Metrics Question

[g0pirates]

I’ve seen writers say that our efficiency/turnover metrics are what’s holding our NET ranking from being better… that we don’t beat up on bad teams enough.

Shouldn’t our win over Uconn, the #1 ranked team…. which was by 15+, count for more? Teams will lose to them and barely fall in ranks, but our huge win over them counts for nothing?

 

[Piratz]

It’s aggregate stats. We had a poor non conference season. That’s still a weight. A few blowout losses too.

 

[shu09]

Seton Hall was over #100 in NET after the Rutgers loss. You just don't erase that in a month. It's a season-long effort.

 

[lloyde dobler]

I’ve seen writers say that our efficiency/turnover metrics are what’s holding our NET ranking from being better… that we don’t beat up on bad teams enough.

Shouldn’t our win over Uconn, the #1 ranked team…. which was by 15+, count for more? Teams will lose to them and barely fall in ranks, but our huge win over them counts for nothing?

What makes you think it didn’t count for more? It definitely did.

 

[Gohall129]

we play ugly basketball. Lots of turnovers, lots of fouls and close games. But we win games. We’re not a team set up for metric success and that’s okay. Firmly position ourselves to get in the tournament and it will take care of ourselves. Even with the low NET we’re now being listed on the 7 line of bracketology