CSNbbs

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 11:51 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]You guys are cracking me up... this is a team that should be a second weekend team. Doesnt mean they will and they have work to do to earn a seed that would make it easier but they absolutely are a top 16 team.

Beyond that who knows. If Cumberland plays like he is capable and Broome keeps developing i like their chances.

Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

On that note... when you look at the numbers you find that preseason voter polls are a better predictor of tournament success than end of the year voter polls and way better than various noise within the season. (Things like kenpom and sagarin are still better than both of those). One of the big reasons is the polls overreacting to what they just saw or a small sample of games they saw throughout the season. The preseason polls they are just guessing based on talent, potential and with many voters computer projections, but that seems to be better than trying to vote based on the small sample of what they actually watch and their propensity to have a bias towards what they saw recently.

(12-27-2017 02:34 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 11:51 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]You guys are cracking me up... this is a team that should be a second weekend team. Doesnt mean they will and they have work to do to earn a seed that would make it easier but they absolutely are a top 16 team.

Beyond that who knows. If Cumberland plays like he is capable and Broome keeps developing i like their chances.

Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

I'm not so sure the schedule/AAC will help that cause, unless they beat Wichita and maybe SMU.

I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:34 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 11:51 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]You guys are cracking me up... this is a team that should be a second weekend team. Doesnt mean they will and they have work to do to earn a seed that would make it easier but they absolutely are a top 16 team.

Beyond that who knows. If Cumberland plays like he is capable and Broome keeps developing i like their chances.

Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

I'm not so sure the schedule/AAC will help that cause, unless they beat Wichita and maybe SMU.

I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

I don't think you're giving the AAC enough credit. It's going to be a four or potentially 5 bid league.

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

People way overrate how good other teams are. Xavier is ranked 6th in the country and barely beat ETSU and Marshall at home. Kentucky was 7th and got beat by UCLA in a game that was controlled by UCLA most of the second half.

Not that they're not great teams it just shows that everyone is capable of looking great or terrible on any given night.

We have looked really good a couple times and played two really bad games. I think it just means we could beat anyone on a good night and if we don't play well we could lose to an 8-10 type seeded team (FL). Im optimistic if Broome can continue to grow into his role that can take us to the next level where we could be a threat to do real damage.

(12-27-2017 04:02 PM)RealDeal Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

People way overrate how good other teams are. Xavier is ranked 6th in the country and barely beat ETSU and Marshall at home. Kentucky was 7th and got beat by UCLA in a game that was controlled by UCLA most of the second half.

Not that they're not great teams it just shows that everyone is capable of looking great or terrible on any given night.

We have looked really good a couple times and played two really bad games. I think it just means we could beat anyone on a good night and if we don't play well we could lose to an 8-10 type seeded team (FL). Im optimistic if Broome can continue to grow into his role that can take us to the next level where we could be a threat to do real damage.

This is fair. People overrated Florida because they saw them get ridiculously hot over a couple game stretch early in the season. (it still bugs me that UC was uncharacteristically bad that game at protecting the ball and sharing the ball) That's the hard part about watching basketball is that it can be easy to be fooled if you don't watch the team on the right night. I think most of us have a great idea of UC's strengths and weaknesses even if we don't agree exactly on where they fall in relation to everyone else. It's much harder with teams you only watch a couple of times a year.

I like to watch to see what a matchup problem someone might be, or the shots he is taking and making, but then you almost have to check the numbers and see is that close to what that guy normally is. We've all played basketball with the terrible guy who throws it in the basket a couple of times. Another thing I look for when I watch a team is 1. what kind of shots the get and 2. what kind of shots they give up. If you're not getting good looks even if you happen to shoot well one game that is less likely to translate... if you're getting good looks but missing...well often that will remedy itself. The eye test varies so much from night to night with every team. If you watched X against UC you might think they are a top 5 team. If you watched them against ETSU or Arizona State you might think they have major issues. Don't overreact. Trust what you see to an extent, but if its not consistent with the numbers it's probably an aberration.

UCF-SMU yawwwn. Ex and Marquette is a better game.

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:34 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 11:51 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]You guys are cracking me up... this is a team that should be a second weekend team. Doesnt mean they will and they have work to do to earn a seed that would make it easier but they absolutely are a top 16 team.

Beyond that who knows. If Cumberland plays like he is capable and Broome keeps developing i like their chances.

Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

I'm not so sure the schedule/AAC will help that cause, unless they beat Wichita and maybe SMU.

I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

I agree in the sense that the in game coaching is less then impressive. That said i think they get the scouting and game plan correct. The problem is when there's an anomaly and we do not adjust accordingly.

(12-28-2017 07:43 AM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:34 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 11:51 AM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]You guys are cracking me up... this is a team that should be a second weekend team. Doesnt mean they will and they have work to do to earn a seed that would make it easier but they absolutely are a top 16 team.

Beyond that who knows. If Cumberland plays like he is capable and Broome keeps developing i like their chances.

Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

I'm not so sure the schedule/AAC will help that cause, unless they beat Wichita and maybe SMU.

I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

I agree in the sense that the in game coaching is less then impressive. That said i think they get the scouting and game plan correct. The problem is when there's an anomaly and we do not adjust accordingly.

In general it appears Mick comes up with a game plan and sticks to it and is adverse to making in game changes even at the half. I don't know if it is stubbornness or a belief his guys can't adjust on the fly.

Another issue in the past that I haven't seen this year was an unwillingness to call a TO to stop the bleeding if the opposing team goes on a run. There were games in the past where you’re watching the Bearcats scrambling and looking lost while the other team runs up and down the court scoring a will, and you are screaming at the TV "call a TO!" and Mick just doesn't do it.
I understand wanting to play through it and not burning a TO but sometimes you just have to before you're buried.

We must just win due to superior talent, then.

(12-28-2017 10:32 AM)mptnstr@44 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-28-2017 07:43 AM)eroc Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:50 PM)Cat-Man Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:34 PM)bearcatmark Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-27-2017 02:31 PM)CincyBro Wrote: [ -> ]Sorry Mark, I'm not writing off this season, who knows come tourney time ( injuries and things ), but I can only find 8 people that think they are Top 16. You, the six AP voters and Ken.

Ken doesn't think that... That's what his numbers come to. As do Sagarins. As does BPI. I guarantee if you bet games just based on on Sagarin and Kenpom you'd do far better than on the AP voters who watch a tiny fraction of the games played.

The AP and coaches poll are subject to a ton of noise throughout the season. They overreact to individual games or a couple of games. I'm willing to bet UC will be back in the top 16 of both polls at various times throughout the season.

I'm not so sure the schedule/AAC will help that cause, unless they beat Wichita and maybe SMU.

I didn't think this team was very good (at least as good as it should be), until I saw what UCLA did to Kentucky. Now I think anything can happen. But I do think this team will go as far as the talent will take them, not the coaching.

I agree in the sense that the in game coaching is less then impressive. That said i think they get the scouting and game plan correct. The problem is when there's an anomaly and we do not adjust accordingly.

In general it appears Mick comes up with a game plan and sticks to it and is adverse to making in game changes even at the half. I don't know if it is stubbornness or a belief his guys can't adjust on the fly.

Another issue in the past that I haven't seen this year was an unwillingness to call a TO to stop the bleeding if the opposing team goes on a run. There were games in the past where you’re watching the Bearcats scrambling and looking lost while the other team runs up and down the court scoring a will, and you are screaming at the TV "call a TO!" and Mick just doesn't do it.
I understand wanting to play through it and not burning a TO but sometimes you just have to before you're buried.

averse

Sorry, grammar police.

Watched about 5 minutes of ECU/Tulsa. Man they are bad. Really bad. In every way.

Tulane beating Temple in Philly. Tulane may end up being a NIT caliber team. Dunleavy was a great hire for the Green Wave.

(12-28-2017 08:45 PM)jarr Wrote: [ -> ]Tulane beating Temple in Philly. Tulane may end up being a NIT caliber team. Dunleavy was a great hire for the Green Wave.

Yup...they have come a LONG way in a short time with Dunleavy.

(12-28-2017 09:50 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-28-2017 08:45 PM)jarr Wrote: [ -> ]Tulane beating Temple in Philly. Tulane may end up being a NIT caliber team. Dunleavy was a great hire for the Green Wave.

Yup...they have come a LONG way in a short time with Dunleavy.

Yep and at 63, he's still got some good coaching years in front of him if he wants to stick around, and he is also probably not interested in hopping around like a younger coach. Tulane could have him for another 6 or 8 years and not have to worry about him leaving.

Memphis looked pitiful vs. LSU

(12-28-2017 11:14 PM)InspectorHound Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis looked pitiful vs. LSU

I worry about our long layoff... 10 days... hopefully we won't be ice cold and rusty out of the gate and dig ourselves into a whole we can't get out of.

(12-29-2017 08:09 AM)CliftonAve Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-28-2017 11:14 PM)InspectorHound Wrote: [ -> ]Memphis looked pitiful vs. LSU

I worry about our long layoff... 10 days... hopefully we won't be ice cold and rusty out of the gate and dig ourselves into a whole we can't get out of.

Maybe they start slow but Memphis is really bad, probably 10th place bad just ahead of ECU and USF. They have some good players but need a lot more talent to be competitive in league play. Right now teams 1 through 9 are really dangerous with the jury still out on Memphis. Either way this year the American should feel like a real power conference as just about every road game will qualify as column two victory but getting those will not be easy for even the top teams.

(12-28-2017 09:57 PM)jarr Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-28-2017 09:50 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote: [ -> ]

(12-28-2017 08:45 PM)jarr Wrote: [ -> ]Tulane beating Temple in Philly. Tulane may end up being a NIT caliber team. Dunleavy was a great hire for the Green Wave.

Yup...they have come a LONG way in a short time with Dunleavy.

Yep and at 63, he's still got some good coaching years in front of him if he wants to stick around, and he is also probably not interested in hopping around like a younger coach. Tulane could have him for another 6 or 8 years and not have to worry about him leaving.

If Tulane continues on their track over the next several years (and I think they will), statues of Dunleavy will be erected around campus. I like him and echo what a great hire he was for their program and for our conference. You're talking one less bottom feeder in the American and that's a good thing for all of us.