As I am sure many of you know, the ratings percentage index (RPI) has been abandoned as a metric for college basketball rankings. The NCAA Evaluation Tool (NET) has replaced RPI and is now one of the most important quantitative metrics that the selection committee will use to determine who will play in March. One of the most interesting parts of NET is that it is not only backward-looking but also has a predictive component. The NCAA was extremely vague as to how the predictive components would be introduced - only mentioning it under the 'team efficiency' header as an example of an area where predictive elements could be used. On the surface, it seems like a step in the right direction but still with a lot of room for improvement. The initial rankings include a lot of mid-majors high in the rankings - which goes to show the lack of subjectivity. But, the value of a road win is 1.4X more valuable than that of a home win. Same goes for a home loss which is 1.4X as hurtful to a team's rating. The 1.4 value seems extremely arbitrary. What are your guys' thoughts? This link goes into their rating system. And here is the first version of the rankings.

The 1.4 value is the same as what RPI used. Whether or not they re-evaluated whether it was the appropriate value is somewhat ambiguous.

The NET has a hidden formula, a special sauce, which they're not sharing. So it makes me suspicious that the formula will favor ESPN properties (isn't their secret BPI supposed to be part of the formula?), and that it will tend to downgrade say, the non-ESPN Big East. Just my opinion, but the numbers should be transparent. RPI has its faults, but at least the math is in front of us

Loyola Marymount ranked ahead of Kansas. Yep, nothing wrong here.

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/26/2018 7:03:00 PM (view original):
The 1.4 value is the same as what RPI used. Whether or not they re-evaluated whether it was the appropriate value is somewhat ambiguous.

RPI didn’t take location of games into consideration. Just read that in ESPN’s latest article about NET and RPI.

Tech is #9, I am fine with it.

Let's wait until the end of the regular season and conference tournament to see how this plays out.

One problem I can already see is the margin of victory which is capped at 10. Don't get me wrong, I think adding margin of victory is a great idea. Problem is, how do you differentiate between a team that's trailing by 2 or 3 points with 1 minute left, has to foul, misses some threes at the end and the other team goes on to win by 10, and in the other example, the team that had to win the game at the free throw line late in the game, same two teams play later in the season, goes on and wins by 30 points. How exactly is that rewarding margin of victory?

Posted by Sportsbulls on 11/26/2018 9:47:00 PM (view original):

Posted by dahsdebater on 11/26/2018 7:03:00 PM (view original):
The 1.4 value is the same as what RPI used. Whether or not they re-evaluated whether it was the appropriate value is somewhat ambiguous.

RPI didn’t take location of games into consideration. Just read that in ESPN’s latest article about NET and RPI.

this is contrary to my previous understanding of rpi. unless they changed it at some point.

i realize that wikipedia is not necesarily the greatest source... but their info agrees with me and dasher

RPI
Basketball formula[edit]

The current and commonly used formula for determining the RPI of a college basketball team at any given time is as follows.

RPI = (WP * 0.25) + (OWP * 0.50) + (OOWP * 0.25)

where WP is Winning Percentage, OWP is Opponents' Winning Percentage and OOWP is Opponents' Opponents' Winning Percentage.

The WP is calculated by taking a team's wins divided by the number of games it has played (i.e. wins plus losses).

For Division 1 NCAA Men's basketball, the WP factor of the RPI was updated in 2004 to account for differences in home, away, and neutral games. A home win now counts as 0.6 win, while a road win counts as 1.4 wins. Inversely, a home loss equals 1.4 losses, while a road loss counts as 0.6 loss. A neutral game counts as 1 win or 1 loss. This change was based on statistical data that consistently showed home teams in Division I basketball winning about two-thirds of the time.^[5] Note that this location adjustment applies only to the WP factor and not the OWP and OOWP factors. Only games against Division 1 teams are included for all RPI factors.

That's my understanding as well oldave. But the issue in HD is that at the lower levels there really isn't much HC advantage applied. So the 1.4x multiplier is way higher than it should be for D2/D3. Which is why it's stupid to schedule home games - especially against sims.

But to address the OPs point... HD already has its own secret sauce for the selection process. RPI is just a part of it but it takes in to account other factors. Of all the things wrong with HD, the projection report is rarely one of them.

You guys our probably right then. Maybe I just read it wrong.

Posted by oldwarrior on 11/26/2018 9:01:00 PM (view original):
Loyola Marymount ranked ahead of Kansas. Yep, nothing wrong here.

Maybe I rushed to judgment on Loyola Marymount. No denying they are a top 10.

They have a win over Westcliff University as well as a home game two-point thrashing against Central Connecticut State.

Oh how I miss those chuck-and-duck LMU teams...Kimble and Gathers...that was some fun basketball back in the day!!

Still love watching that game against Shaq and LSU.