Sorted by AdjEM of all 358 teams
1. Loyola 25
2. Missouri St. 64
3. Drake 91
4. No. Iowa 114
5. So. Ill 124
6. Ind. St. 173
7. Bradley 175
8. Valpo 216
9. Ill. St. 223
10. Evansville 236
NET added in parenthesis:
1. Loyola 25 (16)
2. Missouri St. 64 (91)
3. Drake 91 (103)
5. So. Ill 124 (147)
6. Ind. St. 173 (173)
4. No. Iowa 114 (162)
7. Bradley 175 (194)
8. Valpo 216 (218)
9. Ill. St. 223 (224)
10. Evansville 236 (291)
MVC conference NET 11th
MVC conference RPI 18th
(Huge contrast in public perception)
Quote from: wh on December 21, 2021, 12:03:18 PM
NET added in parenthesis:
1. Loyola 25 (16)
2. Missouri St. 64 (91)
3. Drake 91 (103)
5. So. Ill 124 (147)
6. Ind. St. 173 (173)
4. No. Iowa 114 (162)
7. Bradley 175 (194)
8. Valpo 216 (218)
9. Ill. St. 223 (224)
10. Evansville 236 (291)
MVC conference NET 11th
MVC conference RPI 18th
(Huge contrast in public perception)
Public perception? Don't both KenPom and NET base their numbers on formulas? What aspect of NET or RPI is public perception?
MVC Conference place per KenPom = 11
Quote from: Just Sayin on December 21, 2021, 01:10:11 PM
Quote from: wh on December 21, 2021, 12:03:18 PM
NET added in parenthesis:
1. Loyola 25 (16)
2. Missouri St. 64 (91)
3. Drake 91 (103)
5. So. Ill 124 (147)
6. Ind. St. 173 (173)
4. No. Iowa 114 (162)
7. Bradley 175 (194)
8. Valpo 216 (218)
9. Ill. St. 223 (224)
10. Evansville 236 (291)
MVC conference NET 11th
MVC conference RPI 18th
(Huge contrast in public perception)
Public perception? Don't both KenPom and NET base their numbers on formulas? What aspect of NET or RPI is public perception?
My point has nothing to do with KenPom vs. NET. Simply, the college basketball world does not think as highly of a conference ranked 18th as it does a conference ranked 11th. That's called "difference in perception." More specifically, the MVC is fortunate that it's no longer living under the RPI relative value system. Since you brought it up, I will say this about NET vs. KenPom, or any other statistical ranking system. Per the NCAA: "As NET rankings serve as the primary sorting tool for Division I men's basketball, they play an important role in establishing a team's resume." If I recall correctly, some (but not all) of the Pom metrics are used in the NET calculation. If we're going to publish rankings, I'm naturally curious as to how the ranking system used by the NCAA selection committee ranks us.
Yes KenPom is used by NCAA in part for NET. A resume is based on quality of opponents played which is used by NCAA for seeding.
Kenpom's numbers are based solely on what happens on the court via the box scores with minor tweaking for SOS. And KenPom's numbers are designed to be predictive which NET and RPI are not.
I'll ignore the snarky comment "That's called "difference in perception."
Speaking of rankings, our next 2 opponents have NET rankings of 350 and 304, respectively, with a combined record against D-1 opponents of 0-20.
Quote from: wh on December 21, 2021, 02:43:40 PM
Speaking of rankings, our next 2 opponents have NET rankings of 350 and 304, respectively, with a combined record against D-1 opponents of 0-20.
We need to play with the energy and urgency of the last 12 minutes against Eastern Michigan for each of these games, and carry forward into Valley play.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk