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

[SkoShox]

Anyone else notice we got a vote in the most recent AP poll?

After we beat Houston and ECU we might get 2!

[jcdshocker]

Anyone else notice we got a vote in the most recent AP poll?

[Shocker82/85]

WSU is 10-4 in division 1 games and has played 1 quad 4 game. We are #78 in the NET. The 77 teams ahead of WSU have played approximately 18.5 D-1 games and 4 quad 4 games. I wonder what our NET would be if WSU was 13-4 with 3 more blowout quad 4 games. I have always thought it makes more sense when comparing records among teams that all quad 4 wins and losses and quad 3 losses should be subtracted from a teams # of wins. Doing that, WSU would be 9-4. Drake would be 8-2 and Loyola would be 8-4. Analyze those games. Eliminate the fluff of quad 4 games. Should WSU go out and buy 3 quad 4 games to improve their NET, BPI and Kenpom ratings? It seems silly, but when you compare other teams ratings by those metrics to WSU’s, it makes you wonder.

ESPN has WSU’s strength of record (SOR)at #48, strength of schedule (SOS) #96 and quality game record of 1-2. Loyola is 0-2 and Drake is 1-1. Quality games are against the BPI top 50. WSU’s BPI is 114. There are 34 teams ranked ahead of WSU that have a SOS >96 AND a SOR>48. 11 teams in the BPI top 50 have a SOR lower than WSU’s 48. CBS still publishes RPI. WSU’s is 34. With a win over Houston, if winning matters, WSU is going to be tough to ignore. BPI gets more attention but when ESPN ranks resumes it does it by SOR.

Reasons to hope despite our rebounding difficulties. Compared to last year, we are improved in out scoring our opponents on points off turnovers and from the free throw line. Our field goal defense is very good also despite all the 2nd shots. Hopefully a 4 game trend will continue involving Gilbert, Dennis and Wade. Each of them has improved their field goal percentage from approximately 30% to 40% and effective field goal percentage from 40% to 50%. The 5 starters are averaging 61 points a game in those 4 games compared to 52 for the season. Small improvements in all areas can make a big difference. Udeze’s turnovers drive us crazy, but did you know that if you add his 20 turnovers to his 58 shots taken starting with the Mississippi game, 9 games, he would still be shooting 52%. 41 shots made out of 78 shots & turnovers. Another reason to hope is Dexter’s individual defense against the other teams’ stars. Can he hold Grimes to a below par game? One final reason is that Tyson hasn’t had consecutive poor scoring games. The last 2 times he scored less than 10 he came back with his two 29 point games.

[shock]

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.

I know I was in the other side bigly. Would WSU be third in the MVC this year? Probably not. Do we know for sure? No. Let the sun shine on that dogs ass and be happy for them.

[RoyalShock]

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

[Atxshoxfan]

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.

[AZ Shocker]

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.

[SB Shock]

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.

[WuDrWu]

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.

[pie n eye]

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.

[Stickboy46]

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.

[Stickboy46]

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.

[Shockm]

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.

[wichshock65]

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.

[pie n eye]

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.