Our Non Conference

[Icehawk]

And folks keep ignoring that a few of those are HBCUs and Hurley has committed to playing them.

 

[Tiamat7]

KenPom's rankings are among the most respected out there. His algorithm doesn't need any work. And by advanced metrics they haven't played 4 games against Top 15 competition:

11 Kansas
19 Gonzaga
15 North Carolina
32 Texas

I'm happy we played all those games, and the team will benefit from them all. I think it has given a fair representation of what it was going for: the general strength of the teams we have played. We played 5 good to very good teams, and then a bunch of trash.

The Texas win should age well. Their Kenpom and NET will rise if they do reasonably well in the killer Big 12. And Dylan Disu (who wasn't available against UConn) looked good in his return last game.

 

[87Xfer]

this is completely wrong. a quad 4 game is any team 161 or lower in the NET at home, so a "quality mid major" team like, for instance, upenn from the ivy league (net #174) is viewed the same as, say, mississippi valley (net #362) using the new system.

and that is only one factor in determining seedings -- other factors, including margin of victory and team efficiency, heavily favor teams that blow other teams out.

do you really think you know more about non-conference scheduling than our coaching staff?? we literally won a national championship last year with the same scheduling practices.

I'm pretty sure he does think so

 

[McLovin]

Yeah, and? A higher seed is indicative of a better team and it's better and easier to win the title from a higher seed. 60%+ of champs are 1 seeds. 33 out of 38 (since the expansion) have been 1, 2, or 3 seeds.

UConn is the only 7 seed and one of only two 4 seeds to win. Give me a great resume and a 1 or 2 seed every year.

Kansas has a great resume and a 1 or 2 seed every year and we have more titles in the last 13 seasons as a 3, 7 and 4 seed than they have in 30 years.

I’m really not worried about seeding. If we take care of business and aren’t rewarded with a top seed, great, we’ll have less cupcakes next year. If we take care of business and are rewarded with a top seed, great, the schedules worked out as planned.

Either way, I don’t care who we play in March if we are playing like we are capable.

 

[McLovin]

Here's the thing: given the talent level of UConn even if more people left or different things took place...the team will still reliably beat a team around 200 with ease. Those aren't powerhouses.

I get playing some scrubs. It's just the dreck we play is way worse than it needs to be, IMO.

But margin of victory is a big factor in the overall computer rankings. So why risk beating a quad 4 team ranked 200 by 14 when you can smash the 357th team by 42? That’s the game Hurley is playing and what he’s banking on. We’ll see if it pays off…

 

[jibsey]

Even though teams that are 4’s and 7’s don’t usually win it all there are tons of 1’s, 2’s and 3’s that bomb out every year so what’s the problem? We’re not going in less than a 3 likely and we have to earn it no matter what seed we have.

 

[PAHusky]

Even though teams that are 4’s and 7’s don’t usually win it all there are tons of 1’s, 2’s and 3’s that bomb out every year so what’s the problem? We’re not going in less than a 3 likely and we have to earn it no matter what seed we have.

Right but the logic here is pretty simple. You don’t need to be a high seed to win it. We’ve proven that. But it’s statistically more likely to win a chip if you are and you clearly have an easier initial path the higher seed you are, so why wouldn’t you want one? Of course you have to earn it regardless of seed, so what?

 

[jibsey]

Right but the logic here is pretty simple. You don’t need to be a high seed to win it. We’ve proven that. But it’s statistically more likely to win a chip if you are and you clearly have an easier initial path the higher seed you are, so why wouldn’t you want one? Of course you have to earn it regardless of seed, so what?

Isn’t a 1, 2, or 3 seed good enough? I don’t see us worse than that unless injuries. You get a 16, 15, 14 in game one, an 8, 7, and 6 potentially in game 2. After that you gotta beat a team ranked worse than the Zags we just beat by 13 points.
Can’t protect against a higher seed playing out of their minds but how does the strength of our non conference schedule impact our situation this year based on what we’ve already done?

 

[ConnHuskBask]

Playing Mississippi Valley State is actually good and your seed doesn't matter because Shabazz Napier.

 

[uconn_jack]

How much of the NCAA Tourney seeding is human versus computer algorithims(sp?)?

It's all human, they just cherry pick computer analytic rankings to try and justify why they seeded teams where they did, even if they do so inconsistently.

 

[tzznandrew]

this is completely wrong. a quad 4 game is any team 161 or lower in the NET at home, so a "quality mid major" team like, for instance, upenn from the ivy league (net #174) is viewed the same as, say, mississippi valley (net #362) using the new system.

and that is only one factor in determining seedings -- other factors, including margin of victory and team efficiency, heavily favor teams that blow other teams out.

do you really think you know more about non-conference scheduling than our coaching staff?? we literally won a national championship last year with the same scheduling practices.

It's not viewed the same because SOS is factored into NET. So even if they don't look at it, it affects things.

do you really think you know more about non-conference scheduling than our coaching staff??

What kind of dumb ass ***** question is this? Why not just shut the board down if we can't talk about the games or make semi-critical statements.

I have given many reasons why I think those games are terrible to play. Only one avenue of reasoning is that it affects our tournament seeding. I think it does and it has. I think the other reasons, though, are sufficient to not play East Bumblechuck State in December. Because, as I have conceded, if we win big games it's not going to be all that important. We're talking about things on the about margins here.

 

[tzznandrew]

Playing Mississippi Valley State is actually good and your seed doesn't matter because Shabazz Napier.

Seriously. The stands are nearly empty. The teams gets almost nothing. It adds nothing to our resume and hurts our advanced metrics. And (as I've said before and I stand by it) these sorts of schedules affect things on the margins.

They're bad games that fans don't care about and only offer injury risk.

 

[elmcityboy]

It's not viewed the same because SOS is factored into NET. So even if they don't look at it, it affects things.

this is simply not true lol

you are being ridiculous

 

[Waquoit]

I think this team is primed and ready to hit on all cylinders going into conference play. Isn't that what an OOC schedule is for? UConn played 3 teams better than the best team Houston played. KenPom says that's good for being 49 spots ranked lower in SOS. Nonsense.

 

[PAHusky]

Isn’t a 1, 2, or 3 seed good enough? I don’t see us worse than that unless injuries. You get a 16, 15, 14 in game one, an 8, 7, and 6 potentially in game 2. After that you gotta beat a team ranked worse than the Zags we just beat by 13 points.
Can’t protect against a higher seed playing out of their minds but how does the strength of our non conference schedule impact our situation this year based on what we’ve already done?

Fair enough, agree completely that there's not much difference amongst 1-2-3 seeds.

 

[tzznandrew]

this is simply not true lol

you are being ridiculous

College basketball's NET rankings, explained

Here's everything you need to know about college basketball's NET ranking system.

www.ncaa.com

"The NET includes more components than just winning percentage. It takes into account game results, strength of schedule, game location, scoring margin, net offensive and defensive efficiency, and the quality of wins and losses."

 

[tzznandrew]

I think this team is primed and ready to hit on all cylinders going into conference play. Isn't that what an OOC schedule is for? UConn played 3 teams better than the best team Houston played. KenPom says that's good for being 49 spots ranked lower in SOS. Nonsense.

I feel like you're making a different point. Ultimately my disdain for these sub-300 games (as I've articulated) is multifaceted. One of those facets is that it make our resume worse. It may only do so marginally, but it does. And sometimes those margins matter in things like seeding. If UConn plays to its potential and doesn't drop a silly game or two, it doesn't matter.

But even if that's the case and it doesn't affect our seeding in any way, I still think these games are terrible to play, as I have already laid out (so I won't beat a dead horse...though, forgive me, I have a newborn and good-natured arguing on the internet is one of the few fun things available to me).

 

[elmcityboy]

College basketball's NET rankings, explained

Here's everything you need to know about college basketball's NET ranking system.

www.ncaa.com

"The NET includes more components than just winning percentage. It takes into account game results, strength of schedule, game location, scoring margin, net offensive and defensive efficiency, and the quality of wins and losses."

that's one sentence in an article -- it doesn't actually explain how the NET works. strength of schedule is accounted for by using the quadrant system, which essentially views home games against low majors and mid majors exactly the same.

these are two better articles, with more detail on the other factors that are considered. there is consideration given to "margin of victory" AND to team efficiency, a separate stat which rewards teams that run up the score on inferior opponents.

Bracketology: FAQ's about the NET rankings and how the NCAA Tournament bracket is built by the selection committee

Here's everything you wanted to know about how the NCAA builds the bracket for March Madness

www.cbssports.com

The five factors behind the NCAA's NET ranking system

Get ready to hear a lot about team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted win percentage and scoring margin.

www.si.com

again i ask, why would dan hurley (who has an entire team of analytics guys behind him) put together a schedule that hurts our chances at getting a good seed? we are one of the most analytics-oriented teams in the entire country. it's one of the reasons we won a chip last year.

 

[tzznandrew]

that's one sentence in an article -- it doesn't actually explain how the NET works. strength of schedule is accounted for by using the quadrant system, which essentially views home games against low majors and mid majors exactly the same.

these are two better articles, with more detail on the other factors that are considered. there is consideration given to "margin of victory" AND to team efficiency, a separate stat which rewards teams that run up the score on inferior opponents.

Bracketology: FAQ's about the NET rankings and how the NCAA Tournament bracket is built by the selection committee

Here's everything you wanted to know about how the NCAA builds the bracket for March Madness

www.cbssports.com

The five factors behind the NCAA's NET ranking system

Get ready to hear a lot about team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted win percentage and scoring margin.

www.si.com

again i ask, why would dan hurley (who has an entire team of analytics guys behind him) put together a schedule that hurts our chances at getting a good seed? we are one of the most analytics-oriented teams in the entire country. it's one of the reasons we won a chip last year.

Your first article has a quote saying they use RPI SOS.

"4. Strength of schedule, especially non-conference strength of schedule. At least one team gets left out of the tournament almost every year primarily because of a very poor non-conference schedule. The NET does not have a strength of schedule output, so the committee is still using the RPI version."

Anyway, below is what the NCAA actually offers about how they calculate it, and you'll see the quality of the opponent is in the first factor, "Team Value Index," which they say is "An algorithm set up to reward teams who beat other good teams?" Based on the NCAA's own language, which would have more of a reward, for instance, playing the 250th best team or the 350th best team?

This isn't hard: SOS plays a role in the NET. Who you played, where you played them.

As to this question:

again i ask, why would dan hurley (who has an entire team of analytics guys behind him) put together a schedule that hurts our chances at getting a good seed? we are one of the most analytics-oriented teams in the entire country. it's one of the reasons we won a chip last year.

I can't answer that explicitly because I don't know. He's certainly not saying to himself "Let's make a schedule to make it worse to get a good seed." Could have been scheduling issues with other teams, might be an AD reason. Could be they guessed wrong on programs. Could be he thought the five teams they were playing (UNC, Kansas, Gonzaga, Indiana, Texas) were just fine. You are giving him the benefit of the doubt, which is fair because he's won a title. He also got a 4 seed last year when the team should have gotten a 3 seed.

But mathematically, playing terrible teams makes the Team Value Index worse.

 

[7774]

But margin of victory is a big factor in the overall computer rankings. So why risk beating a quad 4 team ranked 200 by 14 when you can smash the 357th team by 42? That’s the game Hurley is playing and what he’s banking on. We’ll see if it pays off…

That’s really not how it works though. Margin of victory doesn’t matter, your actual margin of victory compared to the expected margin of victory is what matters.

 

[7774]

that's one sentence in an article -- it doesn't actually explain how the NET works. strength of schedule is accounted for by using the quadrant system, which essentially views home games against low majors and mid majors exactly the same.

these are two better articles, with more detail on the other factors that are considered. there is consideration given to "margin of victory" AND to team efficiency, a separate stat which rewards teams that run up the score on inferior opponents.

Bracketology: FAQ's about the NET rankings and how the NCAA Tournament bracket is built by the selection committee

Here's everything you wanted to know about how the NCAA builds the bracket for March Madness

www.cbssports.com

The five factors behind the NCAA's NET ranking system

Get ready to hear a lot about team value index, net efficiency, winning percentage, adjusted win percentage and scoring margin.

www.si.com

again i ask, why would dan hurley (who has an entire team of analytics guys behind him) put together a schedule that hurts our chances at getting a good seed? we are one of the most analytics-oriented teams in the entire country. it's one of the reasons we won a chip last year.

Am I completely confused or are you actually saying the NET model treats all games in a specific quadrant equally?

 

[McLovin]

That’s really not how it works though. Margin of victory doesn’t matter, your actual margin of victory compared to the expected margin of victory is what matters.

True, but we have been blowing out the 300+ teams beyond the eMOV with 40+ point wins.

For example, DePaul is ranked 216 in KenPom (same range as URI, Fordham, St. Louis) and our eMOV for our game on Jan 2nd is 25 points. Can we beat DePaup by 25? Absolutely. But it will probably take a full work load of minutes from our starters to get that done.

Do we want to be burning Clingan early in the season against mid majors to cover the eMOV or let our stars ply less minutes enroute to blowing out the bottom feeders?

 

[auror]

Your first article has a quote saying they use RPI SOS.

"4. Strength of schedule, especially non-conference strength of schedule. At least one team gets left out of the tournament almost every year primarily because of a very poor non-conference schedule. The NET does not have a strength of schedule output, so the committee is still using the RPI version."

Anyway, below is what the NCAA actually offers about how they calculate it, and you'll see the quality of the opponent is in the first factor, "Team Value Index," which they say is "An algorithm set up to reward teams who beat other good teams?" Based on the NCAA's own language, which would have more of a reward, for instance, playing the 250th best team or the 350th best team?

This isn't hard: SOS plays a role in the NET. Who you played, where you played them.

View attachment 94211

As to this question:


I can't answer that explicitly because I don't know. He's certainly not saying to himself "Let's make a schedule to make it worse to get a good seed." Could have been scheduling issues with other teams, might be an AD reason. Could be they guessed wrong on programs. Could be he thought the five teams they were playing (UNC, Kansas, Gonzaga, Indiana, Texas) were just fine. You are giving him the benefit of the doubt, which is fair because he's won a title. He also got a 4 seed last year when the team should have gotten a 3 seed.

But mathematically, playing terrible teams makes the Team Value Index worse.

They really need put out a new graphic, since the NET no longer includes #3, #4, or #5. But that graphic is still used even in their annual piece about what NET is for some reason (despite them saying in the column that those 3 aren't used).

The NET is basically KenPom but bumping up teams with a lot of wins. That's it.

Strength of schedule is considered as part of both the efficiency part and the resume part.

 

[jibsey]

I think this team is primed and ready to hit on all cylinders going into conference play. Isn't that what an OOC schedule is for? UConn played 3 teams better than the best team Houston played. KenPom says that's good for being 49 spots ranked lower in SOS. Nonsense.

Correct. Look the important thing to know is that the team as is, is competitive if not better than the best teams out there. We have players healing and improving their games. Players are not robots and we don’t really know with 100& certainty how the season will play out, but, have things ever been better for UCONN men’s hoop fans?

 

[elmcityboy]

i will defer to @auror and others! it's possible that my understanding of this stuff is wrong.

it's just kind of funny to me that we are having this conversation when our team is ranked #3 on kenpom and #5 on the NET (behind BYU, weirdly, who has played an even softer schedule) and would surely be a 1 seed if the postseason started today