Reply to thread

Message: [QUOTE="auror, post: 4526427, member: 1329"] Apologies, but the NET isn't a pure "resume metric". My wording was about the specific type of metric (resume or predictive). The NET is a hybrid metric, part predictive and part resume. Not as good as pure metrics at either aspect, but a compromise if you will. So if we want to rank resumes, the actual resume metrics are the best choice, not the NET. The SOR and KPI are the "resume metrics" on the actual committee member team sheets they're given (they also have BPI, KenPom, and Sagarin for predictive metrics). But I prefer WAB over KPI because it measures things a little different, and I see it cited much more often in discussions, because it is simple, transparent, and useful. We're 16 in SOR, 26 in KPI, and 19th in the Torvik version of WAB. The committee members can individually look at any metric they like. [URL='https://heatcheckcbb.com/bracketology-analyzing-impact-of-metrics-in-ncaa-tournament-selection-seeding/']But a pretty comprehensive study of some of their past choices[/URL] reveals a pretty equal importance between predictive metrics and resume metrics for seeding through the first 9 seedlines. After that, it's much more about resume metrics for the bubble. Averaging our predictive and resume gets us a 4 seed right now. [/QUOTE]