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

[jncuse]

One last post for today in this stupid a@@ thread (at times), at least relating specifically to the mechanics of KenPom, that I let myself get too involved in, because I get dragged into math especially when its related to a topic I like (college basketball). Any points on this thread from me in the next few days will be purely tourney talk based which run on a different plane than KP as they should.

With a 1 point win today, we should start to see some differences between our KP and NET

- Our KP, #76 now, basically didn't move at all, because we were expected to win by 2 points, and we won by 3,

- Our NET, #76 now, should move up tomorrow, because its not all margin and there are certain W-L components. Although I can't say I know everything going on in that number.

- Finally for our resume, its comes down to W's and L's, and a Q2 win by 3 point is huge compared to a Q2 loss by 3 points. And that is where I will be heading for the rest of the night -- "tournament talk" type discussions... KP and Tournament Resumes can run on very different planes and need to be interpreted very differently. They are both results based, can both be "generally understood", but look at results quite differently.

For the most part the things that have hindered our KP right now, and our NET to a degree, are not limiting our tourney resume:
1) Big margin losses to good teams. For tourney purposes, those L's are expected and are simply just L's no matter the score. Nobody expects a bubble team to win at Duke, win at UNC, neutral at Tennessee. Perhaps by season end someone might argue that the games vs Gonzaga and Virginia were more winnable, but you are still allowed some L's.

2) Our margin against bad teams is not that great. Once again the committee doesn't give a crap about that -- really just games are more just nuisance games. Don't lose them --- and we didn't. That's all that matters.

Really its just about winning games at this point - I have the target at 8-5 in the ACC.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

One last post for today in this stupid a@@ thread that I let myself get too involved in, because I get dragged into math especially when its related to a topic I like (college basketball)

With a 1 point win today, we should start to see some differences between our KP and NET

- Our KP, #76 now, basically didn't move at all, because we were expected to win by 2 points, and we won by 3,

- Our NET, #76 now, should move up tomorrow, because its not all margin and there are certain W-L components. Although I can't say I know everything going on in that number.

- Finally for our resume, its comes down to W's and L's, and a Q2 win by 3 point is huge compared to a Q2 loss by 3 points. And that is where I will be heading for the rest of the night -- "tournament talk" type discussions... KP and Tournament Resumes can run on very different planes and need to be interpreted very differently. They are both results based, can both be "generally understood", but look at results quite differently.

For the most part the things that have hindered our KP right now, and our NET to a degree, are not limiting our tourney resume:
1) Big margin losses to good teams. For tourney purposes, those L's are expected and are simply just L's no matter the score. Nobody expects a bubble team to win at Duke, win at UNC, neutral at Tennessee. Perhaps by season end someone might argue that the games vs Gonzaga and Virginia were more winnable, but you are still allowed some L's.

2) Our margin against bad teams is not that great. Once again the committee doesn't give a crap about that -- really just games are more just nuisance games. Don't lose them --- and we didn't. That's all that matters.

Really its just about winning games at this point - I have the target at 8-5 in the ACC.

One of the wider anomalies with the computer rankings this year is the difference between the old RPI and the new NET. We’re in the Top 20 in the old RPI and mid 70’s in the NET. That’s a pretty significant delta, to our detriment. I think we’re overrated in RPI and underrated in NET. In reality we’re probably an average of the two (upper 40’s). But I’d feel a helluva lot more comfortable if our NET was top 50, or even Top 40, by end of year. I don’t like this 70-80 no man land.

 

[jncuse]

In terms of opponents we have beat, I don't think there is anybody we need to be more interested in right now than Pitt.

We have beat them twice, and they are on that Q1/Q2 line and not doing it successfully. As mentioned in another post in this thread, I think there are early season margins boosted their KP and NET and they are being weighted less and less each game.

As much as it hurts, cheer Pitt to start winning. Unfortunately they have a tough schedule coming up - eight of the next 12 games on the road.

 

[FrancoPizza]

Saying there not close is ignorant

I think he’s more on point than you want to admit. I wouldn’t go so far as to say we haven’t beaten or been competitive with a quality team, though. The team’s ceiling is beating maybe a 6 or 7 seed. The have a couple wins over possible NCAA teams already, but they really need to beat Clemson at least once to feel better about their chances. I would even say they can afford to stub their toe in a game they’re supposed to win IF they can grab another Q1 win someplace.

 

[jncuse]

One of the wider anomalies with the computer rankings this year is the difference between the old RPI and the new NET. We’re in the Top 20 in the old RPI and mid 70’s in the NET. That’s a pretty significant delta, to our detriment. I think we’re overrated in RPI and underrated in NET. In reality we’re probably an average of the two (upper 40’s). But I’d feel a helluva lot more comfortable if our NET was top 50, or even Top 40, by end of year. I don’t like this 70-80 no man land.

I think the NET will take of itself (at least to a satisfactory level) if we win 8 of our next 13. If we don't win 8 of the next 13 it might not be relevant anyway.

If we look over the year's we see P6 teams with RPI's or NET's getting in / getting out when they range between 45 and 70. It comes down to your W's and L's at that point.

NC St from last year though is an interesting comp though (and they had a NET of 45). They are the resume we might find ourselves trending to the most -- 12-8 in a bit easier ACC, 1-7 Q1, but 7-4 in Q2, ZERO bad losses. I was surprised they got in last year, and its possible that NET of 45 put them over the top. There is no way we can get our NET to a level to put us over the top.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I think the NET will take of itself (at least to a satisfactory level) if we win 8 of our next 13. If we don't win 8 of the next 13 it might not be relevant anyway.

If we look over the year's we see P6 teams with RPI's or NET's getting in / getting out when they range between 45 and 70. It comes down to your W's and L's at that point.

NC St from last year though is an interesting comp though (and they had a NET of 45). They are the resume we might find ourselves trending to the most -- 12-8 in a bit easier ACC, 1-7 Q1, but 7-4 in Q2, ZERO bad losses. I was surprised they got in last year, and its possible that NET of 45 put them over the top. There is no way we can get our NET to a level to put us over the top.

We’re the lowest rated P6 team with only 5 losses, yet have one of the higher rated strength of schedules. The use of offensive & defensive efficiencies in NET and KP is the new wrinkle that’s killing us this year. We played really good teams on neutral and road settings and lost by a wide margin. Those losses are tanking our computer rankings. Seems like the margin of loss is significantly more important than the strength of schedule. Also, our 50 point win against Chaminade is killing us because it doesn’t count in NET. So long story short, Maui is absolutely crushing our rating when we all thought it would be beneficial for our SOS to play in a loaded field.

 

[TexanMark]

Just win baby...it'll take care of itself.

 

[Orangezoo]

We’re the lowest rated P6 team with only 5 losses, yet have one of the higher rated strength of schedules. The use of offensive & defensive efficiencies in NET and KP is the new wrinkle that’s killing us this year. We played really good teams on neutral and road settings and lost by a wide margin. Those losses are tanking our computer rankings. Seems like the margin of loss is significantly more important than the strength of schedule. Also, our 50 point win against Chaminade is killing us because it doesn’t count in NET. So long story short, Maui is absolutely crushing our rating when we all thought it would be beneficial for our SOS to play in a loaded field.

I’ve been a broken record about it but margin of victory has to be neutralized some. You see the massive jumps when a team has a blow out

 

[Cuse181]

It doesn't make any difference what board or topic you never have anything positive to say.
Won't put you on ignore because then it shows I didn't read all the messages, but won't read anymore from you.

That’s not being negative, that’s explaining lunardi’s choice. They can’t get credit for being “1 win away” when they haven’t come close to that win. Don’t get mad at me for pointing out the obvious.

 

[Cuse181]

Saying there not close is ignorant

So far as their performance against top teams goes, it’s true. If they had lost some hard fought battles with Duke or Gonzaga then sure, they’re close. But they weren’t that at all, they were beat downs. A win over Oregon is a start, but you can’t rest your chances of making the tournament on a win over a likely double digit seed. At some point you need to beat someone and compete with the others because the eye test still matters.

And it appears the experts agree with that because they weren’t in a single bracket on bracket matrix as of yesterday night.

 

[storange]

So far as their performance against top teams goes, it’s true. If they had lost some hard fought battles with Duke or Gonzaga then sure, they’re close. But they weren’t that at all, they were beat downs. A win over Oregon is a start, but you can’t rest your chances of making the tournament on a win over a likely double digit seed. At some point you need to beat someone and compete with the others because the eye test still matters.

And it appears the experts agree with that because they weren’t in a single bracket on bracket matrix as of yesterday night.

there is a sliver between last four in and about 15 teams,so I stand by my statement

 

[UnderHisOwnPower]

We’re the lowest rated P6 team with only 5 losses, yet have one of the higher rated strength of schedules. The use of offensive & defensive efficiencies in NET and KP is the new wrinkle that’s killing us this year. We played really good teams on neutral and road settings and lost by a wide margin. Those losses are tanking our computer rankings. Seems like the margin of loss is significantly more important than the strength of schedule. Also, our 50 point win against Chaminade is killing us because it doesn’t count in NET. So long story short, Maui is absolutely crushing our rating when we all thought it would be beneficial for our SOS to play in a loaded field.

NET = Not Even Trying

 

[jncuse]

Pitt up at the half vs Duke.
A win would be huge.
In this NET world a close loss probably helps as well.

 

[Shoym]

One last post for today in this stupid a@@ thread (at times), at least relating specifically to the mechanics of KenPom, that I let myself get too involved in, because I get dragged into math especially when its related to a topic I like (college basketball). Any points on this thread from me in the next few days will be purely tourney talk based which run on a different plane than KP as they should.

With a 1 point win today, we should start to see some differences between our KP and NET

- Our KP, #76 now, basically didn't move at all, because we were expected to win by 2 points, and we won by 3,

- Our NET, #76 now, should move up tomorrow, because its not all margin and there are certain W-L components. Although I can't say I know everything going on in that number.

- Finally for our resume, its comes down to W's and L's, and a Q2 win by 3 point is huge compared to a Q2 loss by 3 points. And that is where I will be heading for the rest of the night -- "tournament talk" type discussions... KP and Tournament Resumes can run on very different planes and need to be interpreted very differently. They are both results based, can both be "generally understood", but look at results quite differently.

For the most part the things that have hindered our KP right now, and our NET to a degree, are not limiting our tourney resume:
1) Big margin losses to good teams. For tourney purposes, those L's are expected and are simply just L's no matter the score. Nobody expects a bubble team to win at Duke, win at UNC, neutral at Tennessee. Perhaps by season end someone might argue that the games vs Gonzaga and Virginia were more winnable, but you are still allowed some L's.

2) Our margin against bad teams is not that great. Once again the committee doesn't give a crap about that -- really just games are more just nuisance games. Don't lose them --- and we didn't. That's all that matters.

Really its just about winning games at this point - I have the target at 8-5 in the ACC.

Thank you for this

 

[Shoym]

Saying there not close is ignorant

Calling someone ignorant when you can't spell is, well, ignorant.

 

[Shoym]

The luck factor is simply how Kenpom explains a team beating better teams. My point is we've been undervalued since Day 1. We started with a bad metric, and add in this team giving up in blowouts, we haven't been able to climb out to a proper ranking. Not saying we're still dragged way down by the preseason start, but it doesn't help when you start with a bad metric. If we started at #10 and had the same season to date, I'm guessing we'd have a better metric right now. All of the teams move in relation to each other, like NET, so our wins/loses have a different effect on our opponents when we're not ranked well. Look at teams with similar resumes but are much higher in NET and Kenpom because they started way higher. Maybe I'm wrong, but it certainly feels that way. It's tough to climb in these rankings.

Spot on!

 

[Shoym]

The AP is always wild. UNC pre-season #1 last year because they got hot for 5 games. Miami pre-season top 15 due to Final Four. It's always so horrible and there's always a load of teams that are ranked purely based on tournament performance the year before, notwithstanding how they performed during the regular season or if the team changed over a bit.

Excellent observation

 

[Shoym]

The problem with math is that we try to use it to explain the universe and the events that unfolded in it, however, the universe has no need of math to operate.

Except math can account for everything.

 

[Cusefan0307]

Statistical volatility due to not having a large enough sample size yet something something In this picture of time.

 

[CardiacCuse]

By definition lock means an almost certainty that you will win.Like I said, we definitely can win 20, but no way are we a lock to do it.

its not 100%

but the odds would be very very good if vegas was setting an over/under imo

 

[Cuse181]

there is a sliver between last four in and about 15 teams,so I stand by my statement

And we dont appear to be in that 15 teams according to bracket matrix. That’s all I’m saying.

 

[jncuse]

We’re the lowest rated P6 team with only 5 losses, yet have one of the higher rated strength of schedules. The use of offensive & defensive efficiencies in NET and KP is the new wrinkle that’s killing us this year. We played really good teams on neutral and road settings and lost by a wide margin. Those losses are tanking our computer rankings. Seems like the margin of loss is significantly more important than the strength of schedule. Also, our 50 point win against Chaminade is killing us because it doesn’t count in NET. So long story short, Maui is absolutely crushing our rating when we all thought it would be beneficial for our SOS to play in a loaded field.

I don't think the Chaminade game really makes a difference either way. It was some other chump we played, the win wouldn't really matter unless we beat them by more than expected. Perhaps I am overlooking something?

You are correct in KP that SOS is not important - it at the score relative to the opponent. Probably NET to a bit lesser degree, but important as well.

Anyway I don't get too wound up in individual NET when it comes to getting in. If we get the wins, enough quality, avoid the bad, it take cares of itself because that is the majority of the evaluation.

 

[jncuse]

We started this morning with 0 Q1 Wins and 3 Q2 Wins.
We wake up tomorrow with 1 Q1 Win and 4 Q2 Wins.

Good day.

 

[jncuse]

So far as their performance against top teams goes, it’s true. If they had lost some hard fought battles with Duke or Gonzaga then sure, they’re close. But they weren’t that at all, they were beat downs. A win over Oregon is a start, but you can’t rest your chances of making the tournament on a win over a likely double digit seed. At some point you need to beat someone and compete with the others because the eye test still matters.

And it appears the experts agree with that because they weren’t in a single bracket on bracket matrix as of yesterday night.

Do we deserve to be in the tournament as of this morning? Nope. So can't blame anybody on the matrix for not having us in.

But the amount we are behind is not that much. Just because we have "0" in the matrix doesn't mean we are that far behind.

The other thing that hurts us in any "as of now" bracket is that there is still limited Q1 and Q2 win data to make assessments -- so people put a lot of weight into Standalone NET simply because of lack of other data to work with. I've done brackets before at this time of year, you have to work with scraps... and with the matrix as well.

Standalone NET on Selection Sunday, is not nearly that important once you have all the data from games. And if we go 8-5 the rest of the way our NET should be in the high 50's I think - not a disqualifying figure by any means.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

LOL, Pitt jumps from low 80’s to 70 in KP after their win at Duke. We went from 76 to 75. KP definitely hates Syracuse this year. I know it has lots of credibility with fans, but its kind of a joke of an algorithm.