Overrated / Underrated [Archive]

Udaman

11-11-2011, 06:25 PM

A few years ago I posted something like this, and got everyone fired up...and I'm kind of bored tonight. So here goes

Overrated:

UConn. Big time. Yeah they have a good first year player...but they will miss the guys they lost more than he will add.

Duke. Yes...at least for now. Losing Smith, Singler and Irving (but especially Smith and Singler) will be tough to overcome. By the end of the year, we'll be dangerous...but for now, I would probably put us around #18 or so.

Kentucky. I think they are good...but they should not be #2. That should go to Ohio State. Nor should they be #3 (Vandy), or #4, or #5.

Arizona. Losing Williams is huge. They shouldn't be ranked.

Underrated:

Vandy. (see above)

Baylor. Calling this right now - they'll be undefeated on Dec 23rd when they play at W. Virginia, and if they win that they'll be undefeated on Jan 2nd until they play Texas A&M. If they win that, they could be ranked #1. It won't last...but this is a good team.

Memphis - another dangerous team, and they play a pretty easy schedule. This is a #1 seed or #2 seed at worst.

Cincinnati - good team with top 4 scorers back.

OK, tear it to shreds.

By the way - SO PUMPED THAT BASKETBALL IS BACK (as is my 8 year old son who reminded me no more than a dozen times today to tape the Duke game...though he still is confused that we live in Belmont, MA and are playing Belmont...only it's not Belmont, Ma)

Kedsy

11-11-2011, 06:33 PM

Duke. Yes...at least for now. Losing Smith, Singler and Irving (but especially Smith and Singler) will be tough to overcome. By the end of the year, we'll be dangerous...but for now, I would probably put us around #18 or so.

Hard to imagine 17 teams better than Duke, even right now. We're going to lose some games early (maybe even tonight) but that doesn't mean teams who don't lose (or even teams who beat us) are "better." Personally, I think the lowest Duke should be ranked right now is around #10. Even at #6 I don't think we're particularly overrated. Just my opinion, of course.

uh_no

11-11-2011, 06:38 PM

A few years ago I posted something like this, and got everyone fired up...and I'm kind of bored tonight. So here goes

Overrated:

UConn. Big time. Yeah they have a good first year player...but they will miss the guys they lost more than he will add.

I'm still out on this, but what you have to consider is that they won the national title on defense, not on walker's offense. Take a look at his numbers in the last 3 games of the tournament, and in the last 2 games in the BE tournament, they weren't stupendous. People caught on and started to make him the focus of the defense, and that shut him down. What it DID do was open up lamb to have the run he did. The question is can the rest of the team be present enough to give lamb enough room to succeed? I have no idea. But I think the most underrated piece of the team is oriakhi. He needs to replace kemba's leadership (who knows if he can) but having two guys like oriakhi and drummond is incredible, and I'm excited to see it. Teams also underrated uconn's size last year, and they are even bigger this year....their 5 is now the 4, the 4->3. Size was one of the key factors in duke's run 2 years ago. Like duke, lots of questions, but saying they are overrated "big time" i think is a bit of an exaggeration.

Duke. Yes...at least for now. Losing Smith, Singler and Irving (but especially Smith and Singler) will be tough to overcome. By the end of the year, we'll be dangerous...but for now, I would probably put us around #18 or so. I think, like uconn, duke has a lot of questions and could swing either way. I honestly believe we have the offensive firepower to overcome the loss of kyle and nolan (and dare I say we may even have a better offense???) but their defense will be much more difficult to replace: not only because the guards won't be as good, but the big guys won't be able to be as confident in the guards stopping everything and thus can't be 100% focused on their men. I'm sure adjustments will be made to fix the issues I see occurring early, but I can't fathom the defense being as good as it was last year, and especially 2 years ago.

Kentucky. I think they are good...but they should not be #2. That should go to Ohio State. Nor should they be #3 (Vandy), or #4, or #5.

Arizona. Losing Williams is huge. They shouldn't be ranked.
UK was a shot away from the title game and likely the national title. They have a monster class and 3/5(?) starters back. If anything, I'd say they should be #1. OSU has a big man who lost a ton of weight and has almost moved himself into question mark status, plus their biggest win last year was over wisconsin (who I believe they also lost to once...i'd need to look it up...) I wasn't sold on them last year, and I'm less sold on them this year. I'm just not sure how you could posisbly drop such a loaded team out of the top 5.

DukieInBrasil

11-11-2011, 06:42 PM

A few years ago I posted something like this, and got everyone fired up...and I'm kind of bored tonight. So here goes

Overrated:
Duke. Yes...at least for now. Losing Smith, Singler and Irving (but especially Smith and Singler) will be tough to overcome. By the end of the year, we'll be dangerous...but for now, I would probably put us around #18 or so.

I've always thought of preseason polls as a predictor of the final finish. As such, i think it's kinda impossible to say that we're overated at least for now, cuz it's still (IMO) a predictor of the finish.

As the season goes on it seems that it is more of a reflection of who is playing the best at the time, but since we haven't started playing yet....I wouldn't be surprised to see Duke slide down to 18 at some point if they lose a few games, I also wouldn't be surprised to see a 1-2 matchup when Duke and UNC meet up.

I'm excited that the season is so close now!!!

uh_no

11-11-2011, 06:48 PM

I've always thought of preseason polls as a predictor of the final finish. As such, i think it's kinda impossible to say that we're overated at least for now, cuz it's still (IMO) a predictor of the finish.

As the season goes on it seems that it is more of a reflection of who is playing the best at the time, but since we haven't started playing yet....I wouldn't be surprised to see Duke slide down to 18 at some point if they lose a few games, I also wouldn't be surprised to see a 1-2 matchup when Duke and UNC meet up.

I'm excited that the season is so close now!!!

uh_no's summary of the polls:

preseason: take last years end of year rankings and dock teams based on who left and their importance to the team...effect mitigated by being a blue blood or having much hyped players waiting in the wings

mid season: did your team lose last week? lose some spots in the rankings. did your team win last week? pass the teams that lost
extenuating circumstances: just kidding there are none....this is always how the polls go

end of season: did you win the national title? ranked #1, were you in the final 4 and were previoulsy ranked in the top 25? top 4, else if you weren't in the top 25 before, you're only guaranteed top 10 now. Fill out the rest of the teams with the order as it was before the tournament

REPEAT!

TonyWR

11-11-2011, 07:09 PM

A few years ago I posted something like this, and got everyone fired up...and I'm kind of bored tonight. So here goes

Overrated:

UConn. Big time. Yeah they have a good first year player...but they will miss the guys they lost more than he will add.

Duke. Yes...at least for now. Losing Smith, Singler and Irving (but especially Smith and Singler) will be tough to overcome. By the end of the year, we'll be dangerous...but for now, I would probably put us around #18 or so.

Kentucky. I think they are good...but they should not be #2. That should go to Ohio State. Nor should they be #3 (Vandy), or #4, or #5.

Arizona. Losing Williams is huge. They shouldn't be ranked.

Underrated:

Vandy. (see above)

Baylor. Calling this right now - they'll be undefeated on Dec 23rd when they play at W. Virginia, and if they win that they'll be undefeated on Jan 2nd until they play Texas A&M. If they win that, they could be ranked #1. It won't last...but this is a good team.

Memphis - another dangerous team, and they play a pretty easy schedule. This is a #1 seed or #2 seed at worst.

Cincinnati - good team with top 4 scorers back.

OK, tear it to shreds.

By the way - SO PUMPED THAT BASKETBALL IS BACK (as is my 8 year old son who reminded me no more than a dozen times today to tape the Duke game...though he still is confused that we live in Belmont, MA and are playing Belmont...only it's not Belmont, Ma)

I say the tarholes are greatly over rated, yep, they are last years uk, all hype. They'll choke out come March. Mark it!

Kedsy

11-11-2011, 07:10 PM

UK was a shot away from the title game and likely the national title. They have a monster class and 3/5(?) starters back.

Only 2 of Kentucky's starters from last year are back. (Knight, Liggins, and Harrelson are all waiting for the NBA to start.) In fact, Kentucky only has 3 players on this year's roster who have ever averaged 8 or more minutes a game in college.

In my opinion, whatever Kentucky did last year is irrelevant. Their top 8 guys include 4 freshmen and 3 sophomores (and one senior). Hard for anybody to say at this point that they're #2 or #1 or #10.

Kedsy

11-11-2011, 07:11 PM

I say the tarholes are greatly over rated, yep, they are last years uk, all hype. They'll choke out come March. Mark it!

Last year's UK went to the Final Four, where they lost by 1 point. Hard to say they "choke[d]."

uh_no

11-11-2011, 07:32 PM

Only 2 of Kentucky's starters from last year are back. (Knight, Liggins, and Harrelson are all waiting for the NBA to start.) In fact, Kentucky only has 3 players on this year's roster who have ever averaged 8 or more minutes a game in college.

In my opinion, whatever Kentucky did last year is irrelevant. Their top 8 guys include 4 freshmen and 3 sophomores (and one senior). Hard for anybody to say at this point that they're #2 or #1 or #10.

Yeah. preseason rankings are 100% crapshoot. I don't think someone can say unequivocally that they are NOT #2 though. Even given their lack of experience, which you point out, with similarly inexperienced teams they went to the final 4 last year and the elite 8 the year before: only narrowly losing out each time. Its hard to count out teams with that much talent regardless of inexperience, and calipari's track record of doing it year in and year out, in my opinion, outweighs the question marks...right NOW.

NOTE: i reserve the right to change my opinion at any time and without notice :)

Wander

11-12-2011, 08:41 AM

Aside from Kentucky, I agree with all of these. I think people are making too big a deal about their youth - in statistical terms, the fact that they have a lot of freshmen means their error bar is larger, but their expected value should still be that high.

The two I feel most strongly about are Duke and Baylor (and felt this way before the Belmont game). We're going to miss the defense of Singler and Smith way too much, and Baylor looks to me like they'll have the best frontcourt in the country.

Olympic Fan

11-12-2011, 11:53 AM

Underrated:

Vandy. (see above)

Baylor. Calling this right now - they'll be undefeated on Dec 23rd when they play at W. Virginia, and if they win that they'll be undefeated on Jan 2nd until they play Texas A&M. If they win that, they could be ranked #1. It won't last...but this is a good team.

Memphis - another dangerous team, and they play a pretty easy schedule. This is a #1 seed or #2 seed at worst.

Cincinnati - good team with top 4 scorers back.

OK, tear it to shreds.

I strongly disagree with this rating. especially about Vanderbilt. You think they should be No. 3. I think they should be No. 23 -- I think they are the single most overrated team in the poll.

It's a classuc case of a good team that has everybody back, so now people are rating them a great team.

A year ago, Vanderbilt flirted around the bottom fringes of the top 25, ending up at No. 25 (before the NCAA Tournament). Then they made a quick NCAA exit.

I don't see any reason to think they'll be so much better this season. They'll be older, but they weren't a particularly young team last year (a sophomore standout in Jenkins, but every other key player else was a junior). They don't add any impact freshmen.

So top 20 maybe,. but a consensus No. 7 in the preseason polls? I don't see it. They were solid last year and will be solid again this year. They can beat top 10 teams at home, but nowhere else. But they are not top 10 material in my eyes.

I'm not going to get into Baylor -- I argued myself blue in the face before last season that they were the most overrated team in preseason. Cincinnati's strong season a year ago was purely a product of a weak schedule (even in the Big East they got a break) -- and even at that, they ended up unranked. Again, maybe they deserve to be on the fringes of the top 25, but until they beat quality competition, no.

Memphis, I agree with you. A good team, a solid team -- we'll see how good Tuesday night when they play the same Belmont team that just took Duke to the wire. They they open against Michigan in Maui and could play Duke in the second round. After that, they go to Louisville and Georgetown. A good preseason schedule ... if they come out of December in good shape, they roll in a weak league.

To me, the single most underrated team in the preseason polls is Florida State. I don't get the skepticism of the voters. They've been steadily getting better over the last three years. They're one of the biggest, deepest, most athletic teams in the country. They reached the Sweet 16 a year ago (with Singleton hobbled and playing a negligible role). They return seven of the top nine players who finished third in the ACC a year ago -- and were part of the nation's best defensive team (two years in a row they've led the nation in FG percentage defense). They've added a solid fifth-year senior point guard who started at Arkansas a year ago. They've added one of the most offensively explosive freshmen this side of Austin Rivers.

They were a better team than Vanderbilt last year and I can't see why they won't be better than Vandy again this season. Not sure they're not better than Baylor (they beat them handily on a neutral court a year ago). I'm not saying top 10 ... but these guys should be second 10.

Final note: I think a lot of it comes down to what the pollsters are voting on -- the relative strength of teams going into the season or how they think they will end up. Duke offers a good example -- no way the Devils are No. 6 at the moment, but I believe (and think the voters believe) that by March Duke will be a solid top 10 team in the 4-8 range. I agree with that thinking.

ChillinDuke

11-12-2011, 12:22 PM

revmel53

11-12-2011, 07:39 PM

Duke ranked 18th? Oh goodness... not so much! I can't name five teams I think are truly better... but all are entitled... right?

Greg_Newton

11-12-2011, 07:52 PM

Wander

11-12-2011, 09:00 PM

It's a classuc case of a good team that has everybody back, so now people are rating them a great team.

I don't see any reason to think they'll be so much better this season. They'll be older, but they weren't a particularly young team last year (a sophomore standout in Jenkins, but every other key player else was a junior). They don't add any impact freshmen.

But certainly we can go back and find counterpoints - teams that aren't particularly young, don't have a fantastic recruiting class, yet improve a ton by virtue of returning lots of good players that have gotten better at the college game. I don't have a ton of examples off the top of my head, but it seems Pittsburgh last year fit this bill pretty well, and maybe even a certain other national championship team the year before that. In my opinion Vandy has enough NBA talent to make a substantial improvement.

dcdevil2009

11-12-2011, 09:37 PM

uh_no's summary of the polls:

preseason: take last years end of year rankings and dock teams based on who left and their importance to the team...effect mitigated by being a blue blood or having much hyped players waiting in the wings

mid season: did your team lose last week? lose some spots in the rankings. did your team win last week? pass the teams that lost
extenuating circumstances: just kidding there are none....this is always how the polls go

end of season: did you win the national title? ranked #1, were you in the final 4 and were previoulsy ranked in the top 25? top 4, else if you weren't in the top 25 before, you're only guaranteed top 10 now. Fill out the rest of the teams with the order as it was before the tournament

REPEAT!

I actually came across this (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great) blog by Pomeroy somewhere on this board last year, but it's still an interesting defense of preseason rankings. As to the actual rankings, I see us being a two seed at the end of the year, justifying the 6 spot in the polls. I'd say that tournament seeding is a better indicator of the best team than the actual tournament, but (hypocritically?) would obviously rather win as a lower seed than lose as a higher one. I think Kentucky is properly ranked, and if the NCAA tournament played best of five, they'd be in the championship, but it's not and their inexperience makes them susceptible to a mid-round upset.

uh_no

11-13-2011, 12:03 AM

Strongly disagree about UConn being overrated. They're the longest, most athletic team in the country by far. They've got the most physically imposing frontline in the country with Drummond and Oriahki, one of the best wing players in Lamb, a top-level PG in Napier, and a slew of long, athletic wings like Roscoe Smith and DeAndre Daniels. I'm not sure if I'd take UNC over them on a neutral court.

I think Syracuse is very underrated, and is probably better than us right now. Louisville could also be very good.

They also did not use their length to their advantage in their opener. oriakhi and drummond combined for 2 points and 9 boards. roscoe smith was slightly better with 8 and 7. That's pretty horrid and their starting 2 guards had to go up for 51 points to make up for the failure of the front court to produce.

and this was against Columbia.

Of course I expect this to get better, as oriakhi is a decently proven enterprise who horribly underperformed, but I was not impressed.

Greg_Newton

11-13-2011, 02:51 AM

They also did not use their length to their advantage in their opener. oriakhi and drummond combined for 2 points and 9 boards. roscoe smith was slightly better with 8 and 7. That's pretty horrid and their starting 2 guards had to go up for 51 points to make up for the failure of the front court to produce.

and this was against Columbia.

Of course I expect this to get better, as oriakhi is a decently proven enterprise who horribly underperformed, but I was not impressed.

Interesting... I just saw the highlights, which were sexy enough.

Regardless, they've/you've got the best post player from last year's final four along with the presumed #1 draft pick in your frontcourt; I have a feeling they'll get it together come tournament time.

CDu

11-13-2011, 10:45 AM

They also did not use their length to their advantage in their opener. oriakhi and drummond combined for 2 points and 9 boards. roscoe smith was slightly better with 8 and 7. That's pretty horrid and their starting 2 guards had to go up for 51 points to make up for the failure of the front court to produce.

and this was against Columbia.

Of course I expect this to get better, as oriakhi is a decently proven enterprise who horribly underperformed, but I was not impressed.

Yeah, this was discussed before the season, but UConn certainly has plenty of question marks. I have no doubt that they'll be able to defend people night in and night out, and they'll certainly be able to challenge a LOT of shots. But they lost their only consistent scoring threat from last year, and they weren't a very good offensive team last year anyway.

They should end up being very good. But they also will need to show that they can score consistently. And they're far from a polished member of the elite at the moment.

COYS

11-13-2011, 11:03 AM

And they're far from a polished member of the elite at the moment.

My opinion is that the media is making too much out of how polished UK and UNC are. UNC has lots of talent, but the roster still has some big question marks. Who makes outside shots? Can Marshall defend well enough against teams with fast/strong guards? What does the team do if an opposing team is able to take Marshall out of the game and Barnes' jump shot isn't falling? Will McAdoo and Hairston be able to contribute enough to provide depth in the post and at the off guard spot? UK, of course, has ridiculous amounts of athletic talent and potential, but they will still be relying on a freshman point guard, yet again. In this case, Marquis Teague is more of a natural scoring guard than a pure point. With all the other talent around him, can he learn to balance his own scoring vs. creating for others? Since a lot of the roster has not even played a difficult collegiate game, it's hard to call UK a polished member of the elite.

I actually think that the only elite team that is already pretty polished is Ohio State. However, it remains to be seen if they will be able to replace the role players that they lost from last year's juggernaut.

Anyway, Jay Bilas and some other writers claim that this year is the return of elite, finished product teams like we haven't had in a long time. I don't buy that yet. Is this years edition of UK better than the 2010 squad that included Wall, Cousins, and a junior Patterson? Was Ohio State's monster team last season not a great team? Losing Kyrie for most of the year may have prevented last year's Duke team from being great, but none of the returning players for UNC have accomplished as much as Nolan and Kyle did before returning for their senior season last year.

This is not to say that I disagree with the polls, or anything. I think UNC, UK, and Ohio State are probably the most elite teams. However, I question how polished they are, at the moment, with maybe the exception of Ohio State. I also don't think the bar is so much higher for these three teams that no one else in the top ten can catch them.

Olympic Fan

11-13-2011, 11:28 AM

But certainly we can go back and find counterpoints - teams that aren't particularly young, don't have a fantastic recruiting class, yet improve a ton by virtue of returning lots of good players that have gotten better at the college game. I don't have a ton of examples off the top of my head, but it seems Pittsburgh last year fit this bill pretty well, and maybe even a certain other national championship team the year before that. In my opinion Vandy has enough NBA talent to make a substantial improvement.

Yes, you can find examples where veteran teams inprove a lot in one time by simply getting older. But I don't think Duke in 2010 qualifies. The '10 Duke team is that kind of team -- a sophomore junior team in 2009 that became a junior-senior team in 2010, but the 2009 Duke team was 30-7 and No. 6 in the nation and played in the Sweet 16. It wasn't a huge jump for the 2010 team (which finished No. 3 in the final poll,k then had the great tournament run.

Pitt last year was close to what you are talking about, but not quite to the level of Vanderbilt. In 2010, they were 25-9 and second in the Big East ... and No, 18 in the final AP poll. Without adding any key newcomers, they jumped to 28-6 and first in the Big East and No. 4 in the finalo AP poll in 2011. They went to the Sweet 16 both years.

That is a fairly large improvement -- bot nearly as large as the pollsters seem to expect Vanderbilt to make this year. Last year, they were 23-11 and tied for third in the eastern division of the SEC (with Georgia). They were ranked No. 25 in the nation and made a first round NCAA exit.

I'm baffled how they can be picked ahead of Florida, which was significantly better than Vandy a year ago (29 wins and first in the SEC east -- four games better than Vandy). Yeah, Florida lost three frontcourt guys, but they return a projected lottery pick at center (Young), and a senior forward in Murphy (our Murph's older brother), plus the deepest most talented backcourt in the country.

Back to Vandy, look at last year's results. They had a nice win over a struggling UNC team in November in Puerto Rico (where Minnesota also beat the Heels) ... they beat Kentucky by four at home ... and they beat ... well, I guess their next best win was a one-point win at home over Marquette. They lost three times to Florida and lost to every decent team they played on the road.
They ended the year by losing 4 of their last six, including a loss to Richmond in the first round of the NCAA Tournament (hey, it wasn't at home, so they don't win).

I can see them being a little better next year, but not enough to be a top 10 team.

Anything's possible, but in my mind the kind of teams that make major jumps are one:

(1) teams that add significant new talent

(2) YOUNG teams that get older (by that I mean most players make their big jumps early, so I can see a freshmen-sophomore team becoming better as a sophomore-junior team. I don't see a junior dominated team suddenly being a lot better just because they are all seniors).

uh_no

11-13-2011, 03:22 PM

Underrated:

Vandy.

41-33 cleveland state leading vandy with 15 mins left

subzero02

11-13-2011, 03:58 PM

I am watching the Vandy game right now.... They are not a top 15 team without their center; so for the time being they are definitely overrated.

subzero02

11-13-2011, 04:12 PM

Cleveland state 71..... Vanderbilt 58. The game was on vanderbilt's homecourt too.

uh_no

11-13-2011, 07:19 PM

Further Upset Alerts:

#16 arizona down 7 to ball st with <15 minutes left
#11 pitt down 4 to ridley 12 mins left

gumbomoop

11-14-2011, 11:48 PM

dukeballboy88

11-15-2011, 07:21 AM

All I know is if that was the #1 team I saw against UNCA, then any team can win it this year.

loran16

11-16-2011, 01:12 AM

Figured this was appropriate here:

UCLA started the season ranked. Then it lost to Loyola Marymount at home.

And now it just lost by 20 at home to Middle Tennessee State. Uh wow.

The good news for them is that they play Chaminade in the first round of Maui. On the other hand....they might just lose if they're not careful. Would a loss result in Howland's firing?

Kedsy

11-16-2011, 01:35 AM

Would a loss result in Howland's firing?

I strongly doubt that. He's made three Final Fours in 8 years at UCLA, including 5 first or second place finishes in the PAC-10. And he seems to be recruiting well. No way that three bad games is going to get him fired.

NYC Duke Fan

11-16-2011, 03:25 AM

I just saw that Memphis beat Belmont by 18 points and we struggled at home to just barely beat them. I am not sure exactly what that means. Does it mean, that we are overrated or that Memphis might be underrated , or nothing at all?

DukieTiger

11-16-2011, 03:29 AM

devildeac

11-16-2011, 07:55 AM

Gotta watch out for that transitive property. Can't read too much into one game.

That could also equate to unc being seven points better than us right now. But, then again, they don't mean ship to me either. (and yes, I did type that ;-)) )

shoutingncu

11-16-2011, 08:57 AM

UCLA started the season ranked. Then it lost to Loyola Marymount at home.

And now it just lost by 20 at home to Middle Tennessee State. Uh wow.

And Larry Drew hasn't even started turning the ball over for them yet!

ChillinDuke

11-16-2011, 10:41 PM

Down 7 with 7 to play.

Long Beach St looks good. Yeah, they are the guys who play Pitt, Louisville, Kansas, UNC, and Xavier this year.

- Chillin

ChillinDuke

11-16-2011, 11:03 PM

#9 Pittsburgh just lost 86-76 at home to Long Beach St.

Quite frankly, Pitt looked outplayed pretty much all game. No one on Pitt looked that scary other than Gibbs who was well contained most of the game. Woodall had flashes but fouled out. Zanna was OK. Long Beach just looked better. I wouldn't be surprised if they won one or multiple more of their matchups against ranked teams.

This guy Casper Ware on LB St is great. Ennis is freakishly long and played a great game on offense and defense.

- Chillin

loldevilz

11-17-2011, 12:24 AM

Underrated- ACC?

No losses yet! Obviously not many impressive wins either, but no bad losses either.

brevity

11-17-2011, 01:33 AM

I've no idea whether LBS is under/overrated, but Dan Monson has a senior-dominated team and a super-challenging OOC schedule: away games at Pitt, UL, Kansas, and UNC, plus neutral court v. Xavier. All of these before Christmas. Most of those games on ESPNU. Hope I remember to watch these guys once or twice.

Long Beach State wins at Pittsburgh 86-76:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/recap?gameId=313200221

You have my attention. Giving you positive pitchforks for pure prescience.

burnspbesq

11-17-2011, 02:40 AM

In fairness to the Bruins, they have no real home court this year. While Pauley Pavilion is undergoing a major renovation this year, they will play most of their "home" games at the Sports Arena, the drafty dump that was home to USC until the Galen Center was built. They will play four games at the Honda Center in Anaheim, a mere 45 miles from campus.

Home-court advantage? Ask yourself how much home-court advantage Duke would have if it had to play a season at the RBC Center.

Indoor66

11-17-2011, 08:40 AM

uh_no

11-20-2011, 03:04 PM

ODU was within 1 of UK with 7 minute left today, and UK squeaked it out by 10

only scoring 62 points? I don't think UK is the run away favorite with UNC that everyone thinks they are.....they were lucky KU couln't hit a shot last week......they're good no doubt, but not phenomenal

also Uconn failed to impress (in my mind) again today, winning by 17 against coppin st, but being down most of the first half and then not really pulling away (it was about 10-15 points the whole second half)....clearly a pair of really good guards, but they can't be giving up 70 points to coppin state.

it'll be interesting to see how all these guys do in their respective tournaments

shoutingncu

11-20-2011, 11:16 PM

only scoring 62 points? I don't think UK is the run away favorite with UNC that everyone thinks they are.....they were lucky KU couln't hit a shot last week......they're good no doubt, but not phenomenal

I think this is going to be a theme with Calipari's teams (until the NBA changes the rules). Remember... Larry Drew and company beat Kentucky early last season. The Wildcats just look young out there. I gained confidence for Carolina's chances in Rupp, but feel should the teams meet a second time, we'll see a very different UK team.

uh_no

11-20-2011, 11:21 PM

I think this is going to be a theme with Calipari's teams (until the NBA changes the rules). Remember... Larry Drew and company beat Kentucky early last season. The Wildcats just look young out there. I gained confidence for Carolina's chances in Rupp, but feel should the teams meet a second time, we'll see a very different UK team.

Well no doubt. Last year even, they got waxed by uconn in maui only to nearly beat them in april....when you're throwing together teams year after year, you just hope you can get them ready by the end of the year.

my opining on it is mostly to counteract that people who were praising them as the 96 bulls simply because they won an exhibition by like 90.....they're just not a great team right now....and i'll think they'll lose to UNC....heck they perhaps could even lose to OSU and syracuse right now....if kansas could have bought a basket, there was a good chance they could have lost that one.....it was a terribly ugly game

i'm sure they'll be be better by march...but i wouldn't go into a game thinking they're impossible to beat simply becasue they have lots of top recruits.....

EDIT: i'm trying to make sense here, but having a hard time articulating it as well as I'd like...so bear with me :)

shoutingncu

11-23-2011, 12:20 AM

Frank Haith.

Did Miami ever beat a ranked team by 39?

Udaman

01-12-2012, 02:40 PM

So we are now in January...time to look back and see how I've done, and make reflections about the state of things now.

For my overrated teams, I think I was right about UConn. They have several losses waiting them still. For Kentucky and Duke, see below. 100% correct on Arizona.

For underrated - correct on Baylor (that was easy to see, however). Wrong on Vanderbilt. Memphis and Cincy are waits and see's.

So as of today....I would put the most overrated team as Syracuse. They have played hardly anyone, and all at home. They are good, but not the #1 team. I predict they'll lose in the Sweet 16 or before.

I'm still not sold on Duke either. We need a road win. Our next four road games are at Clemson, at Maryland, at Virginia Tech and at UNC. Honestly, I would take 2-2. That would at least show me something. But I could see us actually going 0-4 over that stretch, while winning our 5 home games. I don't think that will happen...but until we stand up to a "decent" team on the road and win....

I would still say that Kentucky is a ripe team for an upset in the tournament...though it's hard to say they don't belong in the top 10.

And Cincy is underrated. So is Memphis. So is Harvard.

As more and more college kids leave early, they days of having good mid majors who can compete is here to stay. Butler. San Diego State. Murray State. Creighton. Dayton. Wagner. These teams get good players who stay all four years and gel together. We'll see more and more of them make the Sweet 16, Elite 8 and Final Four. That's the new reality in the NCAA.