Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

2021 NET Rankings Thread (Initial rankings 1/4/21)

Collapse
X
Collapse
First Prev Next Last
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    Originally posted by ShockerFever View Post

    Weird. Seeing how our NET goes down when we win, I figured it’d go way up with that L.
    I believe it is because Kenpom preseason expectations weighting are still having an effect on WSU ratings since they have missed so many games in their schedule.

    Comment


    • #17
      Updated for 1/21

      Resume Analysis right now. Right now it's definitely a better resume than some teams that are projected in (cough Drake cough).

      Pros:
      Q1 Road win
      No losses outside Q1/Q2. 3 of 4 losses are to currently ranked teams
      Only 1 Q4 game
      Strong SOS and RPI

      Cons:
      Only 1 Q1 win
      Bad NET and KP (analytical measures are killing us)

      Next few games have multiple Q1/Q2 opportunities. Need at least 1 of the Q1 games and probably drop no more than 1 of the Q2 games.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by Stickboy46 View Post
        Updated for 1/21

        Resume Analysis right now. Right now it's definitely a better resume than some teams that are projected in (cough Drake cough).

        Pros:
        Q1 Road win
        No losses outside Q1/Q2. 3 of 4 losses are to currently ranked teams
        Only 1 Q4 game
        Strong SOS and RPI

        Cons:
        Only 1 Q1 win
        Bad NET and KP (analytical measures are killing us)

        Next few games have multiple Q1/Q2 opportunities. Need at least 1 of the Q1 games and probably drop no more than 1 of the Q2 games.
        Why can the analytical metrics not measure what we are currently doing? We are playing a lot of good teams and winning even though by not very much. Drake for example (and many others) play lots of bad teams and win by a lot. C'mon Mathematicians. Figure it out.

        Comment


        • #19
          My original prediction of what we need down the stretch still stands. Go 1-1 in Q1, lose no more than one Q2 and no more than one Q3 game remaining and we should be in.

          It would be hilarious in a not funny sort of way if we had a great KP rank all those years but didn’t really benefit from it because the rest of our resume was MVC and then this year we have have a solid resume but crappy KP/NET and they use that to keep us out.

          I don’t think that will happen because those ranks will improve if we continue to win games even if it is at a glacial pace.

          I also think if it’s close that we should get some sort of partial credit for OSU considering our COVID circumstances at the time. That’s probably a tough case to make though since all of our main contributors technically played that game albeit in a limited fashion and weren’t really able to practice leading up to the game. I understand it will be difficult for the committee to parse such things.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by Shockm View Post

            Why can the analytical metrics not measure what we are currently doing? We are playing a lot of good teams and winning even though by not very much. Drake for example (and many others) play lots of bad teams and win by a lot. C'mon Mathematicians. Figure it out.
            It all comes down to margin of victory. If we beat teams by more our ranks would improve more quickly.

            If we just continue to win all that will take care of itself regardless of how much we win by.

            Comment


            • #21
              It might have been Stick that said we started the season ranked much lower due to our player turnover and GGG leaving. I also remember reading on one of the anylitical sites that we would have started the season roughly 40 positions higher if 3G was still the coach. Looks like that has set us up for failure. Even if we beat Houston and split with SMU, aren't we only moving up 15-20 spots, which still puts us outside looking in. Right?

              Just can't believe the AAC is a one bid league. But it's starting to look that way.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by pie n eye View Post

                It all comes down to margin of victory. If we beat teams by more our ranks would improve more quickly.

                If we just continue to win all that will take care of itself regardless of how much we win by.
                But you are not answering the question that I had. We PLAYED GOOD TEAMS and WON while Drake PLAYS BAD TEAMS and WINS BIG. Their analytic system sucks. Drake would lose to these good teams if they played them.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by wichshock65 View Post
                  It might have been Stick that said we started the season ranked much lower due to our player turnover and GGG leaving. I also remember reading on one of the anylitical sites that we would have started the season roughly 40 positions higher if 3G was still the coach. Looks like that has set us up for failure. Even if we beat Houston and split with SMU, aren't we only moving up 15-20 spots, which still puts us outside looking in. Right?

                  Just can't believe the AAC is a one bid league. But it's starting to look that way.
                  I don't believe 3g was a factor at all in preseason rankings. From an analytical standpoint it would have been based on returning player production. I haven't seen anywhere where Coach is factored into the equations for these rankings that we are bad in.

                  We can move up more than 15-20 spots but it will take some really good win. We could move up 10+ points just by beating SMU handily this weekend. Will that happen? I don't know.

                  Even if we only move up 15-20 spots though, we would still be well within the boundaries of teams that have gotten a bid before. It would be preferred to be Top 50 for sure, but teams in the 70s have gotten bids in the past.

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by Shockm View Post

                    But you are not answering the question that I had. We PLAYED GOOD TEAMS and WON while Drake PLAYS BAD TEAMS and WINS BIG. Their analytic system sucks. Drake would lose to these good teams if they played them.
                    Both your and his statements are correct. It SHOULD be that beating good teams should matter more than beating the crap out of bad teams but that doesn't appear to be the case. Both NET and KP have big efficiency metrics. So if you average 1.2 PPP and your opponent who happens to be Chicago state 23 times only averages .60 PPP the NET is going to say you are the greatest team alive.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by Shockm View Post

                      But you are not answering the question that I had. We PLAYED GOOD TEAMS and WON while Drake PLAYS BAD TEAMS and WINS BIG. Their analytic system sucks. Drake would lose to these good teams if they played them.
                      Maybe Drake would lose but you don’t really know that though. You can’t say that with any certainty. Neither can KenPom or BPI or any of the other predictive analytic rankings even though that’s what they aim to do. Of course, if the schedule was played 100 times the predictive analytics would become more accurate.

                      I don’t know the particulars but they basically just take historical data of how a team ranked X in KenPom has done against a team ranked Y. If Team X over performs that expectation they move up. Underperform and they move down.

                      It’s not a perfect system and I think, like others have stated, in a year like this especially considering this particular WSU teams circumstances that they are being underrated by the analytics.

                      The NCAA isn’t being seeded today so this is all irrelevant outside of it being something fun to discuss.

                      If WSU takes care of business down the stretch the analytic rankings will all sort themselves out by the final game and WSU will have a respectable resume that should get them in the NCAA tournament. The path is there now they just have to continue to improve and find ways to win.

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by Shockm View Post

                        But you are not answering the question that I had. We PLAYED GOOD TEAMS and WON while Drake PLAYS BAD TEAMS and WINS BIG. Their analytic system sucks. Drake would lose to these good teams if they played them.
                        Not necessarily picking on you or your comment, but I bet a lot of people on this board had the other side bigly not that long ago.


                        I'm not even giving this a second thought as of today. This team controls it's destiny. If they go 1-4 against UH, SMU, Memphis they don't deserve to get in, and if they win these games, they will get in. These guys aren't going to be left out if they deserve to be in. Not worried.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by Shockm View Post

                          Why can the analytical metrics not measure what we are currently doing? We are playing a lot of good teams and winning even though by not very much. Drake for example (and many others) play lots of bad teams and win by a lot. C'mon Mathematicians. Figure it out.
                          Unfortunately the NCAA has no transparency in their net calculation except at a high level. They don't even allow anybody to see the raw net number except for a team ranking. So we have no idea how close or how far WSU can move up meaningfully.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by wichshock65 View Post
                            Just can't believe the AAC is a one bid league. But it's starting to look that way.
                            That would be very tragic. It seems I read on here the other day that there are only 2 other conferences that have all their teams in the Top-100 (or maybe Top-150). Logic would say that bodes well for the AAC to get multiple bids. If the league finishes that way and doesn't get multiple bids...well...I suppose the P5 bias rears it's ugly head again.

                            FINAL FOURS:
                            1965, 2013

                            NCAA Tournament:
                            1964, 1965, 1976, 1981, 1985, 1987, 1988, 2006, 2012, 2013, 2014, 2015, 2016, 2017, 2018

                            NIT Champs - 1 (2011)

                            AP Poll History of Wichita State:
                            Number of Times Ranked: 157
                            Number of Times Ranked #1: 1
                            Number of Times Top 5: 32 (Most Recent - 2017)
                            Number of Times Top 10: 73 (Most Recent - 2013, 2014, 2015, 2017)

                            Highest Recent AP Ranking:
                            #3 - Dec. 2017
                            #2 ~ March 2014

                            Highest Recent Coaches Poll Ranking:
                            #2 ~ March 2014
                            Finished 2013 Season #4

                            Comment


                            • #29
                              Originally posted by pie n eye View Post

                              It all comes down to margin of victory. If we beat teams by more our ranks would improve more quickly.

                              If we just continue to win all that will take care of itself regardless of how much we win by.
                              That's what the longhorns said after beating oklahoma one year and ending with exact same records. But media and bowls selection talked about style points making the sooners the real victor.
                              Its new day, winning is no longer good enough.

                              Comment


                              • #30
                                Well, it's not the NET rankings, but we did get a single vote in the AP poll today.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X