CHN Top 144 Countdown

[AZ BU Fan]

....These guys are one of the only sources that actually hit this one on the head instead of trashing BU for their frontcourt....
"However, there are not a lot of Missouri Valley Conference teams that possess extremely talented, physical post players
so I doubt their inexperience down low will not be a detrimental to their season."

So are you saying, BU's lack of success in the Valley and in post season NCAA/NIT the past couple of years wasn't due to their inexperience (or perhaps lack of talent) down low, but, that the rest of the team wasn't good enough to win?

 

[tornado]

that is not what I am saying...
and as I have said elsewhere -- the Valley is full of teams that are weak in the frontcourt...almost NO Valley team can actually be described and strong and DEEP in the frontcourt...so why is BU the only Valley team that is always criticized for being weak in the frontcourt?

 

[BradleyJD]

so why is BU the only Valley team that is always criticized for being weak in the frontcourt?

It might have something to do with this being a Bradley board. BU is usually the team being discussed.

I personally do not care what other teams problems or weaknesses are unless it somehow impacts Bradley.

 

[amckillip]

It might have something to do with this being a Bradley board. BU is usually the team being discussed.

I personally do not care what other teams problems or weaknesses are unless it somehow impacts Bradley.

I fall somewhere in the middle of this argument, but you don't think Wichita State's/Creighton's/UNI's frontcourt depth (or lack thereof) is relevant to BU?

 

[tornado]

It might have something to do with this being a Bradley board. BU is usually the team being discussed.

I personally do not care what other teams problems or weaknesses are unless it somehow impacts Bradley.

no -- again I said this in the context of reading the previews for this coming season as published by CHN, Athlon, Lindy's, Sporting News, and a few dozen other locations..
The multiple references to Bradley being especially weak among the Valley frontcourts is what prompted my statement and nothing on this board.

 

[tornado]

These guys now rank Missouri State at #35 -- now where were the people debating whether they are credible??
http://thehoopsreport.com/article.aspx?id=558

they decide this on the strength of two factors...
---that MSU has 3 double digit scorers returning (so does BU and yet BU's 3 returning guy are way better scorers)
---and that they are deep at the post with
"multiple quality big men"......and they specifically cite Creekmore, Patterson, & Rhine -- whose combined stats in league play are roughly equal to the combined stats of Egolf, Singh, and AT...
This is exactly what I mean by the complete inconsistency we see where BU is cited to be horribly shallow in the post, but teams that have about the exact same depth we have are cited inexplicably as having "multiple quality big men"...:roll:



Also - these guys have Creighton at #61..and that's great -- the Valley needs whatever press they can get.........but........
the loss of 3 of their top 5 guys (including, according to these guys, someone named Jason Carter)
seems to have helped them get better...they should have some some homework and gotten the names right...
http://www.thesportsbank.net/college-bball/99-in-99-61-creighton-blue-jays/

 

[LittleBrave]

I still like MSU's chances to contend in the Valley this season.
They DO have a few quality big men - if you include 6'5" Malette. He plays bigger than that, like a TW. Creekmore is pretty solid and so is Weems.
I especially like the fact they have coaches like Cuanzo Martin & Kent Williams who know how to win and seem to have really good repoire with student-athletes.

I DO question whether they'll be as good as #35 to start the season, or if they'll even get consideration for Top 25 for the whole season.

 

[AZ BU Fan]

I guess until the Braves accomplish something on the court in the MVC and live up to the praises we give their current players and coaches, pundits will not share our optimism and give them the benefit of the doubt.

If BU's players and coaches are as good as we think they are, and vs everyone else in the MVC, you'd think BU would have something more to show for it. :?: :?: :?: :?:

BU finally winning something in the MVC this year will finally solve a lot of the issues T has with pollsters, sports writers, and other BU doubters! :lol: :lol: :lol:

 

[TNMSUFAN]

These guys now rank Missouri State at #35 -- now where were the people debating whether they are credible??
http://thehoopsreport.com/article.aspx?id=558

they decide this on the strength of two factors...
---that MSU has 3 double digit scorers returning (so does BU and yet BU's 3 returning guy are way better scorers)
---and that they are deep at the post with
"multiple quality big men"......and they specifically cite Creekmore, Patterson, & Rhine -- whose combined stats in league play are roughly equal to the combined stats of Egolf, Singh, and AT...
This is exactly what I mean by the complete inconsistency we see where BU is cited to be horribly shallow in the post, but teams that have about the exact same depth we have are cited inexplicably as having "multiple quality big men"...:roll:



Also - these guys have Creighton at #61..and that's great -- the Valley needs whatever press they can get.........but........
the loss of 3 of their top 5 guys (including, according to these guys, someone named Jason Carter)
seems to have helped them get better...they should have some some homework and gotten the names right...
http://www.thesportsbank.net/college-bball/99-in-99-61-creighton-blue-jays/

I don't agree with where they have us but I do agree our 5 spot is pretty solid...just looking at Creek and Patterson that is basically 15pts 7rbs every night from the 5 spot which is pretty good for the MVC. Creek and Patterson played in 36 games each and one or the other scored in double figures 25 times. Again I don't agree with us being at #35 but we are as good or better than an Valley team at the 5 spot.

 

[SFP]

I don't agree with where they have us but I do agree our 5 spot is pretty solid...just looking at Creek and Patterson that is basically 15pts 7rbs every night from the 5 spot which is pretty good for the MVC. Creek and Patterson played in 36 games each and one or the other scored in double figures 25 times. Again I don't agree with us being at #35 but we are as good or better than an Valley team at the 5 spot.

I'd have to say the 2nd 1/2 of the season and when Valley play begins CU will have by far the best front court by far. Lawson right now could be the best center and come Jan. he may even slip to starting at the 4. JMHO

 

[AZ BU Fan]

that is not what I am saying...
and as I have said elsewhere -- the Valley is full of teams that are weak in the frontcourt...almost NO Valley team can actually be described and strong and DEEP in the frontcourt...so why is BU the only Valley team that is always criticized for being weak in the frontcourt?

I guess it would be better than being criticized for not having good enough guards, or coaches, as the reason for lack of more success by BU....;-);-);-):lol:

 

[TNMSUFAN]

I'd have to say the 2nd 1/2 of the season and when Valley play begins CU will have by far the best front court by far. Lawson right now could be the best center and come Jan. he may even slip to starting at the 4. JMHO

Agreed but my point was "5 spot" not front court

 

[tornado]

Also - these guys have Creighton at #61..
http://www.thesportsbank.net/college-bball/99-in-99-61-creighton-blue-jays/

they just followed that with Northern Iowa at #60..but again they display a horrid degree
of doing anything like preparation or homework! They say this...
"Jacobson doesn’t have a lot of size up-front.."
They then proceed to discuss the potential frontcourt which belies that statement about size...
Jake Koch, 6-9 ("will slide into the spot that his older brother played")
Lucas O’Rear, solid 6-6 ("while undersized..will provide the muscle down low")
Austin Pehl, 6-10 245lb ("is an unproven commodity")
(actually these 3 guys are about as good as anyone else's top 3 frontcourt players - so maybe the guy should have stopped there)

But the very next words continuing the same sentence discussing frontcourt...
... "and freshman Matt Morrison
needs to add some meat to his skinny frame making the frontcourt
depth an area of concern."

Say what??? Matt Morrison is 5-11 guard?? I guarantee he isn't gonna play the frontcourt..
Then what about 6-8 Nate Buss??
http://wcfcourier.com/sports/college/uni/article_2c1962ca-8c98-11df-af2c-001cc4c03286.html

..and freshman Chip Rank is listed at 6-7 215lb??
http://miamiohio.scout.com/2/878395.html
http://www.thesportsbank.net/college-bball/99-in-99-60-northern-iowa-panthers/

 

[tornado]

Collegehoopsnet.com continues......

#105 Kent State

#104 Utah -- future BU opponent
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/104-utah-2010-11-basketball-preview-168719

#103 Montana
#102 Northeastern
#101 UCSB (Cal-Santa Barbara)
#100 Indiana - seriously ?? They are again going to be one of the weakest teams in the Big Ten and finished last year with RPI 222.
I said this last year when the guy ranked them #109...and indeed they were way worse...ending with RPI 222...
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/indiana-basketball-preview-109-167079


Here's a recap......
#144 South Carolina
#143 Quinnipiac
#142 Wyoming
#141 Charleston
#140 Jackson State
#139 Santa Clara
#138 Tennessee Tech
#137 Wake Forest
#136 Siena
#135 Princeton
#134 East Tennesee State
#133 Sam Houston State
#132 Cleveland State
#131 Indiana State - picked to finish 7th in the MVC
#130 Florida Atlantic
#129 Marshall
#128 South Florida
#127 Southern Illinois - picked for 6th in the Valley
#126 Virginia
#125 Miami (OH)
#124 Morgan State
#123 UAB
#122 Davidson
#121 Bucknell
#120 USC (future BU opponent)
#119 Wright State
#118 Long Beach
#117 Weber State
#116 Oral Roberts
#115 Boston Univ.
#114 Harvard
#113 Louisiana Tech
#112 Winthrop
#111 Stony Brook
#110 North Texas
#109 IUPUI
#108 Boston College
#107 Belmont
#106 Arkansas
#105 Kent State
#104 Utah -- future BU opponent
#103 Montana
#102 Northeastern
#101 UCSB
#100 Indiana

 

[LittleBrave]

Collegehoopsnet.com continues......

#105 Kent State

#104 Utah -- future BU opponent
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/104-utah-2010-11-basketball-preview-168719

#103 Montana
#102 Northeastern
#101 UCSB (Cal-Santa Barbara)
#100 Indiana - seriously ?? They are again going to be one of the weakest teams in the Big Ten and finished last year with RPI 222.
I said this last year when the guy ranked them #109...and indeed they were way worse...ending with RPI 222...
[/SIZE]

We should see a Valley team pretty soon now.
Probably BU or UNI I would think.

Let me guess just for fun:

UNI (85-90)
BU (80-85)
CU (70-75)
MSU (55-60)
WSU (40-45)

 

[tornado]

Next batch --

#99 George Washington
#98 Oakland
#97 Iona
#96 OKlahoma
#95 Charlotte
#94 Providence (this one has me stumped -- Keno has nobody -- he was 4-14 in the Big East and lot his final 11 and 13 of their final 14!
They finished barely better than DePaul, lost almost all his scorers, and all he has are incoming new freshmen and redshirt freshmen! No way this is gonna be a top 100 team)

 

[LittleBrave]

Next batch --

#99 George Washington
#98 Oakland
#97 Iona
#96 OKlahoma
#95 Charlotte
#94 Providence (this one has me stumped -- Keno has nobody -- he was 4-14 in the Big East and lot his final 11 and 13 of their final 14!
They finished barely better than DePaul, lost almost all his scorers, and all he has are incoming new freshmen and redshirt freshmen! No way this is gonna be a top 100 team)

I haven't heard much about Providence since Keno took over. I agree with you, T. They finished #140 in RPI (just because they were in the Big-E)

Oakland seems to have produced some good teams the last few seasons. They lost 2 of their top 3 scorers to graduation, but should still be solid I think. I don't think they want to return to Carver anytime soon.

 

[tornado]

I think the guys at CHN are more than generous to mid-major teams....
and every year seem to include a few that aren't good at all, but they're apparently included just to get a broad range of teams from every conference.
Example -- these guys were picked around #120 last year - Holy Cross...
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/holy-cross-basketball-preview-131-167032
..but they were really bad and won only 9 games, and probbaly anyone could have seen that coming...
Even Binghamton, knowing all their problems and issues, the CHN guys picked them for #110 -- and just about everyone else in American knew they'd be bad - and they were...RPI about 250

 

[LittleBrave]

Very true.
Let's see where they have our top 5 Valley schools. About 4 very good teams this season that could contend for MVC title, but those schools are not strong enough (at least heading into the season) to say they should be picked to win the Valley.

If I were doing the ratings for CHN Top 144, I would place them so: (not to say this is where I think they'll end up by season's end!)

ISU (blue) #135
DU #130
ISU (red) #110
UNI #85
BU #80
CU #75
MSU #55
WSU #45

 

[tornado]

The next batch on the CHN countdown...Bradley comes in at #91

#93 Detroit
#92 Colorado
#91 Bradley
#90 Western Kentucky
#89 Stephen F. Austin

here's their discussion of Bradley...picked 5th in the MVC
...it's fairly good review...but not a single mention of either Prosser, Walt, or Davis...
http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/91-bradley-2010-11-basketball-preview-168735



Here's a complete update to this point...

#144 South Carolina
#143 Quinnipiac
#142 Wyoming
#141 Charleston
#140 Jackson State
#139 Santa Clara
#138 Tennessee Tech
#137 Wake Forest
#136 Siena
#135 Princeton
#134 East Tennesee State
#133 Sam Houston State
#132 Cleveland State
#131 Indiana State - picked to finish 7th in the MVC
#130 Florida Atlantic
#129 Marshall
#128 South Florida
#127 Southern Illinois - picked for 6th in the Valley
#126 Virginia
#125 Miami (OH)
#124 Morgan State
#123 UAB
#122 Davidson
#121 Bucknell
#120 USC
#119 Wright State
#118 Long Beach
#117 Weber State
#116 Oral Roberts
#115 Boston Univ.
#114 Harvard
#113 Louisiana Tech
#112 Winthrop
#111 Stony Brook
#110 North Texas
#109 IUPUI
#108 Boston College
#107 Belmont
#106 Arkansas
#105 Kent State
#104 Utah
#103 Montana
#102 Northeastern
#101 UCSB
#100 Indiana
#99 George Washington
#98 Oakland
#97 Iona
#96 OKlahoma
#95 Charlotte
#94 Providence
#93 Detroit
#92 Colorado
#91 Bradley - picked 5th in the MVC
#90 Western Kentucky
#89 Stephen F. Austin