Vitale's Top 40

[GGGG]

Wade ended up being drafted higher than anyone had him projected. To say he "dropped" is inaccurate.

Yes, you are correct.  I used the wrong term.  I should have said that he wasn't graded as high because of concerns over his outside shooting.

[Big Daddy Z]

Steve Lavins...new St John coach is Vitales buddy from ESPN...picking the Johnnies to be in his top 40 was soely to help his buddy & also with his recruiting.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Dick Vitale's pre-season poll has St Johns 39th and 7th in the Big East which would certainly result in an NCAA bid. CBB's pre-season poll isn't as specific but also has the Johnnies in the tournament. Vitale is "phoning in" his projection but Chico is not? Based on what?

I say phoning it because these guys don't look at all 350 teams to be able to say this team is 39th best.  It's absurd.

You'll note that I didn't make any prediction like that in terms of where they are slotted.  I'm basing my evaluation on what they did last year, how many close games they had which they should win this year with another year under their belt, they return most of their team and they have a new coach.

By the way, is it 66% or 75%.....

[Lennys Tap]

I say phoning it because these guys don't look at all 350 teams to be able to say this team is 39th best.  It's absurd.

You'll note that I didn't make any prediction like that in terms of where they are slotted.  I'm basing my evaluation on what they did last year, how many close games they had which they should win this year with another year under their belt, they return most of their team and they have a new coach.

By the way, is it 66% or 75%.....

First of all, it's not really necessary to look at any more than about 120 teams when compiling a top 25 or top 40 since the bottom 230 are basically irrelevant to the discussion. And of course 39 is really a "grouping" (30-50) which translates into approximately a 7th place Big East finish and a 7-10 seed in the NCAA tournament. That's pretty much where I figured you also had St Johns slotted when you said you thought they would make the tournament. I don't know Vitale's methodology, but is it unrealistic to think he included last year's results (including the closeness of some losses), returning players and a new coach? No offense, but these are hardly groundbreaking concepts.

The point is that whether it's Dick Vitale, the Blue Ribbon Yearbook or fans like us, there is plenty of data available on which to base projections. And when that data leads prognosticators to similar conclusions they're right more often than not. Over the long haul I'll trust their judgement over someone who's an unabashed fan or hater. That also goes for someone who manipulates the data to conform with a prejudice or agenda (not talking about you).

[ChicosBailBonds]

First of all, it's not really necessary to look at any more than about 120 teams when compiling a top 25 or top 40 since the bottom 230 are basically irrelevant to the discussion. And of course 39 is really a "grouping" (30-50) which translates into approximately a 7th place Big East finish and a 7-10 seed in the NCAA tournament. That's pretty much where I figured you also had St Johns slotted when you said you thought they would make the tournament. I don't know Vitale's methodology, but is it unrealistic to think he included last year's results (including the closeness of some losses), returning players and a new coach? No offense, but these are hardly groundbreaking concepts.

The point is that whether it's Dick Vitale, the Blue Ribbon Yearbook or fans like us, there is plenty of data available on which to base projections. And when that data leads prognosticators to similar conclusions they're right more often than not. Over the long haul I'll trust their judgement over someone who's an unabashed fan or hater. That also goes for someone who manipulates the data to conform with a prejudice or agenda (not talking about you).

Fair enough....in fact I agree that they probably only look at the top 120.  That makes the point even more valid.  Only looking at 120 teams and still getting so many wrong from preseason to reality is very poor on their part, especially for their so called expertise.    They should do a much better job then they do.  They pick the top 25 each year out of those 100 or 125 schools, and yet they miss by more than 40%.  Not a good track record considering they live and breathe this stuff (allegedly) every day.

The 66% and 75% is bothering me, did I mess up calculation or did one of us just count the teams wrong?  I'm referencing the number it takes to kick someone out of the league.

[HouWarrior]

First of all, it's not really necessary to look at any more than about 120 teams when compiling a top 25 or top 40 since the bottom 230 are basically irrelevant to the discussion. And of course 39 is really a "grouping" (30-50) which translates into approximately a 7th place Big East finish and a 7-10 seed in the NCAA tournament. That's pretty much where I figured you also had St Johns slotted when you said you thought they would make the tournament. I don't know Vitale's methodology, but is it unrealistic to think he included last year's results (including the closeness of some losses), returning players and a new coach? No offense, but these are hardly groundbreaking concepts.

The point is that whether it's Dick Vitale, the Blue Ribbon Yearbook or fans like us, there is plenty of data available on which to base projections. And when that data leads prognosticators to similar conclusions they're right more often than not. Over the long haul I'll trust their judgement over someone who's an unabashed fan or hater. That also goes for someone who manipulates the data to conform with a prejudice or agenda (not talking about you).

As I am the one first referring to Vitale "phoning it in" such is based on 2 things-
Point 1 -years of watching vitale be enthused for diaper dandies, horrible unreasoned picking by him in NCAA, and if you ever noticed---whoever won the last round game in the most convincing way becomes his new favorite to go all the way--point one is generally, and historically--Dicky is not a Jay Bilas--hes more a cheerleader/homer rooter, than an analyst workhorse.

Point 2-- look at the textual explanations next to his ESPN 2011 picks --some just say things like---so and so's team are always tough....or some dont even mention any player name---it appears he was slotting some without Bilas like study, or any  real reasons...and some were slotted  on sheer historical likelihood, and/or program/coach reputation---
to me that is phoning it in---something ,imo, Dicky V does more than others--
we still watch , and enjoy him (me included) for the over the top way he talks--I just dont take his pronouncements very seriously.

[Lennys Tap]

Fair enough....in fact I agree that they probably only look at the top 120.  That makes the point even more valid.  Only looking at 120 teams and still getting so many wrong from preseason to reality is very poor on their part, especially for their so called expertise.    They should do a much better job then they do.  They pick the top 25 each year out of those 100 or 125 schools, and yet they miss by more than 40%.  Not a good track record considering they live and breathe this stuff (allegedly) every day.

The 66% and 75% is bothering me, did I mess up calculation or did one of us just count the teams wrong?  I'm referencing the number it takes to kick someone out of the league.
[/quote

College basketball is hard to project. Only five guys play at a time. Losing one starter can move a top 15 team out of the top 25. Sometimes the keys to a team's season are players who haven't even played in a D1 game (or any college game). All things considered I don't think the "experts" do that badly.

You are absolutely correct on the 75%. Guess with all the expansion talk I inadvertantly added two teams to the Big East.

[Lennys Tap]

As I am the one first referring to Vitale "phoning it in" such is based on 2 things-
Point 1 -years of watching vitale be enthused for diaper dandies, horrible unreasoned picking by him in NCAA, and if you ever noticed---whoever won the last round game in the most convincing way becomes his new favorite to go all the way--point one is generally, and historically--Dicky is not a Jay Bilas--hes more a cheerleader/homer rooter, than an analyst workhorse.

Point 2-- look at the textual explanations next to his ESPN 2011 picks --some just say things like---so and so's team are always tough....or some dont even mention any player name---it appears he was slotting some without Bilas like study, or any  real reasons...and some were slotted  on sheer historical likelihood, and/or program/coach reputation---
to me that is phoning it in---something ,imo, Dicky V does more than others--
we still watch , and enjoy him (me included) for the over the top way he talks--I just dont take his pronouncements very seriously.

My experience is that Vitale, while being a serious Al McGuire wannabe, is also well informed when it comes to various teams and their strengths and weaknesses. The one criticism I have of him regarding his prognostications is that he is always on the chalk.