|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 13, 2019 20:00:53 GMT -8
Those same experts had three or four pac-12 teams in the top 25. Based on the actual level of competition we faced, we should have challenged for the league title. Did I expect that pre-season? No. I also did not buy into 10th, though a few pre-season games had me wondering. We have a lot of talent and experience on our team. We often play a brand of basketball that is hard to watch and lost a number of games we should not have. I know you are the stats guy here, but in this case there is more to the story. Recruiting class rankings: 3. Oregon 7. Arizona State 10. UCLA 14. USC 19. Arizona 22. Stanford 34. California 35. Utah 43. Washington 70. Oregon State 97. Colorado 139. Washington State
Some were predicting Oregon State to finish 11th in conference. Everyone outside of the Beavers agreed that Oregon State's top three--unquestionably Tres Tinkle, Stephen Thompson Jr., and Ethan Thompson--were comparable or better than most of the teams in the Pac-12--but the next most-hyped player was Hollins. It was hoped that Hollins would continue to progress and maybe the Beavers could hit on a big recruit coming through. However, all it was in the preseason was hope.
The experts had three teams in the top 25: Oregon, UCLA, and Washington. Arizona, Oregon, and UCLA were expected to reload rather than rebuild and USC had Boatwright returning to build around. Arizona State (based on recruiting) and Colorado (based on returners) were expected to compete for sixth and the final Tournament spot.
The result? Oregon State went 0-4 against the top two teams in the Pac-12 and a rather unreal 10-4 against the other nine, especially when you consider that two losses were by a combined three points. (The UCLA loss was a big missed opportunity. There was a rebounding breakdown, but Arizona still flat got lucky.)
Oregon State won in Salt Lake City for the first time since 2012 (the Beavers' lone win in Salt Lake City in the 80-year history of the rivalry).
Oregon State won in Boulder for the first time since 2013 (the Beavers' lone win in Boulder in the 79-year history of the rivalry). Oregon State won at Boulder and Salt Lake City in the same year for the first time in program history.
Oregon State swept Oregon for the first time since 2010.
Oregon State outscored UCLA in their two-game series a combined by 12 points. This is Beavers' most lopsided two-game aggregate series against the Bruins since 1984.
Oregon State swept USC for the first time since 2014. This is the Beavers' most lopsided four-game aggregate series against the Los Angeles schools since 1988.
Oregon State has defeated Washington State in four consecutive games by a combined 78 points. This is the second time that the the Beavers have gone undefeated against Washington State in consecutive years, since Wayne Tinkle was hired as head coach. The previous coach to turn the trick? Ralph Miller in 1984-85 and 1985-86. Miller also turned the trick in 1980-81 and 1981-82.
However, Miller never did it four times in five seasons. The last coach to turn that trick? Slats Gill, who went undefeated against Washington State every year but one from 1956-57 to 1963-64. (The only loss in that span was in Pullman in 1960-61.)
Oregon State's four wins in a two-year period by a combined 78 points against Washington State are a record stretching back to 1962-63. Between 1960-61 and 1962-63, Oregon State and Washington State played 4-5 times per year. Outside of years, when Oregon State played Washington State more than three times, 78 points is Oregon State's all-time consecutive year record against Washington State.
Oregon State's eight-point win over California is the most lopsided victory for the Beavers over the Bears since 2010. The last time that Oregon State went undefeated against California on the season was a decade ago in 2009.
2018-19 is Oregon State's first winning conference season since 1989-90. 2018-19 is also the first season since 1989-90 that Oregon State has finished better than fifth in conference.
Oregon State is guaranteed to play in the quarterfinals in consecutive years for the first time in Pac-12 history and the first time since 2011 (Pac-10) and 2012 (Pac-12).
2018-19 is the first time that Oregon State has earned a bye in the conference tournament since 2010. Oregon State finished seventh that year, but USC was ineligible, so the Beavers moved up to sixth with a bye. Oregon State's last bye before that was in the 1990 Pac-10 Tournament, when the Beavers last won the regular season title. A lot of good stats, but it does not change my opinion. We lost several games we should have won. In most of those cases I felt we had more talent. In a few cases I felt we matched up well, or had more experience (a better team whether or not we were more talented). We also let a number of teams have a chance to beat us when we were clearly better. Playing down to an opponents level is not over-achieving in my book. The bottom line for me is what I saw watching the team play. They do not play consistently to the level they are capable. They have had games where they did, but many more where they did not. I’m disappointed we didn’t finish at least second in the league and are not headed to the dance (unless of course we pull it together this weekend, which I believe they can if they play together....key stat: assists>18).
|
|
|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 13, 2019 20:21:44 GMT -8
Those same experts had three or four pac-12 teams in the top 25. Based on the actual level of competition we faced, we should have challenged for the league title. Did I expect that pre-season? No. I also did not buy into 10th, though a few pre-season games had me wondering. We have a lot of talent and experience on our team. We often play a brand of basketball that is hard to watch and lost a number of games we should not have. I know you are the stats guy here, but in this case there is more to the story. So we underachieved based on other teams underachieving. When, in fact, we should have overachieved due to the conference's unexpected underachievers. Makes perfect sense..... I do not follow other pac-12 schools close enough (I probably average 2 non-Beaver pac-12 games per week) to say whether they underachieved or not. Based on what I saw, there were a lot of teams that were not very good because they either lacked experience/discipline or talent. Two teams impressed me, UW and Stanford. 5 loses to teams we are better than is too many. I take it by your response that you feel we over-achieved?
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 14, 2019 5:51:56 GMT -8
So we underachieved based on other teams underachieving. When, in fact, we should have overachieved due to the conference's unexpected underachievers. Makes perfect sense..... I do not follow other pac-12 schools close enough (I probably average 2 non-Beaver pac-12 games per week) to say whether they underachieved or not. Based on what I saw, there were a lot of teams that were not very good because they either lacked experience/discipline or talent. Two teams impressed me, UW and Stanford. 5 loses to teams we are better than is too many. I take it by your response that you feel we over-achieved? I don’t know if they overachieved. They finished about where I thought they would. I just thought the ucks & ua would have been ahead of us.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Mar 14, 2019 11:51:39 GMT -8
So we underachieved based on other teams underachieving. When, in fact, we should have overachieved due to the conference's unexpected underachievers. Makes perfect sense..... I do not follow other pac-12 schools close enough (I probably average 2 non-Beaver pac-12 games per week) to say whether they underachieved or not. Based on what I saw, there were a lot of teams that were not very good because they either lacked experience/discipline or talent. Two teams impressed me, UW and Stanford. 5 loses to teams we are better than is too many. I take it by your response that you feel we over-achieved? Experience/discipline are words that generally denote good coaching. What teams lacked talent in the Pac-12? Washington State? Maybe. What are those five losses? There were some bad non-conference losses, when Big G was hurt, but, otherwise, what are those five losses? Pretty much every objective non-Beaver has opined that Oregon State is in the bottom three in talent in the conference, and Oregon State went a perfect 3-0 against California and Washington State. Oregon State has Stevie, Ethan, Tres, and Kylor. Big G is a great backup center, and I am a huge fan of the two center lineup or a lineup that has Washington at the four. The rest of the team are largely a bunch projects or square pieces that Wayne is forced to try and place in round holes. The Hollins/Reichle debates on this board sound a lot like a circa 1994 Don Shanklin/Rahim Muhammad football debate. Reichle hustles and occasionally offers a spark on offense. Hollins can play great man defense. Oregon State out-talents next to no one in conference play. However, several of the players are coached up kids with experience and discipline. Most of the other teams in the Pac-12 have more talent. When they are on, Oregon State tends to lose. However, when they have made mistakes, the Beavers have tended to take advantage and win games that they should never be able to win on paper. Wayne did more with a lot less than Arizona, Colorado, UCLA, or USC, teams with far more built-in advantages. Beating UCLA in Corvallis by 13 and almost winning in Pauley in the same season is ridiculous. Sweeping USC in that same season? And beating both Rocky Mountain schools at altitude in the same season? That should never, ever happen. Yet, 2019 Oregon State put up the two best home-and-home games against UCLA in the past 35 years, the best four games against the Los Angeles schools since 1988, and won at both Rocky Mountain schools for the first time in program history (and second time ever at each location in rivalries that go back to the '30s and '40s). All of the hand-wringing and wailing on this board have there place, but it is certainly not with what I have seen this year. There are some tweaks here and there that I would like to see. (Trying to run more of the offense through the big men--especially Big G--is something that I tend to agree with. We could also spend some time on how Wayne botched the end of the UCLA game.) However, from 30,000 feet looking at the body of work in conference this year, I do not know how you cannot be impressed.
|
|
|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 14, 2019 19:10:04 GMT -8
I do not follow other pac-12 schools close enough (I probably average 2 non-Beaver pac-12 games per week) to say whether they underachieved or not. Based on what I saw, there were a lot of teams that were not very good because they either lacked experience/discipline or talent. Two teams impressed me, UW and Stanford. 5 loses to teams we are better than is too many. I take it by your response that you feel we over-achieved? Experience/discipline are words that generally denote good coaching. What teams lacked talent in the Pac-12? Washington State? Maybe. What are those five losses? There were some bad non-conference losses, when Big G was hurt, but, otherwise, what are those five losses? Pretty much every objective non-Beaver has opined that Oregon State is in the bottom three in talent in the conference, and Oregon State went a perfect 3-0 against California and Washington State. Oregon State has Stevie, Ethan, Tres, and Kylor. Big G is a great backup center, and I am a huge fan of the two center lineup or a lineup that has Washington at the four. The rest of the team are largely a bunch projects or square pieces that Wayne is forced to try and place in round holes. The Hollins/Reichle debates on this board sound a lot like a circa 1994 Don Shanklin/Rahim Muhammad football debate. Reichle hustles and occasionally offers a spark on offense. Hollins can play great man defense. Oregon State out-talents next to no one in conference play. However, several of the players are coached up kids with experience and discipline. Most of the other teams in the Pac-12 have more talent. When they are on, Oregon State tends to lose. However, when they have made mistakes, the Beavers have tended to take advantage and win games that they should never be able to win on paper. Wayne did more with a lot less than Arizona, Colorado, UCLA, or USC, teams with far more built-in advantages. Beating UCLA in Corvallis by 13 and almost winning in Pauley in the same season is ridiculous. Sweeping USC in that same season? And beating both Rocky Mountain schools at altitude in the same season? That should never, ever happen. Yet, 2019 Oregon State put up the two best home-and-home games against UCLA in the past 35 years, the best four games against the Los Angeles schools since 1988, and won at both Rocky Mountain schools for the first time in program history (and second time ever at each location in rivalries that go back to the '30s and '40s). All of the hand-wringing and wailing on this board have there place, but it is certainly not with what I have seen this year. There are some tweaks here and there that I would like to see. (Trying to run more of the offense through the big men--especially Big G--is something that I tend to agree with. We could also spend some time on how Wayne botched the end of the UCLA game.) However, from 30,000 feet looking at the body of work in conference this year, I do not know how you cannot be impressed. I guess we could go back and forth with our opinions. From a talent standpoint, I would put ET, TT, STJ, AH, & KK up against anyone in the conference talent-wise, except Stanford & UW. I honestly don’t care about the history against these other schools. I am only looking at the games I saw this year and the teams we played. There were many missed opportunities. If we continue with this level of impressive performances, you may be sitting at Gill by yourself soon. No, I am not impressed, not even close.
|
|
|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 14, 2019 19:25:12 GMT -8
I do not follow other pac-12 schools close enough (I probably average 2 non-Beaver pac-12 games per week) to say whether they underachieved or not. Based on what I saw, there were a lot of teams that were not very good because they either lacked experience/discipline or talent. Two teams impressed me, UW and Stanford. 5 loses to teams we are better than is too many. I take it by your response that you feel we over-achieved? I don’t know if they overachieved. They finished about where I thought they would. I just thought the ucks & ua would have been ahead of us. Watching the ducks preseason, I was not impressed, even with BolBol. You have to catch the ducks early, because they have a great coach and by the end of the year he has figured out how to get the most out of his talent and has them playing good ball. That is probably the most frustrating thing, to watch other teams improve as we fade. I would not have predicted it preseason, but watching the season unfold, we had the talent to take second place in this league, and we could be having fun talking about the epic matchup in the pac-12 championship game against the ducks.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Mar 14, 2019 19:27:28 GMT -8
I don’t know if they overachieved. They finished about where I thought they would. I just thought the ucks & ua would have been ahead of us. Watching the ducks preseason, I was not impressed, even with BolBol. You have to catch the ducks early, because they have a great coach and by the end of the year he has figured out how to get the most out of his talent and has them playing good ball. That is probably the most frustrating thing, to watch other teams improve as we fade. I would not have predicted it preseason, but watching the season unfold, we had the talent to take second place in this league, and we could be having fun talking about the epic matchup in the pac-12 championship game against the ducks. Disagree with the 2nd best talent comment. I would say based on raw talent, we are somewhere between 7th and 10th.
|
|
|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 14, 2019 19:45:19 GMT -8
Watching the ducks preseason, I was not impressed, even with BolBol. You have to catch the ducks early, because they have a great coach and by the end of the year he has figured out how to get the most out of his talent and has them playing good ball. That is probably the most frustrating thing, to watch other teams improve as we fade. I would not have predicted it preseason, but watching the season unfold, we had the talent to take second place in this league, and we could be having fun talking about the epic matchup in the pac-12 championship game against the ducks. Disagree with the 2nd best talent comment. I would say based on raw talent, we are somewhere between 7th and 10th. We had the talent to take second, we were not the second most talented. I think UW and Stanford were clearly more talented based on what I saw. I am sure people could put sound arguments for a few other teams that were right there with us. Regardless, we beat UCLA and split with UA and ASU, and we finish in second. We were talented enough to do that.
|
|
dK
Freshman
Posts: 407
|
Post by dK on Mar 14, 2019 20:38:56 GMT -8
Disagree with the 2nd best talent comment. I would say based on raw talent, we are somewhere between 7th and 10th. We had the talent to take second, we were not the second most talented. I think UW and Stanford were clearly more talented based on what I saw. I am sure people could put sound arguments for a few other teams that were right there with us. Regardless, we beat UCLA and split with UA and ASU, and we finish in second. We were talented enough to do that. My recollection is that we split with UCLA and got swept by the Arizona schools O-4. Where did you hear about a split with UA and ASU? My opinion is that our talent level was probably about equal to Cal and Utah, better than WSU, and inferior to the other eight. osubeavers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball
|
|
|
Post by albanianbeav on Mar 14, 2019 20:57:58 GMT -8
We had the talent to take second, we were not the second most talented. I think UW and Stanford were clearly more talented based on what I saw. I am sure people could put sound arguments for a few other teams that were right there with us. Regardless, we beat UCLA and split with UA and ASU, and we finish in second. We were talented enough to do that. My recollection is that we split with UCLA and got swept by the Arizona schools O-4. Where did you hear about a split with UA and ASU? My opinion is that our talent level was probably about equal to Cal and Utah, better than WSU, and inferior to the other eight. osubeavers.com/schedule.aspx?path=mbball Meant it to say “had we beat UCLA (second game) and split with UA and ASU”. I was posting in a rush. As for talent, I’m just not seeing what some of you are. We are solid 1 through 5. Most others are not, or the talent they have is too raw to be effective.
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Mar 14, 2019 21:28:06 GMT -8
Yes, we overachieved. Nobody thought this team was finishing fourth - there's good reason they were picked 10th in the pre-season. You have some serious orange-tinted glasses to think otherwise. In reality, OSU played to their talent level, and a bunch of teams underachieved in the Pac-12 around them. If you have a problem with TInkle's coaching, imagine fans of every other team in the conference. Only UW had a decent season, and some experts even thought to be at risk of missing the tourney if they had lost today - they beat exactly nobody this year, and helped Cal not go 0-18. OSU's 2nd half 'collapse' was not surprising at all if you looked at the schedule. Additionally, Colorado came into the tourney as the hottest team, and now have won 10 of their last 12.
I'm not a huge WT fan, but this season wasn't one that exposed him as somehow inferior to any other coach in the conference. And BTW, that genius coach to the south who has a huge free agent budget just managed to get his team to score as many points in the first half as the Beavs.
At the end of the day, this team has it's best player who can fill up a box score by reserving energy on defense and going all out on the offensive end with a lot of craftiness to get his, but when it get the crunch, he's both physically overmatched and too gassed to will a victory. Unfortunately, they have nobody else who is more capable. And I love the origin of this thread of thinking getting Kylor the ball in the post is the answer, seeing how he didn't even average 10 ppg last year at the JC level.
Look, I wear my orange tints as much as anybody, but I knew deep down that we needed a lot of luck and things to mange a top 6 finish - and we rode that good fortune to a 4th-place finish. By the end of the season, the talent started go gel across the league, and we hit a wall.
As for Wayne, he went Dancing at Montana 3 of the last 5 years he was there... maybe he's not even wanting to stick around post Tres. And any other mid-major coach we'd go after will notice that too.
|
|