MBB Off-season Thread

[kAzE]

Here's a somewhat intriguing ESPN article with preseason offense and defense ratings, rating Duke 14th overall, with the #2 offense, but just the 106th best defense: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...mer-bpi-update

I wasn't sure where to put this, and didn't think it deserved it's own thread, so I thought that it may be a good idea to just have a general off-season thread (like the FB thread) rather than discuss the 2017-18 team in bits an pieces in various other threads.

Basically, the "experts" over at ESPN think we're going to have the worst defense we've had in the entire KenPom era (since 2002). They also rate us as just the 4th best team in the ACC, behind Louisville, Notre Dame, and Virginia. We all know how credible ESPN's internal metrics are (RIP QBR), so I think it's natural to take these ratings with a large chunk of salt. Still, it's enough to raise an eyebrow. I wonder what they based these ratings on.

[kAzE]

I wonder what they based these ratings on.

Slight addendum to my previous post. I missed this little qualifier:

"Keep in mind that preseason BPI describes the current strength of a team, and is not a prediction of how a team will ultimately end up."

This makes a tiny bit more sense. I could definitely see us having a disastrous defense at the start of the season, but one that improves to acceptable levels over time.

[Troublemaker]

This little snippet about Wichita St being #1 probably helps explain Duke's ranking:

...so the Shockers are bringing almost everyone relevant back. In BPI's mind, that's huge. Returning so many minutes after a strong season is a big reason why BPI considers the Shockers to own the fourth-strongest offense and defense in the country, which helped them edge out the likes of Louisville and Villanova in overall BPI.


I think Olympic Fan has pointed out that this Duke team is returning the least minutes ever for a Duke team, and we're also coming off a so-so season.

[Philadukie]

This little snippet about Wichita St being #1 probably helps explain Duke's ranking:

...so the Shockers are bringing almost everyone relevant back. In BPI's mind, that's huge. Returning so many minutes after a strong season is a big reason why BPI considers the Shockers to own the fourth-strongest offense and defense in the country, which helped them edge out the likes of Louisville and Villanova in overall BPI.


I think Olympic Fan has pointed out that this Duke team is returning the least minutes ever for a Duke team, and we're also coming off a so-so season.

I would think that the preseason BPI has lost predictive value during the one-and-done era.

Do we have preseason BPI from other years to compare how teams did against final BPI or even AP ranking for that year?

[sagegrouse]

I think Olympic Fan has pointed out that this Duke team is returning the least minutes ever for a Duke team, and we're also coming off a so-so season.

I know what you mean, Troublemaker, but I cherish every championship and "ACC Champions" makes this season more than so-so.

[atoomer0881]

Here's a somewhat intriguing ESPN article with preseason offense and defense ratings, rating Duke 14th overall, with the #2 offense, but just the 106th best defense: http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...mer-bpi-update

I wasn't sure where to put this, and didn't think it deserved it's own thread, so I thought that it may be a good idea to just have a general off-season thread (like the FB thread) rather than discuss the 2017-18 team in bits an pieces in various other threads.

Basically, the "experts" over at ESPN think we're going to have the worst defense we've had in the entire KenPom era (since 2002). They also rate us as just the 4th best team in the ACC, behind Louisville, Notre Dame, and Virginia. We all know how credible ESPN's internal metrics are (RIP QBR), so I think it's natural to take these ratings with a large chunk of salt. Still, it's enough to raise an eyebrow. I wonder what they based these ratings on.

Interesting that everywhere else I read, they have the top 4 teams in the ACC as being UNCheat, Duke, Miami, and Louisville. Where the heck did Notre Dame and UVA come from as ranking ahead of us?

[Troublemaker]

I know what you mean, Troublemaker, but I cherish every championship and "ACC Champions" makes this season more than so-so.

I agree with you sage, and heck, I probably still have the entire ACC tourney run on DVR. In this context, I was referring to our statistical profile with a dash of "by Duke's lofty standards" caveat.

[kAzE]

I would think that the preseason BPI has lost predictive value during the one-and-done era.

Do we have preseason BPI from other years to compare how teams did against final BPI or even AP ranking for that year?

You would think that, but apparently, they do factor freshmen in somehow. Also, I don't think BPI was even around before the OAD era, so it can't have "lost" any value (more likely it never had any value to begin with).

But nonetheless, I'd also be interested to see how preseason BPI has fared over the years.

[Olympic Fan]

Interesting that everywhere else I read, they have the top 4 teams in the ACC as being UNCheat, Duke, Miami, and Louisville. Where the heck did Notre Dame and UVA come from as ranking ahead of us?

I think some of you are too hung up on BPI ratings. BPI is just one of many computer-based ranking systems -- probably worse than most. You only see it because of the ESPN hype. No computer model -- even a good one such as KenPom -- means anything until games are played.

FWIW, ESPN's current 2017-18 "too early" rankings have the ACC this way:

5 (nationally) Duke
7 UNC
10 Louisville
12. Miami
21. Notre Dame

Not sure I agree with that either -- Louisville is too low and UNC too high, still, it's worth more than the BPI. Although considering ESPN's college basketball coverage in the last two weeks, I'd assume that is the view from up LaVar Ball's butt.

PS I can see calling 2017 disappointing based on the preseason expectations and the early NCAA exit, still -- 28 wins, an ACC championship and two wins in three games with the Cheats, but if that's a "so-so" season then it's great to be a Duke fan.

[Henderson]

Not sure about ONE thread that purports to cover all of the off-season MBB issues.

Do all such conversations get parked here? From now until CTC? Covering months of off-season topics?

That'd be a pretty all-encompassing thread, wouldn't it?

Maybe the OP has in mind a more focused idea for this particular thread? Like preseason rankings? Or is there already a thread for that?

[kAzE]

I think some of you are too hung up on BPI ratings. BPI is just one of many computer-based ranking systems -- probably worse than most. You only see it because of the ESPN hype. No computer model -- even a good one such as KenPom -- means anything until games are played.

FWIW, ESPN's current 2017-18 "too early" rankings have the ACC this way:

5 (nationally) Duke
7 UNC
10 Louisville
12. Miami
21. Notre Dame

Not sure I agree with that either -- Louisville is too low and UNC too high, still, it's worth more than the BPI. Although considering ESPN's college basketball coverage in the last two weeks, I'd assume that is the view from up LaVar Ball's butt.

Here's Garry Parish's rankings over at CBS (Updated 7/10/17): https://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...op-25-and-one/

He has Louisville #5, Duke #7, Miami #11, UNC #12, and Notre Dame #13. (Virginia was not in his top 26)

Not sure about ONE thread that purports to cover all of the off-season MBB issues.

Do all such conversations get parked here? From now until CTC? Covering months of off-season topics?

That'd be a pretty all-encompassing thread, wouldn't it?

Maybe the OP has in mine a more focused idea for this particular thread?

I view this as a general purpose off-season thread where we can discuss men's basketball topics which don't have relevance to specific things which have their own thread already (such as recruiting, the Dominican Republic trip, the schedule, etc.). I've noticed a lot of non-recruiting Duke basketball talk in the 2017 recruiting thread specifically.

The minutes thread hasn't started yet, so where else are we going to talk about the team for the next 2 months? Yes, it's a Duke basketball forum, but we have 20 threads on the first page at the time of this post, and only 5 of them (including this one) are relevant to the 2017-18 team. It's the offseason, so there are going to be lots of off-topic threads.

The women's team and the football team both have their own off-season threads, so it only seems logical for MBB to have one.

[Olympic Fan]

Here's Garry Parish's rankings over at CBS (Updated 7/10/17): https://www.cbssports.com/college-ba...op-25-and-one/

He has Louisville #5, Duke #7, Miami #11, UNC #12, and Notre Dame #13. (Virginia was not in his top 26)

I respect Parish (except for his odd blind spot when it comes to NC State) and I like his preseason poll a lot more than ESPN.

I do think Parish and a lot of other commentators are missing the bet when it come to Virginia Tech. I like them a LOT more than Virginia -- even with the recent loss of Outlaw.

[Olympic Fan]

Worth noting ... ESPN updated its preseason top 25 today and had Duke at No. 1:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...o-early-top-25

Interesting that they suggest both Bolden and Trent will be coming off the bench. In that scenario, who would be the fifth starter?

Allen ... Bagley ... Carter ... Duval ... and ????

[atoomer0881]

Worth noting ... ESPN updated its preseason top 25 today and had Duke at No. 1:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...o-early-top-25

Interesting that they suggest both Bolden and Trent will be coming off the bench. In that scenario, who would be the fifth starter?

Allen ... Bagley ... Carter ... Duval ... and ????

Just read that on ESPN and was literally thinking the exact same thing.

[kAzE]

Worth noting ... ESPN updated its preseason top 25 today and had Duke at No. 1:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-bas...o-early-top-25

Interesting that they suggest both Bolden and Trent will be coming off the bench. In that scenario, who would be the fifth starter?

Allen ... Bagley ... Carter ... Duval ... and ????

Nobody ever said the people at ESPN are good at this. There's almost no realistic scenario in which Gary Trent comes off the bench.

[JasonEvans]

The only scenario where Trent comes off the bench is one where Jordan Tucker, Alex O'Connell, or Jack White get the start on the wing ahead of him. It seems extremely unlikely given the various recruiting rankings of the players but it is not impossible. Maybe SI has some inside intel about how guys are playing in late summer pick-up and informal practices... but the more likely answer is some weak reporting by SI.

-Jason "also possible that the sentence structure was off and it meant either Bolden or Trent would come off the bench (not both), which is almost certain" Evans

[ipatent]

I wonder what they based these ratings on.

Lack of experience, at least as far as the defensive rating is concerned.

[CDu]

Nobody ever said the people at ESPN are good at this. There's almost no realistic scenario in which Gary Trent comes off the bench.

I agree.

I think the only remotely plausible scenario in which Trent would come off the bench (and this is testing the limits of the term "remote") almost requires that Bolden start. As in, playing Bagley at the 3.

Or, I guess they could say DeLaurier would start at the 3. But it seems highly unlikely that that's what they meant (not to mention highly unlikely to happen).

[jimsumner]

I read an "analysis" recently on Bleacher Report that suggested Tucker would start ahead of Trent because Allen, Duval and Trent were Duke's only guards and Duke would need Trent to come off the bench and spell Allen and Duval.

The flaws with this reasoning are so apparent that I'll not even bother.

[CDu]

I read an "analysis" recently on Bleacher Report that suggested Tucker would start ahead of Trent because Allen, Duval and Trent were Duke's only guards and Duke would need Trent to come off the bench and spell Allen and Duval.

The flaws with this reasoning are so apparent that I'll not even bother.

Wow. Yeah that's... something.