|
Post by sparty on Nov 10, 2020 11:36:33 GMT -8
Five Pac-12 schools in top 25.
OSU in at No. 18.
Rest of Pac.
Stanford 2
Arizona 7
UCLA 9
tsdtr 10
|
|
|
Post by beavdowg on Nov 12, 2020 11:55:47 GMT -8
Ok, I'll go out on a limb and say we finish higher than UCLA and possibly UO.
Go Beavs!
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Nov 12, 2020 14:40:54 GMT -8
Again I'll say I'm baffled. U of O with a huge class in 2016-7 including Ionescu and Hebard were not a top 10 team and they had two established players in Maite and Lexi. U of O this season has Boley (who averaged 2.5 against OSU) and some backup's and yet they are supposed to do better than Ionescu's class did? I don't understand the reasoning.
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Nov 12, 2020 14:54:26 GMT -8
Again I'll say I'm baffled. U of O with a huge class in 2016-7 including Ionescu and Hebard were not a top 10 team and they had two established players in Maite and Lexi. U of O this season has Boley (who averaged 2.5 against OSU) and some backup's and yet they are supposed to do better than Ionescu's class did? I don't understand the reasoning. A. You forgot Sedona Prince. B. This time it's not just two heralded recruits, it's five.
Sure, it's hardly a proven line-up, but putting them at #10 isn't absurd. Arkansas at #14 is the same kind of stretch. If they don't belong, they won't stay there long.
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Nov 12, 2020 15:02:06 GMT -8
Again I'll say I'm baffled. U of O with a huge class in 2016-7 including Ionescu and Hebard were not a top 10 team and they had two established players in Maite and Lexi. U of O this season has Boley (who averaged 2.5 against OSU) and some backup's and yet they are supposed to do better than Ionescu's class did? I don't understand the reasoning. A. You forgot Sedona Prince. B. This time it's not just two heralded recruits, it's five.
Sure, it's hardly a proven line-up, but putting them at #10 isn't absurd. Arkansas at #14 is the same kind of stretch. If they don't belong, they won't stay there long.
Ionescu's class was 5 heralded recruits, not two. The others didn't work out. Arkansas has two veteran guards who are on all the lists as being among the best in the country. And Prince and Sabally haven't scored a point in a college game. I hope they are terrific so it will mean more when the Beav's stomp them, but so far nothing from them. Women's basketball isn't like men's, even the really good ones take a year or two to become really good in college.
|
|
|
Post by bennyskid on Nov 12, 2020 16:06:47 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs.
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Nov 12, 2020 16:18:04 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs. I just have a hard time with buying into 4 teams in the conference being better than us. That makes us middle of the pack in the PAC, and I just can't agree with it. We're not going to be as good this year as we are the next, but we're still gonna be pretty damn good.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 12, 2020 16:20:52 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs. I just have a hard time with buying into 4 teams in the conference being better than us. That makes us middle of the pack in the PAC, and I just can't agree with it. We're not going to be as good this year as we are the next, but we're still gonna be pretty damn good. We lost 2 of our 3 best players and have a lot of uncertainty at guard. Wouldn't be surprised if this team is middle of the PAC.
|
|
|
Post by bvrbooster on Nov 12, 2020 17:55:07 GMT -8
I just have a hard time with buying into 4 teams in the conference being better than us. That makes us middle of the pack in the PAC, and I just can't agree with it. We're not going to be as good this year as we are the next, but we're still gonna be pretty damn good. We lost 2 of our 3 best players and have a lot of uncertainty at guard. Wouldn't be surprised if this team is middle of the PAC. That's certainly true, but we also effectively gain Taya and Jelena, 2 quality transfers, one McDonald's All American, and Savannah. That's a lot of good stuff to add. But I can't argue - guard play with either make us or break us.
|
|
|
Post by sparty on Nov 12, 2020 18:21:01 GMT -8
A. You forgot Sedona Prince. B. This time it's not just two heralded recruits, it's five.
Sure, it's hardly a proven line-up, but putting them at #10 isn't absurd. Arkansas at #14 is the same kind of stretch. If they don't belong, they won't stay there long.
Ionescu's class was 5 heralded recruits, not two. The others didn't work out. Arkansas has two veteran guards who are on all the lists as being among the best in the country. And Prince and Sabally haven't scored a point in a college game. I hope they are terrific so it will mean more when the Beav's stomp them, but so far nothing from them. Women's basketball isn't like men's, even the really good ones take a year or two to become really good in college. Chavez and the Aussie Shelley were not too bad
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Nov 12, 2020 20:13:39 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs. No, not true at all. I was looking forward to the Ducks winning a Natty last season. I just don't understand why folks think they are going to do better than Ionescu's team did. That really doesn't seem odd to you?
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 13, 2020 5:53:51 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs. No, not true at all. I was looking forward to the Ducks winning a Natty last season. I just don't understand why folks think they are going to do better than Ionescu's team did. That really doesn't seem odd to you? Ranking them #10 is not better than they were last year.
|
|
|
Post by beaveragain on Nov 13, 2020 11:56:54 GMT -8
No, not true at all. I was looking forward to the Ducks winning a Natty last season. I just don't understand why folks think they are going to do better than Ionescu's team did. That really doesn't seem odd to you? Ranking them #10 is not better than they were last year. I'm talking about Ionescu's freshman year.
|
|
|
Post by willtalk on Nov 13, 2020 16:15:41 GMT -8
Hmmm. You're not really "baffled", are you? I think you know full well how the voters tend to vote, you just don't want to come out and say that seeing tsdtr at #10 just salts your eyeballs. No, not true at all. I was looking forward to the Ducks winning a Natty last season. I just don't understand why folks think they are going to do better than Ionescu's team did. That really doesn't seem odd to you? The freshman incoming class that Ionescu was a part of was highly underrated. Hardly no one heard of Hebard and though Ionescu was a high school AA, no one expected her to be as good as she turned out to be in college. In fact many thought she might just be a slightly better than average college player. Even her local fans did not expect her to become the player she turned out to be. In fact there was a major debate in Nor Cal about who would be a better colllege player. Sabrina or A. McDonald. So its no real surprise that the incoming class that she was a part of was not expected to loft Oregon into the top Ten. On the surface Oregons present incoming class looks far more impressive than the impression of Ionescu's crew did coming in. I also believe that, other than statistically, people have over estimated the contribution that certain departed players made to Oregon St. In this case the whole was lesser than the sum of its parts. If you focus only on the departing players stats, it gives the impression that the loss is far greater than it actually is. At the end of last season, I looked up the drop in effectiveness of the non post players on the team, before and after they shared the court with a certain player. I also included Maryland. The drops were very significant and telling. I think the present team will be far more successful than what is being predicted based on the losses.
|
|
|
Post by Judge Smails on Nov 13, 2020 18:50:12 GMT -8
No, not true at all. I was looking forward to the Ducks winning a Natty last season. I just don't understand why folks think they are going to do better than Ionescu's team did. That really doesn't seem odd to you? The freshman incoming class that Ionescu was a part of was highly underrated. Hardly no one heard of Hebard and though Ionescu was a high school AA, no one expected her to be as good as she turned out to be in college. In fact many thought she might just be a slightly better than average college player. Even her local fans did not expect her to become the player she turned out to be. In fact there was a major debate in Nor Cal about who would be a better colllege player. Sabrina or A. McDonald. So its no real surprise that the incoming class that she was a part of was not expected to loft Oregon into the top Ten. On the surface Oregons present incoming class looks far more impressive than the impression of Ionescu's crew did coming in. I also believe that, other than statistically, people have over estimated the contribution that certain departed players made to Oregon St. In this case the whole was lesser than the sum of its parts. If you focus only on the departing players stats, it gives the impression that the loss is far greater than it actually is. At the end of last season, I looked up the drop in effectiveness of the non post players on the team, before and after they shared the court with a certain player. I also included Maryland. The drops were very significant and telling. I think the present team will be far more successful than what is being predicted based on the losses. Yes, because Mik was terrible.......I’m not worried about the post play, but having Aleah as the only experienced PG is going to be tough. They need a lot out of the newcomers or this is a middle of the PAC team.
|
|