AP Preseason Poll: Kentucky #1, Duke #4

[duke4ever19]

Didn't see this posted (mods, feel free to move) but... UK gets the top spot with our Dukies ranked #4 with a couple No#1 votes.

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/story/_/id/9908049/kentucky-ranked-no-1-preseason-basketball-poll

Not that the preseason poll means much, but it is interesting to see where the prognosticators have teams before the whole thing blows up after about a month:D

[hurleyfor3]

Raw poll (rather than article):

http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketball/rankings/_/year/2014/poll/1

[Duvall]

UNC must have had a great offseason to jump 14 spots in the polls.

[Bob Green]

...but it is interesting to see where the prognosticators have teams before the whole thing blows up after about a month:D

I doubt it takes that long.

[luburch]

Interesting tidbit:

@RealJayWilliams: #CollegeBasketball: * 7 of the last 10 national champions have been ranked in the Top 5 of the preseason AP poll: UK,Mich St,Ville,Duke & KU

[duke4ever19]

Interesting tidbit:

@RealJayWilliams: #CollegeBasketball: * 7 of the last 10 national champions have been ranked in the Top 5 of the preseason AP poll: UK,Mich St,Ville,Duke & KU


The exceptions were Uconn in 2011, Duke 2010, and Florida 2006 if memory serves. Syracuse was not in the top 5 either in '02-'03.

[matt1]

The exceptions were Uconn in 2011, Duke 2010, Florida 2006, and Syracuse in 2003 if memory serves.

The first three, as Syracuse in 2003 is now the 11th most recent champion. It is interesting that 2010 was a low starting spot for us, as was 2013, the only other year we made it past the Sweet 16. Still, I would rather be #4 than #8 or #9.

[duke4ever19]

I still scratch my head with when I think about Uconn winning in 2011.

[Potato Head]

How weak is the field if UNC gets in at #12?

[Olympic Fan]

The release of this poll extends Duke's streak of consecutive top 10 appearances to 114 straight AP polls (from Nov. 2007 to now).

Duke's 114 straight top 10s are the second-longest in AP poll history. UCLA has 155 straight top 10 weeks in the Wooden glory years (1966-76)

[moonpie23]

wasn't UK Ranked #1 last pre-season?

[dukebballcamper90-91]

they were ranked 3 when we smacked em upside the head 2nd game of the season. Indy was 1

[roywhite]

Just heard Jay Bilas doing a season preview piece on ESPN.

His pick for National Champion? Duke

Said they will improve during the year; Jabari Parker being a key player all over the court, the "queen on the chess board" for Coach K.

[OldPhiKap]

they were ranked 3 when we smacked em upside the head 2nd game of the season. Indy was 1

Ky had a bad player injury early, and never came together last year. They may be the most talented collection of players, we will have to see how good of a TEAM they become. I am fine with letting them take the pressure of #1 early.


Just heard Jay Bilas doing a season preview piece on ESPN.

His pick for National Champion? Duke

Said they will improve during the year; Jabari Parker being a key player all over the court, the "queen on the chess board" for Coach K.

Jay is trill. And very insightful. If Jay is saying this, you know it so NOT to run the hype machine and definitely not because he is a homer. I am sure he has seen our practices and talked to K.

[Kedsy]

Ky had a bad player injury early, and never came together last year. They may be the most talented collection of players, we will have to see how good of a TEAM they become. I am fine with letting them take the pressure of #1 early.

If you're talking about Nerlens Noel, he wasn't injured until mid-February. Kentucky underachieved on merit last season.

[weezie]

Just heard Jay Bilas doing a season preview piece on ESPN.

His pick for National Champion? Duke

Said they will improve during the year; Jabari Parker being a key player all over the court, the "queen on the chess board" for Coach K.

This is the kind of post that catches my eye. In addition to Jay's opinion piece in the latest ESPN mag, he does know his stuff.
His suggestions for improving college ball and helping it to maintain relevance were spot on.

[davekay1971]

How weak is the field if UNC gets in at #12?

It's not the question of how weak is the field, it's the question of how much of a boost does UNC get on name. UNC was, I think, top 10 heading into the 2010 season. However, UNC has three big "ifs" that, if they go UNC's way, could make UNC at least a legitimate top 20 team.

1) Marcus Paige - he's already shown tremendous growth at UNC. If he continues that kind of growth, especially if he makes a "leap", UNC becomes a much better team.
2) PJ Hairston - can he stay out of trouble and play within the team concept? If so, his value as a shooter is unquestioned, and, like Paige, if he grows his game (in PJ's case, becoming a better driver/finisher), he becomes one of the better players in the ACC
3) The always overrated JMM - can he either benefit from Paige getting him the ball in scoring position close in, or can he actually develop an offensive game that doesn't involve athletic dunks and put-backs.

Freshmen, of course, are a question for everyone, UNC no different, and Britt has talent. If he can contribute well this year to improve UNC's front court, and if Paige is better than last year, and if Hairston grows a brain, and if JMM hits a shot from 12 feet away...

Lots of ifs, and rarely do all the ifs break right for any team. But IF all those ifs work out, UNC ain't gonna be awful.

[devildeac]

It's not the question of how weak is the field, it's the question of how much of a boost does UNC get on name. UNC was, I think, top 10 heading into the 2010 season. However, UNC has three big "ifs" that, if they go UNC's way, could make UNC at least a legitimate top 20 team.

1) Marcus Paige - he's already shown tremendous growth at UNC. If he continues that kind of growth, especially if he makes a "leap", UNC becomes a much better team.
2) PJ Hairston - can he stay out of trouble and play within the team concept? If so, his value as a shooter is unquestioned, and, like Paige, if he grows his game (in PJ's case, becoming a better driver/finisher), he becomes one of the better players in the ACC
3) The always overrated JMM - can he either benefit from Paige getting him the ball in scoring position close in, or can he actually develop an offensive game that doesn't involve athletic dunks and put-backs.

Freshmen, of course, are a question for everyone, UNC no different, and Britt has talent. If he can contribute well this year to improve UNC's front court, and if Paige is better than last year, and if Hairston grows a brain, and if JMM hits a shot from 12 feet away...

Lots of ifs, and rarely do all the ifs break right for any team. But IF all those ifs work out, UNC ain't gonna be awful.

Not sure if it was intentional or not, Dave, but great job working shooter, driver and finisher into a sentence with PJ. Next thing we know, you'll want him to become a better (puff, puff) passer;):rolleyes:.

[Ichabod Drain]

wasn't UK Ranked #1 last pre-season?

I believe they were #3, Indiana was #1

[flyingdutchdevil]

wasn't UK Ranked #1 last pre-season?

3. Indiana and Louisville were 1 and 2, respectively.

[MarkD83]

Whenever they come out with preseason rankings I remember a discussion they had last year (or maybe the year before) between ESPN basketball analysts. The final conclusion was that rankings early in the season until end of January are purely so that ESPN can market games on TV. The top teams are all easily recognizable to the casual fan so it is easy to hype a game.

[Kedsy]

It's not the question of how weak is the field, it's the question of how much of a boost does UNC get on name. UNC was, I think, top 10 heading into the 2010 season. However, UNC has three big "ifs" that, if they go UNC's way, could make UNC at least a legitimate top 20 team.

1) Marcus Paige - he's already shown tremendous growth at UNC. If he continues that kind of growth, especially if he makes a "leap", UNC becomes a much better team.

Marcus Paige, first 15 games: 7.3 ppg; 2.4 rpg; 4.2 apg; 2.7 tpg (1.6 a/to); 34.5 FG%
Marcus Paige, last 15 games: 9.2 ppg; 2.7 rpg; 4.7 apg; 2.5 tpg (1.9 a/to); 40.2 FG%

So, there's definitely improvement, but I'm not sure I'd go with "tremendous growth" here.

Also, for comparison, here's Larry Drew II's stats in 2009-10, half a season before he left town:

Larry Drew, 2009-10: 8.5 ppg; 2.7 rpg; 6.0 apg; 3.2 tpg (1.9 a/to); 40.2 FG%

Almost exactly the same as Paige after his "growth," in every category except assists, where Drew was a lot better.

Frankly, if Paige makes the "leap," he still probably won't be all that good.


2) PJ Hairston - can he stay out of trouble and play within the team concept? If so, his value as a shooter is unquestioned, and, like Paige, if he grows his game (in PJ's case, becoming a better driver/finisher), he becomes one of the better players in the ACC

agreed


3) The always overrated JMM - can he either benefit from Paige getting him the ball in scoring position close in, or can he actually develop an offensive game that doesn't involve athletic dunks and put-backs.

From freshman to sophomore season, McAdoo's offensive rating went down (from the mediocre 101.2 to the appalling 91.2) when his usage went up (from 19.8% to 27.2%). Here's a guy who really needs to make a "leap" to be even adequate on a top 20 team.


Freshmen, of course, are a question for everyone, UNC no different, and Britt has talent. If he can contribute well this year to improve UNC's front court, and if Paige is better than last year, and if Hairston grows a brain, and if JMM hits a shot from 12 feet away...

The freshman nobody around here seems to be talking about is Isaiah Hicks (#14 RSCI). My guess is he'll either start or play a big role off the bench, and I have no idea if he's ready, but if he is that's something in UNC's favor.

On the other hand, have you seen Britt play? I haven't, but it's really rare that the #93 RSCI prospect can do much of anything as a freshman on a top 20 team. In my view, if he plays a major role for UNC this year, it'll be because the wheels fell off the wagon.


Lots of ifs, and rarely do all the ifs break right for any team. But IF all those ifs work out, UNC ain't gonna be awful.

Without Hairston, UNC should be pretty awful. With Hairston, I agree they won't be awful, but they won't be much better than mediocre. I'll be shocked if they finish the season anywhere close to #12 in the country.

[Olympic Fan]

Whenever they come out with preseason rankings I remember a discussion they had last year (or maybe the year before) between ESPN basketball analysts. The final conclusion was that rankings early in the season until end of January are purely so that ESPN can market games on TV. The top teams are all easily recognizable to the casual fan so it is easy to hype a game.

Typical of what passes for "expertise" in today's media -- especially ESPN.

If the preseason poll was "purely" so ESPN could market games on TV, then why did preseason polling start in 1961?

The first polls (for basketball) came in the 1948-49 season. The very first AP poll was Jan. 20, 1949 -- two months into the season (which started at the first of December those days). A year later, the first poll was January 5 ... the next year it moved to early December -- after a handful of games were played -- and it stayed there until November of 1961 -- when Ohio State was the first preseason No. 1 pick.

That was long before ESPN had any games to market.

The purpose of the polls was to help the two wire services write national college basketball roundups. The sport was too regional and there were too many games to include everybody. They created the poll to limit the number of game stories they had to distribute nationally. Teams included in the top 20 (the poll originally included 20 teams ... from 1961 to 1968 it included just 10 teams ... it went back to 20 in 1969 ... after 1990, the poll has included 25 teams) got game stories included in the national roundup. Other schools were limited to regional distribution.

The Associated Press has always been picked by the writers. The original coaches poll was administered by the United Press -- a rival wire service company. When the UPI faded, the poll was taken over the USA Today -- later joined by ESPN.

But despite what Bomani Jones and his bubbleheaded colleagues think, sports didn't start with ESPN ... and neither did the preseason poll.

[vick]

Whenever they come out with preseason rankings I remember a discussion they had last year (or maybe the year before) between ESPN basketball analysts. The final conclusion was that rankings early in the season until end of January are purely so that ESPN can market games on TV. The top teams are all easily recognizable to the casual fan so it is easy to hype a game.

The problem with this line of thinking is, preseason polls are actually fairly accurate (http://kenpom.com/blog/index.php/weblog/entry/the_pre-season_ap_poll_is_great). During the season, voters don't seem able to help themselves from doing silly things, like voting a team down for losing a 1-point game on the road to an similarly-ranked team (as if home court advantage didn't exist), massively over-weighting recent performances, etc. Sure there are occasionally huge whiffs, but by and large preseason polls aren't bad at all.