So long, RPI

[Pakuni]

NCAA selection committee replacing RPI with something called the NET.

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-08-22/division-i-mens-basketball-committee-adopts-new-ranking

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

Interesting. I am cautiously optimistic but would need to see the formula to be sure. The cap on margin of victory is an interesting touch. I understand why they do it but I really think the fear of running up the score is overblown. I probably would have set the cap at 15 rather than 10.

[Jay Bee]

Can someone find the calc for us?

[Lennys Tap]

RPI was a dinosaur that should have become extinct years ago. Whatever replaces it can't be worse.

[MomofMUltiples]

Is the NET an acronym?  I assumed so, since it is in all caps.  However, they didn't tell us what it stands for.  Any guesses?

[mikekinsellaMVP]

Is the NET an acronym?  I assumed so, since it is in all caps.  However, they didn't tell us what it stands for.  Any guesses?

Second paragraph -- NCAA Evaluation Tool.

[MuMark]

https://www.ncaa.com/news/basketball-men/article/2018-08-22/college-basketball-new-ranking-system-replacing-rpi

[barfolomew]

"The team sheets also included three predictive metrics: those managed by renowned basketball analytics experts Ken Pomeroy and Jeff Sagarin, as well as ESPN's Basketball Power Index."

Good God!
At least it may end up helping us this year.
Perhaps the only question that remains is one-seed or two-seed for MU?

[OhioGoldenEagle]

"The team sheets also included three predictive metrics: those managed by renowned basketball analytics experts Ken Pomeroy and Jeff Sagarin, as well as ESPN's Basketball Power Index."

Good God!
At least it may end up helping us this year.
Perhaps the only question that remains is one-seed or two-seed for MU?

NIT or TBT?

[Boozemon Barro]

Second paragraph -- NCAA Evaluation Tool.

The NCAA part makes me think it will be a total disaster.

[Benny B]

Second paragraph -- NCAA Evaluation Tool.

So NET is just a nickname for a member of the selection committee?

[MUEng92]

RPI was a dinosaur that should have become extinct years ago. Whatever replaces it can't be worse.

Let's hope the NCAA doesn't ask you to hold its collective beer.

[bilsu]

It said it considering using game dates, but decided not to. I think they should of considered dates. I do not think a win or loss in November should mean as much as a win or loss in February.

It will be interesting to see if this changes Wojo's position on running the clock out. Will he hold the ball and let the clock expire, if we are up 8 points? This of course is not a big deal, if we are solidly in the tournament. However, not going for the extra 2 points in November for a potential bubble team may make him reconsider not scoring in the last 30 seconds. Personally, I would take the shot with about 2 seconds to go.

[mu03eng]

Looming NCAA stupidity alert. Matt Norlander is reporting that the NCAA won't release the formula/foundation for the NET because it's based on ML/AI and isn't "readable".

[Nukem2]

Looming NCAA stupidity alert. Matt Norlander is reporting that the NCAA won't release the formula/foundation for the NET because it's based on ML/AI and isn't "readable".

So much for transparency.  Also, why the need for quadrants as the model would seem to be self-fullfilling.  Just adds a layer of subjectivity that the NCAA is trying to avoid?  Wonder if/when the NET output will be released to the public.  It's official RPI was released in the past on Monday's later in the season, though others obviously were calculating RPI in real time.  Guess we'll have to wait for those Mondays?  In the meantime, the RPI sites are out of business.

PS, Matt Norlander tweets that Gavitt says the NCAA will release the NET weekly beginning late November or early December.

[GGGG]

They likely aren't releasing the details because they don't want people playing / scheduling to the data.  But of course it's going to be reverse engineered.  People will figure out in general what gets some teams ranked higher than others.  But the idea that the formula isn't "readable" sounds like something I used to say to my grandfather when he couldn't program his VCR.

[Nukem2]

They likely aren't releasing the details because they don't want people playing / scheduling to the data.  But of course it's going to be reverse engineered.  People will figure out in general what gets some teams ranked higher than others.

My take, given some of the talk in the release, is that the NET has variables ("quality of wins and losses")  that favor the Power 6 teams.  I think the mid-majors are going to get screwed especially as some of those power conferences go to a 20 game conference season.  As with the RPI, it behooves schools to schedule wisely (and, of course, win those games).

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

It said it considering using game dates, but decided not to. I think they should of considered dates. I do not think a win or loss in November should mean as much as a win or loss in February.

Why? Is there any other sport where a regular season game at the beginning of the season means less than a regular season game at the end of the season?

[Nukem2]

The committe will still have to deal with late season injuries and with star players returning late in the season after being injured.

[Its DJOver]

Why? Is there any other sport where a regular season game at the beginning of the season means less than a regular season game at the end of the season?

I think this is interesting, and I'm not quite sure where I stand.  Say Harry had come in last year, and been better than advertised, a Hank 2.0 if you will.  I would have hoped that the Georgia loss would have been viewed differently because the team was "incomplete".  It also has to be seen as a double edge sword, where the VCU and LSU games were viewed differently because he had Haani.

Now none of those games were big enough to move us in the field last year, but there was a big debate about how ND should have been treated with the loss and then return of Bonzie.  If my memory serves correct, they were the first team out, so an argument can be made that a win in any one of the losses in their 7 game losing streak in January would have put them in.

Valid arguments on both sides, as long as they are consistent with their treatment of teams in scenarios mentioned above there shouldn't be too many legitimate complaints.

[Nukem2]

I think this is interesting, and I'm not quite sure where I stand.  Say Harry had come in last year, and been better than advertised, a Hank 2.0 if you will.  I would have hoped that the Georgia loss would have been viewed differently because the team was "incomplete".  It also has to be seen as a double edge sword, where the VCU and LSU games were viewed differently because he had Haani.

Now none of those games were big enough to move us in the field last year, but there was a big debate about how ND should have been treated with the loss and then return of Bonzie.  If my memory serves correct, they were the first team out, so an argument can be made that a win in any one of the losses in their 7 game losing streak in January would have put them in.

Valid arguments on both sides, as long as they are consistent with their treatment of teams in scenarios mentioned above there shouldn't be too many legitimate complaints.

As I posted just before you, injuries are something the NET can't deal with.  That's up to the committee.

[TAMU, Knower of Ball]

I think this is interesting, and I'm not quite sure where I stand.  Say Harry had come in last year, and been better than advertised, a Hank 2.0 if you will.  I would have hoped that the Georgia loss would have been viewed differently because the team was "incomplete".  It also has to be seen as a double edge sword, where the VCU and LSU games were viewed differently because he had Haani.

Now none of those games were big enough to move us in the field last year, but there was a big debate about how ND should have been treated with the loss and then return of Bonzie.  If my memory serves correct, they were the first team out, so an argument can be made that a win in any one of the losses in their 7 game losing streak in January would have put them in.

Valid arguments on both sides, as long as they are consistent with their treatment of teams in scenarios mentioned above there shouldn't be too many legitimate complaints.

Personally, I think the tournament should be about what teams earn it, not how they good they are perceived at the end of the season. If we are going to forgive early season losses because a star player was injured who is not now, are we going to punish teams who lose stars late in the season? If Doug McDermott went down with injury in the Big East tournament, should Creighton have been left out because with McDermott they wouldn't have been a good enough team to make the tournament?

[MU82]

I agree with TAMU about the point spread. You can win or lose by 10 and it's not close to a blow out; my knee-jerk reaction also was 15.

I agree with Nuke, mu03 and others on the lack of transparency. But yes, I do imagine that soon enough everybody will know the formula (or darn close to it).

I'm gonna go in with optimism. Beats the alternative.

Yay! Ding dong RPI is dead!

[Its DJOver]

Personally, I think the tournament should be about what teams earn it, not how they good they are perceived at the end of the season. If we are going to forgive early season losses because a star player was injured who is not now, are we going to punish teams who lose stars late in the season? If Doug McDermott went down with injury in the Big East tournament, should Creighton have been left out because with McDermott they wouldn't have been a good enough team to make the tournament?

Left out entirely? No.  But bumped down a couple seed lines? I think that'd be justifiable.

I think cases where a team loses a player as good as Bonzie and were close as ND were last year are few and far between.  As long as they're consistent, whichever direction they would lean, I would have no problem.

[GGGG]

Left out entirely? No.  But bumped down a couple seed lines? I think that'd be justifiable.

See I don't.  You judge a team by how it performs as a team on the court based on the whole season.  I don't think factors like injuries, or when certain wins or losses occur, should matter at all.

In no other sport does that stuff matter.