Jump to content

B1G Teams in NCAA (early projection)


DWB

Recommended Posts

Reading on here we all are upset with bracettologist and the net rankings so my question to you which they would not have these things posted on a daily basis.  Like I said in another post yesterday I just think this stuff gets oversaturated and just makes everything a little bit less enjoyable.  Are you guys glad that we have these things so we kind of know how we are positioned in the field or would you rather just be surprised on selection Sunday. Also we have to remember what these guys are predicting is just off of what they feel is the key components on selecting teams and not necessary what the selection committee will do.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • Replies 231
  • Created
  • Last Reply
25 minutes ago, rico said:

Rutgers has 1 win away from home...

No team since 1994 has made it into the field with fewer than three wins away from home. The only one since 2007 to get in with fewer than four was Oklahoma, which had three in 2018. That was the Sooners squad that got off to an amazing start, only to crash and burn through most of conference play.

Rutgers is another one of those teams (Along with Purdue, BYU, Houston) who's NET makes absolutely no sense.

Rutgers is 3-7 vs Quad 1 (all wins home) has a Quad 4 loss (St. Bonaventure at Neutral) and a Quad 3 loss (@Pitt). Their best wins are at home Penn State, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

They have exactly 1 road/neutral win......Nebraska.

How in the hell are they 20 spots higher than IU in the NET!?!?!

They are on the 8/9 line in almost all brackets. Being as high as a 6 seed in some!!!

http://bracketmatrix.com/

The one thing about Rutgers, there is a very good chance they lose out the last 4 games and end up 18-13.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, JugRox said:

Rutgers is another one of those teams (Along with Purdue, BYU, Houston) who's NET makes absolutely no sense.

Rutgers is 3-7 vs Quad 1 (all wins home) has a Quad 4 loss (St. Bonaventure at Neutral) and a Quad 3 loss (@Pitt). Their best wins are at home Penn State, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

They have exactly 1 road/neutral win......Nebraska.

How in the hell are they 20 spots higher than IU in the NET!?!?!

I am pretty sure they beat Seton Hall.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

14 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

Reading on here we all are upset with bracettologist and the net rankings so my question to you which they would not have these things posted on a daily basis.  Like I said in another post yesterday I just think this stuff gets oversaturated and just makes everything a little bit less enjoyable.  Are you guys glad that we have these things so we kind of know how we are positioned in the field or would you rather just be surprised on selection Sunday. Also we have to remember what these guys are predicting is just off of what they feel is the key components on selecting teams and not necessary what the selection committee will do.

I don't know about you but going back into the 80's me and my buddies would haggle over the sagarin ratings.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

I never really looked at those ratings just the top 25

Well, there used to be only a Top 20, but to my point Sagarin was used by the Selection Committee before this NET or BPI or whatever.  Us basketball junkies followed Sagarin back then like people follow the NET and Quads today.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

10 minutes ago, IU Scott said:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basketball/bracketology

Well having us play Richmond in the play in game brings back bad memories of the lost to them in 1988 first round.  I think Lunardi tries to matchup certain teams because of stories like us playing Arizona if we win the play in game.

Lunardi has always overly relied on NET/RPI for his bracket. He does pretty poorly... seems likely that he is low on IU.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

44 minutes ago, JugRox said:

Rutgers is another one of those teams (Along with Purdue, BYU, Houston) who's NET makes absolutely no sense.

Rutgers is 3-7 vs Quad 1 (all wins home) has a Quad 4 loss (St. Bonaventure at Neutral) and a Quad 3 loss (@Pitt). Their best wins are at home Penn State, Illinois, and Wisconsin.

They have exactly 1 road/neutral win......Nebraska.

How in the hell are they 20 spots higher than IU in the NET!?!?!

They are on the 8/9 line in almost all brackets. Being as high as a 6 seed in some!!!

http://bracketmatrix.com/

The one thing about Rutgers, there is a very good chance they lose out the last 4 games and end up 18-13.

I think Rutgers is much closer to IU in terms of bracket positioning that people realize for the reasons noted above..

But with the NET: a big part of it is how they weight efficiency. When we have lost, we have lost big - which shows up in two components of the NET (scoring margin and net efficiency). That's what's dragging IU down. Rutgers will show more generously here.

On the other hand, scoring margin for NET is capped at 10 points - so "too close" games against bad teams aren't as negative as in something like KenPom. Example: the difference between Rutgers beating Bryant by only 2 points and IU beating Troy by 38 points is discounted (which is the biggest reason IU shows up better in more "pure" efficiency rankings).

The NET is sort of a weird hybrid between results-oriented rankings (purely W/L and who you have played) and efficiency-oriented rankings (e.g., KenPom, or Sagarin). 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, Zville Hoosier said:

Between Lunardi and the NET I can’t even look at that nonsense anymore or I’ll just get mad. So ridiculous 

Lunardi's problem is he is using the raw NET number and is apparently too stupid to look at the supporting data behind the number.

He's so dumb and / or lazy, that, if I hacked the NET system and put Incarnate Word at the top of the rankings, they would magically appear in Joe's bracket as a #1 seed.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

The IU/Rutgers discrepancy is hard to come to terms with reviewing the two resumes. The NET also seems to be the only major ranking metric that has such a large deviation (BPI, Pomeroy, Sagarin all close). The only theory that I can come up with is that Quad 2 victories are not valued much lower than Q1 at all and margin of victory is a very heavy influence (moreso than 5th of out 5 factors would insinuate). More of IU's Quad 1 games ended up being double figure outcomes, but IU also owns 4 of the 5 best wins between the two teams while Rutgers also owns by far the 2 worst losses.

image.thumb.png.b9cb71de7f39f3730bea6e3e03535285.png

image.thumb.png.53c7cdc00283d42bee381a1a55cfdac8.png

 

 

 

Also - here's a fun one. 21 spots ahead of IU.

image.thumb.png.1ab3e63e8d73f1ce38be645d5ac7197d.png

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, PhinithreeMagic said:

The IU/Rutgers discrepancy is hard to come to terms with reviewing the two resumes. The NET also seems to be the only major ranking metric that has such a large deviation (BPI, Pomeroy, Sagarin all close). The only theory that I can come up with is that Quad 2 victories are not valued much lower than Q1 at all and margin of victory is a very heavy influence (moreso than 5th of out 5 factors would insinuate). More of IU's Quad 1 games ended up being double figure outcomes, but IU also owns 4 of the 5 best wins between the two teams while Rutgers also owns by far the 2 worst losses.

image.thumb.png.b9cb71de7f39f3730bea6e3e03535285.png

image.thumb.png.53c7cdc00283d42bee381a1a55cfdac8.png

 

 

 

Also - here's a fun one. 21 spots ahead of IU.

image.thumb.png.1ab3e63e8d73f1ce38be645d5ac7197d.png

Yep, it seems like there is absolutely no difference between a Quad 1 and Quad 2 win.  That’s really the only thing that makes sense.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.




×
×
  • Create New...