Professional and College Basketball Forums banner

4661 - 4680 of 4800 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,696 Posts
That guy tried what I wanted JP to try with the formula.
Get enough of those data points and you should be able to figure it out.
That would be "you", not me.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,062 Posts
Excellent find.
Agree, it is an excellent find. So Stanford got enough credit for [a neutral court loss to] Butler then winning @ Providence that evening to pass Oregon. But if you read the author's previous analysis of the other 4 metrics, Stanford was already better than Oregon in the other 4. What would be more interesting to me would be analyze everything up to Jan 10 and figure out why Oregon could have had a better NET despite Stanford being the better team based on known variables.

A cursory glance - up until Jan. 10, games of note (at that time):
Oregon - Memphis (W), Seton Hall (W), Gonzaga (L), UNC (L), Mich (W), .. Pac-12 - Colo (L), Ariz (W)
Stanford - Okla (W), Butler (L), KU (L)

Oregon was clearly getting credit for having the tougher schedule. By season's end, that played out and Oregon did show themselves to be a better team than Stanford. I don't think we (the A10) can schedule tough enough for the NET, because for most of us, we can't get an OOC like Oregon's. Now, Dayton had a good OOC this season, comparable to that, and they were aptly rewarded all year, even as they started playing A10. It lends a lot of credence to making sure the expected top tier schedules tough, middle needs to schedule like Stanford did, and the lower needs to win games.

Also, it would only be fair to publish the TVI formula. They aren't gaining anything by hiding it. Publish it, and let people argue why they disagree with the formula, instead of arguing a black box.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,331 Posts
Agree, it is an excellent find. So Stanford got enough credit for [a neutral court loss to] Butler then winning @ Providence that evening to pass Oregon. But if you read the author's previous analysis of the other 4 metrics, Stanford was already better than Oregon in the other 4. What would be more interesting to me would be analyze everything up to Jan 10 and figure out why Oregon could have had a better NET despite Stanford being the better team based on known variables.

A cursory glance - up until Jan. 10, games of note (at that time):
Oregon - Memphis (W), Seton Hall (W), Gonzaga (L), UNC (L), Mich (W), .. Pac-12 - Colo (L), Ariz (W)
Stanford - Okla (W), Butler (L), KU (L)

Oregon was clearly getting credit for having the tougher schedule. By season's end, that played out and Oregon did show themselves to be a better team than Stanford. I don't think we (the A10) can schedule tough enough for the NET, because for most of us, we can't get an OOC like Oregon's. Now, Dayton had a good OOC this season, comparable to that, and they were aptly rewarded all year, even as they started playing A10. It lends a lot of credence to making sure the expected top tier schedules tough, middle needs to schedule like Stanford did, and the lower needs to win games.

Also, it would only be fair to publish the TVI formula. They aren't gaining anything by hiding it. Publish it, and let people argue why they disagree with the formula, instead of arguing a black box.
One thing Dayton showed this season is, that it's not necessary to have any road games OOC to get a good NET.
I think that it shows that it’s necessary to play a decent OOC schedule and win.

The fact that Dayton didn’t have a road game was an anomaly. It is my understanding that the neutral site game against St Mary’s was more of a last second thing because they weren’t able to arrange the two H&H contracts with P5 that they have had for years. They preferred situation (I believe) was to have the three Maui games, neutral site game in Chicago vs. Colorado and an away game(s) as part of H&H contract.
 

·
Piker
Joined
·
8,902 Posts
Discussion Starter #4,673
I think that it shows that it’s necessary to play a decent OOC schedule and win.

The fact that Dayton didn’t have a road game was an anomaly. It is my understanding that the neutral site game against St Mary’s was more of a last second thing because they weren’t able to arrange the two H&H contracts with P5 that they have had for years. They preferred situation (I believe) was to have the three Maui games, neutral site game in Chicago vs. Colorado and an away game(s) as part of H&H contract.
I enjoyed the UD basketball account tweeting out dates asking for a good game.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,028 Posts
Mind you, it's Iowa. We aren't even talking about Ohio State, Indiana, Michigan, or Michigan State here. Iowa.

Many of those middle-to-lower P5 hoops programs have no goddamn idea. Most seasons, you can put them in a league like the A10, AAC, Mountain West, or even the MVC, and they aren't a top 2-3 seed.

Their entire existence is propped up by the heavyweights in their respective leagues and exorbitant OOC buy game budgets subsidized by football revenue. Talk about an over-inflated sense of entitlement..
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,724 Posts
Washington against Stephen F. Austin:

Team Value Index: ? | ?
Net efficiency: 6.0 | 14.5
Win%: .469 | .893
Adj. Win%: .418 | .904
Net margin: 1.3 | 6.5

NET ranking: 58 | 77 (LOL)
 
4661 - 4680 of 4800 Posts
Top