College Basketball Thread 2014-15

[tmwiese55]

If UW wins out you have to think they get a #1 seed over Gonzaga. But what about if they lose one more game? I really want to get the #2 or 3 overall seed in order to avoid Kentucky until the championship game.

[brwrsfan]

They should have a one seed already over Gonzaga. I find it pretty ridiculous that brackets predict them as a 1 and WI a 2. The overall profiles at this time are drastically skewed in the Badgers favor. It would be one thing if they were undefeated, but they aren't. Per ESPN:

 

RPI - Wisconsin 6, Gonzaga 8

SOS - Wisconsin 32, Gonzaga 80

Top 50 wins - WI 6, Gonzaga 4

Top 100 wins - Wisconsin 11, Gonzaga 7

Sub 150 RPI wins - Wisconsin 6 (2 of which are Northwestern at 156), Gonzaga 10 (with 3 more on the schedule)

 

So higher RPI, SOS, more top 100 wins, less sub 150 wins. Each lost to a top 10 team. Yes, we lost to Rutgers (without Kaminsky) but Rutgers is 117 in the RPI, so that's not a horrible loss, it's not good, but it's not an absolute killer either. The rest of their profile should be enough to be ranked higher by "bracket experts".

 

To answer your question though, yes, if the Badgers lost just one more game and don't lose to someone horrible in the first round of the B10 tournament, they should 100% be a 1 seed. The gap in profiles should continue to widen significantly as our SOS and RPI should actually improve in the next few weeks as all 7 games we have left are against RPI top 100 teams (including Maryland at 14), while Gonzaga's should continue to fall - they have 2 games left against RPI top 65 teams, but also 3 games against teams RPI 175 or worse (2 worse than 230).

 

If we finish 6-1 (This would include at least beating one of Maryland/OSU on the road, or both), that puts us at 28-3, with 17 top 100 wins (at least with current RPI rankings)....compared to a max of 9 for Gonzaga. Our SOS would likely be inside the top 25 (compared to probably 90-100 for Gonzaga). It's not their fault their conference sucks, but when looking at the overall profiles, it's pretty noticeable. I don't think there is much doubt that if the Badgers played in that conference, they'd roll through it undefeated too.

[tmwiese55]

Good info, I totally agree that we should get that over them but would we. I generally think the committee will be smart enough to know we were without Frank and TJ in that Rutgers game, whereas joe schmo writer at this point isn't doing that much research.

 

I'm just a little concerned as it seems whenever a lower level team like Gonzaga, Wichita, St Joes has an undefeated or 1 loss year they still throw them a 1 seed and the predictably don't make it out of the sweet 16. I think it would help the committee also if Duke were to end up with 5 losses, like one to UNC and then again in the conf tourney. They can give the #1 to Gonzaga and put Duke in their bracket as the #2 making it really irrelevant as to who the #1 is. I would just hope they're on Kentucky's side of the bracket. Duke and Kentucky are the two teams I would fear the most in the tourney.

[fondybrewfan]

If a Big Ten team gets through the regular season and tournament with a total of 2 losses on the season they probably will be a lock for a #1. I wouldn't totally be upset if we are a #2 so long as the #1 in our group isn't Kentucky. Kentucky is probably a lock for a #1; no one else really is. If Gonzaga loses at all they are out. Both Duke and Virginia could both conceivably lose multiple games in a fairly deep ACC. Other than Kentucky UW probably has the cleanest route to a #1 simply because the Big Ten sucks and I am not sure anyone can beat them assuming complete health. Duke has a hell of a resume; UW needs them to lose another game to be seeded above them.

[LouisEly]

To add insult to injury, Marquette has released PG recruit Nick Noskowiak from his letter of intent.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/marquette-grants-release-to-basketball-recruit-nick-noskowiak-b99444793z1-291926831.html

 

Sounds like it doesn't have much to do with the school though and mostly has to do with a home situation and a probable need to get as far away from it as possible. Marquette now has only nine scholarship players committed for next season.

 

Hope there are a few more Matt Carlino's available next year. So much for Semi Ojeleye, apparently he is heading to SMU.

[tmwiese55]

Well MU has Ellenson coming in next year and a couple other very high recruits so I won't feel too bad. Especially since some of the reason they'll be light on scholarship players is the new coach seemingly pushing people out. I'd expect Ellenson to shoot and score a ton while not winning enough to make the tourney, then he'll be gone after one year.

 

If UW lands Stone as they're expected, they'll be primed for a likely 1 seed and legit chance at the FF again.

[fondybrewfan]

I really don't think Ellenson will be a one and done player; not that he doesn't have the talent to be one. I think he will stick around for at least 2 years. I think Marquette could easily be good enough for the tourney next year with Wilson, Fischer, Ellenson, and the rest of the recruiting class. They will still be very young but they could be a strong team.

 

Even if UW doesn't land Stone they have a pretty solid recruiting class coming in. Assuming Dekker comes back they likely will at least be the B10 favorite again. Koenig, Hayes, and Dekker is a really good top 3 guys. IF they get Stone that team could be every bit as good or better than this year. They will need pretty significant contributions from freshman, redshirt freshman, and other young players next year though. Pritzl might need to step in right away and be the shooter they need. The big man that is redshirting this year is supposedly holding his own in practice and should contribute next year.

[tmwiese55]

I'm basing my ellenson guess off what is being reported about his attitude, seems extremely full of himself. If he puts up 20ppg next year it wouldn't surprise me if he bails right away to get paid. Really any player that will be a first round pick it should be a no-brainer to go pro. Last year you even saw tons of guys that were borderline to even get drafted go pro just so they could go play in Europe rather than playing for free. MU could make a run at the tourney for sure but I'd call them bubble. I'm no expert on them though. I like what I see in Wilson and Fischer to go with Ellenson. I just have this feeling Ellenson might be a me first guy that doesn't fit well when it comes to winning games (like what people say about Melo).

 

UW is the B1G favorite no matter what next year. If Stone comes though they'll be a likely 1 seed. Bronson and Nigel will be a force. Happ should be able to step right into Dekker's role, Stone right into Frank's if he comes. I would be shocked if Dekker stays, he'll be a first rounder. The way it sounds the only reason he might stay is just that these guys really love playing together and living the college life in Madison. That being said, living the NBA live with 10 Mil in the bank is a pretty good life too.

[LouisEly]

The problem with Marquette is that with only 9 scholarship players you already need at least one walk-on in order to just practice, much less if anyone goes down with injury. I think you're seeing that with them this year as simply a lack of bodies makes it hard to practice.

 

The question with UW is who is going to play guard besides Koenig? Showalter has athleticism but no shot - he's shooting 37.5% from the floor and is 1-12 from 3-pt. Jordan Hill is being redshirted, but he's not known as a scorer. Riley Dearring hasn't shown enough to get on the floor with Jackson down. Pritzl will be a true freshman, and Bo isn't known for giving PT to true freshmen. The rest are walk-ons. If Koenig goes down they are in big trouble. You need more than one good guard if you are going to win enough to be a #1 seed, much less go deep in the tourney.

[tmwiese55]

Yes very true on lack of guard depth. They swung and missed on several PGs in this class and will be their primary focus in the next class. If Dekker were to stay it would help as he can get minutes at the 2 and is a competent ballhandler. They can handle an injury anywhere except to Bronson. Could probably say this with any team other than the blue bloods of UK, Duke, Kansas etc though. Word is Pritzl will likely start right away. And supposedly Jordan Hill will be really good at D and able to handle the ball, maybe a Flowers type, but he won't be able to score which he likely won't be needed for anyway. Schowalter can't competently handle the ball or shoot so I'd expect Hill to get PT over him.

 

I've been saying all year they should be finding ways to get Dearing some real experience with all these blowouts, you might need him at some point. Instead we're up 19 yesterday with 2 minutes to go and the starters are still in. Even when guys like Dearing, Showalter, and Brown get in with 90 seconds left they're just running the clock. Why not throw Dearing out there with like 15 minutes left for a 3 minutes stretch and see how he does, assuming you have a comfortable lead.

[brwrsfan]

I think you guys are slightly over-estimating the Badgers roster next year. All signs to me seem to indicate Dekker will be leaving (though personally I think that's a mistake). That means we're losing 4 of our top 8 players. Sure, Koening is ready to replace Jackson, but otherwise we're looking at replacing a potential POY candidate in Kaminsky, a three year starter and potential NBA pick in Dekker, plus Jackson and Dukan.

 

Even if we get Stone, we're relying on a TON of unproven talent, many of which have never played a college game (Stone, Pritzl, Happ) or the ones that have haven't made any real contributions (Brown, Dearing, Hill). Sure, they could pan out...but they may not. It's a lot to expect a bunch of unproven players to immediately gel with Hayes and Koening. They could, and if they all pan out the way we're hoping, they could be a very good team, but to assume we are a B10 favorite and Final Four contender seems a bit far fetched at this time. There very well could be some growing pains or some of the guys might not live up to the hype.

[homer]

I mean will UW be a Final Four caliber team next year? Doubtful. But they'll still be top 4 in the B1G and be like a 4 seed in the tourney. Koenig and Hayes could both be All B1G. I'm guessing Happ and Hill both contribute significantly. Brown will likely improve. There will be a drop off but it's not like UW will be bad or anything. And if they get Stone? Who knows.

[Outlander]

Not really over stating next year, perhaps under stating this year. They will have a decent chance of still winning the big 10 next year but this year they are far and away the best team in the league and perhaps the team with the best chance to beat Kentucky in the tournament. This is probably the greatest team in my lifetime so obviously don't expect them to do the same next year.

[superfly]

I really don't think Ellenson will be a one and done player; not that he doesn't have the talent to be one. I think he will stick around for at least 2 years. I think Marquette could easily be good enough for the tourney next year with Wilson, Fischer, Ellenson, and the rest of the recruiting class. They will still be very young but they could be a strong team.

 

Even if UW doesn't land Stone they have a pretty solid recruiting class coming in. Assuming Dekker comes back they likely will at least be the B10 favorite again. Koenig, Hayes, and Dekker is a really good top 3 guys. IF they get Stone that team could be every bit as good or better than this year. They will need pretty significant contributions from freshman, redshirt freshman, and other young players next year though. Pritzl might need to step in right away and be the shooter they need. The big man that is redshirting this year is supposedly holding his own in practice and should contribute next year.

 

 

Bronson Koenig is a stud.

[tmwiese55]

I see what you mean. If Dekker is gone and Stone doesn't come then I definitely agree the FF hopes are a long shot. To me that all hinges on Stone, would be shocked if Dekker stays. I think we're the B1G favorite no matter what just based on Koenig/Hayes both being juniors and first team pre-season all B1G next year. Obviously not as drastic of favorites as this year though. I think MD would be the #2 assuming their guys don't go pro. OSU always recruits well but I assume their super frosh will go pro.

[fondybrewfan]

Everything I have read on Happ says he probably would be getting meaningful minutes this year if he hadn't redshirted. Personally I think Dekker comes back. If he doesn't come back and they don't get Stone there probably will be some growing pains and scoring could be a little more difficult. However Bo always seems to come up with players that contribute so I have no doubt that Pritzl, Happ, Brown, Dearing, Hill, etc will be in a position to play well next year. The also have 3 other solid commits for next year as well that could play in Charlie Thomas, Alex Illikainen, and Khalil Iverson.

[brwrsfan]

It'll be an odd year. Normally with Bo, we tend to have guys waiting in the wings to fill the starter spots that are open and freshman rarely make an immediate impact (some have, but not many and very few started). But next year we theoretically could see 2 true freshman (Stone and Pritzl) and a redshirt freshman (Happ) starting.

 

Sure, maybe guys like Brown and Dearing step up, but it seems like big leap for them based on what I've seen out of them so far (albeit very limited minutes for the most part).

 

This all assumes that they get Stone, without him, they're going to be pretty small and may struggle some. I tend to think Stone is coming, but just can't know for sure (my guess is he announces it at the state tournament). I also think Dekker is leaving, as every mock draft I see has him in the first round - not lottery but first round is a few million guaranteed. I think it's a mistake but I think he leaves.

[tmwiese55]

I don't like when so many people frequently say it's a mistake for someone to go pro. You're playing for free right now and every year you stay in college you lose a year of earning potential, year of actual bball potential and upside, and increase risk of injury. I think everyone generally gets that basic point.

 

But what I don't think people realize is how much more someone can improve while sitting the bench but practicing in the nba and/or just playing 10-20 minutes. This isn't the easiest to explain but I'll give it a try. In college you're forced to waste time going to class and there is actually rules preventing how often you can practice. In the NBA, you have no responsibility other than practicing basketball, with the best coaches in the world helping you. It's really up to you at that point. One way to look at is like this, yes a player after 4 years of CBB will be better and more prepared than after year 3. However, it's logical the same player would be better after 3 yrs of college + 1 year of NBA than he would be after just 4 years of CBB. So at the same age the second scenario would create a better player. One could also make the argument that after a certain point some players could plateau and not really able to improve any more in CBB without new challenges/coaches. Now factor in that you'd be getting paid by going pro and I think it's a no brainer.

 

The only time it makes sense to stay for me would be if there is a good chance you can drastically improve your draft position to get a much larger guaranteed rookie contract. This could make sense for some freshman to stick one more year, say a Kevon Looney type, instead of going at like 11th this year maybe he could stay and be top 3 next year. Once you get to 3-4 years the nba starts looking at as a bad thing, plus with a couple less years for them to develop the kid. With Dekker do you think no matter what that he's going to jump into the top 5-8 picks next year? Plus if I'm him I'd be really sick of getting benched any time I missed a shot or made a turnover, he's Bo's whipping boy.

 

I know it's kind of a long rant but I hope it makes sense.

 

Another way to look at it, if Anthony Davis had stuck in college for two more years and then gone pro (making him a rookie this year), do you think he'd be putting up the 25, 14, 4 stat line (or whatever crazy numbers it is) this season or would he be putting up normal rookie averages of 13 and 8. Plus he's now only a year away from a 100 mil max contract.

[FVBrewerFan]

To add insult to injury, Marquette has released PG recruit Nick Noskowiak from his letter of intent.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/marquette-grants-release-to-basketball-recruit-nick-noskowiak-b99444793z1-291926831.html

 

Sounds like it doesn't have much to do with the school though and mostly has to do with a home situation and a probable need to get as far away from it as possible. Marquette now has only nine scholarship players committed for next season.

 

I saw this. Does anyone know the story here?

[brwrsfan]

I don't like when so many people frequently say it's a mistake for someone to go pro. You're playing for free right now and every year you stay in college you lose a year of earning potential, year of actual bball potential and upside, and increase risk of injury. I think everyone generally gets that basic point.

 

But what I don't think people realize is how much more someone can improve while sitting the bench but practicing in the nba and/or just playing 10-20 minutes. This isn't the easiest to explain but I'll give it a try. In college you're forced to waste time going to class and there is actually rules preventing how often you can practice. In the NBA, you have no responsibility other than practicing basketball, with the best coaches in the world helping you. It's really up to you at that point. One way to look at is like this, yes a player after 4 years of CBB will be better and more prepared than after year 3. However, it's logical the same player would be better after 3 yrs of college + 1 year of NBA than he would be after just 4 years of CBB. So at the same age the second scenario would create a better player. One could also make the argument that after a certain point some players could plateau and not really able to improve any more in CBB without new challenges/coaches. Now factor in that you'd be getting paid by going pro and I think it's a no brainer.

 

The only time it makes sense to stay for me would be if there is a good chance you can drastically improve your draft position to get a much larger guaranteed rookie contract. This could make sense for some freshman to stick one more year, say a Kevon Looney type, instead of going at like 11th this year maybe he could stay and be top 3 next year. Once you get to 3-4 years the nba starts looking at as a bad thing, plus with a couple less years for them to develop the kid. With Dekker do you think no matter what that he's going to jump into the top 5-8 picks next year? Plus if I'm him I'd be really sick of getting benched any time I missed a shot or made a turnover, he's Bo's whipping boy.

 

I know it's kind of a long rant but I hope it makes sense.

 

Another way to look at it, if Anthony Davis had stuck in college for two more years and then gone pro (making him a rookie this year), do you think he'd be putting up the 25, 14, 4 stat line (or whatever crazy numbers it is) this season or would he be putting up normal rookie averages of 13 and 8. Plus he's now only a year away from a 100 mil max contract.

 

Anthony Davis was the consensus best player in the country that year. His stock had nowhere to go but down. Dekker isn't exactly in that boat. If I was him, I'd go pro, it's an incredible amount of guaranteed money to give up if you're going to go in the first round. That said, having watched Dekker and the NBA a lot in the last few years - to me (and I'm not a scout or anything) but Dekker has a TON he can improve on to be ready for the NBA. For starters, he could improve his jump shot tremendously. He could improve his defense. He could also show an ability to score more - he's only averaging 13 PPG this year. He could very well be THE man on the roster next year. If he were to show improved jump shot, and more ability to take over a game, I think he could easily move into the lottery next year.

 

Yes, he can practice with an NBA team, but is that really better than playing actual games against top-level college competition. Maybe. Hard to say without going through it. I also think another year in college can make his NBA career longer. Guys that come out early get drafted, but many, many of them are out of the NBA without ever really doing anything (see Joe Alexander for example). Coming into the league a more developed player (in theory) could result in more PT early, which can lead to better things down the road. No guarantees either way, but to me, he's far from a finished product and another year in Bo's system (not to mention graduating) would seem beneficial to him.

 

That said, if I'd leave if I were him just purely from a financial standpoint.

[brwrsfan]

To add insult to injury, Marquette has released PG recruit Nick Noskowiak from his letter of intent.

 

http://www.jsonline.com/sports/goldeneagles/marquette-grants-release-to-basketball-recruit-nick-noskowiak-b99444793z1-291926831.html

 

Sounds like it doesn't have much to do with the school though and mostly has to do with a home situation and a probable need to get as far away from it as possible. Marquette now has only nine scholarship players committed for next season.

 

I saw this. Does anyone know the story here?

 

From what I know, he has some serious issues - depression I believe. He's been on and off the HS basketball team all season and it seems like he has a lot of personal issues to work through right now without worrying about basketball.

[tmwiese55]

 

Anthony Davis was the consensus best player in the country that year. His stock had nowhere to go but down. Dekker isn't exactly in that boat. If I was him, I'd go pro, it's an incredible amount of guaranteed money to give up if you're going to go in the first round. That said, having watched Dekker and the NBA a lot in the last few years - to me (and I'm not a scout or anything) but Dekker has a TON he can improve on to be ready for the NBA. For starters, he could improve his jump shot tremendously. He could improve his defense. He could also show an ability to score more - he's only averaging 13 PPG this year. He could very well be THE man on the roster next year. If he were to show improved jump shot, and more ability to take over a game, I think he could easily move into the lottery next year.

 

Yes, he can practice with an NBA team, but is that really better than playing actual games against top-level college competition. Maybe. Hard to say without going through it. I also think another year in college can make his NBA career longer. Guys that come out early get drafted, but many, many of them are out of the NBA without ever really doing anything (see Joe Alexander for example). Coming into the league a more developed player (in theory) could result in more PT early, which can lead to better things down the road. No guarantees either way, but to me, he's far from a finished product and another year in Bo's system (not to mention graduating) would seem beneficial to him.

 

That said, if I'd leave if I were him just purely from a financial standpoint.

 

The Davis thing was just an example of what I was saying about player development and my point that it's better in the NBA. No way he'd be this good right now if he'd stayed in college. I agree on everything you said about Dekker needing to improve on a ton of things, almost all players going into the NBA need that though. I can't believe how much his shot has regressed since he got to college, usually that's a strength of UWs development, for some reason he's gone backwards. Aaron Gordon couldn't do anything on the court other than dunk and play hard defense and he was drafted in the top 7ish. Anthony Davis averaged like 12 ppg in college and couldn't shoot beyond the FT line in college. I think my argument has been proven time and again by the fact that underclassmen almost always go ahead of the 3-4 year guys and usually pan out better in the league. Doug McDermott averaged like 28 a game his senior year and got drafted in the 20s. Did he really have anything to prove his senior year? Everything he's learning now in a bench role for the Bulls could have been done last year. Jabari couldn't play defense. Wiggins couldn't handle the ball and couldn't shoot at an NBA level.

 

Of course you can point to the flameouts like Alexander but like I mentioned, it's on the kid at that point and his personal responsibility to make himself better. Really you could argue that going pro was the best thing Alexander did, he got paid before going back to college and potentially having everyone figure out he wasn't that good or didn't have the drive needed to make it. For every one like him though you also have to remember the countless number of HS, Freshman, Soph players that have become stars or at least multi year successful pros.

 

I know this isn't an exact science and of course arguments can be made many ways. I was just pointing out another way to look at that noone seems to bring up. Everyone just makes the financial, take your money point and I never see this view pointed out.

[bani1717]

For what it's worth, Diamond Stone signed a Wisconsin Badgers item for me in December. So he better go with Wisconsin now!!

[hawing]

For what it's worth, Diamond Stone signed a Wisconsin Badgers item for me in December. So he better go with Wisconsin now!!

Please bear with me, because I don't closely follow the recruiting game, but Stone is like three months from finishing high school and he still hasn't decided/announced where he's going?

[tmwiese55]

That's fairly common in CBB for the top players. 6 of the top 10 players haven't picked yet. I'm not entirely sure of the reason but I think a factor could be to see what coaching turnover happens. Another reason might be that a superstar player is so much more important than in football that any coach will find a scholarship for these guys if they decide to pick their school Also, in CBB once someone commits they're actually committed and other teams back off. Unlike CFB where they recruit up until they sign the letter of intent.