Official complain about net rankings thread
- Thread starter Some guy
- Start date
Penn state currently higher in the NET than Minnesota.
I guess they Are more efficient or something
All you need to know is that St Louis is 12 and Minnesota is in the 50s.
We should have a metric where winning games is more important than how close you lose and how much you win by.
I guess they Are more efficient or something
All you need to know is that St Louis is 12 and Minnesota is in the 50s.
We should have a metric where winning games is more important than how close you lose and how much you win by.
PoockItInfor6
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 24, 2016
- Messages
- 1,587
- Reaction score
- 974
- Points
- 113
Don’t they only update once a week?
First one was released today.
Somehow Minnesota is one of 3 teams in the country with 10’wins
One of 8 teams in the country with 3+ quad 1 wins
But is only 43rd
Ohio state with more losses, fewer wins, and a 1-3 record vs quad 1
Rank: 28
Michigan state 119 they aren’t even a quad 2 win for the gophers
That is maybe true. It doesn’t mean this is a good metric. The fact that it is used at all is a joke.
right now, beating liberty on the road is a better win than beating Michigan state at home according to NET
KenPom and Net do some things better than RPI
RPi is a better measure of achievement.
Once you have a large enough sample of games (I’d argue you never have a large enough sample when you only play 30 games and there are 300+ teams) at some point efficiency based metrics become better predictors than RPI.
I think we should measure teams based on achievement rather than based on how we think they might hypothetically achieve moving forward
RPi is a better measure of achievement.
Once you have a large enough sample of games (I’d argue you never have a large enough sample when you only play 30 games and there are 300+ teams) at some point efficiency based metrics become better predictors than RPI.
I think we should measure teams based on achievement rather than based on how we think they might hypothetically achieve moving forward
We do. It's called RPI and it was the preferred method of picking team strength for many years.
I really don't like NET (regardless of where the Gophers are ranked). We could have emptied the bench with at least 5 minutes left against Michigan State but can't do that because of NET concerns. We could have thrown in the towel and let the subs play for the last three minutes against Wisconsin but, again, had to consider NET.
Yup.
I just said in another thread RPI is a better measure of achievement.
Flukey wins should still count as wins and flukey losses should still count as losses.
efficiency based metrics are better for predicting in many cases. But the tools used to evaluate shouldn’t be predictive metrics. They should be metrics to measure what actually happened.
3 1 point losses is not better than 2 1 point wins and 1 25 point loss.....but if you use efficiency metrics...it is.
I demand a full and complete audit! Our RPI is #10.
I will give NET credit for something: at least that metric doesn't have Duke in the top 25 like the polls still do. Duke is currently #115 in the NET rankings.
The fact that we are behind Penn State does seem kind of crazy but that probably is a feature of environmental factors this season and our lopsided 2 losses. Because of cancellations, Penn State has only 7 games overall with zero games against Quad 3&4 teams. We have 12 games with 7 against Quad 3&4 teams which, as someone else mentioned, apparently includes Michigan State at this point of the season.
The fact that we are behind Penn State does seem kind of crazy but that probably is a feature of environmental factors this season and our lopsided 2 losses. Because of cancellations, Penn State has only 7 games overall with zero games against Quad 3&4 teams. We have 12 games with 7 against Quad 3&4 teams which, as someone else mentioned, apparently includes Michigan State at this point of the season.
This says MSU is #7?
Week 7
Poll Date : January 03, 2021
NET Rankings
| Team | W/L | Conf | SoS Rank | NET 1-50 | 51-100 | 101-150 | 151-200 | 200+ | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| . |
| Dixie State | 4-2 | Western Athletic | 209 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 2-0 |
| . | 
| Bellarmine | 3-3 | Atlantic Sun | 235 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 1-0 |
| . | 
| UC San Diego | 2-0 | Big West | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | |
| . | 
| Tarleton State | 2-2 | Western Athletic | 25 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 0-1 | 0-1 | 0-0 |
| 1. | 
| Gonzaga | 10-0 | West Coast | 63 | 5-0 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 3-0 |
| 2. | 
| Kansas | 8-2 | Big 12 | 40 | 4-1 | 0-1 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 2-0 |
| 3. | 
| Dayton | 5-2 | Atlantic 10 | 54 | 1-0 | 1-1 | 1-0 | 1-1 | 1-0 |
| 4. | 
| San Diego State | 6-2 | Mountain West | 16 | 1-1 | 2-0 | 2-1 | 0-0 | 0-0 |
| 5. | 
| Baylor | 9-0 | Big 12 | 228 | 1-0 | 4-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 4-0 |
| 6. | 
| Duke | 3-2 | Atlantic Coast | 229 | 0-2 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 0-0 | 1-0 |
| 7. | 
| Michigan State | 7-3 | Big Ten | 231 | 1-2 | 1-0 | 0-0 | 2-1 | 3-0 |
Not sure who is doing data entry at yahoo. But the ncaa official net on their website has MSU at 119This says MSU is #7?
Week 7
Poll Date : January 03, 2021
NET Rankings
Team W/L Conf SoS Rank NET 1-50 51-100 101-150 151-200 200+ . Dixie State 4-2 Western Athletic 209 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 2-0 . Bellarmine 3-3 Atlantic Sun 235 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 . UC San Diego 2-0 Big West 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 . Tarleton State 2-2 Western Athletic 25 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 1. Gonzaga 10-0 West Coast 63 5-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 3-0 2. Kansas 8-2 Big 12 40 4-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 2-0 3. Dayton 5-2 Atlantic 10 54 1-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 1-0 4. San Diego State 6-2 Mountain West 16 1-1 2-0 2-1 0-0 0-0 5. Baylor 9-0 Big 12 228 1-0 4-0 0-0 0-0 4-0 6. Duke 3-2 Atlantic Coast 229 0-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 7. Michigan State 7-3 Big Ten 231 1-2 1-0 0-0 2-1 3-0
duke at 115
This says MSU is #7?
Week 7
Poll Date : January 03, 2021
NET Rankings
Team W/L Conf SoS Rank NET 1-50 51-100 101-150 151-200 200+ . Dixie State 4-2 Western Athletic 209 0-1 0-0 0-0 0-1 2-0 . Bellarmine 3-3 Atlantic Sun 235 0-1 0-1 0-0 0-1 1-0 . UC San Diego 2-0 Big West 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 0-0 . Tarleton State 2-2 Western Athletic 25 0-0 0-0 0-1 0-1 0-0 1. Gonzaga 10-0 West Coast 63 5-0 1-0 0-0 0-0 3-0 2. Kansas 8-2 Big 12 40 4-1 0-1 1-0 0-0 2-0 3. Dayton 5-2 Atlantic 10 54 1-0 1-1 1-0 1-1 1-0 4. San Diego State 6-2 Mountain West 16 1-1 2-0 2-1 0-0 0-0 5. Baylor 9-0 Big 12 228 1-0 4-0 0-0 0-0 4-0 6. Duke 3-2 Atlantic Coast 229 0-2 1-0 0-0 0-0 1-0 7. Michigan State 7-3 Big Ten 231 1-2 1-0 0-0 2-1 3-0
That's not what I'm seeing.
DI Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com
Get NCAA college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today Coaches poll and the NCAA NET Rankings.
www.ncaa.com
The complaint about the NET rankings is they measure which team SHOULD win, not which team actually wins. So, if you play efficiently and lose you don't get docked for the loss. But, if a highly-talented inefficient team wins, they don't get credit for the wins. It is great for gamblers to figure out which teams to bet on, but should only be one small factor in determining the Field of 68.
Spot on
and maybe it is a small factor...which is then fine....but the ncaa advertises it like it’s the biggest of the metric (even if the metric only accounts for 15-20% of their decision making)
UpAndUnder43
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2017
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 12,009
- Points
- 113
That's not what I'm seeing.
DI Men's Basketball Rankings - NCAA Men's Basketball NET Rankings | NCAA.com
Get NCAA college basketball rankings from the Associated Press, USA Today Coaches poll and the NCAA NET Rankings.
Well they are 119 when I click the link...so you're drunk?
UpAndUnder43
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2017
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 12,009
- Points
- 113
The first NET rankings to me are unimportant at best. Like preseason polls. If you're good you'll be fine. If you're bad you won't be. Net rankings maybe factors into 2-3 at large bids but only after a lot of other things are considered. In my opinion at least.
alchemy2u
Well-known member
- Joined
- Nov 13, 2009
- Messages
- 5,621
- Reaction score
- 2,173
- Points
- 113
It would be interesting to measure how accurate the NET ranking is in predicting wins. Isn't that they purpose? To determine which team would do better in a game? I would bet that the NET is awful in predicting the winner in those obvious game where it look wrong.
I think Kenpom and other efficiency rankings are meant to be predictive.
net is heavily weighted towards efficiency but I’m not even sure they release their exact formula
No, I said they were #119 and posted that source. You must have me confused with someone else.
UpAndUnder43
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 3, 2017
- Messages
- 13,946
- Reaction score
- 12,009
- Points
- 113
Oh, it said "thats not what I'm seeing" with a big bold #7 but you had quoted them. My bad.
Great point. I agree that NCAA tournament selection should be because of achievement based on the team's record, not on point spreads. Selection is a reward for a good season based on wins and strength of schedule. A team with an 18-14 record shouldn't get in because they beat the hell out of multiple weaker teams and lost respectably to many better ones. Let them go to the NIT.
I see that. Yahoo is way off but right for some teams...
I blame alcohol
WhoFellDownTheGopherHole?
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 11, 2011
- Messages
- 3,641
- Reaction score
- 2,579
- Points
- 113
It's been a while since we've had the luxury of thinking about it, but isn't this what we want - don't even the "good" Gopher teams always play the disrespected underdog card/role?
Awwww...it's just like the good ol' days.
Awwww...it's just like the good ol' days.