|
Post by beaverstever on Jan 14, 2019 17:11:20 GMT -8
Things in life are rarely as bad or good as they seem. Your exaggeration does nothing to prove your point. Don't let ESPiN and entirely fallible rating systems tell you what to think. The PAC did not perform well out of conference, but if the conference is given just 1 bid to the tourney that will be a huge slight. CC teams don't beat top 10 teams like ASU did. Not ever. Down year? Sure. CC level? That's just dumb. Say what you guys want, but teams are pretty bad in the Pac-12 right now. I mean take a look at who we beat. An Oregon who only have a couple of players in Pac12 level, and is a team who lost to Texas Southern and played competitive games with teams like western oregon. UCLA who fired their coach and lost to teams like Belmont and Liberty. USC who has some off court issues and are 9-8 sliding down. We seem to be the only team that has chemistry and is good enough in all positions. If there's anytime to win a league, it's this year. It is down for sure. However, the Pac-12 does have wins over the following teams with high (top 50) NET ratings - Utah State (ASU) - #2 Kansas (ASU) - Iowa State (UA) hole's win over Syracuse #59 might end up into the top 50 as well. It ain't much, but we had a year in the CR era with none of these, IIRC. Hurts that UW couldn't quite pull it off at Gonzaga or Stanford at KU.
|
|
|
Post by osubeaver2018 on Jan 14, 2019 17:12:25 GMT -8
Things in life are rarely as bad or good as they seem. Your exaggeration does nothing to prove your point. Don't let ESPiN and entirely fallible rating systems tell you what to think. The PAC did not perform well out of conference, but if the conference is given just 1 bid to the tourney that will be a huge slight. CC teams don't beat top 10 teams like ASU did. Not ever. Down year? Sure. CC level? That's just dumb. Say what you guys want, but teams are pretty bad in the Pac-12 right now. I mean take a look at who we beat. An Oregon who only have a couple of players in Pac12 level, and is a team who lost to Texas Southern and played competitive games with teams like western oregon. UCLA who fired their coach and lost to teams like Belmont and Liberty. USC who has some off court issues and are 9-8 sliding down. We seem to be the only team that has chemistry and is good enough in all positions. If there's anytime to win a league, it's this year. Liberty and Belmont are ranked 45 and 86 in the NET rankings respectively. Hardly poor competition at all. I do agree that we may be one of 3 or 4 teams that does have a lot of chemistry and is capable at all 5 positions though. We do seem to have as complete of a team as we have had in a while.
|
|
|
Post by beavheart on Jan 14, 2019 17:41:28 GMT -8
Things in life are rarely as bad or good as they seem. Your exaggeration does nothing to prove your point. Don't let ESPiN and entirely fallible rating systems tell you what to think. The PAC did not perform well out of conference, but if the conference is given just 1 bid to the tourney that will be a huge slight. CC teams don't beat top 10 teams like ASU did. Not ever. Down year? Sure. CC level? That's just dumb. Say what you guys want, but teams are pretty bad in the Pac-12 right now. I mean take a look at who we beat. An Oregon who only have a couple of players in Pac12 level, and is a team who lost to Texas Southern and played competitive games with teams like western oregon. UCLA who fired their coach and lost to teams like Belmont and Liberty. USC who has some off court issues and are 9-8 sliding down. We seem to be the only team that has chemistry and is good enough in all positions. If there's anytime to win a league, it's this year. Seems like we've been saying this for several years now. Just when I think the Pac12 can't lose any more mojo/talent/depth, whatever you want to call it, it seems like the following year is even worse. How much of that is real, and how much hyperbole? I can see how the one-and-done rules are causing turmoil for the game in general (Oregon this year), but at some point I can't help to consider how everything is now based on a system that simply rewards teams for being located in highly populated areas where they are surrounded by lower level teams to snack on. This "metric" is then turned in to gospel, and poof there goes the rating for the west coast. Too spread out, too few programs. Especially at the mid-major level. We get punished for it to the point that even we start to believe we suck. Fact of the matter, the only time it seems like we get close to level billing with the other major conferences is when we have a good or great OOC record. Anything less, and the Pac12 is basically treated like an also ran. I still think you are framing things in an overly negative/simple prism. Oregon has more than a couple Pac12 level players. UCLA is loaded with athletes and have actually been playing better since firing Alford. I don't get how USC dropped some of the games they did. They should be better than 9-8. I can agree that the conference is not having a good year, but I don't think it's going to be easy to win the thing at all. This is indeed looking like the year for the Beavs to make a move in the conference, but I think most of that has to do with how much the Beavs are improved. Not as much with how "down" the rest of the conference is. I would call a top 4 finish in conference and an NIT invite a success at this point. With how the team is playing I am hoping for more, but I need to see a few road wins to expect anything more than that.
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 14, 2019 17:50:05 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle.
There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 7:00:20 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle. There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days. Somebody should do a rough count of the recruiting stars of the kent state starters against the recruiting stars of the UCLA starters. Ok i did. Kent State (9)Antonio Williams 2* Philip Whittington not listed CJ Williamson 2* Mitch Peterson 2* Jalen Avery 3* UCLA (22)Kris Wilkes 5* Prince Ali 4* Jaylen Hands 5* Chris Smith 3-4* Moses Brown 4-5* data courtesy of VerbalCommits.comAnd the disparity grows with the reserves. (UCLA has more recruiting stars in the top 5 reserves than they do starting) So how does Kent State roll over the Beavs and just a few weeks later the Beavs stomp UCLA? Are recruiting stars bogus as far as being a successful team? yeah partly. Kylor Kelley rated a 2* recruit? What? At least a couple of those UCLA players are overrated too.
|
|
|
Post by ochobeavo on Jan 15, 2019 7:32:52 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle. There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days. I was actually just looking at an NBA mock draft the other day - yes, mock drafts are meaningless, but they had the following Pac-12 guys listed. I think the big eye opener is no one from Zona or Washington, but as others pointed out, Zona decimated by guys leaving plus probably some uncertainty re Sean Miller's future. 1st Round: KZ Okpala (Stanford) avg 18/6 Kevin Porter (USC) suspended following Beaver game by the way... Bol Bol (Oregon) broke broke foot foot. 2nd Round: Kris Wilkes (UCLA) Luguentz Dort (ASU). That's a real name. confirmed... Robert Franks (WSU) Benny Boatwright (USC) Jaylen Hands (UCLA) Zylan Cheathem (ASU) 12 pts, 10 rebounds.
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Jan 15, 2019 7:38:05 GMT -8
Kent State: Williams Sr, Avery Sr, Walker Sr, Williamson Jr, Peterson JR. Senderoff is an 8th-year head coach.
UCLA: Brown FR, Hand SOO, Smith SO, Ali JR, Wilkes SO. Their reserves were all sophomores and freshman, Bartow has been a head coach four games.
Veterans win games. Kent State won by three. Hardly "rolling over."
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Jan 15, 2019 8:20:47 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle. There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days. Somebody should do a rough count of the recruiting stars of the kent state starters against the recruiting stars of the UCLA starters. Ok i did. Kent State (9)Antonio Williams 2* Philip Whittington not listed CJ Williamson 2* Mitch Peterson 2* Jalen Avery 3* UCLA (22)Kris Wilkes 5* Prince Ali 4* Jaylen Hands 5* Chris Smith 3-4* Moses Brown 4-5* data courtesy of VerbalCommits.comAnd the disparity grows with the reserves. (UCLA has more recruiting stars in the top 5 reserves than they do starting) So how does Kent State roll over the Beavs and just a few weeks later the Beavs stomp UCLA? Are recruiting stars bogus as far as being a successful team? yeah partly. Kylor Kelley rated a 2* recruit? What? At least a couple of those UCLA players are overrated too. It's called experience and team chemistry. Prince Ali (Jr.) is UCLA's only upperclassmen starter. Bruins start 2 sophomores and 2 freshmen, and their top 3 reserves are freshmen. The starters you listed for Kent St. are all upperclassmen (4 juniors and 1 senior), and their best player who didn't start and scored 26 against the Beavs is a senior. When recruiting all things being equal I'd rather have a bunch of 4 and 5 star guys coming in, but that doesn't mean 3 and even 2 star players can't develop into good players and not every 4 and 5 star player is going to have great success. Rating high school kids is far from an exact science. Have a bad AAU summer or not playing on the right team, you're ranking will suffer. I follow Illinois too and they recently got a verbal from a top 40 kid Kofi Cockburn. Because of that verbal they might have a chance at his teammate Christian Brown. Brown was rated as high as #13 in his class in April 2017. He hovered between 13-35 up until August of 2018 when he dropped to 62. Why? He had a toe injury during summer of 2018 and couldn't play (or if he did he was ineffective). So here is a guy who the scouts know and highly, and he drops almost 50 spots. Imagine how far a guy rated 280 would drop if he didn't play AAU season before his senior year in high school. So, yeah, rankings and stars aren't perfect indicators of a players value. And they surely aren't after the kid has been in school for 3 or 4 years. As to the Pac 12 being down -- yeah it is. But there is still talent in it and it likely isn't down as much as people think. I'm not sure how all these rating systems like KenPom and NET work, but the thing that has always bothered me about polls is if you don't start out with a good ranking it is often difficult to move up. And when you're in a conference like ACC that is highly ranked the middling to decent teams have multiple games guaranteed against highly ranked opponents and some of those games are at home -- giving them a better chance to move up than sometimes a good team in a less highly ranked conference. And we all know that conference rivalries bring out the best in teams. So the Pac 12 only getting two teams in the tourney is a slap in the face. But only way you can change that is win games, and Pac 12 had an historically bad December -- finishing just 2 games over .500. So that means Beavs likely have to finish 2nd or higher in conference (and definitely not lower than 3rd) to have a chance at NCAA tourney. So, needless to say, Thursday's game is a big one.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Jan 15, 2019 8:32:36 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle. There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days. Somebody should do a rough count of the recruiting stars of the kent state starters against the recruiting stars of the UCLA starters. Ok i did. Kent State (9)Antonio Williams 2* Philip Whittington not listed CJ Williamson 2* Mitch Peterson 2* Jalen Avery 3* UCLA (22)Kris Wilkes 5* Prince Ali 4* Jaylen Hands 5* Chris Smith 3-4* Moses Brown 4-5* data courtesy of VerbalCommits.comAnd the disparity grows with the reserves. (UCLA has more recruiting stars in the top 5 reserves than they do starting) So how does Kent State roll over the Beavs and just a few weeks later the Beavs stomp UCLA? Are recruiting stars bogus as far as being a successful team? yeah partly. Kylor Kelley rated a 2* recruit? What? At least a couple of those UCLA players are overrated too. How is the mystery that is why OSU fans are pulling their hair out about Wayne Tinkle and this team. Should Kent State of beat us? no. It was a bad loss. I think that is the only explanation. Kind of like Riley, Wayne Tinkle seems to have found a knack for losing to teams he shouldn't (and beating teams he shouldn't...) Consistency has been the heel of this team for some time. If OSU plays like they have over the last 3 games, I can't see us not finishing in the top 3 of the Pac. But as history has shown us. that is a big IF.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 8:39:07 GMT -8
Kent State: Williams Sr, Avery Sr, Walker Sr, Williamson Jr, Peterson JR. Senderoff is an 8th-year head coach. UCLA: Brown FR, Hand SOO, Smith SO, Ali JR, Wilkes SO. Their reserves were all sophomores and freshman, Bartow has been a head coach four games. Veterans win games. Kent State won by three. Hardly "rolling over." Kent State won that game with a 35-12 run. That's rolling. But yeah i get your point savvy vets matter.
|
|
|
Post by beavs6 on Jan 15, 2019 8:41:52 GMT -8
Oregon, UCLA and USC are loaded with talent. Of the 8 ducks that played against OSU, one was originally an overseas kid that was not ranked in the recruiting services, and 6 of the other 7 have a higher 247Sports composite recruiting score than Tres Tinkle. There's plenty of talent in the league. The one and dones and transfers are kinda ruining a lot of basketball programs these days. I was actually just looking at an NBA mock draft the other day - yes, mock drafts are meaningless, but they had the following Pac-12 guys listed. I think the big eye opener is no one from Zona or Washington, but as others pointed out, Zona decimated by guys leaving plus probably some uncertainty re Sean Miller's future. 1st Round: KZ Okpala (Stanford) avg 18/6 Kevin Porter (USC) suspended following Beaver game by the way... Bol Bol (Oregon) broke broke foot foot. 2nd Round: Kris Wilkes (UCLA) Luguentz Dort (ASU). That's a real name. confirmed... Robert Franks (WSU) Benny Boatwright (USC) Jaylen Hands (UCLA) Zylan Cheathem (ASU) 12 pts, 10 rebounds. Beat oregon with 1 player on that list. Beat USC with 2 players on that list. Beat UCLA with 2 players on that list.
Check. Check. And check. Now need to pull of the win against ASU...with 2 players on that list. Come on Beavs!
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Jan 15, 2019 10:41:07 GMT -8
Was it after the Kent State game that Coach T pointed out we were only playing two kids with 2 years of playing experience under their belts? I know it was after one of the losses and was criticized by at least one or two here on the boards.
Big G is back and the younger/newer players have a few more games in the system. Maybe that helps explain the loss against Kent State and the win vs. UCLA, maybe it doesn’t. It’ll be interesting to see how the rest of the season goes. If the kids continue to improve, maybe the coach had a legit point
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jan 15, 2019 10:53:39 GMT -8
You guys are making way too much of the Kent State loss. Kent State also beat Vanderbilt who beat ASU by 16. Duke lost (at home) to unranked Syracuse....59th in the NET rankings prior to the game. We beat Penn who beat Villanova. Sometimes you lose games. Come out of this weekend with a sweep, and I think the loss to Kent St. is more than offset by the road win at ASU or UA.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Jan 15, 2019 11:26:30 GMT -8
You guys are making way too much of the Kent State loss. Kent State also beat Vanderbilt who beat ASU by 16. Duke lost (at home) to unranked Syracuse....59th in the NET rankings prior to the game. We beat Penn who beat Villanova. Sometimes you lose games. Come out of this weekend with a sweep, and I think the loss to Kent St. is more than offset by the road win at ASU or UA. ok but you realize the impact of that loss if beavs end up on the tourney bubble? Either win the pac 12 conference tournament or be number 2 and HOPE number 2 gets in. Or have all the players shave their heads and fake join the hari krishnas to get the human interest seed. NCAA tourney selection committee loves bright shiny objects.
|
|
|
Post by nabeav on Jan 15, 2019 11:57:10 GMT -8
I feel like given how weak the conference is, we were always going to be Pac-12 Tourney Champs or NIT. We just don't play a strong enough non-conference schedule to be an at large. There are very few opportunities to really make a positive impact in conference right now. This weekend is probably our best shot. 2 wins in the desert might be what we need (assuming we don't cancel it out by losing to Cal later on) to get an at large bid.
|
|