MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: kryza on October 27, 2014, 01:37:56 PM

Title: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: kryza on October 27, 2014, 01:37:56 PM
9th in the Big East.

Ouch...

http://kenpom.com/
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: 4everwarriors on October 27, 2014, 01:39:25 PM
Lock for the NIT, assumin' a soft bubble, hey?
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: willie warrior on October 27, 2014, 01:40:38 PM
Damn--we need to bring back Buzz, then we will be top 25 and picked to win the BEast.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: wadesworld on October 27, 2014, 01:41:45 PM
Lock for the NIT, assumin' a soft bubble, hey?

Depends if there are any bubbles burst based on who wins their regular season conference title but doesn't win their conference tournament title, aina?
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: wadesworld on October 27, 2014, 01:42:15 PM
Damn--we need to bring back Buzz, then we will be top 25 and picked to win the BEast.

Much like Bert's schtick got old, your schtick has gotten old too.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: g0lden3agle on October 27, 2014, 01:43:30 PM
Damn--we need to bring back Buzz, then we will be top 25 and picked to win the BEast.

So you're saying last year's team simply played to its actual potential, not the bloated potential the press gave it in the preseason?
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on October 27, 2014, 02:23:46 PM
On paper, we don't look good. Let's prove them wrong!
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Golden Avalanche on October 27, 2014, 03:06:44 PM
9th in the Big East.

Ouch...

http://kenpom.com/

Good. I didn't want to waste my time nor emotional energy following this team for 30-odd games over the next four months. At least now I know how they'll finish.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Henry Sugar on October 27, 2014, 03:17:12 PM
#86 for a preseason ranking. The current ranking is also #107 on offense and #64 on defense. Prediction is for the team to go 15-13 (8-10).

As a start to the season those all kind of seem right to me.

Other BE rankings:

Nova #9
GU #22
SJU #39
Creighton #47
Prov #53
X #66
Butler #67
Seton Hall #85
DPU #197
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: GooooMarquette on October 27, 2014, 03:30:00 PM
Hard to argue with the prediction.

On the bright side, it'd be pretty difficult to fail to meet expectations.... ;)
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: WarriorInNYC on October 27, 2014, 03:42:49 PM
#86 for a preseason ranking. The current ranking is also #107 on offense and #64 on defense. Prediction is for the team to go 15-13 (8-10).

As a start to the season those all kind of seem right to me.

Other BE rankings:

Nova #9
GU #22
SJU #39
Creighton #47
Prov #53
X #66
Butler #67
Seton Hall #85
DPU #197

It is hard to argue with the prediction, but Creighton at #47?  I'm having a little difficulty with that one.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on October 27, 2014, 03:43:52 PM
Other BE rankings:

Nova #9
GU #22
SJU #39
Creighton #47
Prov #53
X #66
Butler #67
Seton Hall #85
DPU #197

Fairly similar to the rankings I came up with when I did my model over the summer:

Villanova #8
Georgetown #30
St. John's #46
Providence #60
Xavier #62
Creighton #68
Butler #78
Marquette #86 (huh, exactly the same)
Seton Hall #91
Depaul #186

KP's are a little more optimistic than mine. I'll defer to him
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on October 27, 2014, 03:46:05 PM
It is hard to argue with the prediction, but Creighton at #47?  I'm having a little difficulty with that one.

People forget that they have two very good players coming off redshirt, a solid graduate transfer, a decent recruiting class, and better bench from last season than people realized. But still, I do agree that 47 seems a bit high. But I think they will be better than people think.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Nukem2 on October 27, 2014, 04:11:42 PM
People forget that they have two very good players coming off redshirt, a solid graduate transfer, a decent recruiting class, and better bench from last season than people realized. But still, I do agree that 47 seems a bit high. But I think they will be better than people think.
Also have Will Artino at center with some decent backups and seniors Chatman and Brooks might be as good a guard combo as any in the BE.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: willie warrior on October 27, 2014, 04:18:34 PM
So you're saying last year's team simply played to its actual potential, not the bloated potential the press gave it in the preseason?
No I am not saying that, but thank you for putting words in your mouth. We had the talent last year, but Buzz blew it--plain and simple.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: tower912 on October 27, 2014, 04:57:29 PM
That high?
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Benny B on October 27, 2014, 05:02:14 PM
KenPom must have adjusted the bias in his model since UW is only #6.

That means everyone is 6 spots lower than they should be.  So Marquette is really #80.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Warhawk Warrior on October 27, 2014, 07:04:24 PM
Only thing that this ranking will prove is that it will be terribly wrong.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Galway Eagle on October 27, 2014, 07:19:09 PM
Didn't he have us low last year? Personally I think his model is most effective with teams that return a good amount of data but with a lot of unknowns its not as effective or at least I hope that's the case.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Atticus on October 27, 2014, 07:33:07 PM
Oh, the hypocrisy!

Pomeroy graduated from an MWC school. Surely he favors that conference over the BE.

Lol
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Dawson Rental on October 27, 2014, 07:41:34 PM
#86 for a preseason ranking. The current ranking is also #107 on offense and #64 on defense. Prediction is for the team to go 15-13 (8-10).

As a start to the season those all kind of seem right to me.

Other BE rankings:

Nova #9
GU #22
SJU #39
Creighton #47
Prov #53
X #66
Butler #67
Seton Hall #85
DPU #197

So, an 8-10 Big East record will get us ninth place?  Wow!

Seton Hall is way over rated.  A great freshman class, but the stud guard is inconsistent, and the other guys are going to need development time.  Fuquon Edwin is going to be missed big time, IMO.  Eugene Teague and Patrik Auda were big and experienced, and Brian Oliver was a dangerous 3 point threat.  All of them are going to be a lot to replace.  Look for them to become a load in a year, if Whitehead sticks around.  This year Gibbs and Sina will have to carry them.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Wojo Era on October 27, 2014, 08:19:48 PM
#86 for a preseason ranking. The current ranking is also #107 on offense and #64 on defense. Prediction is for the team to go 15-13 (8-10).

As a start to the season those all kind of seem right to me.

Other BE rankings:

Nova #9
GU #22
SJU #39
Creighton #47
Prov #53
X #66
Butler #67
Seton Hall #85
DPU #197

So if the 2nd to last place team is 8-10, that must mean about 6 teams will go 9-9 in this model
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Dawson Rental on October 27, 2014, 08:21:41 PM
So if the 2nd to last place team is 8-10, that must mean about 6 teams will go 9-9 in this model

And that DePaul is in for a typical year.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Dr. Blackheart on October 27, 2014, 09:32:34 PM
So if the 2nd to last place team is 8-10, that must mean about 6 teams will go 9-9 in this model

Stated another way: "MU will be one game out of third place!"

#regressiontothemean
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: TAMU, Knower of Ball on October 27, 2014, 10:27:14 PM
So, an 8-10 Big East record will get us ninth place?  Wow!

The model predicts 9th in KP ranking. Not necessarily 9th in the conference. I guess he projects a rough non-conference? Maybe due to Luke's absence?

I'm trying to picture how an 8-10 team could get 9th out of 10.

1. Nova (14-4)
2. Georgetown (13-5)
3. St. John's (11-7)
4. Creighton (9-9)
5. Providence (9-9)
6. Xavier (9-9)
7. Butler (8-10)
8. Seton Hall (8-10)
9. Marquette (8-10)
10. Depaul (1-17)

That would suck for our conference. Would need stellar non-conferences to get more than 2 bids!
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: Dawson Rental on October 27, 2014, 11:19:15 PM
The model predicts 9th in KP ranking. Not necessarily 9th in the conference. I guess he projects a rough non-conference? Maybe due to Luke's absence?

I'm trying to picture how an 8-10 team could get 9th out of 10.

1. Nova (14-4)
2. Georgetown (13-5)
3. St. John's (11-7)
4. Creighton (9-9)
5. Providence (9-9)
6. Xavier (9-9)
7. Butler (8-10)
8. Seton Hall (8-10)
9. Marquette (8-10)
10. Depaul (1-17)

That would suck for our conference. Would need stellar non-conferences to get more than 2 bids!

Yeah, that is an important distinction.
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: g0lden3agle on October 28, 2014, 06:43:30 AM
edit: nevermind
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: The Lens on October 28, 2014, 12:15:34 PM
Two teams in the Top 35 and people wonder why Dana O'Neil wrote what she wrote. 
Title: Re: #86 in Kenpom's Preseason Rankings
Post by: bilsu on October 28, 2014, 12:25:56 PM
Lock for the NIT, assumin' a soft bubble, hey?
The NIT automatically takes conference champions, who lose in their conference tournament like UWGB did last year. NCAA 68 + NIT 32=100 bids of which there will be at least 20 teams rated worse then 86th that are taking up bids. 100-20=80, which leaves 86th 6 teams short of an NIT bid. This of course is not exact, but the 86th ranked team is not likely to get an at large bid to either tournament.