TOP 10 RANKING!

[MomofMUltiples]

I'd rather win every game by 1-2 points and look ugly doing it than beat a few in blowouts but lose 1/3 of our games.  Not sure the metrics are rewarding the right things.

[brewcity77]

I'd rather win every game by 1-2 points and look ugly doing it than beat a few in blowouts but lose 1/3 of our games.  Not sure the metrics are rewarding the right things.

In essence, the system you are advocating for is the RPI. Rewards record and record of opponents, ignores how you win.

It's a bit of a conundrum. Strictly rewarding wins regardless of score was clearly a faulty model. But the models that reward margins also have holes. The NET currently is that something in the middle. It's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction, I believe. Though I still want to see a regressive formula for margin of victory.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

In essence, the system you are advocating for is the RPI. Rewards record and record of opponents, ignores how you win.

It's a bit of a conundrum. Strictly rewarding wins regardless of score was clearly a faulty model. But the models that reward margins also have holes. The NET currently is that something in the middle. It's not perfect, but it's a step in the right direction, I believe. Though I still want to see a regressive formula for margin of victory.

Brew, I haven't studied the NET much this season - but it seems to me that non-con SOS is way less important than it was with RPI.  Obviously you still need to challenge yourself with some tough non-con games, but with NET, wouldn't there be some benefit to basically playing all of your buy games against god awful 300+ RPIish teams, and pounding them, as opposed to playing decent teams in the 150-250 range.

Basically a rags and riches type non-con.  Play your tough games like we did against Indiana, Kansas, Louisville, Wisconsin, K State and Buffalo - but then fill out the rest of your non-con with garbage teams and just pound them.  I am talking purely from a numbers perspective - not what is best for actually building a winning team.   

[brewcity77]

I've been thinking the same of late. Va Tech is the poster child for this, but UW also benefited from absolutely hammering the bottom tier cupcakes.

When looking at teams in the past, it was pretty clear that RPI and SOS had a strong correlation. Now NET and SOS seem to just be different metrics. I'll be honest, when I was looking at the last few teams in my last S-Curve, I couldn't really separate Creighton, Arizona, and Butler. Very different profiles, but hard to really say whose is best. Ultimately, I picked Creighton on strength of schedule. It was the one thing that really jumped off the page. I'll be interested to see how that plays in come March 17.

[JamilJaeJamailJrJuan]

I've been thinking the same of late. Va Tech is the poster child for this, but UW also benefited from absolutely hammering the bottom tier cupcakes.

When looking at teams in the past, it was pretty clear that RPI and SOS had a strong correlation. Now NET and SOS seem to just be different metrics. I'll be honest, when I was looking at the last few teams in my last S-Curve, I couldn't really separate Creighton, Arizona, and Butler. Very different profiles, but hard to really say whose is best. Ultimately, I picked Creighton on strength of schedule. It was the one thing that really jumped off the page. I'll be interested to see how that plays in come March 17.

For sure.  Certainly not advocating for playing terrible teams, as that probably is not good for anybody, really.  I do hope the Committee puts more stock in SOS as opposed to years past, as it seems its not built into NET nearly at all, and was a huge factor in RPI.

Pounding terrible teams isn't what should put you in the tournament. 

[BrewCity83]

Has RPI been completely abandoned by the tournament committee?  Or are they still going to use it to a lesser extent in conjunction with the other metrics?

[romey]

Is the RPI even in existence out there?  It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of this year's teams ranked by NET vs. RPI.
NM, just checked it out.

[Osiris]

Is the RPI even in existence out there?  It would be interesting to see a side-by-side comparison of this year's teams ranked by NET vs. RPI.
NM, just checked it out.

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html

MU is #17.

[brewcity77]

Has RPI been completely abandoned by the tournament committee?  Or are they still going to use it to a lesser extent in conjunction with the other metrics?

From what they've said, completely abandoned. I've listened to interviews with Dan Gavitt & he's indicated while it was worthwhile for its time, the rise of analytic models show that its time is done.

[BrewCity83]

http://realtimerpi.com/rpi_Men.html

MU is #17.

Interesting...Wisconsin-Madison is #29 RPI.  And Kansas is #1.

[brewcity77]

Interesting...Wisconsin-Madison is #29 RPI.  And Kansas is #1.

A good example how SOS matters in RPI. Kansas is also #1 in SOS.