Interesting also that the Big East Tournament games for St John’s are considered home games by the NCAA
Bubble watch
- Thread starter NittanyPirate
- Start date
Actual results can be deceiving. St. John's lost by 1 point at Creighton. That is hard to do. They lost by 4 points at UCONN. Again, hard to do. On a resume, those games are treated no differently than our 26-point thrashing at Villanova. Kenpom, and the other metrics, treat those games differently.
Look, if you're a college basketball coach, college basketball reporter, or college basketball gambler you need kenpom. If you're a fan who wants to better understand college hoops (a complicated game with 350+ teams that play different schedules at different times in different conferences with varying degrees of difficulty), you need kenpom. If you just want to root for your team and watch the games for fun, you don't need kenpom. The metrics are meaningless to you.
We grab 36.3% of our shots for offensive rebounds and have the 16th nest conversion rate of those rebounds in the country.
It isn't pretty, but it is effective.
I am sure this is billed into the NET algorithm, but this statistics cures alot of efficiency ills.
It isn't pretty, but it is effective.
I am sure this is billed into the NET algorithm, but this statistics cures alot of efficiency ills.
| 210 | Stony Brook | W, 90-74 | Home | 1-0 | ||||||
| 109 | Michigan | L, 89-73 | Home | 1-1 | ||||||
| 86 | North Texas | W, 53-52 | Neutral | 2-1 | ||||||
| 25 | Dayton | L, 88-81 | Neutral | 2-2 | ||||||
| 51 | Utah | W, 91-82 | Neutral | 3-2 | ||||||
| 350 | Holy Cross | W, 91-45 | Home | 4-2 | ||||||
| 133 | West Virginia | W, 79-73 | Away | 5-2 | ||||||
| 304 | Sacred Heart | W, 85-50 | Home | 6-2 | ||||||
| 88 | Boston College | L, 86-80 | Semi-Home | 6-3 | ||||||
| 195 | Fordham | W, 77-55 | Home | 7-3 | ||||||
| 52 | Xavier | W, 81-66 | Home | 8-3 | 1-0 | |||||
| 3 | Conn | L, 69-65 | Away | 8-4 | 1-1 | |||||
| 45 | Hofstra | W, 84-79 | Home | 9-4 | ||||||
| 46 | Butler | W, 86-70 | Home | 10-4 | 2-1 | |||||
| 43 | Villanova | W, 81-71 | Away | 11-4 | 3-1 | |||||
| 38 | Providence | W, 75-73 | Home | 12-4 | 4-1 | |||||
| 35 | Creighton | L, 66-65 | Away | 12-5 | 4-2 | |||||
| 34 | Seton Hall | L, 80-65 | Away | 12-6 | 4-3 | |||||
| 39 | Marquette | L, 73-72 | Home | 12-7 | 4-4 | |||||
| 42 | Villanova | W, 70-50 | Home | 13-7 | 5-4 | |||||
| 32 | Xavier | L, 88-77 | Away | 13-8 | 5-5 | |||||
| 36 | Conn | L, 77-64 | Home | 13-9 | 5-6 | |||||
| 41 | DePaul | W, 85-57 | Home | 14-9 | 6-6 | |||||
| 39 | Marquette | L, 86-75 | Away | 14-10 | 6-7 | |||||
| 43 | Providence | L, 75-72 | Away | 14-11 | 6-8 | |||||
| 39 | Seton Hall | L, 68-62 | Home | 14-12 | 6-9 | |||||
| 43 | Georgetown | W, 90-85 | Away | 15-12 | 7-9 | |||||
| 44 | Creighton | W, 80-66 | Home | 16-12 | 8-9 |
Hoping the team runs the table. This bubble , NET stuff is numbing.
No…they believe that is the line that will most likely split bettors 50/50 on bets.
Remember…the books aren’t gamblers…they’re not trying to win bets…they’re just making vig
On the vig. I am not a better but i always thought the line went up and down to balance the bets
I understand the metrics. But if that is what you’re basing which team is better on then you are missing what the essence of the game is about: winning. Obviously there are things that SHU does that are undervalued by the metrics, as noted elsewhere, a high offensive rebounding rate. I agree that SHU doesn’t play a pleasing, Kenpom friendly style but I’ll take the Ws first and foremost when evaluating teams head to head.
I wish we’d make more shots. It’s much easier and more efficient. The OR is better than nothing and we need it as our shooting % aren’t good.
And tonight is a great example of why predictive metrics are used by Vegas. Should the spread have been less than 8.5?
According to many here you would think we should have been, since we played CU to a 3 OT loss and were hosed by the refs. As well as our record and proximity in the standings says we are even.
According to many here you would think we should have been, since we played CU to a 3 OT loss and were hosed by the refs. As well as our record and proximity in the standings says we are even.
And the odds payoffs are not always the same on both sides of the odds. But keep in mind they don’t need to win many games…given the volume…but what they don’t want is to lose games…so they want a balance of bets and if they make just a little on most games…with the volume of bets…is huge
Spread of 8.5 was fine. I don't remember anyone on here saying we're better than Creighton.
Will try and keep this simple since I work for one of these major Sportsbooks. On a normal spread wager. Take tonight as an example. Creighton was favored by 9.5 at -110 odds (give or take depending on the book and the time you placed the bet). You’re betting $110 to win $100. Books work to balance this out to have an even amount of money on both sides to guarantee them winning money. This is why the line will change depending on the amount of money coming in. But in a perfect world for the book. There’s an even amount of money on each side and they take the profit since one side bet on the losing team at -110 odds.
Butler is toast, barring a miracle run at MSG. SJU delivered the fatal blow tonight.
And watch their NET jump with that 23 point road win vs Butler. Cue the complaints.
2/28 bubble results (bubble) *nearing lock
Creighton 85 (Seton Hall) 64
Marquette 91 (Providence) 69
Iowa State 58 *Oklahoma 45
Alabama 103 (Ole Miss) 88
So Carolina 70 (A&M) 68
*Northwestern 68 Maryland 61
(JMU) 84 Georgia State 78
(Colorado) 88 California 78
(Indiana State) 85 Evansville 67
(St John’s) 82 (Butler) 59
(Virginia) 72 BC 68
(Oregon) 78 Oregon State 71
2/29 bubble games
*Nebraska @ Ohio State
Stanford @ (Utah)
(Gonzaga) @ San Francisco
Creighton 85 (Seton Hall) 64
Marquette 91 (Providence) 69
Iowa State 58 *Oklahoma 45
Alabama 103 (Ole Miss) 88
So Carolina 70 (A&M) 68
*Northwestern 68 Maryland 61
(JMU) 84 Georgia State 78
(Colorado) 88 California 78
(Indiana State) 85 Evansville 67
(St John’s) 82 (Butler) 59
(Virginia) 72 BC 68
(Oregon) 78 Oregon State 71
2/29 bubble games
*Nebraska @ Ohio State
Stanford @ (Utah)
(Gonzaga) @ San Francisco
The NET has caused the problem where team's are going to always sure there is as large as possible margin of victory in games. I mean that is why last nigtht once we knew we were going to lose with like ten minutes left, I was hoping Sha would leave starters in even after Creighton put it's bench in so we would hopefully lose by less than 15. But if course Creighton didn't pull it's starters till 5 minutes left up by 20 something
Because the winners get paid 90% of what they bet and the losers pay 100%. 10% built in profit.
Who am I? In two parts.
Part I: My overall record is 17-12. I am 3-6 against the NET top 50, 9-11 against the NET top 100, 11-12 against the NET top 150 and have six wins against teams ranked 175, 207, 211, 301, 319 and 352.
My best win by NET is at home against No. 12 and my best OOC win is over the NET No. 53 at a neutral site. I also have two wins over NET No. 32. My worse loss is against NET 118.
Part II: My overall record is 18-10. I am 4-5 against the NET top 50, 8-9 against the NET top 100, 9-9 against the NET top 150 and have nine wins against teams ranked 190, 192, 207(2X), 237, 264, 306, 319 and 320.
My best win is against NET No. 4. I also have a win over No. 11 and two over No. 40. My best OOC win is over NET 149 and my worse loss is against NET 102.
Part I: My overall record is 17-12. I am 3-6 against the NET top 50, 9-11 against the NET top 100, 11-12 against the NET top 150 and have six wins against teams ranked 175, 207, 211, 301, 319 and 352.
My best win by NET is at home against No. 12 and my best OOC win is over the NET No. 53 at a neutral site. I also have two wins over NET No. 32. My worse loss is against NET 118.
Part II: My overall record is 18-10. I am 4-5 against the NET top 50, 8-9 against the NET top 100, 9-9 against the NET top 150 and have nine wins against teams ranked 190, 192, 207(2X), 237, 264, 306, 319 and 320.
My best win is against NET No. 4. I also have a win over No. 11 and two over No. 40. My best OOC win is over NET 149 and my worse loss is against NET 102.
I LOVE these nameless comparisons and i think it’s great that they typically become more and more common in early March. They usually make you realize how important the name on the front of a jersey is in getting an at large bid
Obviously SHU is team 2. Without cheating I’ll guess team 1 is someone from the Big10… Mich St?
Obviously SHU is team 2. Without cheating I’ll guess team 1 is someone from the Big10… Mich St?
The Selection Committee uses blind comparisons as part of its process. Partly to keep names and biases from being involved.
Yes, it is St. John's.
I used them to show there's not a lot of difference between the two teams when you look at them side-by-side. Our overall record is slightly better as is the record against the first three quads. We have better top end wins but also more soft wins. They have four OOC wins better than our best OOC win.
Yes, we beat them twice head-to-head and this is a factor but if this were, say Ohio State (b/c you brought them up) and there was no head-to-head involved the call between the two might be closer than we'd like.
2/29 results (bubble) *nearing lock
(Gonzaga) 86 San Francisco 68
Ohio State 78 *Nebraska 69
(Memphis ) 82 East Carolina 58
(Utah) 90 Stanford 68
3/1 bubble games
(JMU) @ Coastal Carolina
Columbia @ (Princeton)
Fresno State @ *Nevada
(Gonzaga) 86 San Francisco 68
Ohio State 78 *Nebraska 69
(Memphis ) 82 East Carolina 58
(Utah) 90 Stanford 68
3/1 bubble games
(JMU) @ Coastal Carolina
Columbia @ (Princeton)
Fresno State @ *Nevada
I honestly think St johns is going to win the BET especially if they can get out of playing on day 1
3/1 results (bubble) *nearing lock
(JMU) 86 Coastal Carolina 76
(Princeton) 84 Columbia 70
*Nevada 74 Fresno State 66
3/2 bubble games
Tulane @ *Florida Atlantic
(Villanova) @ (Providence)
(Oregon) @ Arizona
Oklahoma State @ *Texas
*Miss St @ Auburn
(So Florida) @ Charlotte
Wyoming @ *Colorado State
(Wake) @ Virginia Tech
(Iowa) @ *Northwestern
(Virginia) @ Duke
(Pitt) @ BC
(A&M) @ Georgia
(KansasSt) @ (Cincinnati)
Cornell @ (Princeton)
Houston @ *Oklahoma
*Mich St @ Purdue
(New Mexico) @ *Boise state
(Ole Miss) @ Missouri
California @ Utah
*TCU @ BYU
*Gonzaga @ St Mary’s
(JMU) 86 Coastal Carolina 76
(Princeton) 84 Columbia 70
*Nevada 74 Fresno State 66
3/2 bubble games
Tulane @ *Florida Atlantic
(Villanova) @ (Providence)
(Oregon) @ Arizona
Oklahoma State @ *Texas
*Miss St @ Auburn
(So Florida) @ Charlotte
Wyoming @ *Colorado State
(Wake) @ Virginia Tech
(Iowa) @ *Northwestern
(Virginia) @ Duke
(Pitt) @ BC
(A&M) @ Georgia
(KansasSt) @ (Cincinnati)
Cornell @ (Princeton)
Houston @ *Oklahoma
*Mich St @ Purdue
(New Mexico) @ *Boise state
(Ole Miss) @ Missouri
California @ Utah
*TCU @ BYU
*Gonzaga @ St Mary’s
Wake Forest lost at Virginia Tech by 11. That's very good.
Virginia lost by 25 at Duke. Scored 48 points. Fourth time scoring in the 40's in the last five games. How on earth is this an NCAA Tournament team??
Virginia lost by 25 at Duke. Scored 48 points. Fourth time scoring in the 40's in the last five games. How on earth is this an NCAA Tournament team??
This is an outlier take. I can assure and promise this whole board that team criteria of record, metrics are deciding factors vs brand name of school.
They're 21-9 overall -- 7-9 against Q1 and Q2 (3-6 and 4-3 respectively) and have no losses below Q2. They are fortunate their blowout loss to ND is just above the Q3 cut line but the committee will evaluate that for what it truly is.
All nine of their losses are by double digits. They look like us with a few more wins -- a great defensive team whose offensive limitations can leave them looking bad.
They have a road win at Clemson, a neutral site win over Florida and home wins over Wake Forest and Texas A&M. That's five top 60 NET wins.
Lunardi has them as a 10. It's not a great resume but none of the bottom 10 at-large teams are going to be flawless.
Virginia Cavaliers NET - Nitty Gritty Report & Team Sheet 2024 Men's College Basketball | WarrenNolan.com
NET - Nitty Gritty Report & Team Sheet for Virginia Cavaliers 2024 Men's College Basketball. This Is a Duplication of the report used by the NCAA Tournament Selection Committee to Determine At-Large Teams in the national championship tournament with quadrants
Which rooting activities can we employ to most impact the outcomes of these teams' games?
Start with screaming out your window and work your way up to throwing objects at the tv.
