|
Post by beaverstever on Dec 2, 2019 22:20:13 GMT -8
If I had to make a prediction after 8 games, the Beavers finish 6th or 7th, 7-11 to 9-9. Their NC schedule does nothing to prep them for Pac12 play. They've beat one team with a winning record (think Iowa St is now 4-3?), beaten teams that are like 16-32 overall, and not played great D doing so. It may be somewhat similar to football where we are going to try to outscore people with the D side lacking/inconsistent for 40 minutes. I think TT, ET offer some consistent fire power, but not sure their FG% can stay up. Hollins improved, but he'll be facing some very high caliber players, as will ZR.... will they be able to average 19 pts/game between them? KK just will not get help in the middle and will have to focus on staying out of foul trouble. Giving TT and ET 40 pts/game (ave 36 pts/game now vs this schedule) when TT will be a huge focus for opponents, can the others give 30pts/game and will the D make that stand (giving up 66 pts/game to this schedule and only +1 in reb margin)? Again, the last 4 games are very bad teams overall and will not prep this team for a hostile opening trip to the mountains. They can only play who gets put on the schedule. OU and Iowa State are generally what they will see in the Pac-12. Also, the starters are seasoned, so they know what Pac-12 play is about. Overall, the weak schedule probably helps, as it's more important they establish their young players ahead of season than get tuned for the rigors, IMO, and as the OU game showed they probably aren't ready to build a tourney resume with the preseason anyway. A&M should be better than they are from a scheduling standpoint, but yea, these next 4 are going to bury our SoS, which already wasn't great. Fortunately, the Pac-12 has teams that are holding their own, providing for marquee wins if they can get them.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Dec 3, 2019 9:59:30 GMT -8
If I had to make a prediction after 8 games, the Beavers finish 6th or 7th, 7-11 to 9-9. Their NC schedule does nothing to prep them for Pac12 play. They've beat one team with a winning record (think Iowa St is now 4-3?), beaten teams that are like 16-32 overall, and not played great D doing so. It may be somewhat similar to football where we are going to try to outscore people with the D side lacking/inconsistent for 40 minutes. I think TT, ET offer some consistent fire power, but not sure their FG% can stay up. Hollins improved, but he'll be facing some very high caliber players, as will ZR.... will they be able to average 19 pts/game between them? KK just will not get help in the middle and will have to focus on staying out of foul trouble. Giving TT and ET 40 pts/game (ave 36 pts/game now vs this schedule) when TT will be a huge focus for opponents, can the others give 30pts/game and will the D make that stand (giving up 66 pts/game to this schedule and only +1 in reb margin)? Again, the last 4 games are very bad teams overall and will not prep this team for a hostile opening trip to the mountains. They can only play who gets put on the schedule. OU and Iowa State are generally what they will see in the Pac-12. Also, the starters are seasoned, so they know what Pac-12 play is about. Overall, the weak schedule probably helps, as it's more important they establish their young players ahead of season than get tuned for the rigors, IMO, and as the OU game showed they probably aren't ready to build a tourney resume with the preseason anyway. A&M should be better than they are from a scheduling standpoint, but yea, these next 4 are going to bury our SoS, which already wasn't great. Fortunately, the Pac-12 has teams that are holding their own, providing for marquee wins if they can get them. It is early, but the Pac-12 currently has 4 ranked teams in it. The conference as a whole is certainly improved, and I think there is no way we only send 3 to the dance this year. It will be a dog fight to get 10 wins again in conference however. I do think it is hard to judge where this team is at. We split the two decent teams we played. Iowa State is 4-3, but two of their losses are to #13 Seton Hall and #4 Michigan... and BTW, if you are buying early on who is going to the final four, Michigan is a big time buy. They dominated both UNC and Gonzaga so far this season. Oklahoma could be good, I suppose, 6-1, but losing to Stanford. Oklahoma was our 3rd game of the year. Hard to tell much from early season games sometimes. We have been pretty good offensively, and pretty suspect defensively at times. I'd argue that honestly Portland State, which was a win, was the only game this year in which we really got sloppy and almost gave one away. I just don't really know how that portents to conference play. I think we can run with anybody. Not sure we can stop everybody though. We may be in for some barn burners. But this roster should be a roster that produces a winning Pac record. It would be a dissappointing season if not. Despite being picked to finish lower in the Pac this year...
|
|
|
Post by osubeaver2018 on Dec 3, 2019 10:57:15 GMT -8
They can only play who gets put on the schedule. OU and Iowa State are generally what they will see in the Pac-12. Also, the starters are seasoned, so they know what Pac-12 play is about. Overall, the weak schedule probably helps, as it's more important they establish their young players ahead of season than get tuned for the rigors, IMO, and as the OU game showed they probably aren't ready to build a tourney resume with the preseason anyway. A&M should be better than they are from a scheduling standpoint, but yea, these next 4 are going to bury our SoS, which already wasn't great. Fortunately, the Pac-12 has teams that are holding their own, providing for marquee wins if they can get them. It is early, but the Pac-12 currently has 4 ranked teams in it. The conference as a whole is certainly improved, and I think there is no way we only send 3 to the dance this year. It will be a dog fight to get 10 wins again in conference however. I do think it is hard to judge where this team is at. We split the two decent teams we played. Iowa State is 4-3, but two of their losses are to #13 Seton Hall and #4 Michigan... and BTW, if you are buying early on who is going to the final four, Michigan is a big time buy. They dominated both UNC and Gonzaga so far this season. Oklahoma could be good, I suppose, 6-1, but losing to Stanford. Oklahoma was our 3rd game of the year. Hard to tell much from early season games sometimes. We have been pretty good offensively, and pretty suspect defensively at times. I'd argue that honestly Portland State, which was a win, was the only game this year in which we really got sloppy and almost gave one away. I just don't really know how that portents to conference play. I think we can run with anybody. Not sure we can stop everybody though. We may be in for some barn burners. But this roster should be a roster that produces a winning Pac record. It would be a dissappointing season if not. Despite being picked to finish lower in the Pac this year... The improved play of AH and ZR as well as contributions from the bench are going to be important in conference play. Tres is going to have games that he is able to take over (see ISU game), and ET/KK will be productive enough to give a solid core. That should be enough to win 6-7 games in conference play at minimum I would suspect. ZR appears to be a much improved overall scorer this year and is not just a catch and shoot specialist which has been huge so far in the first eight games. He also is taking better care of the ball and is just as scrappy as ever. His play as well as hopefully ~20-25 points from AH/Lucas/Gianni/SMM will IMO be key to getting 3-6 other wins that will likely decide our fate come March, particularly if the usual production from the "big three" is not there on a given night. I think if everyone was told this team would be 7-1 at this point before the season started there wouldn't be anyone out there that wouldn't be happy with that, even with our weak schedule outside of ISU/OU. I have been pleased with our offensive efficiency so far this year and outside of one stretch in the 2nd half of the OU game there have been far fewer long droughts compared to what we've seen in years past. Hopefully the improvements we've seen translate to some wins in an improved conference. I would suspect 20-21 wins is the magic number for this team to be considered for an at-large bid as I agree I don't see the conference only getting 3-4 teams in the tournament again this year.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 3, 2019 10:57:28 GMT -8
They can only play who gets put on the schedule. OU and Iowa State are generally what they will see in the Pac-12. Also, the starters are seasoned, so they know what Pac-12 play is about. Overall, the weak schedule probably helps, as it's more important they establish their young players ahead of season than get tuned for the rigors, IMO, and as the OU game showed they probably aren't ready to build a tourney resume with the preseason anyway. A&M should be better than they are from a scheduling standpoint, but yea, these next 4 are going to bury our SoS, which already wasn't great. Fortunately, the Pac-12 has teams that are holding their own, providing for marquee wins if they can get them. It is early, but the Pac-12 currently has 4 ranked teams in it. The conference as a whole is certainly improved, and I think there is no way we only send 3 to the dance this year. It will be a dog fight to get 10 wins again in conference however. I do think it is hard to judge where this team is at. We split the two decent teams we played. Iowa State is 4-3, but two of their losses are to #13 Seton Hall and #4 Michigan... and BTW, if you are buying early on who is going to the final four, Michigan is a big time buy. They dominated both UNC and Gonzaga so far this season. Oklahoma could be good, I suppose, 6-1, but losing to Stanford. Oklahoma was our 3rd game of the year. Hard to tell much from early season games sometimes. We have been pretty good offensively, and pretty suspect defensively at times. I'd argue that honestly Portland State, which was a win, was the only game this year in which we really got sloppy and almost gave one away. I just don't really know how that portents to conference play. I think we can run with anybody. Not sure we can stop everybody though. We may be in for some barn burners. But this roster should be a roster that produces a winning Pac record. It would be a dissappointing season if not. Despite being picked to finish lower in the Pac this year... Good news being... rankings/selections typically are far from correct. Michigan is the extreme, but perfect example. Not seen as even top 25 worthy, yet suddenly debut in the poll at #4. Ooops. I do not think the Pac12 will be a great defensive league, yet I think team defense will be the difference in who finishes in the top 4-5. Teams can score, but who can limit the opponents' go to guys and force the others on the roster to come up big. There is a lot of very good talent (7-8 seen as 1st/2nd rd draftees), but they are young. OSU is also going to fight a bit of a perception problem unless they are a clear tourney pic from the Pac12. I think the Pac12 is better, not sure if the national preception will agree much more than 4-5 teams in after we beat up one another. And, you know teams like Zona, Oregon, UW... even USC, UCLA, ASU... have that certain committee appeal if they are in a similar place as OSU. I do not feel like OSU can be tied for 5th for example and get in. Still surprised a 6th place OSU got in with only 1 Pac12 tourney win... and with a 7 seed... 6th place in Pac as the 25th to 28th best team?? It'll be interesting to not only see how league play progresses, but how the Pac12 is viewed. Oregon had a huge opportunity to help the national outlook. Even, though close they are Pac12 losses vs elite teams. If the Pac12 can get 5 teams in the rankings by the Pac12 tourney I can see a 6th team in IF they are 19+ wins, and at least 9-9. Most likely 4-5 teams... hoping 5 if our ranking can keep 4 in top 25.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Dec 3, 2019 11:15:43 GMT -8
It is early, but the Pac-12 currently has 4 ranked teams in it. The conference as a whole is certainly improved, and I think there is no way we only send 3 to the dance this year. It will be a dog fight to get 10 wins again in conference however. I do think it is hard to judge where this team is at. We split the two decent teams we played. Iowa State is 4-3, but two of their losses are to #13 Seton Hall and #4 Michigan... and BTW, if you are buying early on who is going to the final four, Michigan is a big time buy. They dominated both UNC and Gonzaga so far this season. Oklahoma could be good, I suppose, 6-1, but losing to Stanford. Oklahoma was our 3rd game of the year. Hard to tell much from early season games sometimes. We have been pretty good offensively, and pretty suspect defensively at times. I'd argue that honestly Portland State, which was a win, was the only game this year in which we really got sloppy and almost gave one away. I just don't really know how that portents to conference play. I think we can run with anybody. Not sure we can stop everybody though. We may be in for some barn burners. But this roster should be a roster that produces a winning Pac record. It would be a dissappointing season if not. Despite being picked to finish lower in the Pac this year... The improved play of AH and ZR as well as contributions from the bench are going to be important in conference play. Tres is going to have games that he is able to take over, and ET/KK will be productive enough to give a solid core. That should be enough to win 6-7 games in conference play at minimum I would suspect. ZR appears to be a much improved overall scorer this year and is not just a catch and shoot specialist which has been huge so far in the first eight games. He also is taking better care of the ball and is just as scrappy as ever. His play as well as hopefully ~20-25 points from AH/Lucas/Gianni/SMM will IMO be key to getting 3-6 other wins that will likely decide our fate come March, particularly if the usual production from the "big three" is not there on a given night. I think if everyone was told this team would be 7-1 at this point before the season started there wouldn't be anyone out there that wouldn't be happy with that, even with our weak schedule outside of ISU/OU. I have been pleased with our offensive efficiency so far this year and outside of one stretch in the 2nd half of the OU game there have been far fewer long droughts compared to what we've seen in years past. Hopefully the improvements we've seen translate to some wins in an improved conference. I would suspect 20-21 wins is the magic number for this team to be considered for an at-large bid as I agree I don't see the conference only getting 3-4 teams in the tournament again this year. My only concern with both ZR and AH is how athletic teams have limited them. Speaking of only the two games that I think had Pac12 quality players. Iowa State was basically a win only because ISU got a slow shooting start, 35% in the 1st half on lots of wide open looks. Plus OSU hit 57% from three for the game, not really going to happen very often. In the 2nd half ZR was solid...3-5/2-3... 8 pts, 4 reb. But, AH completely disappeared... 0-1, 1 steal, 0 pts in 11 min. Oklahoma game the 3 pt shooting came back to earth, but solid at 40%. The 2nd half was a nightmare for ZR and AH vs their athletes. ZR... 1/5, 3 pts in 17 min. AH took no shots... 0 points, 2 A in 11 min. In 32 min ZH tallies 11 points, 5 reb... think we could live wth that per game, but not over 2 key 2nd halves shooting 40% and really not a great defender. In 22 min, AH tallies 0 pts on 1 shot... and really no other significant stats. Can't happen. He seems to have a far more confident mindset depending on who he sees warming up on the other end. Granted, early on in the season, but he's a veteran. KK, ZR, AH have to give 30+ pts, and 15+ boards/game in Pac12 to have this season turn out like we all want it to. TT and ET will generally get theirs. The key is the others stepping up.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Dec 3, 2019 12:28:38 GMT -8
Over the weekend LaPhonso Ellis and Seth Greenberg were talking about Pac 12 and saying no way they only get in 3 this year and said they expect 5 or 6 in tourney. Right now ESPN/Lunardi are projecting 4. I think a 10-8 conference record has the Beavers dancing. A .500 conference record could do it, but they'll probably need at least 2 wins against the top four teams in conference for 9-9 to be good enough. A win against Utah in first game on the road would give the team a little breathing room. If they could have the same success they had last year on that road swing, it would be huge. And all this is assuming the Beavers win their final 4 non-conference games. A loss, even to Texas A&M, and I think they definitely have to go 10-8 in conference and hope there are no big upsets in conference tournaments that eat up at-large bids.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Dec 3, 2019 12:36:42 GMT -8
It is early, but the Pac-12 currently has 4 ranked teams in it. The conference as a whole is certainly improved, and I think there is no way we only send 3 to the dance this year. It will be a dog fight to get 10 wins again in conference however. I do think it is hard to judge where this team is at. We split the two decent teams we played. Iowa State is 4-3, but two of their losses are to #13 Seton Hall and #4 Michigan... and BTW, if you are buying early on who is going to the final four, Michigan is a big time buy. They dominated both UNC and Gonzaga so far this season. Oklahoma could be good, I suppose, 6-1, but losing to Stanford. Oklahoma was our 3rd game of the year. Hard to tell much from early season games sometimes. We have been pretty good offensively, and pretty suspect defensively at times. I'd argue that honestly Portland State, which was a win, was the only game this year in which we really got sloppy and almost gave one away. I just don't really know how that portents to conference play. I think we can run with anybody. Not sure we can stop everybody though. We may be in for some barn burners. But this roster should be a roster that produces a winning Pac record. It would be a dissappointing season if not. Despite being picked to finish lower in the Pac this year... Good news being... rankings/selections typically are far from correct. Michigan is the extreme, but perfect example. Not seen as even top 25 worthy, yet suddenly debut in the poll at #4. Ooops. I do not think the Pac12 will be a great defensive league, yet I think team defense will be the difference in who finishes in the top 4-5. Teams can score, but who can limit the opponents' go to guys and force the others on the roster to come up big. There is a lot of very good talent (7-8 seen as 1st/2nd rd draftees), but they are young. OSU is also going to fight a bit of a perception problem unless they are a clear tourney pic from the Pac12. I think the Pac12 is better, not sure if the national preception will agree much more than 4-5 teams in after we beat up one another. And, you know teams like Zona, Oregon, UW... even USC, UCLA, ASU... have that certain committee appeal if they are in a similar place as OSU. I do not feel like OSU can be tied for 5th for example and get in. Still surprised a 6th place OSU got in with only 1 Pac12 tourney win... and with a 7 seed... 6th place in Pac as the 25th to 28th best team?? It'll be interesting to not only see how league play progresses, but how the Pac12 is viewed. Oregon had a huge opportunity to help the national outlook. Even, though close they are Pac12 losses vs elite teams. If the Pac12 can get 5 teams in the rankings by the Pac12 tourney I can see a 6th team in IF they are 19+ wins, and at least 9-9. Most likely 4-5 teams... hoping 5 if our ranking can keep 4 in top 25. Yeah, there is no denying after a pretty good chunk of the 64 teams are popularity contests. They make a show about comparing records and schedules and all that for those at large bids, but we are all fools if we don't believe a large influencer is how many people are going to tune in to their games. It think OSU got the nod as the 6th place Pac-12 team due in a large part to marketing story of ending their streak and having a marketable razzle-dazzle player in GP2. They are trying to sell games after all! But just win baby and it takes care of itself. No way a top 3 Pac-12 team this year misses the Dance. Yes, a tied for 5th team probably does miss out. I do think 5 Pac-12 teams feels right, at the early point (wild guess of course at this point in the season). With Arizona, Colorado, Oregon and Washington looking like the early Pac-12 leaders. I think OSU falls in as the first in a series of challengers. I think the only punching bag this year is WSU. But, a whole lotta games to be played still. Who really knows.
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Dec 3, 2019 22:54:38 GMT -8
Good news being... rankings/selections typically are far from correct. Michigan is the extreme, but perfect example. Not seen as even top 25 worthy, yet suddenly debut in the poll at #4. Ooops. I do not think the Pac12 will be a great defensive league, yet I think team defense will be the difference in who finishes in the top 4-5. Teams can score, but who can limit the opponents' go to guys and force the others on the roster to come up big. There is a lot of very good talent (7-8 seen as 1st/2nd rd draftees), but they are young. OSU is also going to fight a bit of a perception problem unless they are a clear tourney pic from the Pac12. I think the Pac12 is better, not sure if the national preception will agree much more than 4-5 teams in after we beat up one another. And, you know teams like Zona, Oregon, UW... even USC, UCLA, ASU... have that certain committee appeal if they are in a similar place as OSU. I do not feel like OSU can be tied for 5th for example and get in. Still surprised a 6th place OSU got in with only 1 Pac12 tourney win... and with a 7 seed... 6th place in Pac as the 25th to 28th best team?? It'll be interesting to not only see how league play progresses, but how the Pac12 is viewed. Oregon had a huge opportunity to help the national outlook. Even, though close they are Pac12 losses vs elite teams. If the Pac12 can get 5 teams in the rankings by the Pac12 tourney I can see a 6th team in IF they are 19+ wins, and at least 9-9. Most likely 4-5 teams... hoping 5 if our ranking can keep 4 in top 25. Yeah, there is no denying after a pretty good chunk of the 64 teams are popularity contests. They make a show about comparing records and schedules and all that for those at large bids, but we are all fools if we don't believe a large influencer is how many people are going to tune in to their games. It think OSU got the nod as the 6th place Pac-12 team due in a large part to marketing story of ending their streak and having a marketable razzle-dazzle player in GP2. They are trying to sell games after all! But just win baby and it takes care of itself. No way a top 3 Pac-12 team this year misses the Dance. Yes, a tied for 5th team probably does miss out. I do think 5 Pac-12 teams feels right, at the early point (wild guess of course at this point in the season). With Arizona, Colorado, Oregon and Washington looking like the early Pac-12 leaders. I think OSU falls in as the first in a series of challengers. I think the only punching bag this year is WSU. But, a whole lotta games to be played still. Who really knows. Oregon State made the Tournament in 2016, because the Beavers deserved to make the Tournament in 2016. It was pre-NET, and RPI was king. RPI-wise, there was no doubt that Oregon State should have made the Tournament. The debate in 2016 was that Oregon State did not win pretty and lost ugly. The Beavers were able to grind out their wins. The ultimate question was whether winning ugly was enough. In the end, the NCAA determined that it was. It also helped that the NCAA really wanted media darlings USC in, and there simply was no logical way to allow the Trojans to dance without the Beavers also dancing. Fast forward to 2020, looking at the way that it is shaping up, it looks like five is a good estimate of Pac-12 teams in. Top five dance with sixth on the bubble. Something along those lines. The way that it looks right now, Oregon State needs at least 21 regular season wins or a great Pac-12 Tournament. 20 is NIT. Short of that, it gets murky.
|
|