|
|
Post by GoYotes on Feb 11, 2022 11:01:12 GMT -6
Need to cheer for S Carolina, OU, A&M, Pitt, Northwestern, Drake, Wichita State, Valpo & Bradley and cheer against Mississippi State, K State, Missouri State, Green Bay, Montana State, Iowa State (sorry yoteforever), UMass & UCLA the rest of this season
|
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 11, 2022 11:16:57 GMT -6
According to Jay and Brad on the Midco broadcast, the Summit does use the NET, not the RPI now for tie-breakers...
Being the 1-seed would be nice, considering the first round game would likely be Denver/Omaha instead of NDSU/WIU. The Bison and Leathernecks have had bad seasons, but are still potentially dangerous.
Semifinal games will likely be from the pool of KC/UND/ORU.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 11, 2022 11:25:00 GMT -6
Bracketology still has us as a 9-seed, now playing DePaul at the Stanford site.
|
|
steelsd
Sophomore Member
Posts: 172 
|
Post by steelsd on Feb 11, 2022 11:42:14 GMT -6
Need to cheer for S Carolina, OU, A&M, Pitt, Northwestern, Drake, Wichita State, Valpo & Bradley and cheer against Mississippi State, K State, Missouri State, Green Bay, Montana State, Iowa State (sorry yoteforever), UMass & UCLA the rest of this season It's actually a pretty interesting exercise to look now at the NET rankings of the two teams non-con schedules (minus common opponents): USD SDSU
South Carolina- 1 Iowa St- 10
Oklahoma- 27 Kansas St- 31
Texas A&M- 40 Missouri St- 42
Northwestern- 67 Northern Iowa- 49
Drake- 96 UMass- 51
Pitt- 97 UCLA- 52
Wichita St.- 128 Mississippi St- 53
Valpo- 242 Green Bay- 107
Bradley- 272 Montana St- 178
(Charlotte- 126 game cancelled)
So it's pretty apparent that both teams are very willing to schedule difficult non-con schedules. It's unfortunate that State was down Myah for nearly the whole time as a couple more wins in there could have at least guaranteed the conference a chance at an at large bid no matter what happens in Sioux Falls. |
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 11, 2022 11:54:09 GMT -6
Need to cheer for S Carolina, OU, A&M, Pitt, Northwestern, Drake, Wichita State, Valpo & Bradley and cheer against Mississippi State, K State, Missouri State, Green Bay, Montana State, Iowa State (sorry yoteforever), UMass & UCLA the rest of this season It's actually a pretty interesting exercise to look now at the NET rankings of the two teams non-con schedules (minus common opponents): USD SDSU
South Carolina- 1 Iowa St- 10
Oklahoma- 27 Kansas St- 31
Texas A&M- 40 Missouri St- 42
Northwestern- 67 Northern Iowa- 49
Drake- 96 UMass- 51
Pitt- 97 UCLA- 52
Wichita St.- 128 Mississippi St- 53
Valpo- 242 Green Bay- 107
Bradley- 272 Montana St- 178
(Charlotte- 126 game cancelled)
So it's pretty apparent that both teams are very willing to schedule difficult non-con schedules. It's unfortunate that State was down Myah for nearly the whole time as a couple more wins in there could have at least guaranteed the conference a chance at an at large bid no matter what happens in Sioux Falls. Forgot #33 Creighton. Yup, both teams (as always) schedule tough. The Yotes almost beat OU in the first game, and IMO just didn't play great in the tournament with TAMU, NU and Pitt. NU is our worst loss right now. Coulda Shoulda Woulda, I guess. Both teams are better than their NET team sheets, I think. This might be a year that the WNIT championship is hosted in SD again. |
|
steelsd
Sophomore Member
Posts: 172
|
Post by steelsd on Feb 11, 2022 11:56:24 GMT -6
It's actually a pretty interesting exercise to look now at the NET rankings of the two teams non-con schedules (minus common opponents): USD SDSU
South Carolina- 1 Iowa St- 10
Oklahoma- 27 Kansas St- 31
Texas A&M- 40 Missouri St- 42
Northwestern- 67 Northern Iowa- 49
Drake- 96 UMass- 51
Pitt- 97 UCLA- 52
Wichita St.- 128 Mississippi St- 53
Valpo- 242 Green Bay- 107
Bradley- 272 Montana St- 178
(Charlotte- 126 game cancelled)
So it's pretty apparent that both teams are very willing to schedule difficult non-con schedules. It's unfortunate that State was down Myah for nearly the whole time as a couple more wins in there could have at least guaranteed the conference a chance at an at large bid no matter what happens in Sioux Falls. Forgot #33 Creighton. Yup, both teams (as always) schedule tough. The Yotes almost beat OU in the first game, and IMO just didn't play great in the tournament with TAMU, NU and Pitt. NU is our worst loss right now. Coulda Shoulda Woulda, I guess. Both teams are better than their NET team sheets, I think. This might be a year that the WNIT championship is hosted in SD again. I stated I didn't include common opponents since whatever Creighton does affects both teams equally. But I agree, a couple of bounces in a couple of those games could have made it pretty easy to know that both teams had their ticket punched no matter the outcome in SF. The way it goes though. |
|
|
|
Post by GoYotes on Feb 11, 2022 12:23:32 GMT -6
If it does come down to using the NET to determine the #1 seed at what point in time will the NET rankings be used. Many of the non-conference opponents will play regular season games after the end of the Summit League regular season with some playing games on March 5, which is the same day the SLT starts. With the NET being this close, the results of one late regular season game from any of the teams mentioned above could be the deciding factor.
|
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Feb 11, 2022 12:31:20 GMT -6
It's actually a pretty interesting exercise to look now at the NET rankings of the two teams non-con schedules (minus common opponents): USD SDSU
South Carolina- 1 Iowa St- 10
Oklahoma- 27 Kansas St- 31
Texas A&M- 40 Missouri St- 42
Northwestern- 67 Northern Iowa- 49
Drake- 96 UMass- 51
Pitt- 97 UCLA- 52
Wichita St.- 128 Mississippi St- 53
Valpo- 242 Green Bay- 107
Bradley- 272 Montana St- 178
(Charlotte- 126 game cancelled)
So it's pretty apparent that both teams are very willing to schedule difficult non-con schedules. It's unfortunate that State was down Myah for nearly the whole time as a couple more wins in there could have at least guaranteed the conference a chance at an at large bid no matter what happens in Sioux Falls. Forgot #33 Creighton. Yup, both teams (as always) schedule tough. The Yotes almost beat OU in the first game, and IMO just didn't play great in the tournament with TAMU, NU and Pitt. NU is our worst loss right now. Coulda Shoulda Woulda, I guess. Both teams are better than their NET team sheets, I think. This might be a year that the WNIT championship is hosted in SD again. Biggest problem I can see with these ratings is that no credit is given for how much a team can improve during a season. There're plenty of teams who are a lot different at the end of February than they were at the end of November. One of the most gratifying things for a coach is having a team develop and improve during the course of a season and with this system that's not rewarded. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong kiyoat. You've studied this a lot more than I have. |
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 11, 2022 14:51:30 GMT -6
Forgot #33 Creighton. Yup, both teams (as always) schedule tough. The Yotes almost beat OU in the first game, and IMO just didn't play great in the tournament with TAMU, NU and Pitt. NU is our worst loss right now. Coulda Shoulda Woulda, I guess. Both teams are better than their NET team sheets, I think. This might be a year that the WNIT championship is hosted in SD again. Biggest problem I can see with these ratings is that no credit is given for how much a team can improve during a season. There're plenty of teams who are a lot different at the end of February than they were at the end of November. One of the most gratifying things for a coach is having a team develop and improve during the course of a season and with this system that's not rewarded. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong kiyoat. You've studied this a lot more than I have. You're right, but there is too much we don't know about how the NET score/rank is calculated. It's kind-of known, but they don't publish the exact formula. As far as I know, the NET does not weight the score with when a game was played. It is like the RPI in that way. There are many "advanced metrics" or "computer rankings" (really an algorithm, not a computer) that DO weight more recent games more heavily. Massey does it, for example. I'm pretty sure KenPom does it, too. There is a downside for mid-majors when using that kind of system, though. If a mid-major gets a resume-enhancing win in the non-conference, (like if we had beaten Oklahoma), then a weighted ranking would de-emphasize that, right along with the bad losses of the non-con. We would be left with a sh@tty Strength-Of-Schedule, the perennial problem with mid-majors... I don't know. Many people have argued that the NCAA should have just adopted KenPom's formula instead of trying to invent their own system. His rankings consistently outperformed others in terms of predicting tournament outcomes. But then they wouldn't be able to tinker with it secretly, and I think that's why we have the NET. |
|
|
|
Post by elcoyote on Feb 11, 2022 15:41:12 GMT -6
Biggest problem I can see with these ratings is that no credit is given for how much a team can improve during a season. There're plenty of teams who are a lot different at the end of February than they were at the end of November. One of the most gratifying things for a coach is having a team develop and improve during the course of a season and with this system that's not rewarded. Feel free to correct me if I'm wrong kiyoat. You've studied this a lot more than I have. You're right, but there is too much we don't know about how the NET score/rank is calculated. It's kind-of known, but they don't publish the exact formula. As far as I know, the NET does not weight the score with when a game was played. It is like the RPI in that way. There are many "advanced metrics" or "computer rankings" (really an algorithm, not a computer) that DO weight more recent games more heavily. Massey does it, for example. I'm pretty sure KenPom does it, too. There is a downside for mid-majors when using that kind of system, though. If a mid-major gets a resume-enhancing win in the non-conference, (like if we had beaten Oklahoma), then a weighted ranking would de-emphasize that, right along with the bad losses of the non-con. We would be left with a sh@tty Strength-Of-Schedule, the perennial problem with mid-majors... I don't know. Many people have argued that the NCAA should have just adopted KenPom's formula instead of trying to invent their own system. His rankings consistently outperformed others in terms of predicting tournament outcomes. But then they wouldn't be able to tinker with it secretly, and I think that's why we have the NET.Thanks for the info. I was told once by someone who would know that the committee looks for reasons to put the P5s in and excuses to keep the midmajors out. I would tend to go along with that analysis. |
|
|
|
Post by gopheryote on Feb 11, 2022 19:52:07 GMT -6
Need to cheer for S Carolina, OU, A&M, Pitt, Northwestern, Drake, Wichita State, Valpo & Bradley and cheer against Mississippi State, K State, Missouri State, Green Bay, Montana State, Iowa State (sorry yoteforever), UMass & UCLA the rest of this season Could also look for our reserves to maintain leads a bit better. Would help with the efficiency side of the equation. |
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 13, 2022 15:15:31 GMT -6
Updates after the weekend games:
our RPI dropped from #55 to #59
our net efficiency rose from #27 to #19! highest this season!
our NET stayed at #37
This is the way.
(Jacks' NET dropped from #38 to #39)
|
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 14, 2022 9:26:25 GMT -6
updated the "opponents NET rankings" matrix on the first post.... they are at a point of the season where things have basically stabilized. I like the lack of wild swings with this ranking system, honestly. We need to keep ahead of the Jacks, so we aren't paired with the schizophrenic Leathernecks in the first round. Would rather play Omaha or Denver. (whoever makes the tournament).
|
|
|
|
Post by Coyote Fan on Feb 15, 2022 1:23:48 GMT -6
Other than one year where the Leathernecks won the tourney they are one of the most over rated teams in the Summit League. They play all offense and no defense basketball. I think a traditional defense first team like Oral Roberts of the recent past scares me more than Western Illinois. There is no other team other than the South Dakota schools that is a scary opponent because each and every one of them is closer to a D2 program than they are a top 40 D1 program. When the Jacks lost to Omaha that was a total fluke because Omaha themselves was a fluke in that tourney. They are back to being irrelevant again. NDSU showed a pulse last year trying to make a good #3 in the Summit but they have now flat lined back to the pack.
|
|
|
|
Post by kiyoat on Feb 15, 2022 9:48:06 GMT -6
latest bracketology has USD still at a 9-seed, with the Jacks now in the "next 4 out". This is a good trend! It has taken a while for the pundits and voters to get over the two SD schools' non-conference W/L records...
|
|
