Big East Poll , NET Rankings and Team Sheets

[brewcity77]

MU wins at the number (at the time) 36 team in regulation and doesn't move in the NET. Creighton wins at the (at the time) number 54 team in triple overtime and moves up 5 spots.

Lol.

Tell me you don't know how the NET works without telling me you don't know how the NET works.

It's a bit tongue in cheek, but because we only see rankings and not ratings, that movement doesn't really tell you much. The NET's closest analogue is kenpom, see this post from December after St Thomas:

Except that's likely not true. I have no doubt our NET took a significant hit because of that result. But because you only see the rank number, it may not look that way. You have to think of it like kenpom, where the number that matters is the Adjusted Efficiency Margin, not the rank. Using 30 as a completely arbitrary cap, NET could've looked like this before and after the St. Thomas game:

1) Arizona 30.00
2) Houston 29.85
3) Purdue 29.65
4) BYU 29.20
5) Baylor 27.80
6) UConn 27.75
7) Iowa State 27.70
8) Marquette 27.50
9) Creighton 25.25
10) Tennessee 25.20
11) Alabama 25.15
12) Indiana State 24.90

So imagine the St. Thomas result was a massive hit to their rating. Marquette wins, but loses a full 2 points in the NET. You have the following next day rankings and ratings (we'll assume none of the others changed since none of them played 12/14):

1) Arizona 30.00
2) Houston 29.85
3) Purdue 29.65
4) BYU 29.20
5) Baylor 27.80
6) UConn 27.75
7) Iowa State 27.70
8) Marquette 25.50
9) Creighton 25.25
10) Tennessee 25.20
11) Alabama 25.15
12) Indiana State 24.90

Marquette's rating changed massively, but because of the gap they had built in, their rank didn't change at all. The two aren't automatically linked. But it's very possible you could have big gaps like that. Look at some of the Pomeroy disparities between positions:

1) Houston +31.21
4) Arizona +29.55
5) BYU +25.07
8) Auburn +23.25
21) Kentucky +20.37
38) Florida +15.89
143) Longwood +1.83
205) Chattanooga -2.66

In this case, the gap between 1-Houston and 4-Arizona (1.66) is pretty similar to the gap between 5-BYU and 8-Auburn (1.82), but the one-rank gap between 4-Arizona and 5-BYU (4.48) if applied further down is a 16-rank gap between 5-BYU and 21-Kentucky (+4.70) and another 17-rank gap if applied again to 21-Kentucky and 38-Florida (4.48).

We only have a ranked picture of NET because they don't share the formula, but there are almost certainly gaps like this where the disparity between two teams might be one in rank, but the gap further down the rankings would equate to 15, 20, or more spots. Look at the 78-rank gap between Longwood and Chattanooga (4.49). That's a titanic difference in ranks for virtually the same efficiency difference as 4/5 have.

So Creighton may have moved up more rank spots, but that doesn't mean they actually moved up further. It likely just means the rating gap between 11-16 was smaller than the rating gap between 16-17. Just because it's only one spot in the ranking doesn't mean their moves weren't comparable.

Creighton moved past three teams that lost (Kansas, Baylor, Duke) and two inactive teams (Illinois, Wisconsin). Those teams were likely very tightly bunched in the rating. Marquette moved ahead of Duke, but because Dayton blasted Rhode Island on the road, they moved ahead of us. Most likely, all the teams from 11-17 are still closely bunched. Go beat DePaul by more than their average margin of defeat in Big East play (24.4) and we might easily move up to 11 ourselves.

[mugrad_89]

Tell me you don't know how the NET works without telling me you don't know how the NET works.

It's a bit tongue in cheek, but because we only see rankings and not ratings, that movement doesn't really tell you much. The NET's closest analogue is kenpom, see this post from December after St Thomas:

So Creighton may have moved up more rank spots, but that doesn't mean they actually moved up further. It likely just means the rating gap between 11-16 was smaller than the rating gap between 16-17. Just because it's only one spot in the ranking doesn't mean their moves weren't comparable.

Creighton moved past three teams that lost (Kansas, Baylor, Duke) and two inactive teams (Illinois, Wisconsin). Those teams were likely very tightly bunched in the rating. Marquette moved ahead of Duke, but because Dayton blasted Rhode Island on the road, they moved ahead of us. Most likely, all the teams from 11-17 are still closely bunched. Go beat DePaul by more than their average margin of defeat in Big East play (24.4) and we might easily move up to 11 ourselves.

That's the part of NET I'm not crazy about, the margin of victory playing the factors that it does.  One thing Creighton is really good at is blowing out the teams they should which helps their ranking.

[brewcity77]

That's the part of NET I'm not crazy about, the margin of victory playing the factors that it does.  One thing Creighton is really good at is blowing out the teams they should which helps their ranking.

The main thing to remember about the NET is it's a sorting tool, not a metric that really impacts seeding or selection. People overstate its importance.

Ultimately, NET is telling you how good on average a team is on a give night. So yes, the blowouts help because that's one end of the spectrum, but over the course of the season it will balance against the close results in conference play. And for Marquette, the NET of teams like Kansas, Illinois, Purdue, and Butler are more important than our own NET is because that's where the quality of your wins and losses is judged.

[mugrad_89]

The main thing to remember about the NET is it's a sorting tool, not a metric that really impacts seeding or selection. People overstate its importance.

Ultimately, NET is telling you how good on average a team is on a give night. So yes, the blowouts help because that's one end of the spectrum, but over the course of the season it will balance against the close results in conference play. And for Marquette, the NET of teams like Kansas, Illinois, Purdue, and Butler are more important than our own NET is because that's where the quality of your wins and losses is judged.

I agree with you - it's nothing worth getting too worked up about during the season.  Almost like in-season bracketology projections.

[brewcity77]

I agree with you - it's nothing worth getting too worked up about during the season.  Almost like in-season bracketology projections.

Yup. This time of year, there's so much that will change that projections have little meaning. Late February, early March is when they first start to be close to accurate. Right now, the main point of brackets is bracketologists gaining familiarity with the field and practice.

I'm actually working on a new S-Curve right now, should have it out by tomorrow morning, but while I'll have Marquette placed in a region with a path ahead of them, it's not likely to look close to what we'll see on Selection Sunday.

[MU82]

brew, as of right now, how many Q1 wins and losses to we have? And if you wouldn't mind breaking them down, I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in seeing how each of our Ws and Ls is currently classified. If you don't have the time or interest, I fully understand.

[Herman Cain]

brew, as of right now, how many Q1 wins and losses to we have? And if you wouldn't mind breaking them down, I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in seeing how each of our Ws and Ls is currently classified. If you don't have the time or interest, I fully understand.

Big East NET rankings as of games of January 20, 2024
New Old
8   7   UConn   
11   16   Creighton   
17   17   Marquette   
38   34   Villanova   
41   36   St. John's
43   43   Xavier   
57   53   Providence   
60   54   Seton Hall   
66   64   Butler   
175   172   Georgetown   
309   311   DePaul
January 21 Team Sheets . MU is 17
https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2024/net-teamsheets-plus

Click on Link at bottom. Has all teams resumes Q1 etc Go to 17 for MU

[PGsHeroes32]

brew, as of right now, how many Q1 wins and losses to we have? And if you wouldn't mind breaking them down, I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in seeing how each of our Ws and Ls is currently classified. If you don't have the time or interest, I fully understand.

We are 4-4 in Q1 and 2-1 in Q2

Really need Butler to stay Q2. Big thing with our resume is we have no Q3/4 losses and also we didnt get fat on a lot of those games. We have only 7 total Q3/4 games so far(trash can Depaul hurts that) which I believe has to be among the best

[brewcity77]

brew, as of right now, how many Q1 wins and losses to we have? And if you wouldn't mind breaking them down, I (and I'm sure others) would be interested in seeing how each of our Ws and Ls is currently classified. If you don't have the time or interest, I fully understand.

Sure...

Quadrant 1 (4-4)
H: 1-30 / N: 1-50 / A: 1-75

W: 11-Creighton (H), 12-Illinois (A), 14-Kansas (N), 41-St. John's (A)
L: 2-Purdue (N), 13-Wisconsin (A), 57-Providence (A), 60-Seton Hall (A)

Quadrant 2 (2-1)
H: 31-75 / N: 51-100 / A: 76-135

W: 38-Villanova (H), 59-Texas (H)
L: 66-Butler (H)

They are further subdivided, so we are 3-2 in Q1A and 1-2 in Q1B.

For context, only 4 programs have more Q1 wins than we do: Purdue (7), Connecticut (6), Arizona (5), and Wisconsin (5). Purdue and Arizona are the only two programs with more Q1A wins than we have. That's the reason I expect us to still be a solid 3-seed when I update (working on the S-Curve now). Our quality wins are about as good as they come right now.

[MU82]

Sure...

Quadrant 1 (4-4)
H: 1-30 / N: 1-50 / A: 1-75

W: 11-Creighton (H), 12-Illinois (A), 14-Kansas (N), 41-St. John's (A)
L: 2-Purdue (N), 13-Wisconsin (A), 57-Providence (A), 60-Seton Hall (A)

Quadrant 2 (2-1)
H: 31-75 / N: 51-100 / A: 76-135

W: 38-Villanova (H), 59-Texas (H)
L: 66-Butler (H)

They are further subdivided, so we are 3-2 in Q1A and 1-2 in Q1B.

For context, only 4 programs have more Q1 wins than we do: Purdue (7), Connecticut (6), Arizona (5), and Wisconsin (5). Purdue and Arizona are the only two programs with more Q1A wins than we have. That's the reason I expect us to still be a solid 3-seed when I update (working on the S-Curve now). Our quality wins are about as good as they come right now.

Thanks, sir. You da man.

[Scoop Snoop]

Thanks Brew. We are in much better shape than I thought. Appreciate the very easy to understand format.

[mugrad_89]

Thanks Brew. We are in much better shape than I thought. Appreciate the very easy to understand format.

The strong November is gonna hold up well all season.

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

The strong November is gonna hold up well all season.

Sean Jones game winner vs UCLA was one of the most important shots of the season.

The ensuing win against Kansas was probably worth a seed line or two.

[MuggsyB]

Sean Jones game winner vs UCLA was one of the most important shots of the season.

The ensuing win against Kansas was probably worth a seed line or two.

I stated that within a week of that clutch J. 

[Juan Anderson's Mixtape]

I stated that within a week of that clutch J.

And that importance continues to grow.

[GoFastAndWin]

Type "2024 NET Ranking and Quad Wins" and click on Marquette or any other team.

It's a great breakdown of whom we've played and their respective quadrant. Then scroll down and see where your teams' future scheduled teams fall in the Quadrants as of today. 

Sorry if this has been posted before. Just a very easy-to-read tool.

[MU82]

Much appreciated, GFAW.

[brewcity77]

Thanks Brew. We are in much better shape than I thought. Appreciate the very easy to understand format.

I will still have us on the 3-line in the morning (spoiler) but I remember last year getting some grief over keeping Marquette as a 3 when we ended up with a 2-seed on Selection Sunday. In a group chat with other bracketologists today, I saw some others bumping Marquette back up to the 2-line and asked them why they had to make me look bad to my people.

[MU82]

Honored to be one of "brew's people."

[MarquetteMike1977]

Marquette's NET is #17 Today

[lawdog77]

I will still have us on the 3-line in the morning (spoiler) but I remember last year getting some grief over keeping Marquette as a 3 when we ended up with a 2-seed on Selection Sunday. In a group chat with other bracketologists today, I saw some others bumping Marquette back up to the 2-line and asked them why they had to make me look bad to my people.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8nhcIXgcnWk

[wisblue]

Type "2024 NET Ranking and Quad Wins" and click on Marquette or any other team.

It's a great breakdown of whom we've played and their respective quadrant. Then scroll down and see where your teams' future scheduled teams fall in the Quadrants as of today. 

Sorry if this has been posted before. Just a very easy-to-read tool.

To add to that, the Warren Nolan site has an "NET Nitty Gritty" chart that shows various information for all teams. That makes it very easy to see at a glance any team's information and compare it to others.

https://www.warrennolan.com/basketball/2024/net-nitty

[wisblue]

I will still have us on the 3-line in the morning (spoiler) but I remember last year getting some grief over keeping Marquette as a 3 when we ended up with a 2-seed on Selection Sunday. In a group chat with other bracketologists today, I saw some others bumping Marquette back up to the 2-line and asked them why they had to make me look bad to my people.

It's important to remember that, while people focus on the seed LINE the bracket is built off a seed LIST, which ranks all teams in the field from 1 to 68.

When it came down to Selection Sunday last year after the conference tournaments, the consensus among bracketologists seemed to be that Marquette and Baylor were the contenders for spots 8 and 9 on the seed list. That's the last 2 seed and first 3 seed. The Selection Committee placed MU at number 8.

So, if you had MU as number 9 and Baylor 8 you didn't look bad. You just didn't look like a shameless homer. I was following a mock selection being conducted by some bracketologists (including Bracket Guy Dave, who is one I follow) and they were divided on the Baylor/Marquette placement.

[wisblue]

https://bracketville.wordpress.com/seed-list/

This is one of my favorite sites for following bracketology.

Dave updates his seed lists and brackets every few days, and his updated seed list today has Wisconsin at 8 and Marquette at 9, so again right on the edge of the 2 and 3 seed.

[brewcity77]

I usually keep these to their own thread, but I went deep on why the NET rankings aren't what most fans think they are and why their flaws don't actually matter because the rankings aren't used the way people think they are:

Forget About NET