Page 1 of 3 123 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 49
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana

    MBB 2020-2021: Way-Too-Early Preseason Rankings Being Posted Way-Too-Earlier

    It's Thursday, March 19, the first full day of the cancelled 2020 NCAA Tournament, and I have already found three different preseason rankings for the 2020-2021 season. Each set of rankings goes into some detail -- Jon Rothstein speculates on the starting five for 45 different teams -- but I'll just post the links and share the Top 10 and ACC teams here.

    (If you find 2020-2021 men's basketball rankings from other sources, please do the same.)

    USA Today Top 25 (ad blocker resistant, possibly a paywall)

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Baylor
    3. Virginia
    4. Kentucky
    5. Creighton
    6. Duke
    7. Iowa
    8. Wisconsin
    9. Florida State
    10. Texas Tech
    18. North Carolina

    Also considered: Louisville

    247 Sports Top 21 for '21

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Virginia
    3. Kentucky
    4. Baylor
    5. Florida State
    6. Duke
    7. Creighton
    8. Kansas
    9. Iowa
    10. San Diego State
    12. North Carolina

    More to watch: Louisville

    College Hoops Today Early Rothstein 45

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Villanova
    3. Baylor
    4. Kansas
    5. Florida State
    6. Iowa
    7. Creighton
    8. Virginia
    9. Ohio State
    10. Kentucky
    11. Duke
    24. North Carolina
    29. Louisville
    30. Miami

    The weirdest part was when the USA Today writer pointed out that Virginia is the defending national champion for another year.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Hot'Lanta... home of the Falcons!
    These are somewhat interesting and I am glad you started the discussion, but this feels like a somewhat futile effort until we know a lot lot lot more about NBA early entry decisions (plus there are still several five-star basketball recruits who are yet to pick a school).
    Why are you wasting time here when you could be wasting it by listening to the latest episode of the DBR Podcast?

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Richmond, VA
    Since I am stuck in 1991 "watching" the NCAA tournament, this thread is about 30 years too early.


    None of the players have even been born yet.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by JasonEvans View Post
    These are somewhat interesting and I am glad you started the discussion, but this feels like a somewhat futile effort until we know a lot lot lot more about NBA early entry decisions (plus there are still several five-star basketball recruits who are yet to pick a school).
    Each of these writers making these rankings would probably agree with you, but they’re bored and going through March Madness withdrawal just like we are. Speculative college basketball content is better than no speculative college basketball content. And they all plan to update their rankings as the offseason continues and more information becomes available.

    Also, I there’s still value in a group of way-too-early opinions. For example, it was interesting that all three writers separately believe that Luka Garza is returning, and so they each put Iowa in their top 10.

    Here are two more.

    Stadium/Jeff Goodman's Ridiculously Early Top 25

    1. Baylor
    2. Villanova
    3. Creighton
    4. Gonzaga
    5. Michigan State
    6. Virginia
    7. Texas Tech
    8. Kentucky
    9. Kansas
    10. Duke
    13. Florida State
    15. Louisville
    16. North Carolina

    Heat Check Top 25

    1. Virginia
    2. Kentucky
    3. Baylor
    4. Villanova
    5. Duke
    6. Gonzaga
    7. Creighton
    8. Kansas
    9. Oregon
    10. Florida State
    17. North Carolina

    Also considered: Louisville, N.C. State

    Both assume the same about Luke Garza, but put Iowa just outside the top 10. Another angle: you might look for Arizona State in some of these rankings, for those of you with a Duke-adjacent interest in Bobby Hurley and Marcus Bagley.

    Unrelated, but I also found a blog post with a way-too-early 2020-2021 preseason ranking for women's college tennis. You won't like their #1 team, but Duke is #10.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Location
    I know not what course others may take; but as for me, give me liberty, or give me death!
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post

    The weirdest part was when the USA Today writer pointed out that Virginia is the defending national champion for another year.
    So does the Walton belt come back to UVA or does it stay with USC?

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    Seattle, WA
    Quote Originally Posted by Reddevil View Post
    So does the Walton belt come back to UVA or does it stay with USC?
    Stays with USC.
    Just be you. You is enough. - K, 4/5/10, 0:13.8 to play, 60-59 Duke.

    You're all jealous hypocrites. - Titus on Laettner

    You see those guys? Animals. They're animals. - SIU Coach Chris Lowery, on Duke

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Reddevil View Post
    So does the Walton belt come back to UVA or does it stay with USC?
    Quote Originally Posted by pfrduke View Post
    Stays with USC.
    Neither. I think you smoke the belt during the offseason, and a new one magically generates in a San Francisco basement.

    UVA lost the belt when they lost to Purdue, and they did not win it back later. So they have no belt to defend.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Three more 2020-2021 early preseason rankings posted today.

    NBC Sports/Rob Dauster Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Creighton
    5. Virginia
    6. Michigan State
    7. Kentucky
    8. Kansas
    9. Texas Tech
    10. San Diego State
    11. Florida State
    12. Duke
    15. North Carolina
    16. Louisville

    Fansided Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Kentucky
    5. Virginia
    6. Kansas
    7. Iowa
    8. Duke
    9. Florida State
    10. Wisconsin
    20. North Carolina

    News-Gazette/Scott Richey Top 10

    1. Villanova
    2. Baylor
    3. Gonzaga
    4. Kentucky
    5. Duke
    6. Creighton
    7. Michigan State
    8. Illinois
    9. North Carolina
    10. Arizona State

    There are some anomalies here -- hometown pick Illinois and Arizona State -- but Scott Richey was an AP voter last season, so I felt it was relevant.

  9. #9
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    The Worldwide Leader in What Do We Do Now finally weighs in.

    ESPN/Jeff Borzello Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Creighton
    3. Gonzaga
    4. Baylor
    5. Kentucky
    6. Duke
    7. Iowa
    8. Virginia
    9. Michigan State
    10. Kansas
    11. North Carolina
    22. Florida State

  10. #10
    scottdude8's Avatar
    scottdude8 is online now Moderator, Contributor, Zoubek disciple, and resident Wolverine
    Join Date
    Jan 2010
    Location
    Storrs, CT
    Quote Originally Posted by brevity View Post
    The Worldwide Leader in What Do We Do Now finally weighs in.

    ESPN/Jeff Borzello Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Creighton
    3. Gonzaga
    4. Baylor
    5. Kentucky
    6. Duke
    7. Iowa
    8. Virginia
    9. Michigan State
    10. Kansas
    11. North Carolina
    22. Florida State
    From the B1G perspective, #9 seems quite high for MSU, while #19 seems quite low for Michigan. MSU loses its heart and soul in Cassius Winston, and for all of his positive attributes it became clear this year that Xavier Tillman was a complementary player who benefited from playing with Winston (and there's no guarantee he returns... he is a "mobile" big who can defend, and thus could be worth a late-first round flier in the draft). Every other piece for the Spartans is young and unproven (various players, like Rocket Watts and Aaron Henry, showed flashes of potential this year, but nothing consistent... for reference, you could say that MSU had a bunch of AoC/Joey type hot/cold players surrounding Winston and Tillman). And MSU's incoming recruiting class has no clear early contributors.

    Meanwhile, while Michigan also loses its senior PG (as well as a senior center), it returns arguably its three most skilled scorers, including two potential NBA-caliber wings in Isaiah Livers and Franz Wagner (the third being do-everything guard Eli Brooks). Brooks and Livers will be seniors, and big man Austin Davis is returning for a fifth year and developed into a very capable backup big (Duke would love to have a guy like Davis for 10-15 mpg next year given how our roster looks!). Rising juniors David DeJulius and Brandon Johns will likely provide important depth and experience off the bench. And to all that, the Wolverines are adding a Top 5 recruiting class that will likely end up Top 3 if Josh Christopher commits, as nearly everyone is expecting.

    Think of it this way: if Duke had a team that returned its three starters including its two most talented scorers, three seniors, and in all likelihood at least 5 total contributors from a good (not great) season, and added to that a Top 3 recruiting class including two potential one-and-done talents, that team would be Top 5 in the pre-season polls EASY. The only reason to place MSU 10 spots ahead of Michigan is name recognition and the love of Tom Izzo.

    I shall now end my Michigan rant. But look out for the Wolverines next year guys. Seriously.
    Scott Rich on the front page

    Trinity BS 2012; University of Michigan PhD 2018
    Duke Chronicle, Sports Online Editor: 2010-2012
    K-Ville Blue Tenting 2009-2012

    Unofficial Brian Zoubek Biographer
    If you have questions about Michigan Basketball/Football, I'm your man!

  11. #11
    How will the ranking be impacted if both Cassius and Matthew return to Duke

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    Quote Originally Posted by Jaks19 View Post
    How will the ranking be impacted if both Cassius and Matthew return to Duke
    I hope we find out. In the meantime...

    Yahoo! Sports Absurdly Early Top 25

    1. Villanova
    2. Gonzaga
    3. Baylor
    4. Creighton
    5. Duke
    6. Virginia
    7. Kentucky
    8. Iowa
    9. Kansas
    10. Tennessee
    14. North Carolina
    16. Florida State

    Kentucky Sports Radio/Aaron Torres

    1. Villanova
    2. Creighton
    3. Kentucky
    4. Gonzaga
    5. Baylor
    6. Texas Tech
    7. Virginia
    8. UCLA
    9. Iowa
    10. Wisconsin
    11. Duke
    17. Florida State
    22. North Carolina

    Missed the cut: Louisville, NC State

  13. #13
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    New Orleans, Louisiana
    CBS Sports/Gary Parrish Top 25 and 1

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Kentucky
    3. Creighton
    4. Baylor
    5. Villanova
    6. Duke
    7. Virginia
    8. Houston
    9. Iowa
    10. Kansas
    16. North Carolina
    25. Florida State
    26. Louisville

  14. #14
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    Atlanta 'burbs
    So, according to pre-season predictions, unc will be worse next year than they were this year? I can handle that!

  15. #15

    T-Rank Projections

    Bart Torvik has his 2021 T-Rank projections out and they are... interesting.

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Virginia
    3. Baylor
    4. Creighton
    5. Texas
    6. Wisconsin
    7. Kentucky
    8. West Virginia
    9. Florida
    10. Kansas
    11. Texas Tech
    12. Ohio State
    13. Villanova
    14. Houston
    15. Michigan State
    16. Purdue
    17. San Diego State
    18. Duke
    19. Oregon
    20. Florida State
    21. Indiana
    22. North Carolina
    23. Penn State
    24. UCONN
    25. Iowa

    In general, I do not see too many outliers here from other Top 25 lists. Duke is obviously lower than I expected. More on that later. Texas is basically returning everyone, but 5th seems absurdly high to me. Florida also seems high to me and Villanova is a little lower than everyone else has them. T-Rank doesn't have Saddiq Bey returning, so 13th might be a good place for Nova based on the roster he is projecting.

    T-Rank also includes his projected Adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies. He has Duke with and ADJOE of 111.2, which is 39th in the nation. That seems way off to me. Duke has never finished a season with an ADJOE below 10th in the history of T-Rank's database, which goes back to 2007-08. The worst Duke has been is last season, when the ADJOE ended at 115.3, 9th best in the country. I just don't see a Duke team coached by Coach K being unable to score. Duke is projected to have the 4th best ADJDE, for what it is worth, with a 91.5 rating. The projected record is 22-9 on the season with a 13-7 conference record. That seems conservative to me.

    T-Rank also has player projections. Matthew Hurt is the top player with a projection of 16.6 pts/7.4 rbg/1.6 ast stat line playing 82% of the minutes. The core rotation consists of Hurt, Moore, Goldwire, Jalen Johnson, Jeremy Roach, JD Steward, Mark Williams, Jaemyn Brakefield, and Henry Coleman, in descending order. Patrick Tape is projected to play 7% of available minutes. I think you could flip Tape and Coleman.

    Looking at the player projections, I think T-Rank is overly conservative on projecting Jalen Johnson , who he has getting 13 pts/6.3 rpg/1.6 ast. I think Johnson might be closer to 15/8/4, but T-Rank has a tendency to be conservative in player projections in general. I also don't think Jordan Goldwire is going to play as much as he is projecting. We'll see, but I assume Jeremy Roach is going to start at PG with a frontcourt of Wendell Moore, Jalen Johnson, and Matthew Hurt. At SG, I expect to see a good amount of DJ Steward. Goldwire can and should play the PG position when Roach sits, but I think he's closer to a 20-25 MPG player than a 30 MPG player as T-Rank is projecting.

    The other thing about this group is that it does not include Cassius Stanley. If Stanley does return, I wonder if that bumps the team's rating up considerably. Goldwire, Baker, Stanley, Hurt, and Moore would represent some of the most returning minutes a Duke team has had in quite a long time.

  16. #16
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Southbury, CT
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    Bart Torvik has his 2021 T-Rank projections out and they are... interesting.



    In general, I do not see too many outliers here from other Top 25 lists. Duke is obviously lower than I expected. More on that later. Texas is basically returning everyone, but 5th seems absurdly high to me. Florida also seems high to me and Villanova is a little lower than everyone else has them. T-Rank doesn't have Saddiq Bey returning, so 13th might be a good place for Nova based on the roster he is projecting.

    T-Rank also includes his projected Adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies. He has Duke with and ADJOE of 111.2, which is 39th in the nation. That seems way off to me. Duke has never finished a season with an ADJOE below 10th in the history of T-Rank's database, which goes back to 2007-08. The worst Duke has been is last season, when the ADJOE ended at 115.3, 9th best in the country. I just don't see a Duke team coached by Coach K being unable to score. Duke is projected to have the 4th best ADJDE, for what it is worth, with a 91.5 rating. The projected record is 22-9 on the season with a 13-7 conference record. That seems conservative to me.

    T-Rank also has player projections. Matthew Hurt is the top player with a projection of 16.6 pts/7.4 rbg/1.6 ast stat line playing 82% of the minutes. The core rotation consists of Hurt, Moore, Goldwire, Jalen Johnson, Jeremy Roach, JD Steward, Mark Williams, Jaemyn Brakefield, and Henry Coleman, in descending order. Patrick Tape is projected to play 7% of available minutes. I think you could flip Tape and Coleman.

    Looking at the player projections, I think T-Rank is overly conservative on projecting Jalen Johnson , who he has getting 13 pts/6.3 rpg/1.6 ast. I think Johnson might be closer to 15/8/4, but T-Rank has a tendency to be conservative in player projections in general. I also don't think Jordan Goldwire is going to play as much as he is projecting. We'll see, but I assume Jeremy Roach is going to start at PG with a frontcourt of Wendell Moore, Jalen Johnson, and Matthew Hurt. At SG, I expect to see a good amount of DJ Steward. Goldwire can and should play the PG position when Roach sits, but I think he's closer to a 20-25 MPG player than a 30 MPG player as T-Rank is projecting.

    The other thing about this group is that it does not include Cassius Stanley. If Stanley does return, I wonder if that bumps the team's rating up considerably. Goldwire, Baker, Stanley, Hurt, and Moore would represent some of the most returning minutes a Duke team has had in quite a long time.
    No Joey Baker as a contributor? I'm also expecting more time from Tape than listed here.

    I'm not sure the board could handle a 9 loss season...we are so spoiled.
    Good people drink good beer. -Hunter S. Thompson

  17. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    Bart Torvik has his 2021 T-Rank projections out and they are... interesting.

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Virginia
    3. Baylor
    4. Creighton
    5. Texas
    6. Wisconsin
    7. Kentucky
    8. West Virginia
    9. Florida
    10. Kansas
    11. Texas Tech
    12. Ohio State
    13. Villanova
    14. Houston
    15. Michigan State
    16. Purdue
    17. San Diego State
    18. Duke
    19. Oregon
    20. Florida State
    21. Indiana
    22. North Carolina
    23. Penn State
    24. UCONN
    25. Iowa

    In general, I do not see too many outliers here from other Top 25 lists. Duke is obviously lower than I expected. More on that later. Texas is basically returning everyone, but 5th seems absurdly high to me. Florida also seems high to me and Villanova is a little lower than everyone else has them. T-Rank doesn't have Saddiq Bey returning, so 13th might be a good place for Nova based on the roster he is projecting.

    T-Rank also includes his projected Adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies. He has Duke with and ADJOE of 111.2, which is 39th in the nation. That seems way off to me. Duke has never finished a season with an ADJOE below 10th in the history of T-Rank's database, which goes back to 2007-08. The worst Duke has been is last season, when the ADJOE ended at 115.3, 9th best in the country. I just don't see a Duke team coached by Coach K being unable to score. Duke is projected to have the 4th best ADJDE, for what it is worth, with a 91.5 rating. The projected record is 22-9 on the season with a 13-7 conference record. That seems conservative to me.

    T-Rank also has player projections. Matthew Hurt is the top player with a projection of 16.6 pts/7.4 rbg/1.6 ast stat line playing 82% of the minutes. The core rotation consists of Hurt, Moore, Goldwire, Jalen Johnson, Jeremy Roach, JD Steward, Mark Williams, Jaemyn Brakefield, and Henry Coleman, in descending order. Patrick Tape is projected to play 7% of available minutes. I think you could flip Tape and Coleman.

    Looking at the player projections, I think T-Rank is overly conservative on projecting Jalen Johnson , who he has getting 13 pts/6.3 rpg/1.6 ast. I think Johnson might be closer to 15/8/4, but T-Rank has a tendency to be conservative in player projections in general. I also don't think Jordan Goldwire is going to play as much as he is projecting. We'll see, but I assume Jeremy Roach is going to start at PG with a frontcourt of Wendell Moore, Jalen Johnson, and Matthew Hurt. At SG, I expect to see a good amount of DJ Steward. Goldwire can and should play the PG position when Roach sits, but I think he's closer to a 20-25 MPG player than a 30 MPG player as T-Rank is projecting.

    The other thing about this group is that it does not include Cassius Stanley. If Stanley does return, I wonder if that bumps the team's rating up considerably. Goldwire, Baker, Stanley, Hurt, and Moore would represent some of the most returning minutes a Duke team has had in quite a long time.
    This is a fun tool, but there is roughly a 0% chance Goldwire averages 10ppg as Torvik is projecting. Also, Joey Baker is not included in his projections which has to be an oversight. I don't really see a world where Joey Baker plays less than Brakefield/Coleman.

  18. #18
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by DavidBenAkiva View Post
    Bart Torvik has his 2021 T-Rank projections out and they are... interesting.

    1. Gonzaga
    2. Virginia
    3. Baylor
    4. Creighton
    5. Texas
    6. Wisconsin
    7. Kentucky
    8. West Virginia
    9. Florida
    10. Kansas
    11. Texas Tech
    12. Ohio State
    13. Villanova
    14. Houston
    15. Michigan State
    16. Purdue
    17. San Diego State
    18. Duke
    19. Oregon
    20. Florida State
    21. Indiana
    22. North Carolina
    23. Penn State
    24. UCONN
    25. Iowa

    In general, I do not see too many outliers here from other Top 25 lists. Duke is obviously lower than I expected. More on that later. Texas is basically returning everyone, but 5th seems absurdly high to me. Florida also seems high to me and Villanova is a little lower than everyone else has them. T-Rank doesn't have Saddiq Bey returning, so 13th might be a good place for Nova based on the roster he is projecting.

    T-Rank also includes his projected Adjusted offensive and defensive efficiencies. He has Duke with and ADJOE of 111.2, which is 39th in the nation. That seems way off to me. Duke has never finished a season with an ADJOE below 10th in the history of T-Rank's database, which goes back to 2007-08. The worst Duke has been is last season, when the ADJOE ended at 115.3, 9th best in the country. I just don't see a Duke team coached by Coach K being unable to score. Duke is projected to have the 4th best ADJDE, for what it is worth, with a 91.5 rating. The projected record is 22-9 on the season with a 13-7 conference record. That seems conservative to me.

    T-Rank also has player projections. Matthew Hurt is the top player with a projection of 16.6 pts/7.4 rbg/1.6 ast stat line playing 82% of the minutes. The core rotation consists of Hurt, Moore, Goldwire, Jalen Johnson, Jeremy Roach, JD Steward, Mark Williams, Jaemyn Brakefield, and Henry Coleman, in descending order. Patrick Tape is projected to play 7% of available minutes. I think you could flip Tape and Coleman.

    Looking at the player projections, I think T-Rank is overly conservative on projecting Jalen Johnson , who he has getting 13 pts/6.3 rpg/1.6 ast. I think Johnson might be closer to 15/8/4, but T-Rank has a tendency to be conservative in player projections in general. I also don't think Jordan Goldwire is going to play as much as he is projecting. We'll see, but I assume Jeremy Roach is going to start at PG with a frontcourt of Wendell Moore, Jalen Johnson, and Matthew Hurt. At SG, I expect to see a good amount of DJ Steward. Goldwire can and should play the PG position when Roach sits, but I think he's closer to a 20-25 MPG player than a 30 MPG player as T-Rank is projecting.

    The other thing about this group is that it does not include Cassius Stanley. If Stanley does return, I wonder if that bumps the team's rating up considerably. Goldwire, Baker, Stanley, Hurt, and Moore would represent some of the most returning minutes a Duke team has had in quite a long time.
    My quibbles with T-Rank's estimates are mostly in line with yours, and are as follows:
    1. As you note, Duke has always had an elite offense since back to the "McRoberts era." Regardless of team dynamics, Coach K has managed to generate an elite offense. And considering that the incoming players are mostly offensive weapons, I would be quite surprised if our offense isn't top-10 again. I can't say exactly how it will look, but if I was forced to bet I'd bet on a top-10 offense.
    2. Conversely, a top-4 defense given the returning and incoming players might be optimistic. But on aggregate, I agree that it feels like an underestimate.
    3. Again as you mention, Jalen Johnson seems to be underestimated.
    4. I'm skeptical that our two centers will combine for just 37% of the minutes. I'd expect that to be over 50%, if not over 67%.
    5. I agree that Goldwire seems overestimated in terms of his playing time. Especially so if Stanley returns.
    6. But if Stanley is not there, then I think one of Roach or Steward is currently underestimated. I don't know which one for sure though.
    7. I will be quite surprised if the team leader in assists per game is under 3 per game.
    8. I won't quibble on Stanley, because he's still such an unknown.
    9. The absence of Baker entirely is weird. I'd put him as more likely to play than Coleman at the very least. Though I don't know if that will dramatically change things.

    I will quibble a bit with one comment you made here, and that's the last sentence. Even if Stanley returns along with Moore, Hurt, Baker, and Goldwire, that's still over 1,000 fewer career minutes returning than we had coming back this past year. Just as an example. And probably fewer returning minutes than most of the past 6 years (definitely more than in 2018-19, probably comparable to 2017-18, and less than the years prior to that). Unless you mean "returning minutes from only the previous year", in which case it would certainly be more than most if not all of the last 5-6 years.

  19. #19
    Reasons to think the Torvik projections are underrating Duke:

    1. I don't remember how exactly he projects incoming freshmen, but two of our guys who are expected to be major contributors (Roach and Johnson) had turbulent Senior years that either caused them to drop in the rankings and/or have stats discordant with what they're (hopefully) capable of (in the case of Roach and his injury recovery) or against weaker competition than expected (Johnson's transfer home). It's possible if not likely that he's underrating those two players specifically based on how his algorithm projects freshmen.

    2. Stanley is obviously a huge question mark, and I'm surprised Baker isn't included.

    3. Tapé's inclusion feels low to me, as others have noted. He put up 2+ Porpagatu in his junior year at Columbia, so I'm not sure that something <1 is altogether reasonable for his senior grad year.

    4. Coach K's record of success at wringing offensive efficiency out of basically anything he has, as others have mentioned.

    Reasons to think Torvik has accurately pegged Duke, or is even overrating the team:

    1. Tapé is making a *huge* jump in competition level. For Seth Curry, this wasn't a problem whatsoever. For Christian Keeling and Justin Pierce, it was. We'll see what happens but there's a chance he's a complete non-factor.

    2. He's right that Stanley leaves.

    3. The fact is that we are needing to replace by far our two best players. An awful lot rides on the freshmen having an immediate impact, and maybe he's right about them not living up to what we've seen in the past. Another awful lot rides on Moore and Hurt dramatically improving from one year to the next. I think we all have faith that they can do that. However, Hurt's Porpagatu this year was 1.1 and Moore's was 0.9. Moore, sans injury, probably gets a higher number than that. But he legitimately had struggles this year and will need to improve - especially his turnovers - in order to make the jump that we need to be a top 10 team.

  20. #20
    Join Date
    Feb 2007
    Location
    NC
    Quote Originally Posted by Hingeknocker View Post
    The fact is that we are needing to replace by far our two best players. An awful lot rides on the freshmen having an immediate impact, and maybe he's right about them not living up to what we've seen in the past. Another awful lot rides on Moore and Hurt dramatically improving from one year to the next. I think we all have faith that they can do that. However, Hurt's Porpagatu this year was 1.1 and Moore's was 0.9. Moore, sans injury, probably gets a higher number than that. But he legitimately had struggles this year and will need to improve - especially his turnovers - in order to make the jump that we need to be a top 10 team.
    The counterargument to this is that it's basically the same thing that has happened each of the last two years since Grayson Allen graduated (and as Grayson was the only significant returning contributor, you could include heading into his senior year as well). Yet we've continued to be a top-5 team in o verall efficiency each year. It has looked different from year to year (first the zone defense, then the Zion/Barrett juggernaut approach, then the Carey/Jones and deep rotation approach). Next year's team will almost certainly look different as well (probably more interchangeable parts style and more guys able to create their own shots). But I'd expect it to be a really really good team again. Especially so if Stanley does decide to return.

Similar Threads

  1. Preseason basketball rankings
    By wilson in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 21
    Last Post: 10-16-2015, 09:13 AM
  2. Preseason football rankings
    By wilson in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 40
    Last Post: 08-25-2015, 01:08 PM
  3. Preseason Rankings
    By El_Diablo in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 60
    Last Post: 11-03-2011, 04:43 PM
  4. Stupidly Early Preseason Rankings
    By DavidBenAkiva in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 34
    Last Post: 04-07-2010, 09:42 AM
  5. MSoc No.2 in Preseason Rankings
    By burnspbesq in forum Elizabeth King Forum
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: 08-01-2007, 06:15 PM

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •