MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Marquette4life on March 19, 2017, 01:57:47 PM
-
Where do you think Marquette will be? In the top 25?
-
Doubtful. Don't really care.
-
OMG No. Top 35 maybe.
-
#1 in my heart
-
There will be no reason for us to be ranked pre-season next year.
-
There will be no reason for us to be ranked pre-season next year.
Think you could be wrong about that. Our defensive pedigree should garner national acclaim, especially since we lose our best shot blocker and steal man
-
Think you could be wrong about that. Our defensive pedigree should garner national acclaim, especially since we lose our best shot blocker and steal man
Losing them could improve our defense. Defensive stats are only occasionally linked with actually being a good man defender.
-
Promise we'll be top 250
-
Watching other tournament teams this week speaks loudly to me that we are a long, long ways from becoming a good defensive team. Hate to say it, but we are slow, slow, slow.
-
Watching other tournament teams this week speaks loudly to me that we are a long, long ways from becoming a good defensive team. Hate to say it, but we are slow, slow, slow.
Speed has nothing to do with it. The Badgers are just as slow. Virginia is slow and maybe the top defensive team in the county every year. Nova isn't overly fast.
-
Losing them could improve our defense. Defensive stats are only occasionally linked with actually being a good man defender.
ABSOLUTELY AGREE!
-
Wally S made a comment at the halftime of one of the games. Essentially that in college he has never been coached so intensely on defense. That coaches are so detail oriented at the college level and sweat the small stuff - directly impacting playing time.
I don't get the sense that our culture mirrors that...
-
Wally S made a comment at the halftime of one of the games. Essentially that in college he has never been coached so intensely on defense. That coaches are so detail oriented at the college level and sweat the small stuff - directly impacting playing time.
I don't get the sense that our culture mirrors that...
Some players cry that Wojo sits players for the little things, others cry that Wojo turns a blind eye to the little things. Can't please everyone I guess.
-
Speed has nothing to do with it. The Badgers are just as slow. Virginia is slow and maybe the top defensive team in the county every year. Nova isn't overly fast.
There's a difference between speed/quickness and tempo. I don't think he's talking about tempo.
-
There's a difference between speed/quickness and tempo. I don't think he's talking about tempo.
Right. There are very few players on Wisconsin that are quick. Same with Virginia. Or Nova.
The Happs, Hayeses, Harts, Jenkinses, Parenteses, etc. of the world aren't exactly the St. John's athletes of the world.
-
Well Dickie V said we are three seed next season. So obviously we will be ranked in the top 12.
-
Right. There are very few players on Wisconsin that are quick. Same with Virginia. Or Nova.
You are correct, sir, and I believe that two of the above teams are no longer playing in the NCAA tournament.
-
Think you could be wrong about that. Our defensive pedigree should garner national acclaim, especially since we lose our best shot blocker and steal man
Thanks for the Cheer!
-
Some players cry that Wojo sits players for the little things, others cry that Wojo turns a blind eye to the little things. Can't please everyone I guess.
I'm not crying at all - do you think we have a defensive culture that fits that description? I just thought it was an interesting perspective but feel free to attack/dismiss - your prerogative.
-
I don't think we'll be preseason top 25 but throughout the season i think we could be in the top 25. All depends on the defense, we already know we can score
-
Given that our opinions don't mean a thing, I'm going to go bold and say we will be #1.
#donedeal
-
Think you could be wrong about that. Our defensive pedigree should garner national acclaim, especially since we lose our best shot blocker and steal man
Yep, you nailed it...that's what we'll miss Luke for, his defense.
-
Next season is going to be a fun season.
If Sacar improved that much in his redshirt season he will be a solid player for us. We need Jamal,Eke and Theo to put some muscle on, same with Harry so they can bang with the big east bigs. We all know Duane and Haanif will be putting in work this summer to get better. Sam hauser should try to put some weight on and improve his driving. I think Rowsey will get better at finishing in the paint. Im not the coach i just think these are things the players should do or work on
-
Doubt we'll be ranked to start the season. Think we will be very solid and very well could be ranked at some point next season, but not to start.
I think Lunardi does a preseason bracketology. My bet is we'll be in the 7 or 8 range.
Doesn't really matter though. All that matters is where we are on Selection Sunday.
-
Doubt we'll be ranked to start the season. Think we will be very solid and very well could be ranked at some point next season, but not to start.
I think Lunardi does a preseason bracketology. My bet is we'll be in the 7 or 8 range.
Doesn't really matter though. All that matters is where we are on Selection Sunday.
This is what i was thinking, i think we could be ranked throughout the season but not right away
-
How does the strength of conference look next year? Haven't really delved into who is graduating and coming in for other teams next year. How many Big East teams could crack the top 25 next year?
-
How does the strength of conference look next year? Haven't really delved into who is graduating and coming in for other teams next year. How many Big East teams could crack the top 25 next year?
Nova is losing key players, SH is returning everyone, X is losing some players and same with butler. I think MU could be ranked next year
-
How does the strength of conference look next year? Haven't really delved into who is graduating and coming in for other teams next year. How many Big East teams could crack the top 25 next year?
I think the conference will be improved on the whole. The teams at the front of the pack might come back a bit, but there are 8 legitimate NCAA contenders and 7 of them might flirt with the rankings at some point. Villanova, Creighton, Xavier, and Seton Hall, barring unexpected departures, could all start the season ranked.
My thoughts:
Villanova: Lose Hart, Jenkins, and Reynolds, but will have Spellman and Booth available. Bridges and Brunson are studs. Might come back to the pack a little, but solid supporting pieces and recruiting class will keep them around the top-10. Slightly worse
Butler: Lose Chrabascz, Savage, Lewis, and Woodson. Martin and Baldwin will be the leaders, and there will be high hopes for Joey Brunk (sat out this year) as well as maybe the best recruiting class in school history. Look like a bubble team, though I don't like underestimating Holtmann.. Worse
Creighton: Lose Watson, Huff, and Zierden. Patton is the question mark. If he stays, along with Foster, Harrell, Thomas, and Syracuse transfer Kaleb Joseph, they could be really good. As good as pre-Watson injury good. I think Patton is the difference between a top-15 team and a team in the 7-10 seed range come Selection Sunday. Same
Seton Hall: No one graduates, but Delgado is reportedly checking into his draft status. Like Creighton, he could be the difference between a ranked team and a bubble team. Also, watch the recruitment of local kid Trevon Duval. He probably picks a blue blood, but he's a top-5 recruit that could make the Hall dramatically better. Better
Providence: Everyone returns. They should be a very experienced team, though still no real star, and no star recruits either. I think they're a step up from last year, 7-10 seed range. Better
Xavier: Gaston and Bernard graduate, and we'll see what happens with Blueitt and Sumner. If they both return, Xavier could be awesome. Redshirt freshman Eddie Ekiyor will likely be expected to contribute immediately up front, and XU beat out the big boys for PG Paul Scruggs. Questions at the big man positions, but otherwise they have the look of a top-15 team. Better
St. John's: Sort of like us this year. They have some nice pieces and could make a run at a bid, but I doubt they're ready for the rankings just yet. Better
Georgetown: They lose Pryor and Hayes. Their top recruit wants out. Govan, Peak, and Derrickson are back, but not a lot after that. JTIII is on the hot seat. It'll be an interesting summer in DC. Worse
DePaul: Garrett and Harrison-Docks leave. McCallum and Cain are back and joined by incoming transfers Austin Grandstaff and D2 All-American Max Struss. Decent recruiting class. Personally, I think losing Garrett will be addition by subtraction, and with Georgetown's raging second alarm basement fire, they could climb out of the basement. Better
-
Brew, has Georgetown released Waters yet? Seems to be taking awhile.
-
Brew, has Georgetown released Waters yet? Seems to be taking awhile.
Sucks for Georgetown he's a stud
-
Nice write up brew, but Hall does lose Madison Jones, starting PG and best perimeter defender. Still going to be a better team but they do lose somebody
-
Brew, has Georgetown released Waters yet? Seems to be taking awhile.
I haven't seen anything official. Really makes me wonder what's going on there. I thought they'd have him wait in order to fire JTIII and have a replacement try to keep him in the fold, but JTIII is still there over a week later as we watch programs like LSU, Indiana, and Illinois all moving on.
-
Nice write up brew, but Hall does lose Madison Jones, starting PG and best perimeter defender. Still going to be a better team but they do lose somebody
But they could also potentially get Trevon Duvall
-
I think the conference will be improved on the whole. The teams at the front of the pack might come back a bit, but there are 8 legitimate NCAA contenders and 7 of them might flirt with the rankings at some point. Villanova, Creighton, Xavier, and Seton Hall, barring unexpected departures, could all start the season ranked.
My thoughts:
Villanova: Lose Hart, Jenkins, and Reynolds, but will have Spellman and Booth available. Bridges and Brunson are studs. Might come back to the pack a little, but solid supporting pieces and recruiting class will keep them around the top-10. Slightly worse
Butler: Lose Chrabascz, Savage, Lewis, and Woodson. Martin and Baldwin will be the leaders, and there will be high hopes for Joey Brunk (sat out this year) as well as maybe the best recruiting class in school history. Look like a bubble team, though I don't like underestimating Holtmann.. Worse
Creighton: Lose Watson, Huff, and Zierden. Patton is the question mark. If he stays, along with Foster, Harrell, Thomas, and Syracuse transfer Kaleb Joseph, they could be really good. As good as pre-Watson injury good. I think Patton is the difference between a top-15 team and a team in the 7-10 seed range come Selection Sunday. Same
Seton Hall: No one graduates, but Delgado is reportedly checking into his draft status. Like Creighton, he could be the difference between a ranked team and a bubble team. Also, watch the recruitment of local kid Trevon Duval. He probably picks a blue blood, but he's a top-5 recruit that could make the Hall dramatically better. Better
Providence: Everyone returns. They should be a very experienced team, though still no real star, and no star recruits either. I think they're a step up from last year, 7-10 seed range. Better
Xavier: Gaston and Bernard graduate, and we'll see what happens with Blueitt and Sumner. If they both return, Xavier could be awesome. Redshirt freshman Eddie Ekiyor will likely be expected to contribute immediately up front, and XU beat out the big boys for PG Paul Scruggs. Questions at the big man positions, but otherwise they have the look of a top-15 team. Better
St. John's: Sort of like us this year. They have some nice pieces and could make a run at a bid, but I doubt they're ready for the rankings just yet. Better
Georgetown: They lose Pryor and Hayes. Their top recruit wants out. Govan, Peak, and Derrickson are back, but not a lot after that. JTIII is on the hot seat. It'll be an interesting summer in DC. Worse
DePaul: Garrett and Harrison-Docks leave. McCallum and Cain are back and joined by incoming transfers Austin Grandstaff and D2 All-American Max Struss. Decent recruiting class. Personally, I think losing Garrett will be addition by subtraction, and with Georgetown's raging second alarm basement fire, they could climb out of the basement. Better
Excellent work, brew.
A lot will be told by the half-dozen or so players who might leave early for the pros: Sumner, Blueitt, Patton, Delgado ... maybe even Brunson? ... maybe even Govan?
We don't know what motivates some kids, nor do we know who is chirping in their ears.
For example, if I were Sumner, and if I were medically cleared and fairly certain I'd be a first-rounder, I wouldn't hesitate to leave. And nobody ever mentions Brunson, but why wouldn't he at least consider leaving?
-
Brew, has Georgetown released Waters yet? Seems to be taking awhile.
Looks like Waters is already involved with Duke and Kansas. I have to imagine he's been given his release, even if it didn't get a wide announcement.
-
I can't imagine Delgado staying. He was a double double machine this year and the whole world knew it. Unless his personal situation is that he values a degree over the money (I find this very hard to believe) I don't know what would bring him back. At this point he is just getting older.
-
I can't imagine Delgado staying. He was a double double machine this year and the whole world knew it. Unless his personal situation is that he values a degree over the money (I find this very hard to believe) I don't know what would bring him back. At this point he is just getting older.
All the mock drafts ive seen have him going undrafted. It's early but some people could get injured and he could get in
-
But they could also potentially get Trevon Duvall
They did get a visit, but I would surprised if they managed to land him with so many blue bloods swimming in those waters.
-
They did get a visit, but I would surprised if they managed to land him with so many blue bloods swimming in those waters.
Yeah, thats what i was thinking. But he is also from NJ that's why i said he might stay close to home
-
And nobody ever mentions Brunson, but why wouldn't he at least consider leaving?
This one has me perplexed too. He's a star point guard on one of the top 4 teams in the nation. Scores at will, shoots the three, runs the offense well, is a hell hound of a defender, short but not too short for a PG. What's holding him back? No one seems to think him leaving is a possibility.
-
This one has me perplexed too. He's a star point guard on one of the top 4 teams in the nation. Scores at will, shoots the three, runs the offense well, is a hell hound of a defender, short but not too short for a PG. What's holding him back? No one seems to think him leaving is a possibility.
Will be evaluating his chances with his dad this off-season. The feeling is that this is a strong PG class and he may be better off waiting a year.
-
Lots of dominoes to fall. Last year at this time many expected the BE to be better this year than it was last year. That wasn't the case.
-
Lots of dominoes to fall. Last year at this time many expected the BE to be better this year than it was last year. That wasn't the case.
Uhh...I definitely think it was. Almost across the board. Creighton and Xavier suffered after losing their point guards, but Villanova, Butler, Creighton, Marquette, and St John's were all better while Xavier and Seton Hall were about the same despite personnel losses. Even Providence was better than expected.
-
Lots of dominoes to fall. Last year at this time many expected the BE to be better this year than it was last year. That wasn't the case.
It most definitely was the case. Not even close.
-
Uhh...I definitely think it was. Almost across the board. Creighton and Xavier suffered after losing their point guards, but Villanova, Butler, Creighton, Marquette, and St John's were all better while Xavier and Seton Hall were about the same despite personnel losses. Even Providence was better than expected.
Sorry, but injuries are part of dominoes that fall. Last year the conference had the National Champion. This year the conference will be done by the E8.
Nova, SH, Providence, Xavier, Georgetown all worse. Butler and DePaul basically the same. Marquette and St. John's slightly better. Creighton better really only better before Watson went down. After that I believe they were under .500. The league was unquestionably better last year. This year 1 legit Final Four contender, 1 strong but not great team, 2 bad teams, and a bunch of mediocrity. Last year 2 legit FF teams and 2 strong but not great teams.
-
I think the conference will be improved on the whole. The teams at the front of the pack might come back a bit, but there are 8 legitimate NCAA contenders and 7 of them might flirt with the rankings at some point. Villanova, Creighton, Xavier, and Seton Hall, barring unexpected departures, could all start the season ranked.
My thoughts:
Villanova: Lose Hart, Jenkins, and Reynolds, but will have Spellman and Booth available. Bridges and Brunson are studs. Might come back to the pack a little, but solid supporting pieces and recruiting class will keep them around the top-10. Slightly worse
Butler: Lose Chrabascz, Savage, Lewis, and Woodson. Martin and Baldwin will be the leaders, and there will be high hopes for Joey Brunk (sat out this year) as well as maybe the best recruiting class in school history. Look like a bubble team, though I don't like underestimating Holtmann.. Worse
Creighton: Lose Watson, Huff, and Zierden. Patton is the question mark. If he stays, along with Foster, Harrell, Thomas, and Syracuse transfer Kaleb Joseph, they could be really good. As good as pre-Watson injury good. I think Patton is the difference between a top-15 team and a team in the 7-10 seed range come Selection Sunday. Same
Seton Hall: No one graduates, but Delgado is reportedly checking into his draft status. Like Creighton, he could be the difference between a ranked team and a bubble team. Also, watch the recruitment of local kid Trevon Duval. He probably picks a blue blood, but he's a top-5 recruit that could make the Hall dramatically better. Better
Providence: Everyone returns. They should be a very experienced team, though still no real star, and no star recruits either. I think they're a step up from last year, 7-10 seed range. Better
Xavier: Gaston and Bernard graduate, and we'll see what happens with Blueitt and Sumner. If they both return, Xavier could be awesome. Redshirt freshman Eddie Ekiyor will likely be expected to contribute immediately up front, and XU beat out the big boys for PG Paul Scruggs. Questions at the big man positions, but otherwise they have the look of a top-15 team. Better
St. John's: Sort of like us this year. They have some nice pieces and could make a run at a bid, but I doubt they're ready for the rankings just yet. Better
Georgetown: They lose Pryor and Hayes. Their top recruit wants out. Govan, Peak, and Derrickson are back, but not a lot after that. JTIII is on the hot seat. It'll be an interesting summer in DC. Worse
DePaul: Garrett and Harrison-Docks leave. McCallum and Cain are back and joined by incoming transfers Austin Grandstaff and D2 All-American Max Struss. Decent recruiting class. Personally, I think losing Garrett will be addition by subtraction, and with Georgetown's raging second alarm basement fire, they could climb out of the basement. Better
The Johnnies will have MSU transfer Marvin Clark eligible next year . Is a very good addition for them. I think they are upper half of the league.
-
Put it this way:
- 2016 Nova >> 2017 Nova
- 2016 Xavier >> 2017 Butler
- 2016 Seton Hall >> 2017 Providence
- 2016 Butler >> 2017 Marquette
- 2016 Providence > 2017 Seton Hall
- 2017 Creighton > 2016 Creighton
- 2017 Xavier >> 2016 Marquette
- 2016 Georgetown = 2017 St. John's
- 2017 Georgetown > 2016 DePaul
- 2016 St. John's = 2017 DePaul
-
Sorry, but injuries are part of dominoes that fall. Last year the conference had the National Champion. This year the conference will be done by the E8.
Tournament performance is an important measure of conference strength over the long haul (multiple seasons), but it's a weak measure in any given season. If it was an accurate short-term measure, the Horizon and Colonial would have been two of the best four conferences in 2011, since Butler and VCU both made the Final Four.
IMHO, the BE was stronger top to bottom this season...and the seven bids seem to indicate that others agree.
-
Put it this way:
- 2016 Nova << 2017 Nova
- 2016 Xavier = 2017 Butler
- 2016 Butler >> 2017 Providence
- 2016 Butler >> 2017 Marquette
- 2016 Providence > 2017 Seton Hall
- 2017 Creighton > 2016 Creighton
- 2017 Xavier >> 2016 Marquette
- 2016 Georgetown = 2017 St. John's
- 2017 Georgetown > 2016 DePaul
- 2016 St. John's = 2017 DePaul
Let me help you with that:
2016 Nova = 2017 Nova
2016 X >> 2017 Butler
2016 Seton Hall << 2017 Creighton
2016 Butler << 2017 Xavier
2016 Creighton << 2017 Marquette
2016 Providence >> 2017 Seton Hall
2016 Georgetown << 2017 Providence
2016 Marquette << 2017 Georgetown
2016 Depaul << 2017 St. John's
2016 St. John's << 2017 Depaul
Conference records are useless for determining the proper order. I used KenPom.
-
Let me help you with that:
2016 Nova = 2017 Nova
2016 X >> 2017 Butler
2016 Seton Hall << 2017 Creighton
2016 Butler << 2017 Xavier
2016 Creighton << 2017 Marquette
2016 Providence >> 2017 Seton Hall
2016 Georgetown << 2017 Providence
2016 Marquette << 2017 Georgetown
2016 Depaul << 2017 St. John's
2016 St. John's << 2017 Depaul
Conference records are useless for determining the proper order. I used KenPom.
This year's Nova team is nowhere close to last year's. Ochefu was maybe the most undervalued player in the entire BE last year, they had no inside presence whatsoever this year, and they had absolutely no depth.
There is no chance in hell that a Mo Watson-less Creighton team is better than what Seton Hall was last year. They had a great RPI because of some great wins prior to Watson being injured. The team that they ended up being was a pretty mediocre team, and that's being generous.
I matched teams up with their conference standings. Not sure why 7th place 2017 would be compared to 4th place 2016 Butler or why 2017 4th place MU would be matched up with 2016 6th place Creighton, etc. or how you could possibly think that this Xavier team is better than last year's Butler team, but to each their own I guess.
The proof is in the pudding. The BE had a nice non conference and then was killed by injuries. Nova was a legitimate top team, Butler an inconsistent team who could beat some great teams while taking some awful losses, and everyone else was very "meh...not bad, but not great."
-
This year's Nova team is nowhere close to last year's. Ochefu was maybe the most undervalued player in the entire BE last year, they had no inside presence whatsoever this year, and they had absolutely no depth.
There is no chance in hell that a Mo Watson-less Creighton team is better than what Seton Hall was last year. They had a great RPI because of some great wins prior to Watson being injured. The team that they ended up being was a pretty mediocre team, and that's being generous.
I matched teams up with their conference standings. Not sure why 7th place 2017 would be compared to 4th place 2016 Butler or why 2017 4th place MU would be matched up with 2016 6th place Creighton, etc. or how you could possibly think that this Xavier team is better than last year's Butler team, but to each their own I guess.
The proof is in the pudding. The BE had a nice non conference and then was killed by injuries. Nova was a legitimate top team, Butler an inconsistent team who could beat some great teams while taking some awful losses, and everyone else was very "meh...not bad, but not great."
I told you what I was doing in my post. I ranked them by KP. I also don't know why you are only judging them by the end of the season and not by their total body of work. Think about it this way, Creighton this year had a better KP ranking than Seton Hall last year despite losing their best player for half the season. That should tell you how much better Creighton is this season.
You are entitled to your opinion but I prefer actual numbers as opposed to the good old eye test.
-
Villanova went 32-4 without Ochefu. They did fine. The Big East was unquestionably better. Non-conference results were better, Pomeroy rankings were better, NCAA bids were better. By every quantifiable metric, the league was better.
-
I told you what I was doing in my post. I ranked them by KP. I also don't know why you are only judging them by the end of the season and not by their total body of work. Think about it this way, Creighton this year had a better KP ranking than Seton Hall last year despite losing their best player for half the season. That should tell you how much better Creighton is this season.
You are entitled to your opinion but I prefer actual numbers as opposed to the good old eye test.
And I prefer actual on court results to a computer's crunched numbers. We play a double round robin schedule. Everyone plays the same teams in the conference. Comparing the 3rd place finisher to the 6th place finisher doesn't make any sense. They actually went into a basketball court 2 times against each conference opponent the past 2 years and played the games on those courts. Ken Pom is great at comparing schools that haven't played each other. But sign me up for using actual game results over computer numbers.
If you think that Creighton and Xavier are 2 of the top 30 teams because some computer crunched some numbers and forgot to take into account that the best player on each team wasn't actually able to play and their teams stunk down the stretch so be it. Those 2 teams clearly are not top 30 teams in the country. But if a computer says they are then throw the actual conference results out and let's just base what we know based on those results out the window.
-
Villanova went 32-4 without Ochefu. They did fine. The Big East was unquestionably better. Non-conference results were better, Pomeroy rankings were better, NCAA bids were better. By every quantifiable metric, the league was better.
Yes they were "fine." They were also nowhere near as good as last year's Nova team.
And yes, non-con results were great, computer numbers were awesome, bids were sweet. But I don't think some numbers that don't account for whose actually available are overly accurate when the best player on 2 of the 3 best teams up to their injuries are gone. Give me results over computer numbers every day. The 7 bids were awesome. The fact that we had the number 1 overall seed and still only managed an average of a 7.4 seed on those bids shows you just how mediocre they were.
-
Yes they were "fine." They were also nowhere near as good as last year's Nova team.
And yes, non-con results were great, computer numbers were awesome, bids were sweet. But I don't think some numbers that don't account for whose actually available are overly accurate when the best player on 2 of the 3 best teams up to their injuries are gone. Give me results over computer numbers every day. The 7 bids were awesome. The fact that we had the number 1 overall seed and still only managed an average of a 7.4 seed on those bids shows you just how mediocre they were.
If Nova pulls out the win over Bucky, no way you make this argument. Until Nova lost, no one was saying they were a worse team this year. If I missed all the posts this season where you said they were "nowhere near as good" because of Ochefu, feel free to correct me, but I'm calling BS until proven otherwise.
And computer numbers are based on results. They are solely results driven.
-
And I prefer actual on court results to a computer's crunched numbers. We play a double round robin schedule. Everyone plays the same teams in the conference. Comparing the 3rd place finisher to the 6th place finisher doesn't make any sense. They actually went into a basketball court 2 times against each conference opponent the past 2 years and played the games on those courts. Ken Pom is great at comparing schools that haven't played each other. But sign me up for using actual game results over computer numbers.
If you think that Creighton and Xavier are 2 of the top 30 teams because some computer crunched some numbers and forgot to take into account that the best player on each team wasn't actually able to play and their teams stunk down the stretch so be it. Those 2 teams clearly are not top 30 teams in the country. But if a computer says they are then throw the actual conference results out and let's just base what we know based on those results out the window.
Again, you are only looking at the end of the season. Not the entire body of work. You don't get to throw out what Creighton did before the Watson injury or what Xavier did before the Sumner injury. Those wins are still on their resumes.
You also can't tell me with a straight face that you think Providence was the third best team in the Big East just because the tie breaker said they were the best of 4 teams tied at 10-8. Any objective measure says they were the 7th best team in the conference this season.
-
If Nova pulls out the win over Bucky, no way you make this argument. Until Nova lost, no one was saying they were a worse team this year. If I missed all the posts this season where you said they were "nowhere near as good" because of Ochefu, feel free to correct me, but I'm calling BS until proven otherwise.
And computer numbers are based on results. They are solely results driven.
Totally agree
-
If Nova pulls out the win over Bucky, no way you make this argument. Until Nova lost, no one was saying they were a worse team this year. If I missed all the posts this season where you said they were "nowhere near as good" because of Ochefu, feel free to correct me, but I'm calling BS until proven otherwise.
And computer numbers are based on results. They are solely results driven.
I have been saying all season long that their ceiling this year was the E8. No depth, no inside presence. Maybe if I have time I'll search through my posts, but I said well before the Tourney bracket was announced that I thought the ceiling for Nova was E8, for Butler was S16, and for everyone else was 2nd round. Once the bracket was revealed nothing changed other than realizing Xavier was sent a gift from God with their draw and I put them into the S16.
It's not just Ochefu. Jenkins hasn't been as good this year, Divencenzo has a nice future but is nowhere CLOSE to what Archi was last year, Booth isn't available, etc. They were simply not as good as they were last year.
-
Again, you are only looking at the end of the season. Not the entire body of work. You don't get to throw out what Creighton did before the Watson injury or what Xavier did before the Sumner injury. Those wins are still on their resumes.
You also can't tell me with a straight face that you think Providence was the third best team in the Big East just because the tie breaker said they were the best of 4 teams tied at 10-8. Any objective measure says they were the 7th best team in the conference this season.
I went by standings. The results of what actually happened on the court throughout the season, not some computer projections that don't take into account injuries to the best players on 2 of the teams. Providence finished 3rd. There's really no debating that. They played the 18 games and the result was they were the 3rd place team in the BE.
-
I have been saying all season long that their ceiling this year was the E8. No depth, no inside presence. Maybe if I have time I'll search through my posts, but I said well before the Tourney bracket was announced that I thought the ceiling for Nova was E8, for Butler was S16, and for everyone else was 2nd round. Once the bracket was revealed nothing changed other than realizing Xavier was sent a gift from God with their draw and I put them into the S16.
It's not just Ochefu. Jenkins hasn't been as good this year, Divencenzo has a nice future but is nowhere CLOSE to what Archi was last year, Booth isn't available, etc. They were simply not as good as they were last year.
You are being asked to do this work to back up your assertion. The least you can do is find the time to provide your past comments as the foundation of your opinion. Not doing so makes it seem like you're hammering a contrarian viewpoint based on nothing but the most recent result for every Big East team.
-
You are being asked to do this work to back up your assertion. The least you can do is find the time to provide your past comments as the foundation of your opinion. Not doing so makes it seem like you're hammering a contrarian viewpoint based on nothing but the most recent result for every Big East team.
That's fine. It's abundantly obvious that the BE had 1 really good team (Nova), 1 good team (Butler), a bunch of mediocre teams (Creighton, SH, Providence, Marquette, Xavier), and a few bad teams (St. John's, Georgetown, and DePaul). Whether I can quote a specific post from 2 months ago to prove these were my thoughts then or not is irrelevant. The results show that the conference is exactly that. 1 top team, 1 2nd tier team, and a bunch of teams good enough to squeak into the Tournament and do nothing. Again, the fact that the conference had a 1 seed and still had an average seed of 7.4 shows how mediocre just about everyone was.
-
That's fine. It's abundantly obvious that the BE had 1 really good team (Nova), 1 good team (Butler), a bunch of mediocre teams (Creighton, SH, Providence, Marquette, Xavier), and a few bad teams (St. John's, Georgetown, and DePaul). Whether I can quote a specific post from 2 months ago to prove these were my thoughts then or not is irrelevant. The results show that the conference is exactly that. 1 top team, 1 2nd tier team, and a bunch of teams good enough to squeak into the Tournament and do nothing. Again, the fact that the conference had a 1 seed and still had an average seed of 7.4 shows how mediocre just about everyone was.
Your ratings of "really good", "good", "mediocre" and "bad" seem a bit skewed.
The 5 mediocre teams all made the dance as at larges. One as a 6 seed. Tough to call those teams mediocre.
I'd say the BE had 1 elite team, 1 very good team, 5 good teams, 2 OK teams, and 1 bad team.
-
Your ratings of "really good", "good", "mediocre" and "bad" seem a bit skewed.
The 5 mediocre teams all made the dance as at larges. One as a 6 seed. Tough to call those teams mediocre.
I'd say the BE had 1 elite team, 1 very good team, 5 good teams, 2 OK teams, and 1 bad team.
38 of 68 total bids came from the "Power 6" conferences this year. Those conferences total 75 teams. So over half of the teams from power conferences made the NCAA Tournament. If you're playing in a "Power 6" conference, you don't have to be anything more than mediocre to play in the NCAA Tournament.
Sure, compared to the teams in the Horizon League or the Summit League Marquette, Creighton, Xavier, Providence, and Seton Hall are outstanding teams. But that's not who we're comparing these teams to.
-
38 of 68 total bids came from the "Power 6" conferences this year. Those conferences total 75 teams. So over half of the teams from power conferences made the NCAA Tournament. If you're playing in a "Power 6" conference, you don't have to be anything more than mediocre to play in the NCAA Tournament.
Sure, compared to the teams in the Horizon League or the Summit League Marquette, Creighton, Xavier, Providence, and Seton Hall are outstanding teams. But that's not who we're comparing these teams to.
So your arbitrary rankings only include the 75 P6 schools? Then sure, I guess I get it. But thats sort of a silly way to look at it. But whatever, pointless argument.
-
That's fine. It's abundantly obvious that the BE had 1 really good team (Nova), 1 good team (Butler), a bunch of mediocre teams (Creighton, SH, Providence, Marquette, Xavier), and a few bad teams (St. John's, Georgetown, and DePaul). Whether I can quote a specific post from 2 months ago to prove these were my thoughts then or not is irrelevant. The results show that the conference is exactly that. 1 top team, 1 2nd tier team, and a bunch of teams good enough to squeak into the Tournament and do nothing. Again, the fact that the conference had a 1 seed and still had an average seed of 7.4 shows how mediocre just about everyone was.
Sure it's relevant. You hung your entire wardrobe on this being your opinion for months and not just the last 24 hours. Without that evidence of long term thinking, it feels very much like you're cherry picking after the fact to support your case the Big East was worse in 2016-2017 then in 2015-2016.
-
Sure it's relevant. You hung your entire wardrobe on this being your opinion for months and not just the last 24 hours. Without that evidence of long term thinking, it feels very much like you're cherry picking after the fact to support your case the Big East was worse in 2016-2017 then in 2015-2016.
Brew is the one who brought up whether there were past posts about it or not. I didn't hang anything on it being my opinion for months. I have brought up what they were lacking and the average seed of the BE teams. 7.4. That's fairly unimpressive in and of itself. Take into consideration that included in that 7.4 average seed for BE teams is a 1 seed and that's that much worse. I couldn't care less whether you or Brew or whoever else thinks I just think Nova isn't as good because they lost to Wisconsin and prior to that I was all in on them being even better than last year. I'm quite certain that when we had threads like this last season I said Nova, Xavier, Butler would all be down. Like I said, maybe when I have time I'll go back and find them. If I don't get to it and you want to call me a BSer, cool. No problem at all.
Fact of the matter is the BE had 3 high seeds and a bunch of bubble teams, and one of those high seeds really wasn't very good after their starting PG tore his ACL early in the conference season.
I'll say this, I don't think Kansas or Oregon are as good as they were last year but they haven't lost in the Tournament yet.
-
By the way, my opinion on Nova did not change 1 bit based on the Wisconsin result. I think if Nova plays Wisconsin 10 times they win 8 of them. They happened to play poorly and UW played well and they got knocked off. It happens. I don't think UW is a better team than Nova, but Nova was legitimately the best team in the country last year. They played the highest seed they possibly could have played last year in every round but 1 I believe (2 seed Oklahoma instead of 1 seed Oregon in the FF). They smoked everyone but Kansas and UNC. They won a FF game by 40. They were unquestionably the best team by the end of the season last year.
I never felt that way about them this year. A top tier team, but in my opinion they were not going to repeat. They weren't as good. Not deep enough, not versatile enough. They had to simplify their offense because they didn't have all the pieces they had last year.
-
Yep, you nailed it...that's what we'll miss Luke for, his defense.
Just like you nailed it. Luke was our best rim protector.
-
Just like you nailed it. Luke was our best rim protector.
He's pretty much deandre jordan
-
Just like you nailed it. Luke was our best rim protector.
He's pretty much Deandre Jordan
-
Nova really could've used the inside presence that 5 star freshman big man Omari Spellman would've brought had he not been ruled ineligible for the season. They're probably still in the tournament right now if they had him.
-
Nova really could've used the inside presence that 5 star freshman big man Omari Spellman would've brought had he not been ruled ineligible for the season. They're probably still in the tournament right now if they had him.
That's what i told all my badger "friends"
-
Just like you nailed it. Luke was our best rim protector.
And if Luke wasn't our best rim protector then...who, exactly, was?
Nova really could've used the inside presence that 5 star freshman big man Omari Spellman would've brought had he not been ruled ineligible for the season. They're probably still in the tournament right now if they had him.
Agreed. Had he been eligible I think they would've gone back to back.
-
Nova really could've used the inside presence that 5 star freshman big man Omari Spellman would've brought had he not been ruled ineligible for the season. They're probably still in the tournament right now if they had him.
Don't think he is on NBA radar, but he could theoretically go pro rather than ever playing a minute for Nova, correct?
-
Don't think he is on NBA radar, but he could theoretically go pro rather than ever playing a minute for Nova, correct?
Happened with Enes Kanter out of Kentucky some years ago.
-
Happened with Enes Kanter out of Kentucky some years ago.
Of course he was ruled permanently ineligible to play collegiate basketball, so he didn't have much of a choice.
-
I went by standings. The results of what actually happened on the court throughout the season, not some computer projections that don't take into account injuries to the best players on 2 of the teams. Providence finished 3rd. There's really no debating that. They played the 18 games and the result was they were the 3rd place team in the BE.
But that only takes into account the conference season. The non-conference season still counts and is more relevant to determining which conference is stronger.
-
But that only takes into account the conference season. The non-conference season still counts and is more relevant to determining which conference is stronger.
Sure, but 2 teams that were pretty clearly the 2nd and 3rd (or maybe 4th if Butler was better than Xavier with Sumner) best teams in the conference had a fully healthy team throughout the entire non-conference and then fell to the 6th and 7th place spots in the conference based on what actually occurred when the 10 teams in the BE all played each other once at home and once away from home. The results are what they are. Providence was the 3rd place team based not on some computer metrics but based on what actually happened when they played 2 games against the other 9 teams in the BE. It really can't be debated. It happened.
Whether people want to admit it or not, those injuries were big time injuries for this conference. What probably would've been a 1, 2, 4, 4, and then maybe two 10-ish seeds (I'm assuming Xavier and Creighton would've won some games against MU/Providence/SH that they didn't and one ends up missing the Tourney) turned into a 1, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 11 seeds. The conference COULD HAVE BEEN better without the injuries to Sumner and Watson, but those dominoes fell and it completely lowered the profile of this conference.
-
I agree with Wades on this. Injuries to Sumner and Watson made the conference much weaker. We went from 4 really good teams to 2. The weakening enabled MU and Providence to sneak in - quantity over quality though.
-
Sure, but 2 teams that were pretty clearly the 2nd and 3rd (or maybe 4th if Butler was better than Xavier with Sumner) best teams in the conference had a fully healthy team throughout the entire non-conference and then fell to the 6th and 7th place spots in the conference based on what actually occurred when the 10 teams in the BE all played each other once at home and once away from home. The results are what they are. Providence was the 3rd place team based not on some computer metrics but based on what actually happened when they played 2 games against the other 9 teams in the BE. It really can't be debated. It happened.
Whether people want to admit it or not, those injuries were big time injuries for this conference. What probably would've been a 1, 2, 4, 4, and then maybe two 10-ish seeds (I'm assuming Xavier and Creighton would've won some games against MU/Providence/SH that they didn't and one ends up missing the Tourney) turned into a 1, 4, 6, 9, 10, 11, and 11 seeds. The conference COULD HAVE BEEN better without the injuries to Sumner and Watson, but those dominoes fell and it completely lowered the profile of this conference.
I recognize the injuries hurt the conference. No one's denying that. But even if with the injures, the total body of work, which includes what Creighton and Xavier did before the injuries, as well as after them, is better than the total body of work that the third and fourth best teams in the Big East did last year.
You keep focusing on conference games, but that doesn't include what they did in non-conference and in the postseason. I believe results matter too. That's why I use KP rankings because they are based on results of the ENTIRE season. If you want to say Providence was the third in conference play, fine. But they weren't the third best team over the course of the season. If they were, they wouldn't have been playing in Dayton with the lowest seed of any Big East team that made the dance.
-
I was just watching the NIT and realized MU would dominate probably close to every team in that tournament