NET Rankings / Bracketology

Status
Not open for further replies.
#1
So Michigan goes UP one in the NET after losing at home to Illinois and Illinois stays the same after winning on the road at Michigan. Explain please

Do we need to LOSE this next game to go up in the NET?
 
#2
So Michigan goes UP one in the NET after losing at home to Illinois and Illinois stays the same after winning on the road at Michigan. Explain please
Really tough to explain that one, at least to me.
scUM lost twice at home this week, while Illinois won twice on the road.
Yeah, that makes sense.
 
Likes: rtbritt
#3
So Michigan goes UP one in the NET after losing at home to Illinois and Illinois stays the same after winning on the road at Michigan. Explain please

Well we're the Rodney Dangerfield of ncaa hoops.....the younger crowd, you may have to google it.........don't concern yourself with the NET or other rankings......just keep on playing the way we've been playing and win!
 
#4
Tyngsborough, MA
LMAO. Well, Michigan almost beat us. And, we almost lost to Michigan. So, it makes sense.

Do I really need a /s?
 
#5
So Michigan goes UP one in the NET after losing at home to Illinois and Illinois stays the same after winning on the road at Michigan. Explain please
The NET is based on your results against ALL opponents; it is not based on single head-to-head results. If everyone you've played against wins on the same night, your NET can go up even if you lose or don't play. If they all lose, your NET can drop even if you win.
 
Likes: ROFOIllini
#6
BU:1 Trash cans:0
Chicago
NET Men's Basketball Rankings (thru 1/26/20):

8 MSU
13 MD
19 OSU
22 Iowa
23 Rutgers
27 PSU
30 Wisc
32 Illinois
35 Purdue
36 Mich
43 Minny
44 Indiana
144 NU
159 Nebby
 
#7
BU:1 Trash cans:0
Chicago
Unfortunately, they're so hush-hush about the NET formula, that there's basically no way for us to isolate out the impact of a single win or loss. But, yeah, Miami's 2-7 conference record and current four game losing streak and Missouri's 1-5 conference record and current four game losing streak are undoubtedly weighing down our NET ranking.
 
Likes: the national
#9
I know it does not work this way, but what would our NET be if we completely removed the Miami and Miznoz games from our schedule? I've gotta suspect we'd be top 20.
Not an exact answer to your question but we dropped 14 spots in Torvik's T-Rank due to the Miami game (from 26 to 40) and 9 spots due to the Missouri game (from 31 to 40). We're now sitting at 26.

Using Torvik some more the 3 games the hurt Illinois the most (and it's not even close) were Miami, Missouri, MSU.

Illinois has a BARTHAG of 0.8796 which is pretty close to the game by game average or 0.8634.

Miami was a game score of 16.0, Missouri 40.0, and MSU 45.0. If you take those 3 games away then the new average for Illinois becomes 0.9622. That would be good enough for somewhere between 1st and 2nd in T-Rank. If instead of just fully removing those 3 games, if we instead changed all 3 to match our 4th lowest score (71.0 vs Arizona) Illinois' average Game Score would be 0.9224. That would be good enough for somewhere between 9th and 10th in T-Rank. Either way it's clear those are the 3 games holding us back the most at this point.

As you indicated, it doesn't work that way and Illinois dug itself a nice little hole with those 3 losses. The MSU one doesn't sting quite as bad because "quality losses" even when they are complete blow outs don't look as bad on your resume overall but it is definitely still holding us back in the advanced metrics.

We need to be especially careful at home against Minnesota this week. A loss there could really de-rail a lot of the momentum we've built while a win would put us in great position heading into a very tough road game @ Iowa.
 
#10
Not an exact answer to your question but we dropped 14 spots in Torvik's T-Rank due to the Miami game (from 26 to 40) and 9 spots due to the Missouri game (from 31 to 40). We're now sitting at 26.

Using Torvik some more the 3 games the hurt Illinois the most (and it's not even close) were Miami, Missouri, MSU.

Illinois has a BARTHAG of 0.8796 which is pretty close to the game by game average or 0.8634.

Miami was a game score of 16.0, Missouri 40.0, and MSU 45.0. If you take those 3 games away then the new average for Illinois becomes 0.9622. That would be good enough for somewhere between 1st and 2nd in T-Rank. If instead of just fully removing those 3 games, if we instead changed all 3 to match our 4th lowest score (71.0 vs Arizona) Illinois' average Game Score would be 0.9224. That would be good enough for somewhere between 9th and 10th in T-Rank. Either way it's clear those are the 3 games holding us back the most at this point.

As you indicated, it doesn't work that way and Illinois dug itself a nice little hole with those 3 losses. The MSU one doesn't sting quite as bad because "quality losses" even when they are complete blow outs don't look as bad on your resume overall but it is definitely still holding us back in the advanced metrics.

We need to be especially careful at home against Minnesota this week. A loss there could really de-rail a lot of the momentum we've built while a win would put us in great position heading into a very tough road game @ Iowa.
Very good explanation. Thanks
 
#11
Wow. I realize T-Rank is not NET, but the fall from just those three games is even larger than I guessed.
 
#13
South Carolina
Sold! I'll take the 5-seed right now; no need to play out the remainder of the regular season. Let's fast forward to the Big 10 tourney in Indy this weekend, and wait to find out our opening venue next Sunday.
 
#16
The Miami and Mizzou losses hurt a lot. They probably are only going to get worse too.

Purely speculation, but if we won even one of those games, I'd assume we'd be top 25 in NET. Someone on this board did an analysis of our T-ranking (Bart Torvik--free kenpom more or less) (not the same as NET, but good for comparisions sake) that if we would have won vs Miami, Mizzou, and MSU, we'd be ranked between 1 and 2. Here it is:
Not an exact answer to your question but we dropped 14 spots in Torvik's T-Rank due to the Miami game (from 26 to 40) and 9 spots due to the Missouri game (from 31 to 40). We're now sitting at 26.

Using Torvik some more the 3 games the hurt Illinois the most (and it's not even close) were Miami, Missouri, MSU.

Illinois has a BARTHAG of 0.8796 which is pretty close to the game by game average or 0.8634.

Miami was a game score of 16.0, Missouri 40.0, and MSU 45.0. If you take those 3 games away then the new average for Illinois becomes 0.9622. That would be good enough for somewhere between 1st and 2nd in T-Rank. If instead of just fully removing those 3 games, if we instead changed all 3 to match our 4th lowest score (71.0 vs Arizona) Illinois' average Game Score would be 0.9224. That would be good enough for somewhere between 9th and 10th in T-Rank. Either way it's clear those are the 3 games holding us back the most at this point.

As you indicated, it doesn't work that way and Illinois dug itself a nice little hole with those 3 losses. The MSU one doesn't sting quite as bad because "quality losses" even when they are complete blow outs don't look as bad on your resume overall but it is definitely still holding us back in the advanced metrics.

We need to be especially careful at home against Minnesota this week. A loss there could really de-rail a lot of the momentum we've built while a win would put us in great position heading into a very tough road game @ Iowa.
So I assume a two pt victory against Michigan just doesn't offset how bad those losses are.
 
Likes: Epsilon
#17
Look at Missouri and Miami's records.
I guess I'm learning a little bit that NET emcompasses everything, I think.

Example: All of our wins that are considered good wins against good teams...if those teams lose out the rest of the way, then it severely affects our NET rating? We could win out, but if all our our good wins lose their value, our NET cannot go up? And those teams that we've lost to, they keep losing, our NET keeps going down.

Something like that.
 
#18
I guess I'm learning a little bit that NET emcompasses everything, I think.

Example: All of our wins that are considered good wins against good teams...if those teams lose out the rest of the way, then it severely affects our NET rating? We could win out, but if all our our good wins lose their value, our NET cannot go up? And those teams that we've lost to, they keep losing, our NET keeps going down.

Something like that.

I mean, I guess this is how it has always worked when looking at teams. For example, Michigan looked a whole lot better when they beat UNC, but now that win doesn't mean as much, since UNC sucks.

But I guess, bad losses can't just be in the past with NET. They always affect you and keep coming back up and bringing you down if that team doesn't get better.
 
#20
Look at Missouri and Miami's records.
I get that, but even so, we've won 6 straight, while others have had slides.

OSU is still in the top 20. Is that because their early season wins are carrying more positive weight, while ours continue to bring us down?

As each week of winning passed, this metric gets dumber and dumber to me.
 
Likes: the national
#21
The Miami loss is really the one that’s killing us because it was a quad 3 loss at home. The Missouri loss is still a quad 2. Take away that Miami loss and our net would move up quite a bit.
 
Likes: Epsilon
#22
Maybe I'm just overreacting to something I don't understand, but this tells me that we need 12 conference wins to get into the tournament. If we were to finish 11-9(a 5-6 finish)...would our NET tank bad enough to give us issues?

I can't believe they've won 6 Big Ten games in a row, three on the road....and this is even a conversation.
 
#23
Likes: Epsilon
#24
A couple factors in our NET even though I’m surprised we didn’t increase our rating more with 2 road wins last week.

1.Two bad losses
2. Close wins. Scoring margin < 10 points matters. Our NW win was a negative due to scoring margin given their rank while Maryland loss was a boost for same reasons.
3. Low offensive efficiency in some games
4. We’re still only 4-3 in Q1 because Purdue and Michigan have dropped a bit. They move up a few spots and we’ll be 6-3 vs Q1.
5. Too many Q4 games. This should balance out by end of season as some teams will be playing Q4 conference games but not in BIG10.

The main reason.... its all relative. As we move up our ranking peers are good teams who are also playing well and winning road games, etc. Also, there is no recency bias in NET.

Just need to keep winning and inching up as other teams lose.
 
#25
They have done it Tess!
Wildwood
Maybe I'm just overreacting to something I don't understand, but this tells me that we need 12 conference wins to get into the tournament. If we were to finish 11-9(a 5-6 finish)...would our NET tank bad enough to give us issues?

I can't believe they've won 6 Big Ten games in a row, three on the road....and this is even a conversation.
 
Likes: jmilt7
Status
Not open for further replies.