Big East NET Rankings | The Boneyard

Big East NET Rankings

U

UCLJ0211

Joined
Nov 8, 2019
Messages
2,159
Reaction Score
12,461
As of today, there are 6 teams in the top 50 NET in the Big East:

UConn 8
Nova 21
St. John’s 29
Butler 44
Seton Hall 45
Creighton 49

The good news is we should have more opportunities for Q1 wins than originally thought at the beginning of the season. Although UConn is the runaway favorite, I don’t think the conference is as bad as people make it out to be.
 
I think a lot of it is the flip from what was expected to what is occurring amongst the other top teams.

Remember preseason BE coaches had the teams finishing as: SJU, UConn, Creighton, Providence, Marquette , G-town. Nova, X, DePaul, Butler and SHU.

Butler, SHU and Nova have all exceeded expectations OOC.

SJU dropping from a top five team to a top 30 team is a big drop, same with Creighton (top 30 to top 50). Both are still good teams but way below what was expected entering the year.

Then you have MU who decided to basically be horrendous which is a big hit to the league with no Quad 1, 2 or 3 wins. And PC who has two Quad 3 wins as their best wins so far this season.
 
Hurleyman216 said:
It’s amazing to me that based on our resume which seems to me to be a top 3 resume of all teams in college ball at worst that the net has us 8th. We are very clearly one of the best 3-4 teams this year
Expand ...
Better scheduling of the non high majors.
 
.-.
Hurleyman216 said:
Maybe, but that just shows the NET is still not a good metric. The committee isn’t looking at how good or bad the teams ranked over 150 were to determine your seeding. They need to weight Top 25 wins more heavily.
Expand ...
I think they do.

Nova was down to DePaul at the half at home yesterday, btw.
 
Hurleyman216 said:
It’s amazing to me that based on our resume which seems to me to be a top 3 resume of all teams in college ball at worst that the net has us 8th. We are very clearly one of the best 3-4 teams this year
Expand ...
Agreed. Just remember that the NET isn't used for seeding teams, it's just a metric to compare what teams each team in discussion for an NCAA Tournament bid and seed played and beat. So just because UConn is #8 in the NET doesn't mean that would equate to the last number 2 seed. The #8 ranking could be influenced by things that the selection committee may not use, like the really bad teams they beat at home in the out of conference schedule.
 
Last edited:
.-.
businesslawyer said:
And not caring enough about winning margins in non-competitive games. I don’t think anyone will ever get Hurley to care whether he wins a game against a low major by 30 or 50. He’s totally focused on the difference between winning and losing.
Expand ...
Winning and developing over winning margins.
 
Hurley was doing hockey line changes in the early seaon buy games.
 
.-.
Hurleyman216 said:
It’s amazing to me that based on our resume which seems to me to be a top 3 resume of all teams in college ball at worst that the net has us 8th. We are very clearly one of the best 3-4 teams this year
Expand ...
NET isn't really a resume metric. It has a small resume component, but it is something like 4:1 efficiency to resume by weight. Think of it like mostly scoring margin adjusted for schedule expectation with a bonus of winning a lot of games.

The NCAA has a separate metric called WAB which is based on the NET which ranks resume based on how a bubble team would fare against your schedule. UConn is #1 in that metric, with Arizona and Michigan next.

 
auror said:
NET isn't really a resume metric. It has a small resume component, but it is something like 4:1 efficiency to resume by weight. Think of it like mostly scoring margin adjusted for schedule expectation with a bonus of winning a lot of games.

The NCAA has a separate metric called WAB which is based on the NET which ranks resume based on how a bubble team would fare against your schedule. UConn is #1 in that metric, with Arizona and Michigan next.

Expand ...


What do you mean by this description?
 
.-.
nelsonmuntz said:
What do you mean by this description?
Expand ...
About the NET's formula, the NCAA says "Factors include the Team Value Index (TVI), which is a result-based feature that rewards teams for beating quality opponents, particularly away from home, as well as an adjusted net efficiency rating. The adjusted efficiency is a team’s net efficiency, adjusted for strength of opponent and location (home/away/neutral) across all games played. "

We don't know the exact formula and weighting for the NET, but there are people who have reverse-engineered it quite closely. In their calculations, the efficiency component is worth roughly 80% of the overall team score, and the Team Value Index 20%. So 4:1 efficiency:resume components. Whereas something like KenPom is 100% efficiency and SOR or WAB is 100% resume (the only efficiencies that matter are your opponents'). You can consider KenPom to be predictive, the resume models to be backwards-looking, and the NET a hybrid which leans more towards predictive.
 
auror said:
About the NET's formula, the NCAA says "Factors include the Team Value Index (TVI), which is a result-based feature that rewards teams for beating quality opponents, particularly away from home, as well as an adjusted net efficiency rating. The adjusted efficiency is a team’s net efficiency, adjusted for strength of opponent and location (home/away/neutral) across all games played. "

We don't know the exact formula and weighting for the NET, but there are people who have reverse-engineered it quite closely. In their calculations, the efficiency component is worth roughly 80% of the overall team score, and the Team Value Index 20%. So 4:1 efficiency:resume components. Whereas something like KenPom is 100% efficiency and SOR or WAB is 100% resume (the only efficiencies that matter are your opponents'). You can consider KenPom to be predictive, the resume models to be backwards-looking, and the NET a hybrid which leans more towards predictive.
Expand ...

Is the "overall team score" adjusted for quality of opponent, or is the 20% TVI the only way that opponent quality is factored in at all?
 
nelsonmuntz said:
Is the "overall team score" adjusted for quality of opponent, or is the 20% TVI the only way that opponent quality is factored in at all?
Expand ...
The net efficiency is heavily adjusted for opponent, location, and pace as well.

The neutral site games that are pseudo-home games are the best way to game the NET right now.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,631
Messages
4,586,748
Members
10,497
Latest member
Orlando Fos


Top Bottom