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

[Niastri]

82 NET, 78 KenPom after last night. A 13 point win against a team 30 spots ahead of us only moves us up 3 spots...I give up

It is starting to become apparent that the NET isn't working.

Insane that it is so much a black box and yet so relevant.

 

[Cuse12]

if we win the next two, how in gods name do you leave a 21-10 (12-8) ACC team out of the tourney? I would like to know how many teams in the history of the ACC have NOT made the tourney who have had 20 wins or more and an above .500 ACC record. I gotta imagine it’s a short rare list?

 

[Orangezoo]

if we win the next two, how in gods name do you leave a 21-10 (12-8) ACC team out of the tourney? I would like to know how many teams in the history of the ACC have NOT made the tourney who have had 20 wins or more and an above .500 ACC record. I gotta imagine it’s a short rare list?

Clemson last year, UNC also had 19 reg season wins and a winning record and didn’t make it.

 

[Niastri]

if we win the next two, how in gods name do you leave a 21-10 (12-8) ACC team out of the tourney? I would like to know how many teams in the history of the ACC have NOT made the tourney who have had 20 wins or more and an above .500 ACC record. I gotta imagine it’s a short rare list?

Plus, we were 9-2 against a pretty good OOC schedule, with both losses Q1.

This is shaping up to be a referendum on the worth (or lack thereof) of the entire NET ranking.

If they ignore it and let us in, why even have it? If they leave us out, in spite of a much better resume than other teams in every other way, they'll need to defend the value of the NET against all evidence.

If we don't beat Louisville and Clemson, the argument becomes moot...

But if we go 1-1 and end up the regular season 20-11, it will be very interesting next week.

 

[690West]

Who is Stevens?

Bracket guy. Well respected

https://twitter.com/D1scourse

 

[Orangezoo]

Plus, we were 9-2 against a pretty good OOC schedule, with both losses Q1.

This is shaping up to be a referendum on the worth (or lack thereof) of the entire NET ranking.

If they ignore it and let us in, why even have it? If they leave us out, in spite of a much better resume than other teams in every other way, they'll need to defend the value of the NET against all evidence.

If we don't beat Louisville and Clemson, the argument becomes moot...

But if we go 1-1 and end up the regular season 20-11, it will be very interesting next week.

Take care of business against Ville and I suspect this group will be absolutely locked in for Clemson. Clemson has hardly been unbeatable at home with 4 losses on the year. We should have beaten them at the dome in the first game post Benny but I think we come out aggressive and aiming to punch our way into the tourney. Will be a war.

 

[Sbucketball]

if we win the next two, how in gods name do you leave a 21-10 (12-8) ACC team out of the tourney? I would like to know how many teams in the history of the ACC have NOT made the tourney who have had 20 wins or more and an above .500 ACC record. I gotta imagine it’s a short rare list?

Clemson won 23 games last year and got snubbed. When the ACC was perceived as strong those wins got you a bid. That's the problem the last few years. The whole conference needs to get more talent. And if it's an issue with manipulating the NET, then the knuckleheads running the conference need to advise how we can manipulate it too.

 

[Orangezoo]

One team to watch closely is UVA. They’ve got a slightly better resume than us by way of wins over Florida and Texas AM then conference wins at Clemson and at home vs Wake. If they slip at BC and get smoked at Duke and we win our next two….

 

[JustPherU]

Bracket guy. Well respected

https://twitter.com/D1scourse

Wasn’t he a Syracuse reporter a few years back?

 

[690West]

Wasn’t he a Syracuse reporter a few years back?

Yup. I believe around 2015

 

[domestu]

if we win the next two, how in gods name do you leave a 21-10 (12-8) ACC team out of the tourney? I would like to know how many teams in the history of the ACC have NOT made the tourney who have had 20 wins or more and an above .500 ACC record. I gotta imagine it’s a short rare list?

Clemson won 23 games and finished tied for 3rd in the ACC with a 14-6 conference record last year. North Carolina also won 20 games and had a winning ACC record in 2023. Neither school made the NCAAs. Virginia has won 20 games and is 11-6 in league play this season and has not locked down a tournament bid yet because it is a down year for the ACC.

Total wins and winning league records lead to at-large bids when a major conference is really strong, but are much less relevant when the league is weaker. The ACC got nine teams into the tournament in 2018 and Syracuse got a bid with a 19-12 (8-10 ACC) regular season record because of the strength of the ACC that year. SU also defeated a lot of quality opponents that made the Big Dance that year. North Carolina is the only team we have beaten that is definitely going to make the tournament next month. Go Cuse!

 

[DPCuse]

It’s ironic two teams we beat twice are still ahead of us in the NET.

I don't love this argument by itself. Beating them twice only matters if the rest of your resume is virtually the same. Which in this case it kind of is. If you have awful losses and no quality wins, then beating the twice is irrelevant.

 

[blust2i3d4]

One team to watch closely is UVA. They’ve got a slightly better resume than us by way of wins over Florida and Texas AM then conference wins at Clemson and at home vs Wake. If they slip at BC and get smoked at Duke and we win our next two….

Hope UVA lose two more games and we and Pitt win out. All three have 12-8 conference records. The tie breaker rule will make SU>UVa>Pitt.

 

[CardiacCuse]

interesting stat alert!:

by my count only 17 teams in the top 100 in NET have a winning record in Quad 1

and most of those only narrowly

not sure how that is even possible... but it is!

its weird but almost every team in in the top 100 in NET has an abysmal record vs quad 1