Official 2013 Draft Thread - Part VI

[sfam]

spshh.....whisper....he also has a more explosive first step than lebron.

How do they compare as far as court vision?

Bennett has x-ray vision.

[AFM]

WizD killin' it.
Bennett IS elite. He WILL take it to da rack and dunk on a muthawhuta,
Porter is a coward. And probably a virgin, if I had to guess.

[tontoz]

Bennett is a Tier unto himself.

[closg00]

WizD made some good points about Bennett

[pancakes3]

Bennett is a Tier unto himself.

HAHAHA. Fantastic.

[fishercob]

WizD killin' it.
Bennett IS elite. He WILL take it to da rack and dunk on a muthawhuta,
Porter is a coward. And probably a virgin, if I had to guess.

Excellent. Well done, AFM.

[gambitx777]

Should we just rename him Goku Bennett lol.

[Severn Hoos]

People keep dumping on the Mountain West, but the conference was first in RPI this season. It's not a scrub conference.

This made me laugh - and it just goes to show why the RPI is the most bogus "stat" in sports.

Let's take a look at the Mountain West:

New Mexico was the #2 team in RPI. Pretty impressive, huh? And they did compile a 10-3 record against the top 50 teams in the RPI. Wow - they must have been a real powerhouse. So let's take a look at those top 50 teams that they beat:

UNLV (twice)
San Diego St (twice)
Colorado St (twice)
Boise St (twice)

Hmmm... see a pattern here? Like the fact that they're all Mountain West teams? But that's just 8 - what about the other 2 wins? Well, they were against Connecticut (#49 in RPI) and Cincinnati (#50). Oh. Well, that's not so impressive any more, is it? But wait - how did they do in the tournament? That's right, they lost - as a #3 seed - to HARVARD. Yeah, sure, they were the second best team in the country.

What about the other MWC teams? After all, they had 5 of the top 50 RPI teams. Let's look at their RPI rankings (in parentheses) and top 50 wins:

UNLV(22): SD St (2x), CO St (2x), New Mexico, Boise St, Iowa St (45)
Colorado St (23): UNLV, Boise St, San Diego St
San Diego St (29): Boise St (2x), Colorado St, New Mexico, UCLA (27)
Boise St (44): UNLV, Colorado St, San Diego St, Creighton (25)

Shall we throw in Wyoming and Air Force?

Wyoming (#71): San Diego St, Colorado (37)
Air Force (79): New Mexico, Boise St, UNLV, San Diego St

The conference's impressive ranking in RPI was based entirely on beating each other! The teams in bold are the only Top 50 teams outside the conference that anyone in the conference beat. The best win on the entire season was Boise St over Creighton!

But the conference had a chance to prove itself - on a neutral court, against the best teams in the country. They had 5 teams in the tournament. (More than the ACC!) As mentioned, New Mexico was on the wrong end of a historic 14 over 3 upset. UNLV was a 5-seed, lost to #12 Cal. SDSU was a #7 seed, and at least lived up to the ranking. in the 1st round. They beat #10 Oklahoma, then lost to Florida Gulf Coast (a #15 seed). Colorado St (a #8 seed) did beat #9 seed Mizzou, then lost to #1 seed Louisville. And Boise St lost a play-in game to LaSalle.

So there you have it - the so-called best conference in the nation went a putrid 2-5 in the tourney, with 4 of the teams losing to double-digit seeds.

Not only did the conference not produce a Sweet 16 team themselves, the entire conference did not beat a single Sweet 16 team throughout the entire season! In fact, other than Colorado St & SDSU, the only Round of 32 teams that a MWC team beat were Iowa St and Creighton, and they both lost in the round of 32.

Sorry for the rant, but as you can tell, I despise the RPI. And I'm still singularly unimpressed with the level of competition faced by Mr. Bennett and the Runnin' Rebels.

[montestewart]

^
RPI SMACKDOWN!!

[Jay81]

Don't want Noel. Why? Our medical staff.

Horrible

http://www.brewhoop.com/2011/7/21/21800 ... th-of-data

[GhostsOfGil]

Don't want Noel. Why? Our medical staff.

Horrible

http://www.brewhoop.com/2011/7/21/21800 ... th-of-data

[sfam]

Don't want Noel. Why? Our medical staff.

Horrible

http://www.brewhoop.com/2011/7/21/21800 ... th-of-data

We're #1! We're #1!

The Wizards have the honor of being the most injury-riddled team of the decade with an average of 125 games lost per year. Then come the Warriors and Clippers, each with an average of 117.

[stevemcqueen1]

People keep dumping on the Mountain West, but the conference was first in RPI this season. It's not a scrub conference.

This made me laugh - and it just goes to show why the RPI is the most bogus "stat" in sports.

Let's take a look at the Mountain West:

New Mexico was the #2 team in RPI. Pretty impressive, huh? And they did compile a 10-3 record against the top 50 teams in the RPI. Wow - they must have been a real powerhouse. So let's take a look at those top 50 teams that they beat:

UNLV (twice)
San Diego St (twice)
Colorado St (twice)
Boise St (twice)

Hmmm... see a pattern here? Like the fact that they're all Mountain West teams? But that's just 8 - what about the other 2 wins? Well, they were against Connecticut (#49 in RPI) and Cincinnati (#50). Oh. Well, that's not so impressive any more, is it? But wait - how did they do in the tournament? That's right, they lost - as a #3 seed - to HARVARD. Yeah, sure, they were the second best team in the country.

What about the other MWC teams? After all, they had 5 of the top 50 RPI teams. Let's look at their RPI rankings (in parentheses) and top 50 wins:

UNLV(22): SD St (2x), CO St (2x), New Mexico, Boise St, Iowa St (45)
Colorado St (23): UNLV, Boise St, San Diego St
San Diego St (29): Boise St (2x), Colorado St, New Mexico, UCLA (27)
Boise St (44): UNLV, Colorado St, San Diego St, Creighton (25)

Shall we throw in Wyoming and Air Force?

Wyoming (#71): San Diego St, Colorado (37)
Air Force (79): New Mexico, Boise St, UNLV, San Diego St

The conference's impressive ranking in RPI was based entirely on beating each other! The teams in bold are the only Top 50 teams outside the conference that anyone in the conference beat. The best win on the entire season was Boise St over Creighton!

But the conference had a chance to prove itself - on a neutral court, against the best teams in the country. They had 5 teams in the tournament. (More than the ACC!) As mentioned, New Mexico was on the wrong end of a historic 14 over 3 upset. UNLV was a 5-seed, lost to #12 Cal. SDSU was a #7 seed, and at least lived up to the ranking. in the 1st round. They beat #10 Oklahoma, then lost to Florida Gulf Coast (a #15 seed). Colorado St (a #8 seed) did beat #9 seed Mizzou, then lost to #1 seed Louisville. And Boise St lost a play-in game to LaSalle.

So there you have it - the so-called best conference in the nation went a putrid 2-5 in the tourney, with 4 of the teams losing to double-digit seeds.

Not only did the conference not produce a Sweet 16 team themselves, the entire conference did not beat a single Sweet 16 team throughout the entire season! In fact, other than Colorado St & SDSU, the only Round of 32 teams that a MWC team beat were Iowa St and Creighton, and they both lost in the round of 32.

Sorry for the rant, but as you can tell, I despise the RPI. And I'm still singularly unimpressed with the level of competition faced by Mr. Bennett and the Runnin' Rebels.

New Mexico had the #5 SoS this season. They picked their out of conference matchups specifically to be tough teams likely to contend for their conference championships so they would finish with a high RPI. They definitely didn't play a cupcake schedule. Portland was the only crap team they played out of conference.

A poor tourney game doesn't mean the teams weren't good and the conference wasn't strong BTW. If you're using that to damn the MWC and Bennett's in conference competition, damn the Big East too. Plenty of Big East teams have been bounced in the first two rounds by low seeds the past three years. Including Mr. Porter's Georgetown Hoyas. What about all of the Big 10 teams this year that lost early? Does that lessen the quality of that conference this year?

[The Consiglieri]

People keep dumping on the Mountain West, but the conference was first in RPI this season. It's not a scrub conference.

This made me laugh - and it just goes to show why the RPI is the most bogus "stat" in sports.

Let's take a look at the Mountain West:

New Mexico was the #2 team in RPI. Pretty impressive, huh? And they did compile a 10-3 record against the top 50 teams in the RPI. Wow - they must have been a real powerhouse. So let's take a look at those top 50 teams that they beat:

UNLV (twice)
San Diego St (twice)
Colorado St (twice)
Boise St (twice)

Hmmm... see a pattern here? Like the fact that they're all Mountain West teams? But that's just 8 - what about the other 2 wins? Well, they were against Connecticut (#49 in RPI) and Cincinnati (#50). Oh. Well, that's not so impressive any more, is it? But wait - how did they do in the tournament? That's right, they lost - as a #3 seed - to HARVARD. Yeah, sure, they were the second best team in the country.

What about the other MWC teams? After all, they had 5 of the top 50 RPI teams. Let's look at their RPI rankings (in parentheses) and top 50 wins:

UNLV(22): SD St (2x), CO St (2x), New Mexico, Boise St, Iowa St (45)
Colorado St (23): UNLV, Boise St, San Diego St
San Diego St (29): Boise St (2x), Colorado St, New Mexico, UCLA (27)
Boise St (44): UNLV, Colorado St, San Diego St, Creighton (25)

Shall we throw in Wyoming and Air Force?

Wyoming (#71): San Diego St, Colorado (37)
Air Force (79): New Mexico, Boise St, UNLV, San Diego St

The conference's impressive ranking in RPI was based entirely on beating each other! The teams in bold are the only Top 50 teams outside the conference that anyone in the conference beat. The best win on the entire season was Boise St over Creighton!

But the conference had a chance to prove itself - on a neutral court, against the best teams in the country. They had 5 teams in the tournament. (More than the ACC!) As mentioned, New Mexico was on the wrong end of a historic 14 over 3 upset. UNLV was a 5-seed, lost to #12 Cal. SDSU was a #7 seed, and at least lived up to the ranking. in the 1st round. They beat #10 Oklahoma, then lost to Florida Gulf Coast (a #15 seed). Colorado St (a #8 seed) did beat #9 seed Mizzou, then lost to #1 seed Louisville. And Boise St lost a play-in game to LaSalle.

So there you have it - the so-called best conference in the nation went a putrid 2-5 in the tourney, with 4 of the teams losing to double-digit seeds.

Not only did the conference not produce a Sweet 16 team themselves, the entire conference did not beat a single Sweet 16 team throughout the entire season! In fact, other than Colorado St & SDSU, the only Round of 32 teams that a MWC team beat were Iowa St and Creighton, and they both lost in the round of 32.

Sorry for the rant, but as you can tell, I despise the RPI. And I'm still singularly unimpressed with the level of competition faced by Mr. Bennett and the Runnin' Rebels.

Otoh, this reminds me of listening to Vegas sports guys ripping to pieces the NCAA after the draw was announced because they felt it wasn't even minutely surprising that reps largely from the big 6, had paired squads from the mid-majors and smaller conferences consistently against one another, so they could knock each other out during the tournament and not upset the stranglehold the big 6 continue to try and hold onto in terms of the big money in the NCAA's. Also reminds me of UEFA fans justifying their opinion that the rest of the feds in soccer suck, and pointing to the world cup as proof, then you remind them that Europe traditionally sends more than twice as many teams to the cup as anyone else. Might that have a little something to do with all the wins they rack up, and all the runs their teams make in tournament after tournament?

I feel somewhat the same way about the big 6. I think it's very difficult to get a firm grip on just how good they are when the game is rigged for them. When the people evaluating who should go where in the tournament are from their conferences, and interested in their conferences primarily. Kind of sets the table for their own interests wouldn't you say? Not about to argue that Mountain West is the equal of the ACC or the Big 10 or Big East in a great year for those conferences, but is the difference anywhere near as big as it used to be? Not so sure. After all if we talk about who these other conference squads beat, how would that look, would it just be a pile of fellow conference opponents? In many cases, yes.

Looking at them just tourney style:

Colorado State beat the team they were even odds against, then lost to the national champion. No shame in that.

San Diego State? Beat Oklahoma, then lost to upstart FGCU, then again your Otto Porter and Georgetown got clowned by them too.

UNLV? Lost to Cal in San Jose (for those not familiar with the bay, it's about a 45 minute drive south on 880). Not exactly a sin to lose to a team you beat by one bucket on the road in September, in March, when your best player was hurt.

New Mexico and Boise State's results? Can't really help them much, New Mexico should never have lost that game (then again Cal lost to Harvard too), and Boise State wasn't exactly NCAA material to begin with.

All this being said, the fact that the NCAA saw fit to match up: VCU/Akron, Butler/Bucknell, New Mexico/Harvard made Vegas suspicious for a reason. Many of the bookmakers rightly felt that the NCAA's big boys were keen on booting out the new kids on the block before they could do double the damage.

Now when I say all this I'm not arguing that everything you've stated is wrong, I'm simply arguing that there is very little fair or reasonable way by which you can compare these teams considering how thoroughly rigged the system is, and how difficult it is to get teams to draw tough opponents in reasonable situations. Its much worse in NCAA football mind you, but it's not the greatest in hoops either, and at this point, with watered down leagues everywhere, and such massive volatility in who plays where and whose even willing to stay for more than a year, I don't think the conference arguments hold anywhere near the water they did a few decades ago. It's over. We won't know the new lay of the land for many years to come because of the all the changes, conference wide, as well as with regards to players.

[stevemcqueen1]

The other reason the MWC finished so high in RPI this season was because it was a small, undiluted conference without a large group of trash at the bottom for the top teams to beat up on like the Big East, ACC, and SEC.

[hands11]

WizD killin' it.
Bennett IS elite. He WILL take it to da rack and dunk on a muthawhuta,
Porter is a coward. And probably a virgin, if I had to guess.

You are to funny. You really have a love for his posts.

Very interesting.

[hands11]

The silly season is in full bloom.

At this point, most posts are just rehashing stuff that was posted many months ago.

20 new pages a day.

For those that don't realize it. Anything more then a few sentences, isn't likely to get read at this point. At least by most that are just to busy to read it all.

[montestewart]

The silly season is in full bloom.

At this point, most posts are just rehashing stuff that was posted many months ago.

20 new pages a day.

For those that don't realize it. Anything more then a few sentences, isn't likely to get read at this point. At least by most that are just to busy to read it all.

Yes, it's that time of year when foolishness flowers.

When I read things here, I could swear I've read almost the exact same thing recently.

Nearly one new page per hour.

Word to your mother, the more you write, the less they read nowadays, unless they're among the few on holiday.

[gambitx777]

So, question,
If we package our 2 seconds to move up, either further up in the 2ed round or in the late first, who are we going after?

I heard Siva was well liked, Osby, but those two can be had with the picks that we have? So who would we be going after?

[popper]

So, question,
If we package our 2 seconds to move up, either further up in the 2ed round or in the late first, who are we going after?

I heard Siva was well liked, Osby, but those two can be had with the picks that we have? So who would we be going after?

I doubt our 54th pick has any value to other teams. Maybe some cash would help.