The NET is locked, Dook, losers of 3 of 4 to unranked teams still 6th LOL, UK up to 14th.

[The_Answer1313]

Give me consistency every time. Dook has blown out several teams this year too. They’ve also been blown out and have lost to some bad teams lately (some by large margins). Same with Purdue. There’s numerous teams that fall into this category. I’ll take the team that just wins. You have your opinion and I have mine.

That's fine.

You're just completely ignoring the fact that the team that wins the final game.......the one that wins the title........isn't the one that wins by the skin of their teeth most games but rather the one that has shown dominance over the course of the season.

 

[Creed Bratton]

Are you meaning better in the computer rankings or a better team on the floor? I could see a .500 team being a higher ranked in the computer rankings based on certain things in the matrix but that doesn't mean they would be the better team on the floor. That is why games are played on the hardwood not paper.

You just don’t understand the system. If you did it would makes sense to you why teams lose and move up, and why some teams with .500 records are better than the 7th ranked team in America. You’re just not understanding math.

 

[KyFaninNC]

The committee is seeding based on what you have done.

Whether we are the top 8 RIGHT NOW is completely irrelevant to whether we'd be seeded that way.

One is forward looking.

The committee doesn't do that. It's backward looking. It's just about resume resume resume.

I agree, but from what I understand they will rely heavily on the NET, and that Evansville and Utah losses is killing us in that regard.

 

[HenryMuto]

Arizona moved back up to #10 today !!!!!!!!!!!!

 

[KyFaninNC]

Yes exactly.
I mean I can't speak for NET but since it's partly based on efficiency like Kenpom.................we were 15th heading into SEC play. That was after Evansville, Utah and Ohio St. After Evansville, we were still 6th. After that loss.

Our rating has far more to do with the lack of large margin wins than our losses.

Could be. I don’t get into all that stuff. Fact is the NCAA will never divulge the criteria they use 100%.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Could be. I don’t get into all that stuff. Fact is the NCAA will never divulge the criteria they use 100%.

Yep. That's why it's hard to even talk about this in terms of NET.
We can only give an educated guess.

Kenpom is def based on efficiency so we know at least in that system it is the lack of high margin wins.

 

[Rideordiewildcat]

ARZ who didn't play moved back up and into the Top 10 LMFAO.

 

[BourbonBalz]

That's fine.

You're just completely ignoring the fact that the team that wins the final game.......the one that wins the title........isn't the one that wins by the skin of their teeth most games but rather the one that has shown dominance over the course of the season.

I think if you go back over the past numerous years you’ll find that not to be accurate. Additionally, I don’t see a team that blows a few teams out and then gets blown out by bad teams as dominant.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

lol FWIW I'm not "for" NET.
I can't get behind something that I don't fully understand.

But at the end of the day, people that like stats are going to like the computer metrics and people that don't aren't. We'll try to convince each other but it's not going to matter lol.

It's good tho. It's a discussion board. It be pretty boring around here if everyone agreed.

I love stats too. I took it at UK a long time ago. The problem with depending on them too much in a situation like NCAA basketball teams is the disparate nature of the stats. Far too many assumptions and variables are at play. A combination of statistical analysis and a good old smell test is likely best.

For instance, what certainty do you have that Dayton could effectively match-up with us and achieve their typical efficiencies? How many of the teams ahead of us would you expect to win a 10 game series on a neutral court? I may concede Kansas and I'm pretty iffy on that but yet going by Kenpom, all of them should win at a higher percentage.

I don't believe the smell test would agree.

 

[mkasten25]

I think that the Evansville game is such a variance, the NET hasnt been tested like this before. Its just such an outlier.

 

[The_Answer1313]

I love stats too. I took it at UK a long time ago. The problem with depending on them too much in a situation like NCAA basketball teams is the disparate nature of the stats. Far too many assumptions and variables are at play. A combination of statistical analysis and a good old smell test is likely best.

For instance, what certainty do you have that Dayton could effectively match-up with us and achieve their typical efficiencies? How many of the teams ahead of us would you expect to win a 10 game series on a neutral court? I may concede Kansas and I'm pretty iffy on that but yet going by Kenpom, all of them should win at a higher percentage.

I don't believe the smell test would agree.

The thing is people use the eye test and say that isn't matching up with our stats. But I dunno. I mean I sit here and watch this team just like everyone else. We win games no doubt, but it's a constant struggle to pull away. So I find it odd when people say "well yeah our stats might not be great, but we pass the eye test".

Honestly I think we pass the "record test".

And then the underlying stats just back up what I'm seeing.

Outside of getting to the line, there's nothing on offense we rank even in the top 100.

Cal's teams normally rebound. This team as even Cal acknowledged during the post game last game, doesn't. 3 guard lineup doesn't help with that obviously.

But he realizes this team needs to get better. He said the free throws make up for some of it and it does to a degree. If get there to the line a ton of times and make them, that's obviously going to help a bit but that only takes u so far. What happens when we face a team that doesn't foul at all? What happens when we can't rely on free throws to win games.

Same on defense. Our FG% is exceptional. Top 10 I believe. Teams are only shooting 29.9% from 3 on us.

But we are 278th in forcing turnovers, 185th in defensive rebounding and 172nd in fouling.

So I watch this team struggle to pull away from mediocre teams and then the underlying numbers reflect it.

Granted basketball is in a down year so that's our saving grace here.

I think that going back to your question........all of the matches in a 10 game series on a neutral court with teams ahead of us would be extremely close.

You mentioned Kansas but what about Baylor.........a team that's rebounding 36% of their misses. They would be a nightmare on the boards for us. And looking at what they do well I find it hard to see where UK would have an advantage in that one.

Teams like Dayton, SD State and Gonzaga to me at more question marks. If there's ever teams where I feel like a system like Kenpom might overrate, it's those kind of teams.

 

[BigBlueFanGA]

The thing is people use the eye test and say that isn't matching up with our stats. But I dunno. I mean I sit here and watch this team just like everyone else. We win games no doubt, but it's a constant struggle to pull away. So I find it odd when people say "well yeah our stats might not be great, but we pass the eye test".

Honestly I think we pass the "record test".

And then the underlying stats just back up what I'm seeing.

Outside of getting to the line, there's nothing on offense we rank even in the top 100.

Cal's teams normally rebound. This team as even Cal acknowledged during the post game last game, doesn't. 3 guard lineup doesn't help with that obviously.

But he realizes this team needs to get better. He said the free throws make up for some of it and it does to a degree. If get there to the line a ton of times and make them, that's obviously going to help a bit but that only takes u so far. What happens when we face a team that doesn't foul at all? What happens when we can't rely on free throws to win games.

Same on defense. Our FG% is exceptional. Top 10 I believe. Teams are only shooting 29.9% from 3 on us.

But we are 278th in forcing turnovers, 185th in defensive rebounding and 172nd in fouling.

So I watch this team struggle to pull away from mediocre teams and then the underlying numbers reflect it.

Granted basketball is in a down year so that's our saving grace here.

I think that going back to your question........all of the matches in a 10 game series on a neutral court with teams ahead of us would be extremely close.

You mentioned Kansas but what about Baylor.........a team that's rebounding 36% of their misses. They would be a nightmare on the boards for us. And looking at what they do well I find it hard to see where UK would have an advantage in that one.

Teams like Dayton, SD State and Gonzaga to me at more question marks. If there's ever teams where I feel like a system like Kenpom might overrate, it's those kind of teams.

Baylor, maybe, there might be a few more we dont match with well, but that's the thing stats cant quantify, matchups or will to win for that matter. I certainly agree on the mid-majors. I'm not trying to be difficult I just think UK is vastly undervalued by NET and Kenpom, as well as others. We are a weird team this year.

 

[The_Answer1313]

Baylor, maybe, there might be a few more we dont match with well, but that's the thing stats cant quantify, matchups or will to win for that matter. I certainly agree on the mid-majors. I'm not trying to be difficult I just think UK is vastly undervalued by NET and Kenpom, as well as others. We are a weird team this year.

I don't really know what to make of us to be honest at this point.

At the same rate, even with the numbers not looking good, I wouldn't bet against Cal to have this team playing it's best basketball at that time.

We are going to be a tough out regardless.

 

[KyFaninNC]

I don't really know what to make of us to be honest at this point.

At the same rate, even with the numbers not looking good, I wouldn't bet against Cal to have this team playing it's best basketball at that time.

We are going to be a tough out regardless.

Three things determine how far we go.
Foul trouble
Injuries
Hagans-will he stay under control and limit turnovers

 

[The_Answer1313]

Three things determine how far we go.
Foul trouble
Injuries
Hagans-will he stay under control and limit turnovers

limiting turnovers on offense will definitely be big...........not just with Hagans but everyone.

This team might have a hot shooting night one or two games but I don't expect them all of a sudden to start draining shots left and right. And we know we aren't the same offensive rebounding team we've been and we are kinda limited in that IMO because our best lineup consists of 3 guards.

So turnovers is really a key area. Only 7 turnovers vs Auburn and a big reason we won that game.

 

[bthaunert]

I agree, but from what I understand they will rely heavily on the NET, and that Evansville and Utah losses is killing us in that regard.

If last year is any indication, which was the first year the NET was used, they don’t rely heavily on the NET ranking. They look more at team sheets for quad wins and losses. The AP poll was a much better indicator of rankings last year than the NET.

 

[The_Answer1313]

If last year is any indication, which was the first year the NET was used, they don’t rely heavily on the NET ranking. They look more at team sheets for quad wins and losses. The AP poll was a much better indicator of rankings last year than the NET.

Right. The NET rankings IMO are only important in regards to the fact that the team sheets are based on the NET rankings.

The actual number is what it is. It's not going to make or break anyone. Arizona isn't getting a top seed. BYU isn't getting a top seed.

 

[bthaunert]

Right. The NET rankings IMO are only important in regards to the fact that the team sheets are based on the NET rankings.

The actual number is what it is. It's not going to make or break anyone. Arizona isn't getting a top seed. BYU isn't getting a top seed.

Yep. Here are some similar examples from last year:

Houston - #3 in the NET, #11 in the AP Poll - 3 seed
UNC - #7 in the NET, #3 in the AP Poll - 1 seed
LSU - #14 in the NET, #9 in the AP Poll - 3 seed

 

[Rideordiewildcat]

Even with Dook sitting at 6th no matter what they do ESPN even admits the NET is pretty much garbage LMFAO.

From ESPN article:
The NCAA Evaluation Tool Ranking (NET)
Then: Don't worry, the NET will soon make sense.

Now: Some weird things are still happening with the NET.

Our take: Listen, the NET is a good thing. It's a more accurate barometer of the college basketball landscape than the RPI. It gives teams more credit for winning tough games outside their home floors. Overall, it has helped college basketball. With a large sample size at this point in the season, significant movement for any team is rare. But that doesn't mean everything that happens with the rankings is perfect. On Saturday, Arizona lost to UCLA 69-64 and still moved up a spot, from 11th to 10th, in the NET rankings. Arizona has lost three consecutive games, yet it's still ranked ahead of Seton Hall (12th) and Kentucky (14th). Wisconsin's two-point win over Minnesota on Sunday was the team's sixth consecutive win. The NET rankings rewarded the Badgers by dropping them three spots in their rankings (from 27th to 30th). We just think that's interesting.