Quad 1 win

[jncuse]

This detailed analysis is very interesting. My feeling is playing 20 conference games and 2 less non-conference games will hurt the ACC this year. What's your opinion?

My initial view (which might be wrong) is that the extra 2 games actually helps. But not as much as it would have if the conference had played well.

But it depends. If you are replacing two OOC cupcake or low challenge games with two conference games it will help the conference numbers. But I am not sure how the ACC has handled this as a whole.

I know for Syracuse it appears they cancelled "easier" games rather than "tougher" games.

 

[Orangezoo]

What are the current conference rankings? We were 6th last year right? Looking like we are heading for similar ground this year. Not sure I see the Delta in the numbers that makes last year and this year that far apart...

 

[Nicknack]

We have a pretty good idea what the NET will say or do to ACC teams.

I have been studying OOC conference records in November and December for a number of years now and how they will impact things come Selection Sunday. The RPI / NET has a multiplying factor that crushes teams in the the fifth or sixth best conferences in OOC, especially if the GAP is large between #6 and the top 4. Which it is large in terms of conference RPI. Once the SEC, BIG, BE, B12 start to play each other in January they all boost each others NET because they are at a better starting point, and its the opposite for the ACC and the B12.

It is actually quite predictable by this point -- not which specific teams will do well, but which conference's middle teams (whomever they may be) will not get support for the tourney.

If Florida St goes 12-8 top 75 is not an issue. If its less than that it could well be an issue.

Could Florida St go 12-8 in the ACC. Its a decent possibility based on their history. But there are certainly some concerns that it will not happen.

I tend to believe in jncuse with these sorts of things. He's been pretty solid, starting with the year so many on this board counted us out of the tourney and he kept telling/informing that we had a good shot - and we did and got in. I don't remember what year that was because every year now seems bubblicious.

 

[Nicknack]

I don't understand how all of this quad stuff factors into a team getting in the tourney, other than the obvious - you want as many wins against Q1 and hopefully no losses to Q4 teams. That said, does the selection committee value more wins against Q1 teams versus losses to Q4 teams? Seems to me like they should. Sort of like a golf handicap. In my mind, it shouldn't really matter all that much if you lay an egg every once in a while. I would rather have teams who have demonstrated that they can beat a handful of other good (Q1) teams throughout the year.

 

[supp]

Oh man. That Colgate loss is going to haunt us.

 

[Day2]

Oh man. That Colgate loss is going to haunt us.

Just remember, Colgate went 14-1 in the Patriot last year and were ranked 9th in NET heading into the NCAA tournament. If they take care of business in the conference again, their current NET of 110 could actually improve.

 

[jncuse]

I was making a mistake above. So apologies to anyone I confused while I was confusing myself.

As I went for my hike in the woods today it struck me I was doing something wrong in my analysis and I veered off into a different concept for some reason. (I suspect because when we talk to Syracuse its always about bubble line)

I was looking at what was a realistic cutoff for FSU to be a bubble team rather than a top NET 75 (the Q2 line) A P5 bubble team is typically closer to NET 48-55 than NET 75, although there are sometimes one or two breakthroughs in between those numbers each year. That being said there are a number of P5 teams each year that miss the tourney but are still on the top 75 of NET (or the old RPI), and hence would qualify as Q1 road wins.

So while FSU may need to be 12-8 to be a realistic bubble team, it may only need to be 10-10 in ACC to get to NET 75 assuming it holds court the rest of OOC.

 

[jncuse]

I tend to believe in jncuse with these sorts of things. He's been pretty solid, starting with the year so many on this board counted us out of the tourney and he kept telling/informing that we had a good shot - and we did and got in. I don't remember what year that was because every year now seems bubblicious.

Thank you. I think I tend to look at things quite well and sometimes view our position more positively or negatively then the general board view at times. Typically my target as to what we need, especially in January and early February is set at least a game and often a few games lower than many here, and I tend to be right in that case. Not sure if that will be the case this year because I am really down on the ACC and I am a strong believer on my past observations that the ACC will get hammered in NET and accordingly Q1 opportunities.

The first big bubble watch was probably in 2016 - that was an exciting run and probably one of the most interesting bubble lines (not just for Syracuse) in recent times. You had a mix of majors, traditional mid-majors, and then Monmouth of all teams. There was like a dozen viable teams for maybe 5 spots. Most years since then have been comparatively dull on Selection Sunday.

That being said I made an embarrassing mistake on FSU today. As I explained below I let my mind veer into the realm of bubble line rather than NET 75.

 

[Day2]

Thank you. I think I tend to look at things quite well and sometimes view our position more positively or negatively then the general board view at times. Typically my target as to what we need, especially in January and early February is set at least a game and often a few games lower than many here, and I tend to be right in that case. Not sure if that will be the case this year because I am really down on the ACC and I am a strong believer on my past observations that the ACC will get hammered in NET and accordingly Q1 opportunities.

The first big bubble watch was probably in 2016 - that was an exciting run and probably one of the most interesting bubble lines (not just for Syracuse) in recent times. You had a mix of majors, traditional mid-majors, and then Monmouth of all teams. There was like a dozen viable teams for maybe 5 spots. Most years since then have been comparatively dull on Selection Sunday.

That being said I made an embarrassing mistake on FSU today. As I explained below I let my mind veer into the realm of bubble line rather than NET 75.

Don’t worry about it! We all make mistakes. You’re still the NET/bubble guru around here.

 

[blust2i3d4]

I don't understand what basis you have to claim with certainty that it will stand. What have they done this year. No top 100 wins, 3 losses (2 handily) to the good or decent teams it has faced. And the Boston University OT win is the most concerning. This team might be a .500 team or 11-9 team in the ACC. In years past that gets you net top 75. Not this year in the ACC because of how poorly the conference has performed.

View attachment 211452

Are you highly confident that Florida St gets to 12-8 in the ACC... that is likely what is needed to get to net top 75 for them.

Net ranking 40 was last year's according to Google search result.

 

[blust2i3d4]

I mean I watch a lot of hoops. If we finish 2nd in the ACC I wouldn’t be surprised. I hope we win Tuesday because this place continues to find ways to out chicken little itself even after wins.


I agree the ACC is not good. We can win 13 plus ACC games this year.

The first 8 conference games are all very winnable for us. We could start with 7-1 or 8-0.

 

[Orangezoo]

I was making a mistake above. So apologies to anyone I confused while I was confusing myself.

As I went for my hike in the woods today it struck me I was doing something wrong in my analysis and I veered off into a different concept for some reason. (I suspect because when we talk to Syracuse its always about bubble line)

I was looking at what was a realistic cutoff for FSU to be a bubble team rather than a top NET 75 (the Q2 line) A P5 bubble team is typically closer to NET 48-55 than NET 75, although there are sometimes one or two breakthroughs in between those numbers each year. That being said there are a number of P5 teams each year that miss the tourney but are still on the top 75 of NET (or the old RPI), and hence would qualify as Q1 road wins.

So while FSU may need to be 12-8 to be a realistic bubble team, it may only need to be 10-10 in ACC to get to NET 75 assuming it holds court the rest of OOC.

Honest mistake and it still was a good discussion overall. Outside FSU alone everything else is on point.

 

[Dinkyspond]

Just remember, Colgate went 14-1 in the Patriot last year and were ranked 9th in NET heading into the NCAA tournament. If they take care of business in the conference again, their current NET of 110 could actually improve.

Boston University is better than Colgate in the Pat League

 

[NineOneSeven]

I’ll look back in two decades and remember where I was when colgate scored 100 against Syracuse

 

[Orangezoo]

So digging more into FSU- if they don't end up being a top 40-50 team might be Hamilton's worst coaching job or poor recruiting hall (ranking vs production) in a few years.

What they brought in-

Cleveland FR- 25th nationally on 247
Warley FR- 43rd nationally on 247
Butler FR- 71st Nationally on 247 ( 7-1)
Mcleod- JUCO 6th ranked JUCO on 247(7-4)
Fletcher- UK transfer- 71 overall in 2020 on 247
Mills ( UH transfer)- double digit scorer at UH

Paired with their vets Polite, Evans, Osborne and Wilkes you have the typical deep with lots of high end talent FSU squad.

 

[jncuse]

So digging more into FSU- if they don't end up being a top 40-50 team might be Hamilton's worst coaching job or poor recruiting hall (ranking vs production) in a few years.

What they brought in-

Cleveland FR- 25th nationally on 247
Warley FR- 43rd nationally on 247
Butler FR- 71st Nationally on 247 ( 7-1)
Mcleod- JUCO 6th ranked JUCO on 247(7-4)
Fletcher- UK transfer- 71 overall in 2020 on 247
Mills ( UH transfer)- double digit scorer at UH

Paired with their vets Polite, Evans, Osborne and Wilkes you have the typical deep with lots of high end talent FSU squad.

I think we may find out quite a bit about FSU good or bad in 2 of their next 3 games. Neutral courts against KP #101 SC and #55 UCF. Their last 3 games have them on the decline that they need to turn around.

 

[Orangezoo]

I think we may find out quite a bit about FSU good or bad in 2 of their next 3 games. Neutral courts against KP #101 SC and #55 UCF. Their last 3 games have them on the decline that they need to turn around.

Agreed. One thing by season end that will be interesting is looking at the production of freshman vs rankings. The pandemic and then the portal shook everything up to the point of which I am betting the correlation may be the worst it's ever been.

I mean it's still possible even a guy like Benny could have been rated too high just because of all of the pandemic related impacts to recruiting and HS/Prep schedules.

 

[jncuse]

What are the current conference rankings? We were 6th last year right? Looking like we are heading for similar ground this year. Not sure I see the Delta in the numbers that makes last year and this year that far apart...

Forgot to respond to this yesterday

I didn't follow thing closely at all last year until about February where I largely relied solely on the Bracket Matrix. The Matrix is a great tool to throw in somebody's face when they say you have no chance. You can take the last team in compare it to us, and show that the gap is not huge.

So I don't remember where the ACC was last year at this time. That being said there was maybe half (or less) OOC games last year in comparison to normal years, so I think that may have impacted things a lot.

In terms of the #1 vs #6 in rankings. It depends on the delta between #1-4, and #6.

I know I look at conference RPI for this (I don't see Conference NET out there), but I think the NET reacts similarly when considered on a "conference aggregate" scale and impacts Q1/Q2 win opportunities similarly,

Top 4 conferences have RPI's at .588, .582, .574, .573. The ACC is at .553. I know that does not seem huge but the average of the top 4 is .579... the difference of .026 looks small but that is a pretty big gap between the top and #6. You see that gap in years in the P-12 gets hammered for example or when BIG got hammered. Wish I could find archives of where the conference RPI was in prior years to validate this observation, because I am working off memory here, and that can never be 100% certain.