NET Rankings

[BC1764]

Hilarious we’re still talking about this knowing full well the season is over.

[Lord Elrond]

Still the A10 tournament, our only shot

[HoosierPal]

Both Memphis (at Tulane) and Drake (at Missouri State) took L's today.  Michigan demolished Maryland today.  None of these games will help out NET.

[RiseOfTheBillikens]

8 hours ago, BC1764 said:

Hilarious we’re still talking about this knowing full well the season is over.

We actually just played our first conference game. 

[Bay Area Billiken]

SLU's NET is 100, as compared to its RPI (the metric formerly used by the NCAA, and still used in Soccer and Baseball) of 47.  That is a radical difference.  An RPI of 47 would put SLU in the NCAA, is the best RPI in the A10.

A comparison of the NCAA field per the NET vs. the RPI reveals the NET bestowing 7 additional NCAA Tournament at large bids to the Power 5 + 1 (Big East).  That's 7 of the 32 NCAA at large bids.  The NET has 22 one bid (Juan Bid) leagues vs. the RPI's 21.  The transfer to the Power 5 +1 is coming from the intermediate conferences, sometimes collectively lumped together (if not mistakenly in some cases) as the Mid-Majors, 8 bids in total, accounting for 7 additional Power 5 + 1 NCAA at large bids.

[rhagolf]

The losses to Boise State and SIUE could be killers for The Dance.

[CBFan]

15 hours ago, BC1764 said:

Hilarious we’re still talking about this knowing full well the season is over.

Respectfully, let the fans of the team be fans instead of being disrespectful with posts like this.

Laughing at fans and posting it is unbecoming.

Even though I do not think this team and coach are good enough to make the big dance I encourage the fans that still care and I am glad for those fans.

[slu72]

We’d have to go 16-2 in conf play and make the A10 tourney final to even be on the bubble for at large consideration. Our season will come down to taking it all in Brooklyn, so says Captain Obvious. For that happen we better hope Perk and Okoro find their games by mid February. 

[Taj79]

You guys read right?  Every publication in every A10 outpost is writing about how the A10 will likely only send it's conference tournament champion to the Dance.  Juan Bid.  No one scored decisive out-of-conference polnts from major players outside the A10 this year.  Dayton didn't beat a Kansas.  Richmond didn't beat a Kentucky.  As a matter of fact, the only schools to improve on their pre-OOC computer rankings were Fordham, Duquesne and I think Umass.  And while all rose to maybe C level teams, all are expected to be the cellar foundation of this league.  

So the NET is a sideshow kind of thing.  A nice to know and nice to keep track of but it doesn't matter at all going forward.  Plus, I don't see any massive change in how the Billikens play on the road.  Crushed at Iona.  Major failure at Auburn.  Slow going at bottom feeder St. Joes.  Wednesday will be telling-----remember Umass, they of the 9 and 11 A10 record last year 0 and 4 at the time, beat us in Amherst last year 91 to 85.  We then crushed them at Chaifetz 90 to 59 ..... an amazing 37 point swing.  In the loss, Fernandes torched Collins for 24 while Yuri scored 2.  I suspect Noah will be sky high when he meets Yuri again this year given all the pub Yuri is getting as the best in the conference and even the nation.  

Umass' athleticism is going to present some real problems to our weak defensive schemes.  Besides the Fernandes/Collins matchup, Jimerson gets Weeks, who is shooting 44% from three.  Pickett likely gets Cross, who was a four-star recruit going into Louisville and Umass' second leading scorer behind Fernandes.  Perkins or Thatch likely get 6'9" Dyondre Dominguez.  Can Perkins stay with him on a bad ankle or can Thatch negate a six-inch height difference?  That leaves Okoro with Kante or Leveque depending on Leveque's injury status.  Both are physical, brutish players on the low block.  

Last year, Umass played matador defense to rival that of the Joeys.  I haven't seen them much to comment on this year's edition.  They got blown out at the Bonnies Saturday 83 to 64.  

Bottom line:  screw the NET, the RPI, the RIP and the DOA ..... just win bay-bee.  Two for two in road wins would be huge.  

[slu72]

UMass got thrashed by St B’s 83-64. Still, I won’t be shocked by an L. Pissed off, yeah, but surprised, not at all. 

[Bay Area Billiken]

Per boardroom.tv, an NCAA Tourney Unit in ‘22 was estimated to be worth $338,887. Is there any wonder why the NCAA first tweaked, then replaced the RPI with the NET?  SLU, albeit underachieving SLU, with its RPI of 47, but NET of 100, is among those outside the Power 5 + 1 caught in the spider’s web. Right now the NET is transferring 7 NCAA At Large bids to the Power 5 + 1. Do the math. The NET matters, big time, as in all the way to the bank. 

[almaman]

1 hour ago, slu72 said:

UMass got thrashed by St B’s 83-64. Still, I won’t be shocked by an L. Pissed off, yeah, but surprised, not at all. 

After  the SIUE game only thing that can still surprise will be our eventual first loss to Lindenwood @ home.  Otherwise no loss will shock. Still think we are best team in an awful conference that has no real studs and all that pretend to be hope to bail. the team we hoped we had is still there, going undefeated in conference would get us back in the news:)

[Bay Area Billiken]

SLU really needs to exit the A10, where it has zero margin for error. The NET is a diabolical tool used by the NCAA to aid the Power 5 + 1. SLU can’t get in there (Big East), is basically stuck. 

The ‘22-‘23 A10 is so bad, it would be Juan Bid under both the NET (Dayton) and RPI (SLU).

Creighton is 8-6, lost 6 straight games, but is still an NCAA lock due to its NET of 34. Look at Illinois, NET 39 and IN, RPI 82, and way OUT, barely in the NIT. 

[Billiken Rich]

2 minutes ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

SLU really needs to exit the A10, where it has zero margin for error. The NET is a diabolical tool used by the NCAA to aid the Power 5 + 1. SLU can’t get in there (Big East), is basically stuck. 

The ‘22-‘23 A10 is so bad, it would be Juan Bid under both the NET (Dayton) and RPI (SLU).

Creighton is 8-6, lost 6 straight games, but is still an NCAA lock due to its NET of 34. Look at Illinois, NET 39 and IN, RPI 82, and way OUT, barely in the NIT. 

Where?

[White Pelican]

8 minutes ago, Billiken Rich said:

Where?

I'd like to know this too. I'm all ears Bay Area.

[Lord Elrond]

 

3 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

I'd like to know this too. I'm all ears Bay Area.

I’m curious too. We need a non-football playing conference who wants us to join. The Big East doesn’t want us, so who else is a step up from the A10 who wants us?

[Bay Area Billiken]

42 minutes ago, White Pelican said:

I'd like to know this too. I'm all ears Bay Area.

That is the problem. SLU had its opportunities in ‘05 and in ‘13. Those ships left the dock, evidently aren’t returning. 
 

I will always be for SLU, my Alma Mater (x2). But in the words of Coach Majerus, the above is “the brutally honest truth.” The A10, a multi-bid League since ‘06, becoming a one bid league in ‘23, is unacceptable. I’m confident SLU did not sign up for that. 
 

The fanbase gets upset with the team, with the Coach, but the real underlying issue is the conference.

[Bay Area Billiken]

Addendum: The A10 may improve, not this year, but in future seasons with Frank Martin at UMass and Archie Miller at URI. Hopefully, this season is an outlier, but the warning signs for the A10 have been visible in recent seasons. The A10 went from 6 NCAA teams (and condemnation therefore from Coach K) in ‘14 to the more recent 2 team and this season’s current Juan Bid.

My 4 decades ago SLU roommate told me more recently that I want to fix things. That’s probably true. But SLU’s conference affiliation issue cannot be fixed, and therein lies the frustration. 

[TheChosenOne]

7 hours ago, Bay Area Billiken said:

SLU's NET is 100, as compared to its RPI (the metric formerly used by the NCAA, and still used in Soccer and Baseball) of 47.  That is a radical difference.  An RPI of 47 would put SLU in the NCAA, is the best RPI in the A10.

A comparison of the NCAA field per the NET vs. the RPI reveals the NET bestowing 7 additional NCAA Tournament at large bids to the Power 5 + 1 (Big East).  That's 7 of the 32 NCAA at large bids.  The NET has 22 one bid (Juan Bid) leagues vs. the RPI's 21.  The transfer to the Power 5 +1 is coming from the intermediate conferences, sometimes collectively lumped together (if not mistakenly in some cases) as the Mid-Majors, 8 bids in total, accounting for 7 additional Power 5 + 1 NCAA at large bids.

Why even post about the RPI at this point? Wasn't it known to be flawed before it was eliminated from the criteria? It made sense to move to another metric for ranking teams that took more variables into account than the RPI. I fail to see how considering a more sophisticated metric like the NET is some diabolical move by the Power conferences. They were doing that just fine in the actual selection process when RPI was said to be a factor, but the NET itself is an improvement. A better comparison would be comparing what the NET produces (where SLU is at #100) vs. other "comparable" metrics like Pomeroy (SLU is currently ranked #80) or Torvik (SLU is currently ranked #96). T-Rank is nice to look at because it gives you a sense of where the team has been successful (adjusted offensive efficiency, limiting offensive TOs, offensive rebounding for example) vs. struggled (producing TOs defensively, 3 point %, and effective field goal % for example).

I see Illinois (#39 NET, #28 Pomeroy, and #36 Torvik) and Creighton (#34 NET, #26 Pomeroy, and #27 Torvik) referenced, but looking at those three rankings for both it seems to me the NET is fairly reasonable.

[Lord Elrond]

5 minutes ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why even post about the RPI at this point? Wasn't it known to be flawed before it was eliminated from the criteria? It made sense to move to another metric for ranking teams that took more variables into account than the RPI. I fail to see how considering a more sophisticated metric like the NET is some diabolical move by the Power conferences. They were doing that just fine in the actual selection process when RPI was said to be a factor, but the NET itself is an improvement. A better comparison would be comparing what the NET produces (where SLU is at #100) vs. other "comparable" metrics like Pomeroy (SLU is currently ranked #80) or Torvik (SLU is currently ranked #96). T-Rank is nice to look at because it gives you a sense of where the team has been successful (adjusted offensive efficiency, limiting offensive TOs, offensive rebounding for example) vs. struggled (producing TOs defensively, 3 point %, and effective field goal % for example).

So what was the flaw in RPI? Was the flaw that it didn’t favor major conferences over anyone else, and the NET DOES favor major conferences over everyone else?

[cheeseman]

Just now, Lord Elrond said:

So what was the flaw in RPI? Was the flaw that it didn’t favor major conferences over anyone else, and the NET DOES favor major conferences over everyone else?

Yes - See SWMS

[slu72]

Could we dominate the MVC, OVC like ZAGA does their league? Not sure we could because recruiting to those leagues would likely reduce our talent pool. We would need an excellent X and O coach who could recruit to his system, see Rick Pitino. The A10 even as bad as it’s been this year normally is a 2-3 bid league. Our problem is not conf affiliation it’s our team not playing to it’s potential. 

[TheChosenOne]

35 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

So what was the flaw in RPI? Was the flaw that it didn’t favor major conferences over anyone else, and the NET DOES favor major conferences over everyone else?

The RPI is overly simplistic, had an overreliance on strength of schedule vs. performance, and there are much better systems out there whether it be the ones I mentioned (Pomeroy and Torvik) or Sagarin or the one ESPN has (BPI) that factor in performance more heavily. I think you can Google it if you want more detail as I think programs had figured out how to game it as well. I just found it odd to see it even brought up. If you want to argue the NET is biased in favor of the power conferences do so using a comparison of NET to other similar rankings that factor in performance like the others I have mentioned vs. RPI which is flawed or limited whichever description you prefer.

[Bay Area Billiken]

54 minutes ago, Lord Elrond said:

So what was the flaw in RPI? Was the flaw that it didn’t favor major conferences over anyone else, and the NET DOES favor major conferences over everyone else?

Bingo. 
The RPI is still used by the NCAA in Soccer and Baseball. 

[Bay Area Billiken]

2 hours ago, TheChosenOne said:

Why even post about the RPI at this point? Wasn't it known to be flawed before it was eliminated from the criteria? It made sense to move to another metric for ranking teams that took more variables into account than the RPI. I fail to see how considering a more sophisticated metric like the NET is some diabolical move by the Power conferences. They were doing that just fine in the actual selection process when RPI was said to be a factor, but the NET itself is an improvement. A better comparison would be comparing what the NET produces (where SLU is at #100) vs. other "comparable" metrics like Pomeroy (SLU is currently ranked #80) or Torvik (SLU is currently ranked #96). T-Rank is nice to look at because it gives you a sense of where the team has been successful (adjusted offensive efficiency, limiting offensive TOs, offensive rebounding for example) vs. struggled (producing TOs defensively, 3 point %, and effective field goal % for example).

I see Illinois (#39 NET, #28 Pomeroy, and #36 Torvik) and Creighton (#34 NET, #26 Pomeroy, and #27 Torvik) referenced, but looking at those three rankings for both it seems to me the NET is fairly reasonable.

7 additional NCAA bids, of the available 32, an additional 22% of the at large bids, that would be bestowed to the Power 5 + 1 by the NET, is a massive difference. The 7 additional bids, if today was Selection Sunday, are objective facts conveyed by comparing the currently used metric to the formerly used metric. 

When one of the subtracted is SLU, I will raise the issue. 

Whether the new NET is some advanced metric is a subject of debate considering the NET (per my understanding) has no cap on its key efficiency components.  That no cap on efficiency components, for those schools that are following in scheduling, encourages non-conference scheduling of cupcakes and blowouts, the latter of which serve no purpose other than enhancing the NET. 
 

SLU’s conference issue is a long time in the making. The acute effect is showing now.