daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,364
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 13, 2019 10:07:58 GMT -5
Do we root for NC state or Clemson? My thought is NC state as I think Clemson’s resume is weaker as is.
|
|
|
Post by tribeninerhoya on Mar 13, 2019 10:08:26 GMT -5
I think the NET needs tweaking, but in most cases it’s not radically different than RPI or KenPom metrics for teams. It’ll be interesting to see how much the committee uses it and teams like Belmont, Texas, and Indiana become initial case studies. I don't know that I agree with that, especially when just 10-15 spots is a BIG difference. Just for some bubble teams: NCSU: 32 NET, 104 RPI Clemson: 34 NET, 50 RPI Indiana: 51 NET, 82 RPI OSU: 55 NET, 71 RPI Texas: 38 NET, 62 RPI Temple: 50 NET, 31 RPI Arizona State: 67 NET, 39 RPI Obviously, some are close (GTown is 77 NET, 78 RPI), but it's definitely a different metric.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,364
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 13, 2019 10:14:17 GMT -5
I think the NET needs tweaking, but in most cases it’s not radically different than RPI or KenPom metrics for teams. It’ll be interesting to see how much the committee uses it and teams like Belmont, Texas, and Indiana become initial case studies. I don't know that I agree with that, especially when just 10-15 spots is a BIG difference. Just for some bubble teams: NCSU: 32 NET, 104 RPI Clemson: 34 NET, 50 RPI Indiana: 51 NET, 82 RPI OSU: 55 NET, 71 RPI Texas: 38 NET, 62 RPI Temple: 50 NET, 31 RPI Arizona State: 67 NET, 39 RPI Obviously, some are close (GTown is 77 NET, 78 RPI), but it's definitely a different metric. Yes you are right that in some of these cases, NET is way different in RPI (see NC state), but I was thinking along the lines of comparing all three as KenPom has gained lots of weight recently and I think is closer to what the NET is trying to accomplish.
|
|
|
Post by tribeninerhoya on Mar 13, 2019 10:14:28 GMT -5
Do we root for NC state or Clemson? My thought is NC state as I think Clemson’s resume is weaker as is. Interesting: Total wins NCSU: 21 Clemson: 19 Wins against opponents with winning records: NCSU: 3 Clemson: 5 NET NCSU: 32 Clemson: 36 RPI NCSU: 104 Clemson: 50 Last 10 games NCSU: 5-5 Clemson: 6-4 SOS (NCSOS) NCSU: 146 (353) Clemson: 34 (107) Quadrants Records NCSU Q1: 2-8 Q2: 6-0 Q3: 3-2 Q4: 10-0 Clemson Q1: 1-9 Q2: 6-3 Q3: 6-0 Q4: 6-0 I'd say Clemson is more deserving (especially without the crazy losses of GT/WFU that NCSU has), but who knows how that shiny 21 win total (despite it being against hot garbage teams) will look to the committee.
|
|
gunny
Silver Hoya (over 500 posts)
Posts: 560
|
Post by gunny on Mar 13, 2019 10:23:25 GMT -5
If Texas loses to Kansas tomorrow, they are out. End of discussion. Can you imagine the blow back of letting a team in with a 16-16 overall record? At some point don't you have to beat somebody. I understand that they have some really great wins, but they also lost as many games as they won.
All these computer rankings are garbage in my eyes. I know they are relied on heavily, but common on 16-15 should not even be in the conversation for an at large bid regardless of who you beat.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Mar 13, 2019 10:23:40 GMT -5
The good thing is that one of them loses tonight.
|
|
|
Post by tribeninerhoya on Mar 13, 2019 10:27:44 GMT -5
I don't know that I agree with that, especially when just 10-15 spots is a BIG difference. Just for some bubble teams: NCSU: 32 NET, 104 RPI, 32 KP Clemson: 34 NET, 50 RPI, 28 KP Indiana: 51 NET, 82 RPI, 42 KP OSU: 55 NET, 71 RPI, 44 KP Texas: 38 NET, 62 RPI, 27 KP Temple: 50 NET, 31 RPI, 69 KP Arizona State: 67 NET, 39 RPI, 62 KP Obviously, some are close (GTown is 77 NET, 78 RPI), but it's definitely a different metric. Yes some cases are way different in RPI (see nc state), but what about KenPom? Added. The problem I have with KP remains that playing some high end opponents (Duke, UVA) and getting handled while running up the score on crap opponents raises your average efficiency measures enough to make you look good both in offensive efficiency and defensive efficiency and opponents' offensive/defensive efficiency for KP's metric. NCSU is another good example in this situation, where KP gives them the 33rd best offense and 42nd best defense in the country because they were efficient and ran up the score on teams like Mt. St. Mary's (105-55), MES (95-49), UNCA (100-49), WCU (100-67), SCU (98-71), LMD (97-64), etc., to open the season, despite the fact that they had a solid output of 24 points against Virginia Tech, 67 against WFU, 61 against Georgia Tech, etc., and gave up 113 to UNC-CHeat, 94 to Duke, 90 to UNC-CHeat, etc. The new formula appears to be: (1) play a ton of cupcakes and run up the score and your win total, (2) play some tough teams in conference (doesn't matter if you win), (3) profit.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,364
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 13, 2019 11:28:46 GMT -5
Clemson up 18 already.
More brackets I see Clemson as a bubble team than NC State but who knows after today. I was rooting for NC State but maybe if they get killed that’ll leave a bad taste in the committee’s mouth.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Mar 13, 2019 11:30:36 GMT -5
If Texas loses to Kansas tomorrow, they are out. End of discussion. Can you imagine the blow back of letting a team in with a 16-16 overall record? At some point don't you have to beat somebody. I understand that they have some really great wins, but they also lost as many games as they won. All these computer rankings are garbage in my eyes. I know they are relied on heavily, but common on 16-15 should not even be in the conversation for an at large bid regardless of who you beat. Oh, geez, I didnt even realize they were 16-15. Yeah, that's absurd. And, I think they are in like 90 brackets.
|
|
CTHoya08
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Bring back Izzo!
Posts: 2,915
|
Post by CTHoya08 on Mar 13, 2019 11:46:45 GMT -5
I hear you, but I dont think margin of victory should matter at all in basketball. It's one thing in football where scoring against Alabama is pretty much impossible for East Tennessee St. But, if we are beating even Seton Hall by 15 points with 3 minutes to go, no part of Ewing's calculation should be to run up or keep the score up. I think that's bad for the sport, his players and other teams. MOV is also not indicative of games a lot in basketball. A 2 point lead with a minute left could easily become a 10 point win just by virtue of fouls made and shots missed. I largely agree with you. There shouldn't be any benefit to running up the score in a game that is out of reach. Or in not playing your subs because doing so may cost you a few points. Or, for that matter, in deciding to actually try in that final possession of the game where you're already up eight and your opponent has stopped defending. And I agree that fouls at the end of the games or whether that final meaningless (and undefended) three-pointer goes in at the buzzer shouldn't play a role. And maybe all that means there's no way to make MOV count at all. I just think that there's probably a way to do something in the aggregate that does provide some insight into relative strength and weakness. If bubble team X goes to Duke and loses by seven points, to me that's something that should count in some small way in their favor when compared to bubble team Y that goes to Duke and loses by 47. Obviously, that's an extreme example and maybe at smaller margins any benefit is unfair. Don't know. (One easy answer is to not include it in the NET rating but just include things like KenPom ratings on the evaluation sheets the committee gets...they've done that in recent years and I believe do that again this year. Then, you at least have that sort of data available to you but it's not part of the formula that provides the primary sorting mechanism for everything else. The whole system is pretty silly. We take "strength of schedule" into account in like eighteen different ways within the formula....and then we use it independently as a separate way to judge. Our NET rating is so low in part because our NCSOS was fairly bad....why should someone ALSO use NCSOS as some sort of separate tie-breaker.)I feel the same way about the quadrants and their predecessor, top-50 wins (although I recognize that the quadrants are our best argument for inclusion this year). What's the point in creating a formula to rate every team one through three-hundred-whatever, and then say "we can't really trust this formula, so instead we're going to look at how each team did against certain sections of the rankings it spits out"? I also think it's absurd that they haven't actually released the formula, which means coaches and ADs don't even know the rules under which they're competing.
|
|
|
Post by tribeninerhoya on Mar 13, 2019 12:30:12 GMT -5
NCSU says "not so fast." Battling back to cut the lead to 4 with 11:26 left.
|
|
|
Post by BeantownHoya on Mar 13, 2019 13:05:10 GMT -5
We are not perfect but those are 2 horrible teams I just watched.
|
|
hoyalaw33
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 134
|
Post by hoyalaw33 on Mar 13, 2019 13:09:29 GMT -5
I think we like that NCSU comeback. Clemson had a better resume and should be out now. Assuming a blowout win for UVA tomorrow then I still think NCSU is out unless the tourney committee gives great weighting to NET. NC State has 4 victories TOTAL on the year now over teams with winning records. No way in hell should they be even close to the bubble. We should root for a blowout and I think the bubble just gained back the St. Mary's ticket that was punched yesterday.
|
|
daveg023
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,364
|
Post by daveg023 on Mar 13, 2019 13:16:08 GMT -5
Clemson scored 5 points in the last 11 minutes and blew an 18 pt lead. If eyetest still matters, hopefully the committee wasn’t watching that game with a fork nearby.
|
|
|
Post by sleepyjackson21 on Mar 13, 2019 13:26:23 GMT -5
I just love all the idle speculation. I missed it the last several years.
|
|
|
Post by RockawayHoya on Mar 13, 2019 13:40:55 GMT -5
Matrix updated again. Still the 6th team out, but Belmont appears to be fading fast.
Only 15 brackets separate NC St., Clemson, Texas and Indiana so there's a lot of possible movement today. Agree that a poor showing tomorrow against UVA could push NC St. out even despite today's win (which they will get minimal credit for by 1 pt).
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Mar 13, 2019 13:56:49 GMT -5
If Texas loses to Kansas tomorrow, they are out. End of discussion. Can you imagine the blow back of letting a team in with a 16-16 overall record? At some point don't you have to beat somebody. I understand that they have some really great wins, but they also lost as many games as they won. All these computer rankings are garbage in my eyes. I know they are relied on heavily, but common on 16-15 should not even be in the conversation for an at large bid regardless of who you beat. Oh, geez, I didnt even realize they were 16-15. Yeah, that's absurd. And, I think they are in like 90 brackets. I see where you're coming from, but Texas in their OOC schedule played and lost to #4 (on KenPom) Michigan State, and #33 VCU. They also lost to #80 Providence. If they substituted those three games for 200-300 level opponents, their record now is likely 19-12, instead of 16-15. So I think record should matter, but only to a degree. If you play a massive number of top 25 type teams, as Texas has, it really matters a lot less. That being said, this demonstrates why Texas is a bubble team. No team has ever gotten into the NCAA tournament as an at large with 15 losses. The worst records to get in are Villanova (1991) and Georgia (2001) with 16-14 records.
|
|
mdtd
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,567
|
Post by mdtd on Mar 13, 2019 14:21:54 GMT -5
Clemson's only q1 win was against VTech without Robinson. NC State has 4 wins against teams over .500. They both suck. But, they might just knock us out. I'd rather see Belmont and Lipscomb over those two.
|
|
|
Post by Ranch Dressing on Mar 13, 2019 14:52:08 GMT -5
That was a perfect result for us. A close, 1-pt, ugly-ass game in which one team played horribly in the first half and the other team played horribly in the second half, barfing away the lead and victory.
Couldn't have scripted that any better.
Both teams combined to score 15 points in the final 8:59 minutes of the game, and 2 points in the final 3:23.
Go Hoyas!
|
|
hoyazeke
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,837
|
Post by hoyazeke on Mar 13, 2019 15:41:21 GMT -5
Does anyone know the chance our young ladies have of making the field? I don't follow women's college bball too closely but I do know that they finished 4th and made the semis....
|
|