»
Topic: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....
Replies: 17   Last Post: Mar 21, 2019 11:24 AM by: tigercat01
[ Tiger Boards - Basketball ]
Start New Topic
Replies: 17  

Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....

[2]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 12:58 AM
    Reply

They were not a NCAA tourney team.
That one is still a head scratcher to me.


70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 1:43 AM
    Reply

Highest KenPom (or lowest, depending on how you look at it) to ever make the NCAAT as an at-large, and it's not even close

2019 orange level member


Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom

[3]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 9:31 AM
    Reply

I don't think they should have made it, however, they should have been in ahead of us. They beat Marquette (twice), Nova, VSU, and Seton Hall. Those are all wins vs tournament teams (Marq and Nova still ranked) while our Tigers only have wins vs VT (injured VT) and Cuse. Comes down to good wins vs bad losses.


Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 9:51 AM
    Reply

Was I really down voted for that comment??


Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:02 AM
    Reply

probably knowing this place. the truth isnt always taken well here

badge-donor-05yr.jpg

Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:39 AM
    Reply

I'm not gonna downvote you, but there's not really any good argument that St. John's should have made the field over us. Yeah, they had some decent "Q1 wins," but they also had some absolutely atrocious losses. Most notably to DePaul twice, by 30+ to Duke, and by 30+ in their conference tournament.

Not to mention, and perhaps most importantly, based on the NCAA's own NET metric they shouldn't have even made the tournament if the NCAA just took the top 68 teams. Their NET was 71-73 before and after the Big East Tournament! 2019 St. John's is the single worst at-large team ever placed into the field by a wide, wide margin and it showed. That game last night was a bad look for the Selection Committee.

I don't necessarily think Clemson should have gotten in over NC State (head to head matchups mean a lot), UNCG, or maybe even TCU, but St. John's was an NIT 3-seed that somehow stumbled into the Big Dance and showed why they should have been an NIT 3-seed.


Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:03 AM
    Reply

We lost to Duke by 19 and UVA by 20. The committee doesn't take the top 68 NET ranked teams either.

I am not saying St Johns should have been in but there are plenty of arguments to be made that St Johns had a better resume than Clemson.

And at the end of the day, Clemson is the only reason that Clemson didn't get in. We were 1-11 vs quad 1. Win 2 or even 1 more of those games and we're in. At some point you have to reward teams for actually winning games


Their "good wins" shouldn't make up for a low NET

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:49 AM
    Reply

ranking. The whole point of the NET is to take into account the totality of a team's performance, including good wins, bad losses, strength of schedule, efficiency, etc. I don't understand why the NCAA created this new metric, and then ignored it by leaving out NC State and Clemson while including St. Johns and Temple. It makes no sense.

2019 white level member

Re: 70+ in NET and 75+ in KenPom

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:12 AM
    Reply

NYC market , the higher-ups in broadcasting raised the thumb .

2019 white level memberbadge-donor-05yr.jpg

DB23


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 9:42 AM
    Reply

You're overlooking the marketing value of native New Yorkers. I guarantee you the NCAA doesn't.


I think that both we and NC State

[2]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:16 AM
    Reply

suffered because of the overload of ACC teams in the #1 seeds. The committee didn't want to seem to be favoring the league so they eliminated the lower ranked teams even though their RPI could have gotten them in.


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....

[2]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:22 AM
    Reply

It's an absolute joke that they are in over us.

Clemson: Net - 35, SOS - 39, RPI - 60, Ranked Wins - 1, Unranked Losses - 6
St.John: Net - 73, SOS - 69, RPI - 66, Ranked Wins - 3, Unranked Losses - 10


The only metric they have us in ranked wins.

I am not saying that we should be in, but we should definitely be in over St. Johns


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 10:56 AM
    Reply

I wouldn't say it's an 'absolute' joke.

We were 1-11 (only win was vs VT) in Q1 games. St Johns was 5-7 in Q1 games. They were much better against better competition than we were throughout the year, while we were much better vs worst competition. So again, good wins vs bad losses.


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:10 AM
    Reply

I'm assuming you're somewhat of a Johnnies fan, so I understand where you're coming from. But even if you go "good wins vs. bad losses" (which, as Judge put well, the NET ranking was ostensibly supposed to address), Clemson's resume was more impressive than St. John's. Yes, Clemson had a lot of near-misses against Q1, but no truly "bad losses." The closest Clemson came to a "bad loss" was a heartbreaker on to road to Miami, a Top 100 NET team. Most of Clemson's losses to Q1 teams were near-misses played within 1 or 2 possessions.

St. John's on the other hand, yeah they have some "good wins," but boy are their "bad losses" bad. Twice to a DePaul team that was 102 in the NET. By a 16-16 Butler team that, ironically, ranks HIGHER than St. John's in the NET. To a mediocre Providence team. By 30 to Duke. By 32 to Marquette in their conference tournament.


The NCAA created this NET metric to rank teams, and St. John's wouldn't have even made the field if the NCAA just took the Top 68. It's mind-boggling that they harped on the importance of the NET so much throughout the season and then put a team that it ranked so poorly in. St. John's will go down as the single worst at-large team to ever make the field, and their performance last night bore that out. That's just objectively true.


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:11 AM
    Reply

And - just to clarify - I am NOT a salty Clemson fan. I don't necessarily think we should have gotten in (although the NCAA's vaunted NET ranking says otherwise), but St. John's shouldn't have sniffed the tournament, much less made the field.


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....

[1]
Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:19 AM
    Reply

You sir are wrong to assume that I am a Johnnies fan, don't let my NYG fandom confuse you. I have no connection to that university and do not pull for them whatsoever, I just try to be as objective as possible on tigernet which is usually met with disdain.

I understand what you're saying about NET rankings but it is obvious that the committee uses other metrics, such as quality wins to select the field. They do not just take the highest 68 NET rankings and there are a lot of inputs that go into their decision. To me, the committee valued St Johns Q1+Q2 record over Clemson/NCSt Net rankings. Would I have put them in the tourny? No. Would I have put Clemson in the tourny? No 2x.


Re: Of course St. John’s loses their first four game....


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:24 AM
    Reply

No, I get that. I think the Committee largely just uses the "eye test" when it comes to making the decision for the last handful of at-large teams. I just don't St. John's even really passed the eye test. They were a mediocre team by any measurement. And, like others, I don't understand why the NCAA would promote the NET metric all season then completely flout it like they did.


All quad 1 games are not equal....


Posted: Mar 21, 2019 11:19 AM
    Reply

Give them our schedule and see what happens.
Aside from Duke...the next highest team they played was Villanova (26 NET).
For reference...we had 6 games against the top 16.
They also lost by 30 points in their conference tourney.
They also have dreadful losses to DePaul.

Again, they fit the agenda and the committee took them. But I think there were other teams that would have been better in that spot.


Replies: 17  

TIGER TICKETS

FB GAME: Season Tickets
FOR SALE: 2 in Sec UO asking 1500 each, email if interested.

Buy or Sell CU Tickets and More in Tiger Tickets!

[ Tiger Boards - Basketball ]
Start New Topic
1847 people have read this post