|
|
Post by jdogge on Feb 8, 2016 7:02:22 GMT -8
some of you think this team is ...
Currently, OSU has an RPI of 33. That's fourth in the Pac-12. OSU ended last season at 131(10th). So, 18-20 pre-NCAA Tourney wins with an RPI of 33 [perhaps a bit higher] is certainly better than 16 wins at RPI 131. I think the kids are doing pretty well, considering.
|
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 8, 2016 7:47:15 GMT -8
Unfortunately it's not that simple. The tourney has guaranteed spots not matter the record. The more small conference tourney upsets and 12-18 type teams that make it in the worse it gets for bubble teams. The selection committee also uses it's own criteria/rpi that is dependent on the # of teams a conference has in. You never know how those guys think, if you're a 5th, 6th, or 7th team from a conference it's a complete crap shoot. We definitely have pluses... tough conference, high rpi, only one of five teams to have 4 W's vs the top 25 rpi. However, we have also lost to some lower level teams, some our conferences signature W's have been sullied, our conference may be tougher overall but we do not have an elite team.
We need to have a "fresh on their minds" extremely strong finish. You need to beat Stanford on the road, sweep Washington schools, and at least 2 tourney W's. Even at that we will be in a pack of a bunch of bubble teams. Who makes it in will leave great room for arguments either way. With the NCAA you best take away any reasons for doubt and so far this team has not done that.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Feb 8, 2016 7:57:07 GMT -8
Unfortunately it's not that simple. The tourney has guaranteed spots not matter the record. The more small conference tourney upsets and 12-18 type teams that make it in the worse it gets for bubble teams. The selection committee also uses it's own criteria/rpi that is dependent on the # of teams a conference has in. You never know how those guys think, if you're a 5th, 6th, or 7th team from a conference it's a complete crap shoot. We definitely have pluses... tough conference, high rpi, only one of five teams to have 4 W's vs the top 25 rpi. However, we have also lost to some lower level teams, some our conferences signature W's have been sullied, our conference may be tougher overall but we do not have an elite team. We need to have a "fresh on their minds" extremely strong finish. You need to beat Stanford on the road, sweep Washington schools, and at least 2 tourney W's. Even at that we will be in a pack of a bunch of bubble teams. Who makes it in will leave great room for arguments either way. With the NCAA you best take away any reasons for doubt and so far this team has not done that. That's all very nice. But my post wasn't addressing the chances this team has to get into the post season. I was simply pointing out that those posters seriously dissin' this team [oh, that's you] are being a bit harsh. Based on RPI, this team is better than last year's team. You know, not every post is an invitation for you to pontificate. |
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Feb 8, 2016 8:25:26 GMT -8
Unfortunately it's not that simple. The tourney has guaranteed spots not matter the record. The more small conference tourney upsets and 12-18 type teams that make it in the worse it gets for bubble teams. The selection committee also uses it's own criteria/rpi that is dependent on the # of teams a conference has in. You never know how those guys think, if you're a 5th, 6th, or 7th team from a conference it's a complete crap shoot. We definitely have pluses... tough conference, high rpi, only one of five teams to have 4 W's vs the top 25 rpi. However, we have also lost to some lower level teams, some our conferences signature W's have been sullied, our conference may be tougher overall but we do not have an elite team. We need to have a "fresh on their minds" extremely strong finish. You need to beat Stanford on the road, sweep Washington schools, and at least 2 tourney W's. Even at that we will be in a pack of a bunch of bubble teams. Who makes it in will leave great room for arguments either way. With the NCAA you best take away any reasons for doubt and so far this team has not done that. That's all very nice. But my post wasn't addressing the chances this team has to get into the post season. I was simply pointing out that those posters seriously dissin' this team [oh, that's you] are being a bit harsh. Based on RPI, this team is better than last year's team. You know, not every post is an invitation for you to pontificate. Actually every post is a chance for anyone to reply... learn a new word? Your vocabulary is getting much better. I'm sorry you are a judgmental freak and have such a sad life but, others simply reply and go on their way. You, however, seem to have some sort of misguided superiority complex with little evidence to back it up. This "teams vs. last year's team" has zero credence, especially when talking RPIs. RPI is partly based on how our opponents THIS year played... and how THIS team has played. Comparing RPI's from year to year is sort of like averaging ordinal #'s, statistically invalid. And, is you want to play the "stats game" most on here can point out several stats that say otherwise about this year's team vs last years. Pontification now complete... and you DB posts now blocked LOL |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Feb 8, 2016 8:36:00 GMT -8
some of you think this team is ... Currently, OSU has an RPI of 33. That's fourth in the Pac-12. OSU ended last season at 131(10th). So, 18-20 pre-NCAA Tourney wins with an RPI of 33 [perhaps a bit higher] is certainly better than 16 wins at RPI 131. I think the kids are doing pretty well, considering. I don't think anybody here thinks this team is bad (although some have selective memory about last year's team being better). This team does have some glaring weaknesses though that seem easier to fix compared to last year's team (we knew last year's team wasn't going to discover how to score, some are still hoping this one learns how to box out). This team would go from a bubble team to a lock with fixing a few areas. That said, I completely agree that this team has been impressive at times. Right now, the win over hole is more impressive than last year's win over Arizona (RPI-wise), and we had no other top 25 RPI wins, and only 1 other top 50, and had a lost to a sub-200 team. warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/rpiThis year's team has 5 top-50 wins, and no sub-100 losses. This team has made a major step up, no question - and I can understand the frustration that this isn't better recognized. |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 8, 2016 8:39:09 GMT -8
That's all very nice. But my post wasn't addressing the chances this team has to get into the post season. I was simply pointing out that those posters seriously dissin' this team [oh, that's you] are being a bit harsh. Based on RPI, this team is better than last year's team. You know, not every post is an invitation for you to pontificate. Actually every post is a chance for anyone to reply... learn a new word? Your vocabulary is getting much better. I'm sorry you are a judgmental freak and have such a sad life but, others simply reply and go on their way. You, however, seem to have some sort of misguided superiority complex with little evidence to back it up. This "teams vs. last year's team" has zero credence, especially when talking RPIs. RPI is partly based on how our opponents THIS year played... and how THIS team has played. Comparing RPI's from year to year is sort of like averaging ordinal #'s, statistically invalid. And, is you want to play the "stats game" most on here can point out several stats that say otherwise about this year's team vs last years. Pontification now complete... and you DB posts now blocked LOL something, something, social graces... |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 8, 2016 8:48:13 GMT -8
some of you think this team is ... Currently, OSU has an RPI of 33. That's fourth in the Pac-12. OSU ended last season at 131(10th). So, 18-20 pre-NCAA Tourney wins with an RPI of 33 [perhaps a bit higher] is certainly better than 16 wins at RPI 131. I think the kids are doing pretty well, considering. I don't think anybody here thinks this team is bad (although some have selective memory about last year's team being better). This team does have some glaring weaknesses though that seem easier to fix compared to last year's team (we knew last year's team wasn't going to discover how to score, some are still hoping this one learns how to box out). This team would go from a bubble team to a lock with fixing a few areas. That said, I completely agree that this team has been impressive at times. Right now, the win over hole is more impressive than last year's win over Arizona (RPI-wise), and we had no other top 25 RPI wins, and only 1 other top 50, and had a lost to a sub-200 team. warrennolan.com/basketball/2015/rpiThis year's team has 5 top-15 wins, and no sub-100 losses. This team has made a major step up, no question - and I can understand the frustration that this isn't better recognized. Rebounding is a big issue with this team. but beyond that we are a better team. our defensive stats (again, outside of rebounds) are mostly in line with last year. we are a better offensive team in general. our FT shooting is wildly sporadic, but was money this week! WE are losing on the boards, plan and simple. teams have too many second chances. Sure we keep holding teams in the 30% shooting range, but they keep getting looks! But I agree with the jist of the post. We have a harder schedule than last year, with a younger team, and in my opinion are performing generally better. Utah on the road was a melt down and should of been a win, but we have stolen some other real nice wins. Oregon and USC were quality for sure. Stanford at home was a bad loss. In other words, last years team with this year's schedule doesn't have the same record, I believe. |
|
billsaab
Freshman
Retired. Live in SW Washington on 73/4 Acres.
Posts: 589 
|
Post by billsaab on Feb 8, 2016 9:06:38 GMT -8
I see a Young group that need more strength. I see bigs at least 2 as Gomis is injured again, not good rebounders that don't block out. One of them can score but the rest cannot. Reid hasn't contributed very much and the load falls mainly on Payton. Mixing in 3 Freshman who really on other Teams would be brought along more slowly might help a lot next year,but this year is going to be tough for this group. Don't see us getting there and I do hope we can beat Stanford. That is a huge Test .The result will be very telling.
|
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Feb 8, 2016 10:02:29 GMT -8
That's all very nice. But my post wasn't addressing the chances this team has to get into the post season. I was simply pointing out that those posters seriously dissin' this team [oh, that's you] are being a bit harsh. Based on RPI, this team is better than last year's team. You know, not every post is an invitation for you to pontificate. Actually every post is a chance for anyone to reply... learn a new word? Your vocabulary is getting much better. I'm sorry you are a judgmental freak and have such a sad life but, others simply reply and go on their way. You, however, seem to have some sort of misguided superiority complex with little evidence to back it up. This "teams vs. last year's team" has zero credence, especially when talking RPIs. RPI is partly based on how our opponents THIS year played... and how THIS team has played. Comparing RPI's from year to year is sort of like averaging ordinal #'s, statistically invalid. And, is you want to play the "stats game" most on here can point out several stats that say otherwise about this year's team vs last years. Pontification now complete... and you DB posts now blocked LOL Aww, are your feewings hurt? |
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 8, 2016 10:06:13 GMT -8
I see a Young group that need more strength. I see bigs at least 2 as Gomis is injured again, not good rebounders that don't block out. One of them can score but the rest cannot. Reid hasn't contributed very much and the load falls mainly on Payton. Mixing in 3 Freshman who really on other Teams would be brought along more slowly might help a lot next year,but this year is going to be tough for this group. Don't see us getting there and I do hope we can beat Stanford. That is a huge Test .The result will be very telling. 4 of the last 7 I think we are solid NIT team with our RPI and 18 wins Just don't see the dance without our road troubles. 4 wins alone is going to require two road wins... |
|
|
|
Post by beaverstever on Feb 8, 2016 10:23:48 GMT -8
Looking at conference statistics, it's not very pretty - we're middling to bottom in every category except TO-related stats. Normally that would normally mean very few wins. For us to be almost .500 has required squeezing them just right. pac-12.com/content/mens-basketball-statistics |
|
|
|
Post by jdogge on Feb 8, 2016 10:36:46 GMT -8
Looking at conference statistics, it's not very pretty - we're middling to bottom in every category except TO-related stats. Normally that would normally mean very few wins. For us to be almost .500 has required squeezing them just right. pac-12.com/content/mens-basketball-statisticsAgreed. But I think the future is the brightest it has been in a long time. |
|
|
|
Post by treasurevalleybeav on Feb 8, 2016 11:02:39 GMT -8
The future absolutely should be bright. As for this year, I like some adjustments I saw recently. I thought Reid in smaller doses paid off. Steevieeee getting more crunch time minutes was big. TT starting is good. Bruuuuuce playing a bigger role off the bench is a step in the right direction. But if we want to get at least to the elusive NIT, we need to improve on the road and that clearly means rebounding. Can't afford to have Olaf in there much unless he's hot from long distance. He can't rebound or defend at all. That team struggle isn't all on him, but you have to start addressing our glaring weaknesses somewhere. Big G as an alternative hasn't been a bad idea at all.
|
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Feb 8, 2016 14:51:04 GMT -8
Looking at conference statistics, it's not very pretty - we're middling to bottom in every category except TO-related stats. Normally that would normally mean very few wins. For us to be almost .500 has required squeezing them just right. pac-12.com/content/mens-basketball-statisticsWe lack an interior presence. It shows up in the rebounding and general FG defense. We are good defending the perimeter, we hustle, we make turnovers, we have a strong turnover margin... we just are getting out boxed, out muscled down low. Teams can get inside and get second chance shots. we aren't getting our own second chance shots... We are 14-8 based on hustle really. fast break points and turnovers. Bottom of the league in offensive rebounds. near bottom in defense. bottom in rebounding margin. But near the top in most other statistics. That is what I make of that from that state line and watching the games. We are weak in the paint this year, and this year teams are getting better at penetrating our perimeter defense. |
|
