Conference / Non Conference opponent tracker 25-26

psyclone said:

Upset alert.

GW, down 13 to Delaware at one point has cut the deficit to 2 at the half on Monumental (Verizon #576).
Not good for the A10 (GW is an 18 pt favorite), although I just caught the last 3-4 minutes of the half and Delaware was really struggling to defend down low.

Perhaps of greater interest, Justyn Fernandez has 20 of Delaware's 31 pts! If I remember correctly, Fernandez had one of his better games as a Patriot at the Smith Center.

vcu ahead at home vs #86 New Mexico by 5 at the half.

Click to expand...

jruby said:

Came to say Fernandez is tearing GW apart. Maybe Chris will cry at half court if they lose.

Click to expand...

psyclone said:

GW loses by 12 to #286 Delaware. Play at Florida in a few days.

vcu loses by 3 to #86 New Mexico ---2 turnovers in last 45 seconds plus a difficult shot in the paint (while travelling (but not called) with a chance to tie with a 2. Looked terrible in the clutch.

Click to expand...

psyclone said:

GW drops from #60 to #79 with the loss. Fernandez with career high 27 for Delaware.

vcu from #41 to #43 with the loss to New Mexico (ranked 4 in Mountain West)

Click to expand...

JimP said:

Are you guys talking about the NET? I see GW at 45 in the NET. GMU at 58. vcu at 47.

Click to expand...

GMUgemini said:

Yes. They dropped down to 76 in the NET after losing to Delaware (the official numbers won’t reflect the loss until next week).

The other numbers are Kenpom (which I do think the committee uses as part of their selection process).

Click to expand...

When the NCAA men’s basketball committee decides who makes the tournament — and how teams are seeded — they don’t just look at wins and losses. A key piece of the puzzle is predictive-based metrics, which try to answer a simple question: How good is this team right now, regardless of record?​

• KenPom – The Ken Pomeroy ratings are designed to show how strong a team would be if it played tonight, independent of injuries or emotional factors. It’s a math-driven system built on:
  • Offensive efficiency: points scored per 100 offensive possessions
  • Defensive efficiency: points allowed per 100 defensive possessions
    The balance of those two numbers produces an overall measure of team strength.
• Torvik – Also in use for the 2024–25 season, the Torvik rankings (often called “T-Rank”) use a similar efficiency-based formula:
  • Offensive efficiency: points per 100 possessions
  • Defensive efficiency: points allowed per 100 possessions
    Torvik adds a twist with a “game script” that cuts out data after a contest is essentially decided mathematically, so garbage-time possessions don’t skew the numbers. It also weighs recent performance more heavily:
  • Games from the last 40 days count at 100% value
  • After that, they drop by 1% per day until they’re 80 days old
  • Games older than 80 days still count, but only at 60%
• BPI (Basketball Power Index) – ESPN’s BPI is framed explicitly as a team strength metric, not a résumé or “accomplishment” metric. A team’s BPI number reflects how many points better or worse per game it is than an average Division I team on a neutral floor. BPI blends:
  • A preseason rating (based on returning production, recruiting, etc.)
  • Game results, which steadily take over as the season unfolds
    As more games are played, the preseason piece fades until it’s almost irrelevant. For each game, BPI factors in:
  • Points and possessions
  • Opponent strength
  • Game site (home/away/neutral)
  • Travel distance
  • Rest for each team
  • Whether the game was played at a high altitude

GMUgemini said:

And they’ll ignore all of it to pass over a mid-major for a mediocre P4 team every chance they can get.

Click to expand...