Welcome, Guest
Username: Password: Remember me

TOPIC: NET rankings

NET rankings 6 months 1 week ago #321948

  • Adam
  • Adam's Avatar Topic Author
  • Away
  • Posts: 2077
  • Thank you received: 1019

SJU61982 wrote:

Adam wrote:

L J S A wrote: I see other posters complaining about Dayton -- I'd love to be in Dayton, mostly because it would force me for the first time to watch one of the Dayton games.


If we play in Dayton, then there's a 50% chance we won't even be on the bracket everyone fills out. If that's the case then it'd be like not even making the Tournament.

Just my opinion, but playing in Dayton would suck and we'd need to win that game for it to be a successful season.


It sucks because, if you lose, your tournament experience is over before it even started.

If you win though, I think you're probably at an advantage in your Round of 64 game, because you've already had the "win or go home" experience. If you look back to 2011, when this format started, I think at least one of the Dayton winners (and I'm not counting the 16 seeds that win, because they face the 1, where the talent difference is just too great) has advanced past the Round of 64 every year. That's at least 50%.


By 50%, I meant roughly 50% odds to win the Dayton game and advance to the real Tournament, but you have a fair point. However, we are a thin team and might be too worn out to get out of the first weekend if we need to play 3 games in a 5 day period.

Anyways, if we end up in Dayton and win then I'd still consider that a success. I just don't like that route when we have no excuse not to get a better seed.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 6 days ago #322588

  • Paultzman
  • Paultzman's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 23394
  • Thank you received: 13533

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 6 days ago #322607

  • Adam
  • Adam's Avatar Topic Author
  • Away
  • Posts: 2077
  • Thank you received: 1019
Yeah, recently we've been winning games in squeakers and losing in blowouts. Our NET should be better than #48 at 6-6, but obviously we'll take the Ws no matter what. Just glad we won yesterday, but even in losses we need to avoid getting blown out. Our RPI (#37) is a lot better because it doesn't take into account margins.

Here's how many BE wins I think we need on Selection Sunday:
7-11 BE and 3-1 BET (Dayton)
8-10 BE and 1-1 BET (Dayton)
9-9 BE and 0-1 BET (#10 seed)

I'm sure I'll get push back, but the bubble SUCKS this year. On Bracket Matrix, we're on average a #9 seed (not sure if that's before or after yesterday's win). At a certain point (which I believe we reached weeks ago), disagreeing with 9-9 will mean you're going to be disagreeing with all the bracketologists out there.

Anyways, can't be stressed enough how massive yesterday's win was. Had we lost we'd be 5-7 now, and possibly 5-9 after two tough games vs Nova and @ Providence. Let's get the win vs Nova and start thinking about seeding rather than whether or not we'll make it.
The following user(s) said Thank You: Paultzman, OLV72, Sherman, Sheridan & Grant

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Adam.

NET rankings 6 months 6 days ago #322620

  • Jack Williams
  • Jack Williams's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 5574
  • Thank you received: 1195
Being in Dayton sucks because most brackets don’t let you pick the winner of the play in.

Like for example let’s say we play temple in a play in game, on the bracket it’ll say SJU/TEMPLE as you advance them through the bracket it continues to show both teams until the play in game is completed, and by then, most people have filled out their brackets already
The following user(s) said Thank You: Adam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 6 days ago #322621

  • SJU14
  • SJU14's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 1483
  • Thank you received: 271

Adam wrote: Yeah, recently we've been winning games in squeakers and losing in blowouts. Our NET should be better than #48 at 6-6, but obviously we'll take the Ws no matter what. Just glad we won yesterday, but even in losses we need to avoid getting blown out. Our RPI (#37) is a lot better because it doesn't take into account margins.

Here's how many BE wins I think we need on Selection Sunday:
7-11 BE and 3-1 BET (Dayton)
8-10 BE and 1-1 BET (Dayton)
9-9 BE and 0-1 BET (#10 seed)

I'm sure I'll get push back, but the bubble SUCKS this year. On Bracket Matrix, we're on average a #9 seed (not sure if that's before or after yesterday's win). At a certain point (which I believe we reached weeks ago), disagreeing with 9-9 will mean you're going to be disagreeing with all the bracketologists out there.

Anyways, can't be stressed enough how massive yesterday's win was. Had we lost we'd be 5-7 now, and possibly 5-9 after two tough games vs Nova and @ Providence. Let's get the win vs Nova and start thinking about seeding rather than whether or not we'll make it.


Speaking of the bubble, every time I see a bubble team mentioned they always talk about record against quad 1 teams. We have more quad 1 wins than most on the bubble. I keep seeing 1-6 and 2-5 type records with those bubble teams and we are in better shape than that. That is going to be a big factor come selection Sunday
The following user(s) said Thank You: Adam

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 6 days ago #322628

  • Adam
  • Adam's Avatar Topic Author
  • Away
  • Posts: 2077
  • Thank you received: 1019
Yes coming into this season we knew there would be two major issues with our schedule: 1. SOS 2. Quad 1 opportunities.

While our SOS isn't good (which will be offset by our record anyways), I'd argue Q1 wins are far more important. Q1 wins are actually going to be a strength for us.

Current Q1 wins for #48 St. Johns (Top 30 H, 50 N, 75 A):
#43 VCU N
#19 Marquette H
#57 Creighton A
#19 Marquette A

Current Q2 wins that are close to Q1:
#78 Georgetown A

Upcoming:
#21 Villanova H
#74 Providence A
The following user(s) said Thank You: Room112, Amaseinyourface, SJU14

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Last edit: by Adam.

NET rankings 6 months 5 days ago #322808

  • Paultzman
  • Paultzman's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 23394
  • Thank you received: 13533
Zach B
Seton Hall gets a nice jump in the NET, up to 61 from 69. St. John's is at 47. Hofstra at 51. #sjubb #shbb #hofmbb

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 5 days ago #322824

  • Paultzman
  • Paultzman's Avatar
  • Offline
  • Posts: 23394
  • Thank you received: 13533

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 5 days ago #322825

  • Knight
  • Knight's Avatar
  • Away
  • Posts: 5072
  • Thank you received: 1114

Paultzman wrote:


Now that's too friendly!
"Not that there's anything wrong with that."

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

NET rankings 6 months 4 days ago #322891

  • Adam
  • Adam's Avatar Topic Author
  • Away
  • Posts: 2077
  • Thank you received: 1019
Bracket Matrix (first number is NET):
#20 Marquette: 3 seed (106/106 brackets)
#19 Villanova: 5 seed (106/106)
#49 St. John's: 9 seed (106/106)
#61 Seton Hall: 12 seed (85/106)
#54 Butler: 1st team out (48/106)

Interesting how both St. John's and Seton Hall are 6-6 in conference, yet St. John's is significantly ahead and very safely in. You'd think that Seton Hall would get some more respect given they beat teams like Maryland and Kentucky. The problem is they just barely squeaked by most decent opponents OOC, which hurt their NET.

Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.

Moderators: mkras99SJUFAN2espkengmanlawmanfankranmarsOhioFanotisredmannorthKnight

Follow redmen.com on Twitter