Coach Gut but almost any continuity hire could take Vince Carter and Antawn Jamison to a Final Four. You are correct once Dean's recruits went pro / graduated the bottom fell out.
I may be jaded and/or overly critical but I’m honestly having doubts Red could take even that 1998 roster to a final four.
Looking at KenPom.
Before Vegas 115/100 or 65/61
After Vegas 112/100 or 89/57
So that means our D stats actually improved playing 3 top teams and our offense struggled playing 3 really good Ds
Tenn
117/92
121/95
Their D went down and their off went up.
Tenn not as good on D but much better on O than we played.
Before Vegas 115/100 or 65/61
After Vegas 112/100 or 89/57
So that means our D stats actually improved playing 3 top teams and our offense struggled playing 3 really good Ds
Tenn
117/92
121/95
Their D went down and their off went up.
Tenn not as good on D but much better on O than we played.
