Yet UK remains #19 in the NET rankings

[HenryMuto]

I Just seen Kentukcy still at 19 I have to think the NET is freaking broken. There is no way when you are an 8 point dog and you beat the #5 ranked NET team on their home floor and you stay in the same freaking spot ?

KenPom we moved up a couple spots. There is no freaking way you just won a game on the road which gives you a 1.6 win multiplier for winning on the road and you don't even move.

How can anyone take the NET seriously ? If we end up a 4 seed this will be the reason why hell the NET ranking says we are a 5 seed. What a freaking joke.

You just won at the #5 team as an 8 point dog on the freaking road (counts as 1.6 wins in the NET too)

I wanted to punch something when seeing this just now.

 

[bthaunert]

Home vs New Mexico State (285)
Home vs Texas A&M Commerce (332)
Home vs Stonehill (356)
Home vs Marshall (243)

These were 4 games that were pointless to play. Could have been MUCH better opponents. Even Penn (neutral vs 212) would be tolerable.

UNCW is 112th. Losing to them isn't great, but it isn't a dealbreaker.

Florida (35), Tennessee (5), Gonzaga (16) are missed opportunities, but it's not like they are BAD losses.

One of the issues is UK didn’t know they would all be pointless. Marshall finished 83rd in the NET last year. No one thought they would be 150 spots worse this year. Penn finished 141. New Mexico State finished 189. Stonehill and Commerce were the 2 that were terrible last year and terrible this year.

It also didn’t help that UL is in the 200’s and Miami in the 100’s.

IMO, there is not enough credit given for quad 1 results. The fact Auburn is 1-7 and Bama is 3-9 against quad 1, yet are ranked 6 and 8 is a flaw.

 

[HenryMuto]

All of stating why the NET is at 19 makes no sense either. I get that they were at 19 BEFORE the Tennessee road game because of those reasons but you just won ON THE ROAD at the #5 NET team and you don't even move up 1 spot ? IT IS FREAKING BROKEN.

 

[bthaunert]

The NET rates overall performance similar to Kenpom and Torvik. A lot of people think the uncw game is an anchor…and that’s part of it but not that big a factor ultimately.

What hurts is the games we were killing teams and let off the gas at the end or the officials call a bunch bs to close the gap(Georgia, Bama a few others).

Basically we didn’t run up the score enough when we had the chance. Our 10 point average margin of victory isnt that much considering how many possessions per game we average as well.

We were up on Mississippi State by 8 with under a minute and let them tie it. We were up on tennessee by 11 with 2 and some change they had a chance to tie. We were up on bama by 39 at one point with around 8 minutes left and let them shave 17 points off that. Up on Georgia by 30+ and won by 9.

We’ve sucked at closing out games and it’s effected our metrics a great deal. By my count we’ve even taken 3 losses because of it (Kansas, Florida, LSU)

While some of that is true, the NET caps wins at 10 points, so the Bama game doesn’t matter if we won by 39 or 22.

 

[Kentucky2022]

Net is trash just like kenpom… anyone can see this is one of the best teams in the nation!

 

[Disappointed Cat]

The NET rates overall performance similar to Kenpom and Torvik. A lot of people think the uncw game is an anchor…and that’s part of it but not that big a factor ultimately.

What hurts is the games we were killing teams and let off the gas at the end or the officials call a bunch bs to close the gap(Georgia, Bama a few others).

Basically we didn’t run up the score enough when we had the chance. Our 10 point average margin of victory isnt that much considering how many possessions per game we average as well.

We were up on Mississippi State by 8 with under a minute and let them tie it. We were up on tennessee by 11 with 2 and some change they had a chance to tie. We were up on bama by 39 at one point with around 8 minutes left and let them shave 17 points off that. Up on Georgia by 30+ and won by 9.

We’ve sucked at closing out games and it’s effected our metrics a great deal. By my count we’ve even taken 3 losses because of it (Kansas, Florida, LSU)

That is what happens when you fail to play defense and rebound. No lead is safe until the horn sounds.

 

[skcatfan]

While some of that is true, the NET caps wins at 10 points, so the Bama game doesn’t matter if we won by 39 or 22.

I highly doubt that to be true otherwise there’s absolutely zero reason for teams like Bama and Auburn to be top 10 in the NET.

 

[CrimsonCats]

I’m not saying that the NET is perfect by any means, but all this complaining about it after every game gets old because it seems like almost nobody here understands what it actually is, which is an efficiency metric. It doesn’t function like the AP poll where it’s cut and dry that you win and move up or lose and move down and isn’t intended to. I haven’t looked at the specific numbers, but I would guess that yesterday was good for our offense and not great for our defense on the efficiency numbers, which is about what we’ve been all year. I’m not that surprised that our profile in a metric like that didn’t change drastically.

 

[truebluewildcat]

Context matters. At the top of rankings, things are a lot closer. Using Kentucky and the 8th best program of all time doesn't really apply here.

And a 5.5 compared to an 8.. on a 10pt scale lol.. yeah that's not applying here either.

The 250th program, compared to the 180th program, just isn't moving the needle much against teams like UK and Auburn. That 180th program MIGHT have better odds of an upset.. but they are both going to be 10pt+ favorites.

And no, we should not be penalized for playing the 300th team, when it's hard to know a year in advanced where these low majors will be lol.

We shouldn't even be looking in the 300s, or even 200s.

I know it's hard to know teams rankings from year to year as things change. Teams rise and fall.

However, overall, let's try and schedule teams who were within the 130ish the previous season. That's a pretty safe bet. If you schedule within that range, they're not all going to fall off the face of the earth. Even if a couple drop, there's a lot of room before they drop into the deep 200s-300.

Can't do anything about UL as we have to play them. However, all those other teams, they were pretty low last year. Would assume at least a couple were pretty low the previous year as well.

 

[bthaunert]

I highly doubt that to be true otherwise there’s absolutely zero reason for teams like Bama and Auburn to be top 10 in the NET.

It’s true. I’m trying to figure out if they use scoring margin up to 10 at all anymore or if doesn’t play a role at all.

From NCAA.com:

Is there any notable data not included in the NET?​

Game date and game order were not included in the NET rankings so a team's first game counts the same as its 30th.

With the changes announced in May 2020, the NET will no longer use winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage and scoring margin. The change was made after the committee consulted with Google Cloud Professional Services, which worked with the NCAA to develop the original NET.

 

[IowaMuse]

I believe St. Joe's was near the 100s for much of the year. And we still had a ton of big matchups.

But either way a lot of teams play those games.

To me, it's how many games did you schedule where your opponent actually has a realistic chance to beat you? We had 3 or 4 of those games, where a lot of other teams (like Auburn) had just 1 .

But message received lol. No more 250 teams.. just schedule a lot of 100 teams, most of whom are really no different to a team like UK. For teams like UK and Auburn.. it ain't much of a differe ce if you're 175th or 275th.

Agree. The problem with scheduling tougher games means we risk losing them like UNCW. The way Cal builds rosters means it’s always up and down early on. Can beat UnC or lose to UNCW.

 

[UK93CarolinaCat]

The NET rates overall performance similar to Kenpom and Torvik. A lot of people think the uncw game is an anchor…and that’s part of it but not that big a factor ultimately.

What hurts is the games we were killing teams and let off the gas at the end or the officials call a bunch bs to close the gap(Georgia, Bama a few others).

Basically we didn’t run up the score enough when we had the chance. Our 10 point average margin of victory isnt that much considering how many possessions per game we average as well.

We were up on Mississippi State by 8 with under a minute and let them tie it. We were up on tennessee by 11 with 2 and some change they had a chance to tie. We were up on bama by 39 at one point with around 8 minutes left and let them shave 17 points off that. Up on Georgia by 30+ and won by 9.

We’ve sucked at closing out games and it’s effected our metrics a great deal. By my count we’ve even taken 3 losses because of it (Kansas, Florida, LSU)

The late game collapses have to be addressed!!!
We have million dollar assistant coaches, who works on those situations????

 

[crawfords corner]

The season has been up and down. It is what it is.

The Cats are peaking. Lets jump f*cking ball and play the games. Your best against UK's best. Bring it NCAA!!!!

 

[gharding07]

What I'm realizing in the SOS nonsense, is that Kentucky should have done what Auburn did..

Which is, DONT schedule marquee games that will be tough challenges.. instead pad your resume with power conference bottom feeders and more 120ish ranked mid majors lol.

Nice system lol. We played a schedule that in theory, offered more teams that actually had a realistic chance to beat us, in Kansas, UNC, Gonzaga.. but got punished for it.

So lesson learned.. schedule Notre Dame, Arizona St and Northwestern next year and play an OOC slate that is virtually impossible to have more than one loss, a la Auburn.

Or take the Alabama route. Absolutely load up with great non conf games and don't win a single one but be competitive lol.

 

[gharding07]

I highly doubt that to be true otherwise there’s absolutely zero reason for teams like Bama and Auburn to be top 10 in the NET.

I've heard it said multiple times on TV. Its capped at 10.

 

[LineSkiCat14]

We shouldn't even be looking in the 300s, or even 200s.

I know it's hard to know teams rankings from year to year as things change. Teams rise and fall.

However, overall, let's try and schedule teams who were within the 130ish the previous season. That's a pretty safe bet. If you schedule within that range, they're not all going to fall off the face of the earth. Even if a couple drop, there's a lot of room before they drop into the deep 200s-300.

Can't do anything about UL as we have to play them. However, all those other teams, they were pretty low last year. Would assume at least a couple were pretty low the previous year as well.

I don't think that's the right route. Otherwise, other teams would do it. Every top25 team is scheduling teams in the 200s.

Also, again, it's hard to tell where a team is going to be an entire year ahead of time. Albany is a team that sometimes gets into the 150s.. and then sometimes is near the 300s. It's going to be even harder to peg down with the transfer portal gutting teams

I'm not too worried about. Had Miami not totally collapsed were looking at a pretty solid early group of games. If we want to schedule more of these 150s teams and less in the 250s, fine. But then I'd like to see us remove a marquee game. There's no sense trying to have the hardest schedule in America.

 

[HenryMuto]

Gonzaga had a heck of a day they moved from 18 to 16 without playing.

So we couldn't even jump Gonzaga a team that didn't play after winning at the #5 NET team ?

Tell me this isn't messed up.

St Mary's didn't play either they stayed put as well at 17

We should be ahead of Kansas, Gonzaga and St Mary's and we should be at 16.

 

[crestcat]

There’s numbers and there’s numbers but we held UT to 38% shooting and out rebounded them. That’s good D

 

[skcatfan]

It’s true. I’m trying to figure out if they use scoring margin up to 10 at all anymore or if doesn’t play a role at all.

From NCAA.com:

Is there any notable data not included in the NET?​

Game date and game order were not included in the NET rankings so a team's first game counts the same as its 30th.

With the changes announced in May 2020, the NET will no longer use winning percentage, adjusted winning percentage and scoring margin. The change was made after the committee consulted with Google Cloud Professional Services, which worked with the NCAA to develop the original NET.

Well this spells out exactly why the NET is incredibly flawed. As a consequence we see results with Bama and Auburn and I would also add Arizona and Duke to them as well as teams highly overrated. The first and biggest factor of any rating system should always be if you win games. Level of competition should also be very important but you shouldn’t be rewarded for playing a tough schedule if you can’t win any of those difficult games.

 

[drew_ukfan]

Playing Stonehill didn’t help?

 

[fatguy87]

They include an adjusted net efficiency rating into the calculation. That must be a MOV like component by definition, if I am not mistaken.

 

[FFWhite]

Letting teams close the margin when up big to finish games is a net efficiency killer. Margin of win may be capped at 10 but net efficiency does not cut off when teams sub down or let up when up 25.

 

[KyCPA]

NET is such a flawed metric. Teams that lose will go up 5-7 spots like Arkansas did, but Kentucky can win at one the best teams in the country and not move any

Need to play a tougher schedule

 

[HenryMuto]

If you guys think the NET is bad I just checked what the RPI would be if they used that thing still

Kentucky would be RPI 32 right now ! WTF

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

Need to play a tougher schedule

Who? Kentucky? Kentucky played in one of the toughest conferences in America and played good non conferences game minus lousivlle

 

[TOMCATS1990]

I’d like a 2,3,4 seed 5 would be a joke but seeding isn’t all that important. Playing great basketball and matchups are. KY no matter what seed they end up being should be fine. Teams get over seeded and under seeded every year.

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

Bama at 8 because they played a bunch of good teams and lost in bullshit

 

[KyCPA]

Who? Kentucky? Kentucky played in one of the toughest conferences in America and played good non conferences game minus lousivlle

Yes, that's what hurts us in the Net

 

[skcatfan]

Yes, that's what hurts us in the Net

Well if you go by the NET rankings UK has 4 top 10 wins. There’s maybe a handful of teams that are even close to that so difficulty of schedule isn’t an issue.

 

[Dontworryboutit23]

Yes, that's what hurts us in the Net

Louisville game? Kentucky has to play that game

 

[KyCPA]

Well if you go by the NET rankings UK has 4 top 10 wins. There’s maybe a handful of teams that are even close to that so difficulty of schedule isn’t an issue.

Well, yes it is

 

[KyCPA]

Louisville game? Kentucky has to play that game

I get that, but our other OOC games were awful compared to other top teams. That drags us down. Might need to start playing some of the early season tournaments again.

 

[Montana81]

While some of that is true, the NET caps wins at 10 points, so the Bama game doesn’t matter if we won by 39 or 22.

Adjusted efficiency margin has the same effect as scoring margin though. The more you beat teams by the higher your adjusted efficiency margin is going to be. And the adjusted efficiency margin isn’t capped.

Before they took scoring margin out of it completely were they somehow combining scoring margin and adjustment efficiency margin into the formula? That wouldn’t make much sense, but that’s probably why they removed scoring margin all together.

Either way the worse you beat a team the better your net will be. I think our biggest bumps since conference play started were after the bama game and the road game against vandy.

 

[KyCPA]

If Kentucky takes care of business on Friday and Saturday in the SEC Tournament, they have a shot at the 2-line. Definitely on the 3-line right now.

Nothing much more they can do. The resume is what it is. Must beat Texas A&M/Ole Miss. Then it's a 2 or 3-seed.

I keep hearing 3 seed from fans but I would be shocked if we are higher than a 4. Likely a 5 seed.

 

[skcatfan]

Well, yes it is

Take a look at Iowa State’s non conference schedule if you wanna see cupcake city. It doesn’t seem to hurt their ranking one bit.

 

[mebeblue2]

The NET rates overall performance similar to Kenpom and Torvik. A lot of people think the uncw game is an anchor…and that’s part of it but not that big a factor ultimately.

What hurts is the games we were killing teams and let off the gas at the end or the officials call a bunch bs to close the gap(Georgia, Bama a few others).

Basically we didn’t run up the score enough when we had the chance. Our 10 point average margin of victory isnt that much considering how many possessions per game we average as well.

We were up on Mississippi State by 8 with under a minute and let them tie it. We were up on tennessee by 11 with 2 and some change they had a chance to tie. We were up on bama by 39 at one point with around 8 minutes left and let them shave 17 points off that. Up on Georgia by 30+ and won by 9.

We’ve sucked at closing out games and it’s effected our metrics a great deal. By my count we’ve even taken 3 losses because of it (Kansas, Florida, LSU)

MOV is the most useless stat ever used

 

[fatguy87]

MOV is the most useless stat ever used

Quite the opposite. There is an entire industry based upon it.

Plus, I'm sure we'd have lauded the merits of MOV in 2011 and 2016 which would have improved our tournament case relative to the opinions of the selection committee.

 

[bbncal02]

I keep hearing 3 seed from fans but I would be shocked if we are higher than a 4. Likely a 5 seed.

Unless we collapse Friday there’s no way the 2 seed in the SEC is a five. Not this season.

 

[Mike-D]

Kansas, for instance, despite being 21-9, remains ahead of UK in the NET. They have played 21 games against Quad 1 and Quad 2 (UK only played 15). Kansas has only played 9 games against Quad 3 and Quad 4.

Someone in the national media was talking about this the other day. The Big-12 schedules bad teams, and they make sure they all win by 40+. Their conference gets a huge boost from it, so when they start beating each other, the movement is minimal.

 

[fatguy87]

Unless we collapse Friday there’s no way the 2 seed in the SEC is a five. Not this season.

I think we are solidly at a 4 right now. Winning 2 games in the SEC tournament could vault us up a line, especially if Kansas and/or Duke have middling showings in their conference tournaments.