royalfan Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 Just a reminder that although many people bring up NET ranking a lot, it doesn’t matter what ours is. It is simply a sorting tool, not an evaluation tool. Not sure why they don’t use a different sorting tool that they deem worthy of using as an evaluation tool. throwback 1 Quote
hugh42 Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 3 hours ago, hhcmatt said: Some of that is because Fred likes having a smaller rotation. It's why we redshirted 3 guys I agree with this to an extent, but my guess is the coaching staff/Fred thought they would have other rotation pieces in Griffiths, Ulis and Meah. One hasn't panned out so far and the other two have been relegated to situational/foul problem minutes. In the age of the portal/NIL, if we ever want to win a game, let alone make a run in the NCAA tournament, we better develop the kind of depth where we can go 10 deep if needed and not have a significant drop off. Quote
hskr4life Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 1 hour ago, royalfan said: Just a reminder that although many people bring up NET ranking a lot, it doesn’t matter what ours is. It is simply a sorting tool, not an evaluation tool. Not sure why they don’t use a different sorting tool that they deem worthy of using as an evaluation tool. And to add onto this, it's almost even more important what our opponents NETs are because that correlates to Quads which are used pretty heavily. Quote
Vinny Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 10 minutes ago, hugh42 said: I agree with this to an extent, but my guess is the coaching staff/Fred thought they would have other rotation pieces in Griffiths, Ulis and Meah. One hasn't panned out so far and the other two have been relegated to situational/foul problem minutes. In the age of the portal/NIL, if we ever want to win a game, let alone make a run in the NCAA tournament, we better develop the kind of depth where we can go 10 deep if needed and not have a significant drop off. How about we what happens here now that we may need to get our 10th guy some minutes? For what it’s worth, Dan Hurley plays a tight rotation and he just won back to back titles. Quote
Art Vandalay Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 19 minutes ago, Vinny said: How about we what happens here now that we may need to get our 10th guy some minutes? For what it’s worth, Dan Hurley plays a tight rotation and he just won back to back titles. A lot of great coaches prefer 7-8 man rotations, it is very common. I think Jay Wright was a top 1-3 coach and he had short rotations most of the time. You play those 9-11 types early as you can so if you have injuries / fouls they have some experience. If not go with your best players down the stretch. I had no issues with Meah sitting but I’m sure glad we have him now. That’s good depth to me. Vinny and HuscurAdam 2 Quote
hugh42 Posted February 12 Report Posted February 12 2 hours ago, Vinny said: How about we what happens here now that we may need to get our 10th guy some minutes? For what it’s worth, Dan Hurley plays a tight rotation and he just won back to back titles. Develop was the wrong word to use. I have no problem with tight rotations, but when Gary, Williams or Berke get two fouls in the first half it would be nice to have more firepower to bring off the bench. We don't have that this season, hopefully we will have more depth in this regard next year. Vinny and Handy Johnson 2 Quote
Raidsker Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 22 hours ago, HuscurAdam said: "Directly" is doing a lot of work here. Margin of victory is baked into the efficiency numbers so it makes a huge difference without being a stand-alone data point. It used to be in directly and they took it out. Now it is more relative... and adjusted foe where you are playing. Here is someone explaining it better probably. https://www.reddit.com/r/CollegeBasketball/s/jb6xsW2YVG Quote
Norm Peterson Posted February 13 Report Posted February 13 If my counting is correct, our current record against Kenpom top 40 teams: 5-5. Two are road wins; none are home losses. Quote
Vinny Posted February 16 Report Posted February 16 Q1 road win and we’re down two spots to 43 on Torvik. Glad we did some work early this year. Quote
hskr4life Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 1 hour ago, Vinny said: Q1 road win and we’re down two spots to 43 on Torvik. Glad we did some work early this year. Those 6 Q1 wins are probably top 25ish in the nation though. And 3/6 away from home. Vinny 1 Quote
millerhusker Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 8 minutes ago, hskr4life said: Those 6 Q1 wins are probably top 25ish in the nation though. And 3/6 away from home. Yep. Before today only 17 teams in the country had 6+ quad 1 wins. And only 12 of those teams have 5+ road wins. Quote
hskr4life Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 9 minutes ago, millerhusker said: Yep. Before today only 17 teams in the country had 6+ quad 1 wins. And only 12 of those teams have 5+ road wins. Have a feeling we’re going to be one of those “seeded better than many bracketologists had them” type of teams. B1G Red, Vinny, millerhusker and 2 others 5 Quote
hskr4life Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 The Oregon blowout of Rutgers will likely drop that to a Q3 loss tomorrow. We have more than enough Q1 wins to make up for it though. throwback and millerhusker 2 Quote
AuroranHusker Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 25 minutes ago, hskr4life said: The Oregon blowout of Rutgers will likely drop that to a Q3 loss tomorrow. We have more than enough Q1 wins to make up for it though. A bunch of games left for Rutgers to improve their standing, we shall see if they do. @ WAS - USC - @ MICH - @ PUR - MINN Quote
doc1394 Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 (edited) Using @49r's template, here is an update since it seems like he hasn't been able to recently. Sorry if I'm stepping on any toes here. KenPom rankings as of 2-17-25 ======================= B1G (7-8): 9. Wisconsin (A) - L 10. Purdue (A) - L 14. Maryland (2) - L,L 17. Michigan State (A) - L 20. Illinois (H) - W 22. Michigan (H) 26. UCLA (H) - W 28. Ohio State (2) - W 35. Oregon (A) - W 37. Nebraska 53. Indiana (H) - W 56. USC (H) - L 58. Northwestern (A) - W 66. Iowa (2)- L 75. Penn State (A) 76. Rutgers (H) - L 90. Minnesota (H) 94. Washington (A) - W Non-Conference (10-1): 228. UTRGV - W 270. Bethune Cookman - W 309. Farleigh Dickinson - W ---Sanford Pentagon--- 21. Saint Mary’s - L 31. @Creighton - W 245. South Dakota - W 244. North Florida - W —Diamond Head Classic--- 144. Murray State - W 213. Hawaii - W 79. Oregon State - W 223. Southern - W Edited February 17 by doc1394 jayschool, cornfed24-7, Vinny and 2 others 2 1 2 Quote
Fullbacksympathy Posted February 17 Report Posted February 17 2 hours ago, doc1394 said: Using @49r's template, here is an update since it seems like he hasn't been able to recently. Sorry if I'm stepping on any toes here. KenPom rankings as of 2-17-25 ======================= B1G (7-8): 9. Wisconsin (A) - L 10. Purdue (A) - L 14. Maryland (2) - L,L 17. Michigan State (A) - L 20. Illinois (H) - W 22. Michigan (H) 26. UCLA (H) - W 28. Ohio State (2) - W 35. Oregon (A) - W 37. Nebraska 53. Indiana (H) - W 56. USC (H) - L 58. Northwestern (A) - W 66. Iowa (2)- L 75. Penn State (A) 76. Rutgers (H) - L 90. Minnesota (H) 94. Washington (A) - W Non-Conference (10-1): 228. UTRGV - W 270. Bethune Cookman - W 309. Farleigh Dickinson - W ---Sanford Pentagon--- 21. Saint Mary’s - L 31. @Creighton - W 245. South Dakota - W 244. North Florida - W —Diamond Head Classic--- 144. Murray State - W 213. Hawaii - W 79. Oregon State - W 223. Southern - W Pretty dang good. Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.