I always bounce right back Nevada. Probably best to describe me as as n "optimistic realist."
Wichita game thread
- Thread starter Gold*
- Start date
optomistic realist with an occasionally slight melt
Last edited:
We are like the big East a lot of great teams and we beat each other up in conference play.
Ugh no. The BigEast has 4 teams in the top 20 and 6 in the top 40. The AAC has 1 team in the top 40. Not sure I would classify any AAC team as great. Houston is really good. The conference has 4 or so bubble teams. Our problem is we have an abundance of borderline NCAA tourney teams.
I also think its subjective. I think teams in the big conferences have to do less in order to get ranked.
My numbers came from the NET. Subjective polls are irrelevant at this point.
We could have went 7 and 11 in the sec like Arkansas did and be highly considered for ncaa or top seed in nit with 11 conference losses like the hogs as there net is super low. It’s not even how you play but lose 11 games in conference to good teams and be a low net team.
I understand where you are coming from, but the net is intentionally biased towards the big conferences. It had no disparity between our rankings. But if you look at Cincinnati, Wichita St., Connecticut. They are way lower in the net, than they are in the rpi.
That’s what I don’t understand. How can we argue we’re the equivalent of the Pac12 or BigEast in basketball then in the same breath explain our low NET due to the fact we’re not a power conference. If our teams are as good as the teams in those conference the only variable would either be our OOC scheduling or our performance in those games. We’re talking about a mathematic formula not a subject index which gives additional points to teams based on conference affiliation.
I don't think you can be that specific with it. That's why I compared some our top teams, not us specifically. Our ranking is the same, but more importantly you can look at the rpi as a comparison across conferences not a single team. It's not like they did what you said, assigned points based on conference. They just picked certain metrics and adjusted how they view them.
I'm not saying this is one of the metrics because I don't know if it is, but I'll use it as an example. Look at a metric and find a way that it favors power conferences more than it did with the rpi. It doesn't matter whether it is fair or not, your one goal is to favor bigger conferences. So they look at blowout wins and determine if they call a blowout win, a 10 pt or more win, then it favors larger conferences. They probably played with the numbers until they found the magic number to be somewhere near 10. So now they have one stat that works for the power conferences.
Time to move on the the next stat. They find another stat, find a way to read it that is favorable to power conferences. They keep plugging the numbers into say the last ten years, making sure the separate stat works, and then combining it with the previous stat comparison(s) to make sure it works together with the other stat(s) to favor power conferences. The more stats they throw in, the more complex it becomes. But that really doesn't matter, because they've got computer algorithms to make quick work of testing in and out certain stat alterations. When they come up with the one that generally(but not always) favors a team from a power conference then bingo, they have the Net. We oughta give the guy who loves football stats an assignment!
Last edited:
But you are right, either the AAC and the PAC are weaker, or are being biased lower by the NET. You can't make that argument for one group, and not make it for the other.
The difference is perception. All SOS figures are based on the beginning of the season assumption that team A is better than team B and often the only reason for that assumption is due to team A being in conference X and ream B being in conference Y.
That's true, it evens out some in the end, but it did start out with that beginning assumption.
Yeah I don't really see any bias in the NET rankings. You could argue (and I'd agree) that there's bias in the criteria that NET rankings are subject to when determining at-large selections, but I'd argue that that criteria is slightly biased *in our favor*. We played 5 Q1 games in conference alone in a bit of a down year for the top of our conference. Having several opportunities to get what were at that time Top 50 RPI wins benefited us immensely in 2016 when we grabbed an at-large.
The only chances that East Tennessee State (29-4) had to get Q1 wins this year were at Kansas (L) and at LSU (W). What do we think our record would have been? I would hope that ETSU wouldn't get left out if they lost in their conference tournament, but the fact that they even have to sweat it right now is kind of ridiculous.
The only chances that East Tennessee State (29-4) had to get Q1 wins this year were at Kansas (L) and at LSU (W). What do we think our record would have been? I would hope that ETSU wouldn't get left out if they lost in their conference tournament, but the fact that they even have to sweat it right now is kind of ridiculous.
Are you suggesting the current NET is effected by a subjective SOS based on how good humans believed teams were in October ? I’m not saying it’s not just that I haven’t heard that as a data point.
He's a physically gifted player. He's pretty big for a guard, seems pretty strong, jumps well. He is not a very smart player. I believe Jones was the one Haith was calling out earlier in the year about selfish play. You see it in his game, frequently taking shots out of the flow of our normal offense, jacking 3s up early in the shot clock. Jones didn't make the subsequent road trip to ECU/Tulane. We all speculated what that meant for Jones moving forward.
Our offense simply is built for Martins to touch it on every possession and if he kicks it back out to an open shooter when he gets doubled, then that's the shot.
I could see one or two of three players not returning. Jones, Ugboh and Earley. I think Earley still has upside but the staff may want more production immediately. Same goes for Ugboh. I don’t see Jones returning at all. I can’t believe we wasted a scholarship on him while he was redshirting.
Jones has upside. The players all said he was pretty good. Sometimes guys don’t do well when the lights come on. John Phillips’ later teams were notorious for that. It doesn’t mean a scholarship was “wasted.” There are issues, but like any other student athlete at TU, he deserves your support.
Jones struggles with learning the match up zone. I think that is more of a problem than anything for him. As far as shooting he needs two things......confidence and knowledge of when to shoot. Otherwise good stroke.
I question your thoughts of getting rid of Earley. In my mind he may be one of the better Freshmen to arrive at TU. It is really tough to find players with his body who can jump and rebound like he does. He played a little timid as a freshman and makes too many fouls but the upside has potential all-conference written on it.
KJ was also banged up as a freshman and couldn’t hit that hook shot ever, especially when we needed it against UNC. He turned out great. Charlie Davis saved our bacon as a freshman, was excessively awkward and lost the next year with Buzz, and became a damn fine player after that.
Early will be just fine or much better than that. I think the injury made him hit the freshman wall. I’m glad he’s getting to play now.
Early will be just fine or much better than that. I think the injury made him hit the freshman wall. I’m glad he’s getting to play now.
I wasn't saying that he doesn't have potential. I was just saying that maybe with the lack of inside players next season, the coaches might want to look at bringing a guy who can contribute immediately in a greater way. Basically, it's going to be really hard to replace Igbanu's production. Do we think Ugboh + Earley can approach that level of contribution combined.
I know we're still looking for a big, but Bill Lowry mentioned that we're still keeping in contact with Keshawn William's teammate Schumate, in possible addition to a big. That would mean we need 2 more scholarships to open up. I think I'd like to see Earley stay, I'm just used to Haith getting rid of several kids every off season. (Even kids who played meaningful minutes).
All I know is, next year is our last best shot at the tournament for some time. We will lose Joiner, Horne, Jackson, Ugboh, Rachal, and Jones. We need help next season on the frontline. Would it behoove us to balance the classes a bit and bring in some people that can contribute a bit more?
stop acting like you know when and how often we will make the tournament. No one does and it’s year to year. You should go ahead and sit this one out.
He does have a good stroke but he should not have a green light to shoot whenever. Heck, I don't think Korita and Horne have green lights until after Igbanu touches the ball. That's the problem...he thinks he can shoot whenever he touches the ball and hence Haith's assertion that he's selfish.
It is very difficult to make the NCAA tournament after replacing 6 players. It's part of the reason Frank is getting coach of the year this year, because he did so well despite replacing half the team. Moreover, this team isn't even favored to dance right now. At least when we were replacing players last year, we were only really replacing 2 consistent contributors in Jeffries and Taplin. Next year we'd be replacing 4. (Joiner, Jackson, Rachal, Horne).
It's going to be a lot tougher to make the tournament in 2022 / 2023 than it is in 2021. Next year we have pretty much everyone returning minus Korita + Igbanu. We get KES and Haywood off of their redshirts, and we get a couple kids in Williams and Brown. If we were to add a big that can approach Igbanu's level of contribution (or train Earley / Ugboh to play much better) , we could be a Sweet 16 type team. If we don't we might be a bubble team again as other teams will abuse us inside.
We do have to get a "starting" big man to be NCAA capable I feel. Grad transfer or JUCO.
I think so. One is the juco’s leading shot blocker and was recently offered by Memphis. Another is the 2nd leading shot blocker and is a 4-star recruit with a number of major offers.
The 6-11 high school player sitting out playing in Florida at a prep school is another rim protector and rebounder.
