|
|
Post by usdcoyote on Mar 28, 2022 13:04:04 GMT -6
Looks like this year's postseason results support the NET as a superior ranking system to the RPI. At time of seeding/ selecting: USD RPI = #42 (11-seed equiv) SDSU RPI = #48 (12 or 13-seed equiv) USD NET = #33 (8 or 9-seed equiv) SDSU NET = #36 (9 or 10-seed equiv.) I know that there are other factors in the process, but given the success both teams have had in the postseason, ... maybe out-of-conference results in the early part of the season shouldn't hold as much weight. USD was playing like at least a 6-seed, if not higher. SDSU is playing like an at-large team. Easily a 9 through 11-seed. Maybe higher. Further evidence includes Creighton. They had a very high NET rank, but were seeded 10. And they are in the Elite 8. Seems like "net efficiency" is an important stat. Since you brought up Creighton, I think it's important to note that Creighton was a true upset team. They played above their abilities and had a relatively easy path to the Elite Eight. USD's wins were still technically upsets, but the level of play between the two schools is pretty drastically different. Based on the eye test alone, USD looked like a team that belonged in at least the Sweet Sixteen while Creighton was very much the Cinderella of the tournament. We were both 10 seeds, but the product on the court was much better on USDs side. I don't know if I would call Creighton's path an easy one. THey played a 7, 2, and a 3 seed just like us. And that was a hostile environment they played in at Iowa. It was a sold out arena and they were loud. That was a very impressive win. It's not like the highly seeded teams were getting knocked off by someone else in their path. But because their path was tough I would agree that they were a Cinderella team. They did have to play above the level that they played at most of the year to knock off those teams. But I guess if you look at how we played in the NCAA tournament compared to how we looked pre conference then you would probably say we played above our level as well. It's often tough to tell during the conference season if we are getting better or if we just look a lot better because the competition has gotten worse. The way we played in the tournament made me think that we really were playing better later in the year than we were during the pre conference schedule. |
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 28, 2022 13:42:37 GMT -6
Looks like this year's postseason results support the NET as a superior ranking system to the RPI. At time of seeding/ selecting: USD RPI = #42 (11-seed equiv) SDSU RPI = #48 (12 or 13-seed equiv) USD NET = #33 (8 or 9-seed equiv) SDSU NET = #36 (9 or 10-seed equiv.) I know that there are other factors in the process, but given the success both teams have had in the postseason, ... maybe out-of-conference results in the early part of the season shouldn't hold as much weight. USD was playing like at least a 6-seed, if not higher. SDSU is playing like an at-large team. Easily a 9 through 11-seed. Maybe higher. Further evidence includes Creighton. They had a very high NET rank, but were seeded 10. And they are in the Elite 8. Seems like "net efficiency" is an important stat. Since you brought up Creighton, I think it's important to note that Creighton was a true upset team. They played above their abilities and had a relatively easy path to the Elite Eight. USD's wins were still technically upsets, but the level of play between the two schools is pretty drastically different. Based on the eye test alone, USD looked like a team that belonged in at least the Sweet Sixteen while Creighton was very much the Cinderella of the tournament. We were both 10 seeds, but the product on the court was much better on USDs side. I'm not trying to compare Creighton's run with ours, and say one is better or worse. It was just one example off the top of my head. I'd love to compare NET ranking against seeding and actual performance in the tournament for all of the teams... but I'll leave that for another day. Or maybe I'll leave that to Charlie Creme. My question is how closely should the NCAA tournament committee should look at the NET vs other factors. Non-conference performance might be the only measuring stick against top teams for many mid-majors, but they happen so early in the year, that it is a distorted lens with which to evaluate the teams. I wonder if there shouldn't be some non-conference games mixed in towards the end of the season? Don't the men's teams do that sometimes? |
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Mar 28, 2022 13:48:00 GMT -6
Or another approach would be to pay more attention to teams' performances in conference tournaments, and weigh that a little more.
|
|
ndfan
Freshman Member
Posts: 45
|
Post by ndfan on Mar 28, 2022 14:06:35 GMT -6
You and SDSU have been setting standard in Summit for women's basketball by your play this year you have elevated level play compared to other conferences in the country. Yes rest of us are behind you on the level of play but i believe as whole the conference has been improving also but the gap has not narrowed because your level of play has risen for this year. I look at ourselves UND, our none conference play this year we did have win against Montana State qualifier for NCAA tournament and we did have Bucknell almost beat out there until last minute or so the game which qualified for WNIT and won a game. We also split games with ORU and KC in the league who was ahead of us. Both of you had experienced teams and you with your three super seniors which made a big difference in your level of play this past year. I am not saying you don't have other talent because you do and have talent waiting to play but experienced players you have made a big difference. This next year SDSU will be like you guys this year with bunch of super seniors so i expect they will be difficult team to play in the coming year. I agree with you they place to much importance on the early schedule because how you played at beginning of year may not reflect the team you have at the end of the year. I believe we are going to much better team next year and i believe we are going to narrow the gap between you and us and i hope by end of year we can be competitive with both you and SDSU. My hopes rely on that we will be returning 7 of our top 8 and we have good recruiting class coming in and this past year freshman should start to be able to make some valuable contributions to this team. I believe there number of other schools in conference working to catch up and may happen sooner than you guys realize which i think would be great for the conference.
|
|
|
|
Post by Yotes on Mar 28, 2022 17:09:27 GMT -6
It seems like some schools shorten the gap at times. It isn't consistent though. UMKC stepped up this year but their coach is off to Oklahoma State (I think). WIU has been at the top before, but a far cry since. It would be nice to see the competition increase and stay there. I remarked to a friend the other day that it's been a million years since USD lost to anyone in league play besides state. It wouldn't be the worst thing in the world for that to change, unless it's because we regress.
Edit: I looked it up. Besides Dawn first season, we've lost 1 game to a league opponent besides state (Jan 3, 2019 at Denver 104-99). That's over a 5 year period. FWIW, we also have an 8-6 advantage over state in that timeframe, including the dumb year where both games were in Brookings.
|
|
|
|
Post by sdyotefan on Mar 29, 2022 8:09:52 GMT -6
The most important stat illustrating the success of this GREAT Coyote team, is that they finished in the top 16 of 350 D1 basketball teams!!!
What a tremendous accomplishment!!!
|
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Apr 6, 2022 20:31:14 GMT -6
They finally got it right….
|
|
