Saw this live and rewatched. Both times I thought he said it was a guessing game as to how they were going to use the metric, not how it was calculated or what factors played in.
Many times you’ve defended the net for what it is, which is fine, but you always reference the top ranking teams as proof that it’s working. In this case you say the best teams can still put in their managers and walk ons, so the NET efficiency component must not be a big deal. That isn’t evidence that the new ranking works, but evidence that it doesn’t harm the obviously successful teams who aren’t losing anyways.
What concerns me isn’t how the net characterizes the elite teams, but how the net characterizes the bubble range. This is the whole point - putting in the beat at large bids possible. There are flaws in the metric, creating an unknown bubble. Teams in this range are maximizing end of game minutes in a way that will maximize their overall statistics. Period. Pitino spelled that out very clearly.
These teams have something to lose, and they are telling you that they cannot afford to put in their bench to build rapport and risk turnovers or give up a spurt of points for about 5% of the game (2 minutes). Until the committee vocalizes how they will employ this metric, teams it puts on the bubble will most certainly do what they can to maximize the value of a clear win or a clear loss.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk