(01-29-2020 09:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  If the tournament field had been set on Monday based solely on NET ranking (which, of course, it isn't) this is how it would shake out, by conference. The last four in with their W-L record and NET rank are shown in parentheses next to their conference.

B1G 12 teams (Indiana 15-5, 44)

Funny that few of the conference RPI or Power ratings have the B1G as the #1 conference. Most have the Big 12 or the Big East at #1.

yeah but conferences don't get teams in the tourney. Teams get teams into the tourney.

Um, yeah, I understand that.

(01-30-2020 10:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 09:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  If the tournament field had been set on Monday based solely on NET ranking (which, of course, it isn't) this is how it would shake out, by conference. The last four in with their W-L record and NET rank are shown in parentheses next to their conference.

B1G 12 teams (Indiana 15-5, 44)

Funny that few of the conference RPI or Power ratings have the B1G as the #1 conference. Most have the Big 12 or the Big East at #1.

yeah but conferences don't get teams in the tourney. Teams get teams into the tourney.

Um, yeah, I understand that.

a lot of people don't though.

(01-30-2020 09:47 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  If St John's beats Seton Hall and Villanova- both on the road- they're going to get in. They'd be 5-7 away from home, not great but not awful either. With 3 high level wins.....

That's what I mean...others in the conference performed better within it, and more wins, but who is counted in that win total carries weight.

Saint John's and Purdue are interesting ones to watch metrically. Purdue and their NET is close to what Penn State was last year with theirs. Unreal to me that you can be top 40 NET and barely over .500. Saint John's...we do seem to believe they don't warrant consideration, but, technically, there aren't any bad losses there to totally discount them if they were to pick up another big name or two.

Quite honestly, Purdue has zero business being considered either, but, same thing for them...and were they to bag Iowa, Penn State, and Rutgers at home, they probably do get some serious consideration.

The thing is that we have to adjust expectations to account for the fact that a LOT of teams across the country have bad losses on their resumes this season, which means that schools like Purdue and St. John's that might look middling with their conference records are still going to look fairly good by comparison to teams in other leagues since they have a combination of fewer bad losses plus some key non-conference wins.

Virginia is 4th place in the ACC right now... but they got destroyed by Purdue in the non-conference schedule and lost to a middling South Carolina team in the non-conference schedule and a Boston College team that's ranked #157 in the NET rankings as of today. As a result, it's difficult to argue that Virginia should be getting more at-large consideration than Purdue as a result of technically having a better conference record than Purdue (particularly when Purdue beat UVA head-to-head). We can apply this analysis to many other schools across the country right now where the 4th or 5th best teams in the Power Five (minus the Big Ten), much less the non-power leagues, legitimately don't have as good of resumes as teams with losing conference records in the Big Ten or Big East as of right now.

(01-30-2020 10:30 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:47 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  If St John's beats Seton Hall and Villanova- both on the road- they're going to get in. They'd be 5-7 away from home, not great but not awful either. With 3 high level wins.....

That's what I mean...others in the conference performed better within it, and more wins, but who is counted in that win total carries weight.

Saint John's and Purdue are interesting ones to watch metrically. Purdue and their NET is close to what Penn State was last year with theirs. Unreal to me that you can be top 40 NET and barely over .500. Saint John's...we do seem to believe they don't warrant consideration, but, technically, there aren't any bad losses there to totally discount them if they were to pick up another big name or two.

Quite honestly, Purdue has zero business being considered either, but, same thing for them...and were they to bag Iowa, Penn State, and Rutgers at home, they probably do get some serious consideration.

The thing is that we have to adjust expectations to account for the fact that a LOT of teams across the country have bad losses on their resumes this season, which means that schools like Purdue and St. John's that might look middling with their conference records are still going to look fairly good by comparison to teams in other leagues since they have a combination of fewer bad losses plus some key non-conference wins.

Virginia is 4th place in the ACC right now... but they got destroyed by Purdue in the non-conference schedule and lost to a middling South Carolina team in the non-conference schedule and a Boston College team that's ranked #157 in the NET rankings as of today. As a result, it's difficult to argue that Virginia should be getting more at-large consideration than Purdue as a result of technically having a better conference record than Purdue (particularly when Purdue beat UVA head-to-head). We can apply this analysis to many other schools across the country right now where the 4th or 5th best teams in the Power Five (minus the Big Ten), much less the non-power leagues, legitimately don't have as good of resumes as teams with losing conference records in the Big Ten or Big East as of right now.

at some point your overall record just totally takes you out of consideration.... If you finish 17-15 the committee hasn't taken you to the dance at all... No matter how good your wins are. St John's right now is 13-9. They absolutely need to go 5-4 the rest of the way to have any shot. Ending the regular season 17-14, they would probably be in the 7-10 range for the BE and would need 2 BET wins to make the tourney- including a win over 1 or 2 BE seed.

Also there are other factors. Your record away from home being a major one, as you don't get home games in the tourney.

(01-30-2020 08:27 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 06:19 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Conference record has been overlooked before. If a good win or two is there in a good conference, does that overshadow mediocre or bad conference performance?

I would think the committee would be in a world of hurt if a DePaul or St. John’s continue their track toward the bottom of the Big East but were to pick up two big wins against a Villanova, Seton Hall, or Butler. Their current performance has them in the 60’s and 70’s now. Those wins would probably get them right to that dividing line, and you’d have to take the body of work into account.

What I don’t care for NET is that it elevates everyone in a good conference. So much so that it makes a “bad loss” relative. And the B1G and Big East are good examples of this for different reasons. Really doesn’t hurt if you lose to DePaul metrically. However, you’re not crushed if you lose to Northwestern or Nebraska either. Yet, if Nebraska and Northwestern didn’t have the Big Ten schedule propping them up?

The worst conference records ever to make the NCAA tourney 4 games under .500.

The problem for DePaul/St Johns is just going to be their overall record. They're going to finish in the 17-14 or 16-15 range....

Think folks have to remember- Georgia in 2000 in the last 25 years is the ONLY team to finish the season with an overall record less than 4 games over .500 and making the tourney. And Georgia had what many consider the toughest schedule of all time that season.

Wow - I never knew that about Georgia's 2000 schedule.

If you use Sagarin ratings to determine quad 1, quad 2, etc (KenPom & Net weren't around yet), Georgia played 16 games against quad 1, 10 against quad 2, 2 against quad 3, and 1 against quad 4.

Here is their schedule, with AP ranking at the time in parentheses and Sagarin ratings at the end:

Georgia State - 55
@ Minnesota - 71
N Indiana State - 84
N Utah (13) - 66
N Stanford (5) - 2
Coastal Carolina - 288
Pepperdine - 52
@ Georgia Tech - 38
North Carolina State - 73
@ Wake Forest (6) - 13
N University of California - 27
@ Fresno State - 24
Villanova - 70
@ Kentucky - 8
Auburn - 57
@ Mississippi (20) - 16
@ Florida (7) - 9
Louisiana State - 93
@ Vanderbilt - 85
Tennessee (6) - 21
Kentucky - 8
Florida (13) - 9
@ South Carolina - 61
@ Alabama (18) - 36
Vanderbilt - 85
@ Tennessee (22) - 21
South Carolina - 61
Mississippi State - 46
@ Arkansas - 33

(01-30-2020 10:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:48 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  If the tournament field had been set on Monday based solely on NET ranking (which, of course, it isn't) this is how it would shake out, by conference. The last four in with their W-L record and NET rank are shown in parentheses next to their conference.

B1G 12 teams (Indiana 15-5, 44)

Funny that few of the conference RPI or Power ratings have the B1G as the #1 conference. Most have the Big 12 or the Big East at #1.

Out of metrics used by the committee, BPI, KenPom, and Sagarin all have the Big 10 as the number one overall conference by a pretty solid margin. I think RPI and Massey are the only 2 I can find that have either the Big 12 or Big East number one.

I don't think Sagarin is any use for basketball, and I didn't know BPI has conference rankings, will have to check that out - looked at ESPN and only saw teams.

I'm an old RPI guy myself, LOL.

Sagarin and Massey have tracked pretty closely with committee selections in recent years. For that matter, NET did pretty well last year as well.

As of Tuesday's games, all of the Top 50 in both those rankings came from 10 conferences, with one exception. East Tennessee State ranked #50 in the Massey composite. Besides the six basketball power conferences, those with more than one team in the Top 50 are AAC (4 teams), WCC (3), MWC (2) and A10 (2).

There's still a lot of basketball yet to be played, though, and almost all of it in conference play. So a lot can change between now and NCAAT selection time. But it's unlikely that the current one bid leagues are going to get a second team in.

(01-30-2020 10:41 AM)Captain Bearcat Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 08:27 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 06:19 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  Conference record has been overlooked before. If a good win or two is there in a good conference, does that overshadow mediocre or bad conference performance?

I would think the committee would be in a world of hurt if a DePaul or St. John’s continue their track toward the bottom of the Big East but were to pick up two big wins against a Villanova, Seton Hall, or Butler. Their current performance has them in the 60’s and 70’s now. Those wins would probably get them right to that dividing line, and you’d have to take the body of work into account.

What I don’t care for NET is that it elevates everyone in a good conference. So much so that it makes a “bad loss” relative. And the B1G and Big East are good examples of this for different reasons. Really doesn’t hurt if you lose to DePaul metrically. However, you’re not crushed if you lose to Northwestern or Nebraska either. Yet, if Nebraska and Northwestern didn’t have the Big Ten schedule propping them up?

The worst conference records ever to make the NCAA tourney 4 games under .500.

The problem for DePaul/St Johns is just going to be their overall record. They're going to finish in the 17-14 or 16-15 range....

Think folks have to remember- Georgia in 2000 in the last 25 years is the ONLY team to finish the season with an overall record less than 4 games over .500 and making the tourney. And Georgia had what many consider the toughest schedule of all time that season.

Wow - I never knew that about Georgia's 2000 schedule.

If you use Sagarin ratings to determine quad 1, quad 2, etc (KenPom & Net weren't around yet), Georgia played 16 games against quad 1, 10 against quad 2, 2 against quad 3, and 1 against quad 4.

Here is their schedule, with AP ranking at the time in parentheses and Sagarin ratings at the end:

Georgia State - 55
@ Minnesota - 71
N Indiana State - 84
N Utah (13) - 66
N Stanford (5) - 2
Coastal Carolina - 288
Pepperdine - 52
@ Georgia Tech - 38
North Carolina State - 73
@ Wake Forest (6) - 13
N University of California - 27
@ Fresno State - 24
Villanova - 70
@ Kentucky - 8
Auburn - 57
@ Mississippi (20) - 16
@ Florida (7) - 9
Louisiana State - 93
@ Vanderbilt - 85
Tennessee (6) - 21
Kentucky - 8
Florida (13) - 9
@ South Carolina - 61
@ Alabama (18) - 36
Vanderbilt - 85
@ Tennessee (22) - 21
South Carolina - 61
Mississippi State - 46
@ Arkansas - 33

looking at the RPI-
Q1 7-11
Q2 6-2
Q3 2-1
Q4 1-0

(01-30-2020 10:27 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 10:23 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 09:41 PM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  If the tournament field had been set on Monday based solely on NET ranking (which, of course, it isn't) this is how it would shake out, by conference. The last four in with their W-L record and NET rank are shown in parentheses next to their conference.

B1G 12 teams (Indiana 15-5, 44)

Funny that few of the conference RPI or Power ratings have the B1G as the #1 conference. Most have the Big 12 or the Big East at #1.

yeah but conferences don't get teams in the tourney. Teams get teams into the tourney.

Um, yeah, I understand that.

a lot of people don't though.

This is true, although it's interesting to see the "virtuous circle" of the NET rankings when a conference has a critical mass of highly ranked teams. As of right now, Big Ten teams are barely being punished for a conference loss because virtually every loss (besides Northwestern or Nebraska) is deemed to be a "good loss". This means that the NET rankings for most of the Big Ten schools has been remarkably stable.

On the flip side, bad losses continue to haunt teams in the NET rankings even if they've turned it around. My alma mater of Illinois has been on a 6-game winning streak (including road wins at Wisconsin, Purdue and Michigan) and is tied for first place in the Big Ten (widely considered to be the best conference this year), yet its NET ranking has barely budged over the past month. That's because its non-conference losses to Miami and Missouri are actually looking worse today in the NET rankings than they did a month ago. There's no recency bias or accounting for momentum in the NET rankings.

From my own high level observation, it seems like the NET rankings punishes bad losses more than it rewards good wins. I'm not sure if that's actually true or not in terms of the algorithm that is being used, but that's how it appears at a superficial level in just following my own team.

(01-30-2020 10:39 AM)stever20 Wrote:  Also there are other factors. Your record away from home being a major one, as you don't get home games in the tourney.

Yeah, that mark is similar to NET as SOS was to RPI. It's factored into the overall metric, but bears additional consideration.

When you had RPI, the road mark didn't seem to matter as much as the opponent itself. A good win was a good win no matter where it was. Some of the selections that came from that interpretation, it favored the major conference schools, because, well, how do you discount a win against a tournament team just because of where the game was played?

That's still true now, but I like that the quadrant component adds a dimension to it. Tournament-worthy teams should have that road component more considered, imo.

(01-30-2020 10:39 AM)stever20 Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 10:30 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:47 AM)The Cutter of Bish Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:37 AM)stever20 Wrote:  If St John's beats Seton Hall and Villanova- both on the road- they're going to get in. They'd be 5-7 away from home, not great but not awful either. With 3 high level wins.....

That's what I mean...others in the conference performed better within it, and more wins, but who is counted in that win total carries weight.

Saint John's and Purdue are interesting ones to watch metrically. Purdue and their NET is close to what Penn State was last year with theirs. Unreal to me that you can be top 40 NET and barely over .500. Saint John's...we do seem to believe they don't warrant consideration, but, technically, there aren't any bad losses there to totally discount them if they were to pick up another big name or two.

Quite honestly, Purdue has zero business being considered either, but, same thing for them...and were they to bag Iowa, Penn State, and Rutgers at home, they probably do get some serious consideration.

The thing is that we have to adjust expectations to account for the fact that a LOT of teams across the country have bad losses on their resumes this season, which means that schools like Purdue and St. John's that might look middling with their conference records are still going to look fairly good by comparison to teams in other leagues since they have a combination of fewer bad losses plus some key non-conference wins.

Virginia is 4th place in the ACC right now... but they got destroyed by Purdue in the non-conference schedule and lost to a middling South Carolina team in the non-conference schedule and a Boston College team that's ranked #157 in the NET rankings as of today. As a result, it's difficult to argue that Virginia should be getting more at-large consideration than Purdue as a result of technically having a better conference record than Purdue (particularly when Purdue beat UVA head-to-head). We can apply this analysis to many other schools across the country right now where the 4th or 5th best teams in the Power Five (minus the Big Ten), much less the non-power leagues, legitimately don't have as good of resumes as teams with losing conference records in the Big Ten or Big East as of right now.

at some point your overall record just totally takes you out of consideration.... If you finish 17-15 the committee hasn't taken you to the dance at all... No matter how good your wins are. St John's right now is 13-9. They absolutely need to go 5-4 the rest of the way to have any shot. Ending the regular season 17-14, they would probably be in the 7-10 range for the BE and would need 2 BET wins to make the tourney- including a win over 1 or 2 BE seed.

Also there are other factors. Your record away from home being a major one, as you don't get home games in the tourney.

Oh, I get it and agree. Ultimately, just as there's a psychological barrier for the committee to put in too many teams from one conference, there's also a psychological barrier to putting in a team with less than 20 overall wins even if they have great wins and/or a lack of bad losses on their resume.

(01-30-2020 11:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  From my own high level observation, it seems like the NET rankings punishes bad losses more than it rewards good wins. I'm not sure if that's actually true or not in terms of the algorithm that is being used, but that's how it appears at a superficial level in just following my own team.

I don't think this is a bad observation. I'm eagerly waiting for that Dayton-VCU return game. Because, if VCU wins, anyone who bagged VCU is going to get a good bump.

And, I can't help but feel that all VCU has going for them is a win against LSU.

(01-30-2020 10:55 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 10:21 AM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 09:48 AM)stxrunner Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 08:51 PM)quo vadis Wrote:  

(01-29-2020 10:17 AM)ken d Wrote:  If the tournament field had been set on Monday based solely on NET ranking (which, of course, it isn't) this is how it would shake out, by conference. The last four in with their W-L record and NET rank are shown in parentheses next to their conference.

B1G 12 teams (Indiana 15-5, 44)

Funny that few of the conference RPI or Power ratings have the B1G as the #1 conference. Most have the Big 12 or the Big East at #1.

Out of metrics used by the committee, BPI, KenPom, and Sagarin all have the Big 10 as the number one overall conference by a pretty solid margin. I think RPI and Massey are the only 2 I can find that have either the Big 12 or Big East number one.

I don't think Sagarin is any use for basketball, and I didn't know BPI has conference rankings, will have to check that out - looked at ESPN and only saw teams.

I'm an old RPI guy myself, LOL.

Sagarin and Massey have tracked pretty closely with committee selections in recent years. For that matter, NET did pretty well last year as well.

As of Tuesday's games, all of the Top 50 in both those rankings came from 10 conferences, with one exception. East Tennessee State ranked #50 in the Massey composite. Besides the six basketball power conferences, those with more than one team in the Top 50 are AAC (4 teams), WCC (3), MWC (2) and A10 (2).

There's still a lot of basketball yet to be played, though, and almost all of it in conference play. So a lot can change between now and NCAAT selection time. But it's unlikely that the current one bid leagues are going to get a second team in.

Northern Iowa is #45 in Massey Composite & #45 in NET with a win @#16 Colorado. If they end up 27-5 (15-3), they'll get in over the likes of Purdue (11-10) and Minnesota (11-9) who have 1 road win apiece -- neither of which (@Ohio, @Ohio St) sniff UNI's road win @#16 Colorado despite tenfold the opportunities.

Lunardi had UNI in as an at-large over the weekend until UNI took over 1st shifting them to the autobid section.

UNI is an intriguing one, too. Those two conference losses probably knock them off the at-large bubble if they can't finish the job for the AQ. That's where the strength of the conference really helps a Purdue and Minnesota. There may be losses, but nothing as bad as UNI's. And losing in the Big Ten is more forgivable.

RPI still loves UNI, though. 18 is pretty darn strong.

RPI hates Gonzaga.

(01-30-2020 11:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's no recency bias or accounting for momentum in the NET rankings.

I find that problematic. But I'm not sure how you fix it. The realities of scheduling in college hoops mean that a lot of what should be very meaningful games involving tournament-likely teams occur very early in the season, because that's when all those invitational (made for TV) tournaments take place.

If, in the process of "fixing" the recency/momentum problem you exclude most of these games, you're left with just performance in conference play to determine your field. You may as well just use conference standings (which, in the case of the power conferences may not be a bad way of doing it).

(01-30-2020 11:56 AM)ken d Wrote:  

(01-30-2020 11:04 AM)Frank the Tank Wrote:  There's no recency bias or accounting for momentum in the NET rankings.

I find that problematic. But I'm not sure how you fix it. The realities of scheduling in college hoops mean that a lot of what should be very meaningful games involving tournament-likely teams occur very early in the season, because that's when all those invitational (made for TV) tournaments take place.

If, in the process of "fixing" the recency/momentum problem you exclude most of these games, you're left with just performance in conference play to determine your field. You may as well just use conference standings (which, in the case of the power conferences may not be a bad way of doing it).

every game counts the same. They took out last 10-12 games as a selection criteria over a decade ago.

Yeah, recency has its issues. It kinda undermined the non-conference portion of the schedule, especially if you went on the road a lot, or just stayed at home until the conference schedule.

And it goes both ways with trending, but, I do wish there was a way to push some of those cold teams off the board. Yeah, it punishes good work done earlier in the season, but with the one-and-done and transfer trend, team depth is not what it used to be. Plus, when was the last time you had a team that cold turn it around in the tournament?