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

[Capt. Tuttle]

Exactly my point. Math, a language humans devised to help us understand the universe is best used to disprove scientific theories. The fact that math works so well to explain so much should point scientists in a different direction than the path we have gone down since atomism became the prevailing theory, but humans like to complicate things. For instance, a pressure modularization system would be a much better explanation for the behavior of heavenly bodies than gravity.

 

[CardiacCuse]

For the same reason, couldn't you then say W-L record shouldn't be used to rate a team, because you can have "Fake"*** Wins and Losses caused by missing players or injuries.

Margin is a generally effective way to rate a team over a large enough sample of games. There will be some one off variations, for most teams they will largely balance, but there will be the anomalies too like SU, Pitt and Bama this year who consistently performed one way in certain games.

The key thing though is that NCAA tournament is largely just selected by W and L, and the quality of those teams. It doesn't care about your margin.

*** Fake Wins is a term I stole from a Raptors board I am on. In 2021/2022 it was used by bitter fans who wanted us to tank, while we went 48-34. They would label each win as fake because somebody was usually out (especially in that Covid year where basically everybody in the league had to sit 3-4 games at various points of the year)

are you sure about this? that W-L is really what matters? (it should be, imo)...win-loss is much much more important to teams than how much they win by...if it wasnt then buzzer beaters wouldnt be emotional, would they???

but if W-L is really what matter ...why even have the NET at all?

 

[OrlandoCuse]

Point differential should never be used to rate a team.
You can't take into account missing players, sick, or players with minor injuries.

Yet this is where we find ourselves today with NET and KP

 

[ar inj]

jncuse you are on fire. great teaching, digging, researching and then informing all of us.

 

[5OutFred]

Oregon up 1 at Half @ Utah, result would presumably get the Ducks back into Q1 territory for SU. Go Ducks!

 

[OCESIP]

are you sure about this? that W-L is really what matters? (it should be, imo)...win-loss is much much more important to teams than how much they win by...if it wasnt then buzzer beaters wouldnt be emotional, would they???

but if W-L is really what matter ...why even have the NET at all?

It's the same old dilemma that the committee has wrestled with forever. When you get to the last teams being considered, wins and losses are often similar so you need an "out" to help justify your final choices. The "computer" gives you that, and it's tough to question a chuck of metal that is impervious to vocal objections and questions about it's integrity.

 

[TexanMark]

quite odd how we can beat teams that can beat teams we have zero chance of even competing with.

Match ups

This team is easy to root for and fun to watch but certain teams grind our team up.

Another year or two of great recruiting will change that

 

[CardiacCuse]

It's the same old dilemma that the committee has wrestled with forever. When you get to the last teams being considered, wins and losses are often similar so you need an "out" to help justify your final choices. The "computer" gives you that, and it's tough to question a chuck of metal that is impervious to vocal objections and questions about it's integrity.

hmmm well to me this is something entirely new and not the same old dilemma

throwing out overall record almost entirely in favor of cumulative margin of victory and ending up with erratic differences relative to actual wins and losses in the rankings... is nonsensical to me

if you wanna compare teams with similar records, great...look at such things...of course it isnt easy

but overall record should more of an "organizing axis" than it currently seems to be

my worry is that this is really about vegas and point spreads than trying to create a level playing field for team selection.

 

[Cstate]

The Mountain West with a projected 6 teams in. The ACC has work to do!

 

[STEVEHOLT]

Oregon was up 4 then with 2 minute was down 5. Now down 1 with under 2

 

[STEVEHOLT]

….aaaaaand Oregon misses a bunny that would have won it

 

[BomberOrange]

The Mountain West with a projected 6 teams in. The ACC has work to do!

It’s January projections mean nothing

 

[Sbucketball]

jncuse have you looked at what the best NETs are that got left out of the tournament and what stood out on their resumes, and, even more interesting, the worst NETs that got in and why? I just googled it and there's interesting articles about snubs and sneak-ins that discuss NET, and there's pretty big variance (i.e. teams with NETs in the 60s getting in while teams in the 40s left out), but I'm wondering if this is something you've looked at it more detail.

 

[Bulldog04]

Michigan state at 19 with a 12-7 record is hilarious

 

[jordoo]

Michigan state at 19 with a 12-7 record is hilarious

That’s the thing, knowledgeable people can explain to me exactly how this works and why teams have the numbers that they have. However, any normal Joe Schmoe that knows anything about basketball can pick out a handful of anomalies within five minutes.

 

[jncuse]

jncuse have you looked at what the best NETs are that got left out of the tournament and what stood out on their resumes, and, even more interesting, the worst NETs that got in and why? I just googled it and there's interesting articles about snubs and sneak-ins that discuss NET, and there's pretty big variance (i.e. teams with NETs in the 60s getting in while teams in the 40s left out), but I'm wondering if this is something you've looked at it more detail.

I’ll do a look back at 2019, 2021, 2022 and 2023 at some point over the next few days. That data is accessible on Warren Nolan .. although it would make it a heck of a lot easier if he shaded those teams that got in and not.

It's the same old dilemma that the committee has wrestled with forever. When you get to the last teams being considered, wins and losses are often similar so you need an "out" to help justify your final choices. The "computer" gives you that, and it's tough to question a chuck of metal that is impervious to vocal objections and questions about its integrity.

There’s no real evidence that the last teams who have gotten im historically is based on their RPI or NET as far as I have seen.

 

[OrlandoCuse]

I’ll do a look back at 2019, 2021, 2022 and 2023 at some point over the next few days. That data is accessible on Warren Nolan .. although it would make it a heck of a lot easier if he shaded those teams that got in and not.


There’s no real evidence that the last teams who have gotten im historically is based on their RPI or NET as far as I have seen.

The last 5 to 6 teams in are always in a group of a dozen or so that are being compared to each other by the committee. It does become very subjective based on what the committee is focusing on each year, so it’s probably difficult to determine a consistent pattern. “Blind resume” does matter to an extent.

 

[CardiacCuse]

Match ups

This team is easy to root for and fun to watch but certain teams grind our team up.

Another year or two of great recruiting will change that

eh...you would think...except all of those teams happened to be the most highly ranked

all top teams dont present the same matchups issues

in general you are right...but this year? doesnt seem so.

 

[Fly Rodder]

This thread:

We should just go back to the old way of only taking conference champions to March Madness so everyone can stop whining about math being stupid.

 

[Fly Rodder]

That’s the thing, knowledgeable people can explain to me exactly how this works and why teams have the numbers that they have. However, any normal Joe Schmoe that knows anything about basketball can pick out a handful of anomalies within five minutes.

Tell us where Syracuse should be*. All of the smarty pants on here who think that NET and KP and any other ranking site is fundamentally flawed at best or complete and utter trash at worst should be able to hammer our a consensus top 100 in about 10 minutes. GO!




*That seems to be the most important thing here. Since if SU was ranked 10th no one would be complaining.

 

[jordoo]

Tell us where Syracuse should be*. All of the smarty pants on here who think that NET and KP and any other ranking site is fundamentally flawed at best or complete and utter trash at worst should be able to hammer our a consensus top 100 in about 10 minutes. GO!




*That seems to be the most important thing here. Since if SU was ranked 10th no one would be complaining.

Why do you take it so personally that these evaluation algorithms are flawed? The people that make them will tell you that. As I advocated early in this thread, I would prefer that we leave the decisions to a group of flawed humans. I have more faith in a group of humans to make a reasonable decision and see the things that computer algorithms may not be able to see. That doesn’t mean that we won’t still argue about the last four teams in and out.

I don’t need to be an expert in anything to use Reductive reasoning to determine something is flawed or not true. Doing that is independent of providing an alternative method/answer.

 

[richmondcuse03]

As many have pointed out, scoring margin is overweighted. I’m not saying it shouldn’t be considered, just that it’s something all of these algorithms should make a correction for.

We should let Autry know so he runs score up against Louisville.

 

[jordoo]

We should let Autry know so he runs score up against Louisville.

Rather than develop young players, or give walk-on a chance to be on the floor? Over valuing margin is going to lead to less opportunities for players, and inevitably a worse product. I really don’t want the coach of my favorite team worrying about margin of victory. IMO

 

[richmondcuse03]

Rather than develop young players, or give walk-on a chance to be on the floor? Over valuing margin is going to lead to less opportunities for players, and inevitably a worse product. I really don’t want the coach of my favorite team worrying about margin of victory. IMO

I agree. But you saw that happen in college football when coaches knew it mattered in the old bcs rankings. Or even for human rankings.

 

[CardiacCuse]

This thread:

We should just go back to the old way of only taking conference champions to March Madness so everyone can stop whining about math being stupid.

tell that to the NCAA who is overcomplicating a task that only needs elementary school level math into something opaque and mysterious

my issue isnt with math

its with a poorly conceptualized application of math