View previous topic :: View next topic |
Author |
Message |
Coyotes
Joined: 28 Jan 2018 Posts: 1467
Back to top |
Posted: 02/28/22 1:09 pm ::: Historic NET Rankings |
Reply |
|
As we rapidly approach the decisions on who gets to wear dancing shoes, I was hoping to do a deep dive based on last years selections and their NET rankings; however, I can’t seem to find an archive based on past NET rankings. Does anyone know of an obscure place that has them?
|
|
pilight
Joined: 23 Sep 2004 Posts: 66772 Location: Where the action is
Back to top |
|
linkster
Joined: 27 Jul 2012 Posts: 5408
Back to top |
|
Coyotes
Joined: 28 Jan 2018 Posts: 1467
Back to top |
Posted: 03/03/22 8:52 am ::: |
Reply |
|
linkster wrote: |
The SC ignored the NET in 2021 and put the overall 2 & 3 seeds in the same region. I'm sure it was "unavoidable". |
I’m not sure why that’s relevant. The NET is just one metric that the committee can use to determine which team should be ranked in a certain position. By this logic, North Carolina would be a high two seed this year, which while they’re having a good season they’re not deserving of a 2 IMO.
I’ve seen some of the chatter in the UConn sphere that UConn deserves a 1 or a 2 based entirely on the potential of the team. Sure, I think UConn will be a threat now that they’re more healthy than they were, but there’s almost no data surrounding the potential of a healthy UConn team apart from trouncing Big East opponents. With respect to the Big East, they’re not on the same level as some of the other teams. Given UConn’s losses this season albeit some when they weren’t at full strength, there’s no reason to think that if they were in the Big 10, SEC, or Pac-12 that they wouldn’t have more losses. The only realistic metric we have for a healthy UConn is a 16 point loss to South Carolina.
I think it’s personally impossible to seed UConn fairly this year — given the body of work that other teams have crafted—and some other teams have certainly dealt with their own challenges this year. Realistically, given the situation, I think that UConn should firmly remain a 3 seed, and if they earn their way to the final four so be it.
|
|
singinerd54
Joined: 18 Feb 2009 Posts: 1789 Location: Missouri
Back to top |
Posted: 03/04/22 10:58 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Coyotes wrote: |
Given UConn’s losses this season albeit some when they weren’t at full strength, there’s no reason to think that if they were in the Big 10, SEC, or Pac-12 that they wouldn’t have more losses. The only realistic metric we have for a healthy UConn is a 16 point loss to South Carolina.
I think it’s personally impossible to seed UConn fairly this year — given the body of work that other teams have crafted—and some other teams have certainly dealt with their own challenges this year. Realistically, given the situation, I think that UConn should firmly remain a 3 seed, and if they earn their way to the final four so be it. |
All the non South Carolina losses weren't at full strength (and while we looked pathetic in the 4th quarter of that game, I don't see how that hurts our seeding). In the other losses, UConn was missing three of their nine rotation players:
Georgia Tech: Nika, Azzi, Paige (first game after Paige's injury)
Louisville: Nika, Azzi, Paige
Oregon: Azzi, Paige, Christyn
Villanova: Paige, Caroline, ONO
That means they played Oregon without their top three scorers and Villanova without three of their top five scorers. Against Oregon, Louisville, and Georgia Tech, they only had three perimeter players.
On the most recent Top 16 reveal, there was a comment about the committee taking into account injuries (in context of Indiana still being in the top 16). I don't know if it's true that they do or not, but if so, you would think that should factor in for UConn's seeding.
Relatedly, what do we know about how NET is calculated and what is said about how the Selection Committee uses NET in seeding? (Recognizing that what is said and done are two different things.)
|
|
Conway Gamecock
Joined: 23 Jan 2015 Posts: 1881 Location: Here
Back to top |
Posted: 01/08/23 6:31 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Super-bump of this thread, to make an observation. In the other thread keeping track of the remaining undefeated WBB teams, it's now down to just three - South Carolina, Ohio State, and Louisiana State.
Strength of Schedule for The Big Three:
South Carolina: 24th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 129-73
Ohio State: 88th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 126-104
Louisiana State: 200th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 94-95
The old RPI rankings for these teams:
South Carolina: #3
Ohio State: #13
Louisiana State: #39
The current NET ranking for each team:
South Carolina: #1
Louisiana State: #2
Ohio State: #8
Current record versus NET Quadrant 1 opponents:
South Carolina: 5-0
Ohio State: 6-0
Louisiana State: 2-0
Current record versus Quadrant 1+2 opponents:
South Carolina: 7-0
Ohio State: 9-0
Louisiana State: 3-0
But NET is a better ranking system than RPI?
|
|
GEF34
Joined: 23 Jul 2008 Posts: 14102
Back to top |
Posted: 01/08/23 6:42 am ::: |
Reply |
|
Conway Gamecock wrote: |
Super-bump of this thread, to make an observation. In the other thread keeping track of the remaining undefeated WBB teams, it's now down to just three - South Carolina, Ohio State, and Louisiana State.
Strength of Schedule for The Big Three:
South Carolina: 24th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 129-73
Ohio State: 88th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 126-104
Louisiana State: 200th
Opponent's Win-Loss: 94-95
The old RPI rankings for these teams:
South Carolina: #3
Ohio State: #13
Louisiana State: #39
The current NET ranking for each team:
South Carolina: #1
Louisiana State: #2
Ohio State: #8
Current record versus NET Quadrant 1 opponents:
South Carolina: 5-0
Ohio State: 6-0
Louisiana State: 2-0
Current record versus Quadrant 1+2 opponents:
South Carolina: 7-0
Ohio State: 9-0
Louisiana State: 3-0
But NET is a better ranking system than RPI? |
In the overall grand scheme of things the NET is a better ranking system because it takes into consideration so many more things at this very moment in time, it doesn't really "look" into the future, so at the end of the season things will even out and will give a better overall look of how teams rank at the end of the season.
|
|
|
|