|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 19, 2019 9:22:42 GMT -8
We moved up to #85 yet the ucks are still #69?
How is this new system any better than RPI?
|
|
|
Post by TheGlove on Feb 19, 2019 10:07:49 GMT -8
We moved up to #85 yet the ucks are still #69? How is this new system any better than RPI? I was going to post the same. How can you have a better record and beat a team 2x head to head and be ranked behind them? You beat them and drop a spot. Crazy. Pac 12 rankings: Rank Prev Team Conf. Overall Road Neutral Home Non D131 31 Washington Pac-12 20-5 6-3 2-2 12-0 0-0 68 68 Arizona St. Pac-12 17-8 4-4 2-1 11-3 0-0 69 69 Oregon Pac-12 15-10 3-5 1-1 11-4 0-0 73 73 Colorado Pac-12 16-9 5-6 1-1 10-2 0-0 85 84 Oregon St. Pac-12 16-8 4-3 2-1 10-4 0-0 88 87 Arizona Pac-12 14-12 3-6 1-2 10-4 0-0 89 88 Southern California Pac-12 14-12 2-6 1-2 11-4 0-0 97 96 Stanford Pac-12 14-11 4-7 1-2 9-2 0-0 101 101 Utah Pac-12 14-11 5-3 1-3 8-5 0-0 116 114 UCLA Pac-12 13-13 3-5 0-3 10-5 0-0 172 172 Washington St. Pac-12 10-15 2-7 0-3 8-5 0-0 275 274 California Pac-12 5-20 0-8 0-3 5-9 0-0
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Feb 19, 2019 10:14:20 GMT -8
We moved up to #85 yet the ucks are still #69? How is this new system any better than RPI? I was going to post the same. How can you have a better record and beat a team 2x head to head and be ranked behind them? You beat them and drop a spot. Crazy. Pac 12 rankings: Rank Prev Team Conf. Overall Road Neutral Home Non D131 31 Washington Pac-12 20-5 6-3 2-2 12-0 0-0 68 68 Arizona St. Pac-12 17-8 4-4 2-1 11-3 0-0 69 69 Oregon Pac-12 15-10 3-5 1-1 11-4 0-0 73 73 Colorado Pac-12 16-9 5-6 1-1 10-2 0-0 85 84 Oregon St. Pac-12 16-8 4-3 2-1 10-4 0-0 88 87 Arizona Pac-12 14-12 3-6 1-2 10-4 0-0 89 88 Southern California Pac-12 14-12 2-6 1-2 11-4 0-0 97 96 Stanford Pac-12 14-11 4-7 1-2 9-2 0-0 101 101 Utah Pac-12 14-11 5-3 1-3 8-5 0-0 116 114 UCLA Pac-12 13-13 3-5 0-3 10-5 0-0 172 172 Washington St. Pac-12 10-15 2-7 0-3 8-5 0-0 275 274 California Pac-12 5-20 0-8 0-3 5-9 0-0 I don't get it. We were #92, didn't play anyone (on Thur. or Fri) and move to #84. Then we beat a team ahead of us and drop to #85.
|
|
|
Post by mbabeav on Feb 19, 2019 10:28:20 GMT -8
We moved up to #85 yet the ucks are still #69? How is this new system any better than RPI? We lost a couple of stupid games that pinned us way back. If we can win 4 of next 6 and a few tourney games, we might make a case for being #2 Pac 12 team in.
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Feb 19, 2019 10:49:43 GMT -8
I was going to post the same. How can you have a better record and beat a team 2x head to head and be ranked behind them? You beat them and drop a spot. Crazy. Pac 12 rankings: Rank Prev Team Conf. Overall Road Neutral Home Non D131 31 Washington Pac-12 20-5 6-3 2-2 12-0 0-0 68 68 Arizona St. Pac-12 17-8 4-4 2-1 11-3 0-0 69 69 Oregon Pac-12 15-10 3-5 1-1 11-4 0-0 73 73 Colorado Pac-12 16-9 5-6 1-1 10-2 0-0 85 84 Oregon St. Pac-12 16-8 4-3 2-1 10-4 0-0 88 87 Arizona Pac-12 14-12 3-6 1-2 10-4 0-0 89 88 Southern California Pac-12 14-12 2-6 1-2 11-4 0-0 97 96 Stanford Pac-12 14-11 4-7 1-2 9-2 0-0 101 101 Utah Pac-12 14-11 5-3 1-3 8-5 0-0 116 114 UCLA Pac-12 13-13 3-5 0-3 10-5 0-0 172 172 Washington St. Pac-12 10-15 2-7 0-3 8-5 0-0 275 274 California Pac-12 5-20 0-8 0-3 5-9 0-0 I don't get it. We were #92, didn't play anyone (on Thur. or Fri) and move to #84. Then we beat a team ahead of us and drop to #85. All I know is that Selection Sunday is going to be fun this year when the Super Computer spits out Duke, Furman, Stony Brook and Grand Canyon as #1 seeds.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Feb 19, 2019 11:38:55 GMT -8
I was going to post the same. How can you have a better record and beat a team 2x head to head and be ranked behind them? You beat them and drop a spot. Crazy. Pac 12 rankings: Rank Prev Team Conf. Overall Road Neutral Home Non D131 31 Washington Pac-12 20-5 6-3 2-2 12-0 0-0 68 68 Arizona St. Pac-12 17-8 4-4 2-1 11-3 0-0 69 69 Oregon Pac-12 15-10 3-5 1-1 11-4 0-0 73 73 Colorado Pac-12 16-9 5-6 1-1 10-2 0-0 85 84 Oregon St. Pac-12 16-8 4-3 2-1 10-4 0-0 88 87 Arizona Pac-12 14-12 3-6 1-2 10-4 0-0 89 88 Southern California Pac-12 14-12 2-6 1-2 11-4 0-0 97 96 Stanford Pac-12 14-11 4-7 1-2 9-2 0-0 101 101 Utah Pac-12 14-11 5-3 1-3 8-5 0-0 116 114 UCLA Pac-12 13-13 3-5 0-3 10-5 0-0 172 172 Washington St. Pac-12 10-15 2-7 0-3 8-5 0-0 275 274 California Pac-12 5-20 0-8 0-3 5-9 0-0 I don't get it. We were #92, didn't play anyone (on Thur. or Fri) and move to #84. Then we beat a team ahead of us and drop to #85. It doesn't just matter what the Beavs do but other teams around them. If someone moves up than someone moves down. According to NET, someone below us had a more impressive win based on the metrics they use than OSU had against UO, so that team moved ahead of the Beavs and Beavs dropped. Not that hard to understand. Now why UO is rated above the Beavs is much harder to understand. And I don't by any means have a great understanding of how the NET works. But it looks like it really comes down to strength of schedule, because when you look at the two teams' quadrant records the Beavs' is better. NET has Oregon's overall strength of schedule as 66 and 51 non-conf, while the Beavs' overall is 112 and non-conf. is 212. But as far as quadrant records, in quad 1 games UO is 1-5 while Beavs are 2-1; quad 2 -- 2-2 versus 3-4; quad 3 -- 5-2 versus 5-3; and quad 4 -- 7-1 versus 6-0. So Beavs have more quad 1 wins (2 versus 1), more quad 1 and 2 wins (5 versus 3), and more quad 1, 2, and 3 wins (10 versus 8). Given all that it has to come down to SOS. Colorado is actually the one that really baffles me as they are ranked 73 by NET and both their SOSs are worse than the Beavs. And the Beavs have more quad 1, quad 1+2 and quad 1+2+3 wins that the Buffs. Also, as far as the Beavs beating UO twice and being below them in NET rankings, NET doesn't take that into consideration. It only looks at where a team is ranked and whether the game is home, away or neutral court for each team. Head to head record I'm assuming would be something the committee looks at. So right now if it came down to the Beavs or Ucks for a NCAA tourney spot, I'd guess that even though the Beavs have a lower NET ranking they would be the choice given the conference standings and the 2-0 head to head record.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Feb 19, 2019 11:42:30 GMT -8
It's not just the Pac - there have been a ton of sloppy teams this year - the talking heads are calling it the year of the 'soft bubble'. For instance, the SEC has 3 really good teams, and about 5 more that are bubble teams - none of those 5 probably get in under normal years, but of course they'll likely find a way to get half of them in.
Braketology has UW currently as a #7, and ASU as a play-in 12 (vs. one of those SEC bubble teams). That seems about right, charitable to ASU. The NIT might be half Pac-12 teams.
At least we have Utah St., Nevada, Gonzaga, USF, New Mexico State and St. Mary's preventing the NCAA from dropping a western regional. Yikes.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Feb 19, 2019 12:02:49 GMT -8
Another thing about the NET rankings is that games already played can move up and down among quadrants, which could also impact overall ranking. For instance, the Beavs loss to the Huskies is considered a quad 2 loss currently because Huskies have a 31 NET ranking. If they move up to 30 or higher than that becomes a quad 1 loss for Beavs. Likewise if Colorado drops below 75 in NET rankings that our current quad 1 win against them becomes only a quad 2 win. So current wins we have that could move to a higher quadrant are Penn (if they move up 12 spots it goes from quad 3 to quad 2 win), Pepperdine (up 10 spots becomes quad 3 win) and Wash. St. (up 12 becomes quad 3 win).
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 19, 2019 12:09:38 GMT -8
I was going to post the same. How can you have a better record and beat a team 2x head to head and be ranked behind them? You beat them and drop a spot. Crazy. Pac 12 rankings: Rank Prev Team Conf. Overall Road Neutral Home Non D131 31 Washington Pac-12 20-5 6-3 2-2 12-0 0-0 68 68 Arizona St. Pac-12 17-8 4-4 2-1 11-3 0-0 69 69 Oregon Pac-12 15-10 3-5 1-1 11-4 0-0 73 73 Colorado Pac-12 16-9 5-6 1-1 10-2 0-0 85 84 Oregon St. Pac-12 16-8 4-3 2-1 10-4 0-0 88 87 Arizona Pac-12 14-12 3-6 1-2 10-4 0-0 89 88 Southern California Pac-12 14-12 2-6 1-2 11-4 0-0 97 96 Stanford Pac-12 14-11 4-7 1-2 9-2 0-0 101 101 Utah Pac-12 14-11 5-3 1-3 8-5 0-0 116 114 UCLA Pac-12 13-13 3-5 0-3 10-5 0-0 172 172 Washington St. Pac-12 10-15 2-7 0-3 8-5 0-0 275 274 California Pac-12 5-20 0-8 0-3 5-9 0-0 I don't get it. We were #92, didn't play anyone (on Thur. or Fri) and move to #84. Then we beat a team ahead of us and drop to #85. Oklahoma State upset TCU, which catapulted the Cowboys past the Beavers and seven other teams. The Cowboys are 10-16 and ranked ahead of the Beavers, due to NET's determination that Oklahoma State has played the fourth-hardest schedule and Oregon State has played the 112th-hardest schedule. RPI has Oregon State 27 spots ahead of Oklahoma State. Ken Pom has Oregon State 16 spots ahead of Oklahoma State. Ken Pom tends to like Oregon State a bit more than NET or RPI. The Beavers simply have not yet done what they need to do to get in a position to get an at large bid. Oregon State needs to win at least four of the next six to get there. Short of that, the Beavers will have to probably win the Pac-12 to get an invite to the Tournament.
|
|
|
Post by osubeaver2018 on Feb 19, 2019 12:12:40 GMT -8
We actually moved from 90 to 84 after the win against uo in yesterday's rankings, while they moved from 67 to 69. So it isn't QUITE as egregious as it seems, and our drop in 1 spot today was probably due to a result of some game yesterday. I agree though I still don't understand how that game against uo didn't help us more or harm them more. One of the metrics the NET uses is O/D efficiency and margin of victory (capped at 10). We won by 15 so check off the maximum effect of margin of victory for that game and a likely large difference in O/D efficiency and you would THINK that it would at least drop them out of the top 70 or push us into the top 80.
I'm not sure. I'm confused by these rankings too. Our ranking took a big hit with that blowout loss to Stanford (see margin, O/D efficiency above, and throw in the fact that it counts as 1.4 losses in adjusted win % cause we were at home), and our losses to A&M (considered a home game) and Kent St. Saint Louis has fallen like a rock in their ranking too so that can't even be looked at as a "good loss" anymore either.
Barring a big run in the next 7 to (hopefully) 9 games, this year might be a year we look back on and think about what could have been.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 19, 2019 13:21:27 GMT -8
We actually moved from 90 to 84 after the win against uo in yesterday's rankings, while they moved from 67 to 69. So it isn't QUITE as egregious as it seems, and our drop in 1 spot today was probably due to a result of some game yesterday. I agree though I still don't understand how that game against uo didn't help us more or harm them more. One of the metrics the NET uses is O/D efficiency and margin of victory (capped at 10). We won by 15 so check off the maximum effect of margin of victory for that game and a likely large difference in O/D efficiency and you would THINK that it would at least drop them out of the top 70 or push us into the top 80. I'm not sure. I'm confused by these rankings too. Our ranking took a big hit with that blowout loss to Stanford (see margin, O/D efficiency above, and throw in the fact that it counts as 1.4 losses in adjusted win % cause we were at home), and our losses to A&M (considered a home game) and Kent St. Saint Louis has fallen like a rock in their ranking too so that can't even be looked at as a "good loss" anymore either. Barring a big run in the next 7 to (hopefully) 9 games, this year might be a year we look back on and think about what could have been. Non-conference NET: UC Riverside 312 Wyoming 317 Old Dominion 81 Missouri 92 Penn 112 @long Beach State 235 Missouri State 147 @saint Louis 118 Texas A&M 86 Pepperdine 170 Kent State 135 Central Connecticut 288
Those two losses to Missouri and Texas A&M stick out like a sore thumb. The Aggies are currently sitting at 11th in the SEC and the Tigers are a spot behind in 12th in the SEC. Missouri has a huge game against Kentucky tonight, which could really help out the perception of that loss. Texas A&M plays LSU next week, which is another game that Oregon State could really help out Oregon State's perception.
Saint Louis is currently sixth in the likely one-bid Atlantic 10. Kent State is third in the likely one-bid MAC. Saint Louis does have the big game of its regular season against Virginia Commonwealth coming up next week. Kent State also has the biggest game of its remaining regular season, coming up on Saturday, when it plays Buffalo.
Old Dominion is the biggest win. The Monarchs sit on top of Conference USA, two games clear of the pack. Old Dominion biggest remaining conference game is against Southern Miss on the sixth.
Penn is lamentably the second-biggest win. The Quakers are currently in fifth in the eight-team Ivy League, having just lost to Harvard on Saturday at home by seven.
Missouri State was the third-biggest win. The Bears are actually leading the Missouri Valley Conference on tiebreakers over Drake and Loyola-Chicago (a Final Four team last year). Missouri State has won seven of the past eight to dig its way out of a 5-11 start. If they keep it up, the Bears may turn out to be a quality win. Missouri State's final big game is against Drake on the second.
Pepperdine was the fourth-biggest win. Pepperdine is currently seventh in the 10-team West Coast Conference. The Waves travel to Spokane on Thursday to play Gonzaga, which is a chance to help out Oregon State.
Long Beach State was the fifth-biggest win and UC Riverside was seventh. The 49ers are currently sitting in seventh in the Big West and the Highlanders are in eighth in the nine-team Big West. Riverside still has a big game against UC Irvine coming up on the second. Long Beach State's big wins are probably over until at least the Big West Tournament.
Central Connecticut was the sixth-biggest win. The Devils are sitting in ninth place in the 10-team Northeast Conference.
Wyoming was the worst of the eight wins. The Cowboys are currently 10th in the 11-team Mountain West. Wyoming's final big game is on the road at Fresno on the 27th.
If Oregon State's opponents can grind out some wins, hopefully, our NET will start to trend the right direction.
|
|
|
Post by obf on Feb 19, 2019 15:47:10 GMT -8
This may be a dumb question.... Why is our SOS, and really our out of conference opponents, so bad? Is this a case, like in football, where the schedule was created a decade ago so it is just a random occurrence that all of our OOC foes got bad at the same time? Or did we purposely schedule bad teams trying to boost the win/loss record of a team that was languishing for a couple decades, avoiding even the shadow of a perennially good team for fear that we would be destroyed? Is it because we don't get any invitations to good pre-season tournaments because out last years NET/RPI is also poor (thus creating a catch 22, you have to have a good NET/RPI to get a good NET/RPI)? Can we somehow blame this on either QA or Larry "Smith" Scott?? The pac-12 being down has been discussed ad nauseam, so take that as a given, I am more interested in why we have such a bad OOC SOS.
|
|
|
Post by joecool on Feb 19, 2019 16:14:33 GMT -8
Non-conference NET: UC Riverside 312 Wyoming 317 Old Dominion 81 Missouri 92 Penn 112 @long Beach State 235 Missouri State 147 @saint Louis 118 Texas A&M 86 Pepperdine 170 Ken State 135 Central Connecticut 288
What a terrible non conference schedule. Combine that with a very mediocre conference and that's why we are stuck where we are. The losses to Kent St. and Stanford were killers.
|
|
|
Post by vhalum92 on Feb 19, 2019 17:52:57 GMT -8
Isn't our OOC schedule so bad because we have not been good/scheduled opponents we thought we could beat... but didn't get it done?
We do have a say in who we schedule OOC, so someone at the Athletic Department was working on that schedule and made some decisions to lead to it. I'm sure every year has some negative surprises where you are scrambling to fill a game or two. I can understand a few weaker opponents.
I'd ask, when are these games scheduled as well. Sometimes a team can drop off or trend up between making the contract to play and the execution of the game.
|
|
|
Post by osubeaver2018 on Feb 19, 2019 18:56:22 GMT -8
Non-conference NET: UC Riverside 312 Wyoming 317 Old Dominion 81 Missouri 92 Penn 112 @long Beach State 235 Missouri State 147 @saint Louis 118 Texas A&M 86 Pepperdine 170 Ken State 135 Central Connecticut 288
What a terrible non conference schedule. Combine that with a very mediocre conference and that's why we are stuck where we are. The losses to Kent St. and Stanford were killers. Can't fault the AD for some of the scheduling this year. The Dam City game against A&M doesn't look like a tough game because of how much A&M fell off a cliff this year after a Sweet 16 appearance last year. Missouri, another SEC team is struggling much the same, and had we won that game would have played then #12 KState instead of Penn. @stl was a good game to schedule because they are typically a pretty solid group with a good recent NCAA tournament history in a usually competitive A10 conference that just happens to be down this year as well with StL not being that great.
I would love to see us play in a better non-conference tournament and keep trying to draw a good team to Portland (maybe even one at home, we had Miss. State not too long ago in Gill), and also really challenge ourselves with a road game against a regular top 25 team. Play 4-6 resumé boosting games and still get your ~6 cupcakes to experiment with different things and get young guys some PT. You don't get punished for playing a tougher schedule and losing a couple games in basketball like you do in football.
We weren't THAT far off from looking like that's what we were doing this year with our schedule, it just so happened that some of these other teams didn't hold up their end of the deal and have decent years themselves.
I do also think that if we had taken care of business against Kent State and then one of A&M or StL then this team would be considered IN the tournament in a lot of people's projections. All we can do now is win what we have left and hope that the scheduling is a little better next year.
|
|