dukedevilz's preseason top 50, part 2

[dukedevilz]

Just a couple of notes pertaining to teams in the 26-50 range:

-I had St.John's at #37 before Mustapha Heron was declared eligible. I didn't feel the need to rewrite all of the rankings and update the screenshots. So, I think I might argue that SJU could be a top 30 team.

-I originally had New Mexico in my top 40. I took them out of my top 50 shortly after the season-ending injury to JaQuan Lyle.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I'm not sure what's worse between how much you underrate Michigan or how much "RSCI" underrates Ignas Brazdeikas. 74th is a joke.

 

[Deathclutch]

I'm not sure what's worse between how much you underrate Michigan or how much "RSCI" underrates Ignas Brazdeikas. 74th is a joke.

Homer

 

[dukedevilz]

I'm not sure what's worse between how much you underrate Michigan or how much "RSCI" underrates Ignas Brazdeikas. 74th is a joke.

I look at their complete roster, and I see a lot of question marks. Outside shooting must improve. Simpson & Matthews, the two leading returning scorers, are both very mediocre in that aspect. The incoming freshmen look good, but they don't appear to be instant impact players.

No doubt I'm wrong about several things. Projecting teams that have such a high turnover is incredibly hard. How good will the freshmen be? What kind of progression will the upperclassmen make? I like the RSCI rankings because it's the composite rankings from multiple recruiting services. Brazdeikas had a range of 41-99 in his rankings, FWIW.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I look at their complete roster, and I see a lot of question marks. Outside shooting must improve. Simpson & Matthews, the two leading returning scorers, are both very mediocre in that aspect. The incoming freshmen look good, but they don't appear to be instant impact players.

No doubt I'm wrong about several things. Projecting teams that have such a high turnover is incredibly hard. How good will the freshmen be? What kind of progression will the upperclassmen make? I like the RSCI rankings because it's the composite rankings from multiple recruiting services. Brazdeikas had a range of 41-99 in his rankings, FWIW.

What site had Brazdeikas 99? They should leave the business. Rivals has Brazdeikas as a 5* which would've been top 32 if they ranked foreign players.

I hear "a lot of question marks" every single year. There were a lot of question marks when Derrick Walton, Zak Irvin, and D.J. Wilson left last year. Instead of trying to replace that offense Michigan developed a new identity and became one of the best defensive teams in the country. Simpson and Matthews struggle with 3pt shooting but are the best defensive back court in the country.

 

[KisteK]

I hope Iowa State outpla

What site had Brazdeikas 99? They should leave the business. Rivals has Brazdeikas as a 5* which would've been top 32 if they ranked foreign players.

I hear "a lot of question marks" every single year. There were a lot of question marks when Derrick Walton, Zak Irvin, and D.J. Wilson left last year. Instead of trying to replace that offense Michigan developed a new identity and became one of the best defensive teams in the country. Simpson and Matthews struggle with 3pt shooting but are the best defensive back court in the country.

http://www.verbalcommits.com/players/ignas-brazdeikis

Without venturing to ESPN, I'm going with those dweebs.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I hope Iowa State outpla

http://www.verbalcommits.com/players/ignas-brazdeikis

Without venturing to ESPN, I'm going with those dweebs.

5* on Rivals
5* on Scout


And somewhere has him 99th?


Are Scout and 247 the same thing now? Because that site has him as a 5* on Scout but if I try to find that it brings me to 247.

 

[schoonerwest]

5* on Rivals
5* on Scout


And somewhere has him 99th?


Are Scout and 247 the same thing now? Because that site has him as a 5* on Scout but if I try to find that it brings me to 247.

You're starting to sound like Gilligan.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

You're starting to sound like Gilligan.

The site is demonstrably wrong.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

@dukedevilz RSCI puts Rivals ranking of Brazdeikas at 99th overall.

1. Rivals doesn't rank foreign players so I have no idea where they made that number up.
2. Brazdeikas has a 5th star at Rivals and the lowest ranked 5 star is 31st overall.

 

[KisteK]

ESPN doesn't have him listed, so not them.
Strange.

 

[dukedevilz]

What site had Brazdeikas 99? They should leave the business. Rivals has Brazdeikas as a 5* which would've been top 32 if they ranked foreign players.

I hear "a lot of question marks" every single year. There were a lot of question marks when Derrick Walton, Zak Irvin, and D.J. Wilson left last year. Instead of trying to replace that offense Michigan developed a new identity and became one of the best defensive teams in the country. Simpson and Matthews struggle with 3pt shooting but are the best defensive back court in the country.

Looks like 99 was actually his composite score. Did he re-classify at all? I see him listed as a 5-star recruit on rivals, but I don't see him ranked anywhere when I scroll down the class of 2018. ESPN didn't rank him for whatever reason. I can't really make a judgement because I haven't seen him play. 247 recently published an article and had him as the #5 incoming freshmen in the Big 10 (behind Romeo Langofrd, Jalen Smith, Ayo Dosunmu, and Daniel Oturu). So I take that he'll be a solid player, possibly starting.

The 2017 Michigan team still had 3 reliable shooters that were returning in Wagner, Rahkman, and Robinson... Maybe Poole, Livers, and Brazdeikis carry the load this year. I don't know. I could be wrong. I'm just not completely wowed when I look at the roster. Time will tell.

Edit: Okay, I was just looking at the AAU stats for Brazdeikis and Brandon Johns.. Brazdeikis shot 26.6% from 3, while Brandon Johns shot 43.6%. It will be interesting to see how the minutes are distributed. Also, how many minutes would you expect from Jon Teske? Is he going to start? He certainly wouldn't stretch a defense the same way Mo Wagner would.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Looks like 99 was actually his composite score. Did he re-classify at all? I see him listed as a 5-star recruit on rivals, but I don't see him ranked anywhere when I scroll down the class of 2018. ESPN didn't rank him for whatever reason. I can't really make a judgement because I haven't seen him play. 247 recently published an article and had him as the #5 incoming freshmen in the Big 10 (behind Romeo Langofrd, Jalen Smith, Ayo Dosunmu, and Daniel Oturu). So I take that he'll be a solid player, possibly starting.

The 2017 Michigan team still had 3 reliable shooters that were returning in Wagner, Rahkman, and Robinson... Maybe Poole, Livers, and Brazdeikis carry the load this year. I don't know. I could be wrong. I'm just not completely wowed when I look at the roster. Time will tell.

Edit: Okay, I was just looking at the AAU stats for Brazdeikis and Brandon Johns.. Brazdeikis shot 26.6% from 3, while Brandon Johns shot 43.6%. It will be interesting to see how the minutes are distributed. Also, how many minutes would you expect from Jon Teske? Is he going to start? He certainly wouldn't stretch a defense the same way Mo Wagner would.

Rivals (and maybe ESPN?) doesn't rank foreign players. Bossi said that he would be a top 30 player in his rankings if they did.

Shooting I'm not too concerned about. Poole will be a stud shooter. Livers can shoot. Johns can shoot. Brazdeikas can shoot. DeJulius is a really good shooter if he cracks the rotation. We'll see, I guess. Anything we lose in shooting from Duncan Robinson we make up for in other areas with Livers/Brazdeikas/Johns.

Teske will start and play as much as he can handle. 20+ mpg. He can't stretch the floor or score the way Wagner could but he is better defensively.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I think you're focusing way too much on on aspect of the game (shooting) and not the whole picture Michigan had the #3 defense in the country last year and returns its top 3 defenders (Simpson, Matthews, Teske). Matthews was our regions Most Outstanding Player and averaged something like 16 and 5 in the tournament. He's a difference maker.

I'd be shocked if this team finished outside of the top 25 and I think the ceiling is quite a bit higher than that.

 

[Wall2Boogie]

All I want to know is if grambling state is ahead of Louisville?

 

[UL_1986]

All I want to know is if grambling state is ahead of Louisville?

Second post about Louisville within TT.

 

[dukedevilz]

Rivals (and maybe ESPN?) doesn't rank foreign players. Bossi said that he would be a top 30 player in his rankings if they did.

Shooting I'm not too concerned about. Poole will be a stud shooter. Livers can shoot. Johns can shoot. Brazdeikas can shoot. DeJulius is a really good shooter if he cracks the rotation. We'll see, I guess. Anything we lose in shooting from Duncan Robinson we make up for in other areas with Livers/Brazdeikas/Johns.

Teske will start and play as much as he can handle. 20+ mpg. He can't stretch the floor or score the way Wagner could but he is better defensively.

I think you're focusing way too much on on aspect of the game (shooting) and not the whole picture Michigan had the #3 defense in the country last year and returns its top 3 defenders (Simpson, Matthews, Teske). Matthews was our regions Most Outstanding Player and averaged something like 16 and 5 in the tournament. He's a difference maker.

I'd be shocked if this team finished outside of the top 25 and I think the ceiling is quite a bit higher than that.

Brazdeikas shot 26.6% from 3 in the D1 Circuit AAU games. 21 for 79 is a solid sample size, IMO. So I wouldn't expect proficiency in that department. Johns, yes, he appears to have a nice touch. How much will he play? Between Simpson, Matthews, Brazdeikas, and Teske, you have 4 guys that will play significant minutes that will struggle to stretch a defense. That is concerning to me.

As far as overemphasizing shooting, no, I don't think so. 203 of the 351 D1 schools had an effective shooting percentage of 50% or greater. That is significant. It means that offenses are much, much more effective than defenses. The whole "defense is just as important" argument is a sham in the sense that defenses don't stop offenses 50% of the time. They just don't. And that link I provided for doesn't account for free throws, which means way more than 203 teams would have a true shooting percentage north of 50%.

But again, this is simply a projection. I could be way, way off. I probably am. I'll stand by my picks, nonetheless.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Brazdeikas shot 26.6% from 3 in the D1 Circuit AAU games. 21 for 79 is a solid sample size, IMO. So I wouldn't expect proficiency in that department. Johns, yes, he appears to have a nice touch. How much will he play? Between Simpson, Matthews, Brazdeikas, and Teske, you have 4 guys that will play significant minutes that will struggle to stretch a defense. That is concerning to me.

As far as overemphasizing shooting, no, I don't think so. 203 of the 351 D1 schools had an effective shooting percentage of 50% or greater. That is significant. It means that offenses are much, much more effective than defenses. The whole "defense is just as important" argument is a sham in the sense that defenses don't stop offenses 50% of the time. They just don't. And that link I provided for doesn't account for free throws, which means way more than 203 teams would have a true shooting percentage north of 50%.

But again, this is simply a projection. I could be way, way off. I probably am. I'll stand by my picks, nonetheless.

That's not a large sample size at all.

Depends re: Johns. We have depth. Whoever the best two are out of Livers/Brazdeikas/Johns will get the minutes. I think we might see some small ball with Johns at the 5 here and there to get him on the floor but we'll see.

That's a weird route to take something I wasn't saying. My point isn't that "defense > offense" on a per possession basis. My point is that a team with an elite defense can get by even with holes on offense. Michigan might not "spread the floor" the way the tickles your fancy, but Charles Matthews is a scorer. Jordan Poole is a scorer. Ignas Brazdeikas is scorer.


And yes, you probably are wrong. I'd give you a 10 spot cushion and bet you that Michigan finishes as a top 25 team.

 

[dukedevilz]

That's not a large sample size at all.

Depends re: Johns. We have depth. Whoever the best two are out of Livers/Brazdeikas/Johns will get the minutes. I think we might see some small ball with Johns at the 5 here and there to get him on the floor but we'll see.

That's a weird route to take something I wasn't saying. My point isn't that "defense > offense" on a per possession basis. My point is that a team with an elite defense can get by even with holes on offense. Michigan might not "spread the floor" the way the tickles your fancy, but Charles Matthews is a scorer. Jordan Poole is a scorer. Ignas Brazdeikas is scorer.


And yes, you probably are wrong. I'd give you a 10 spot cushion and bet you that Michigan finishes as a top 25 team.

So avatar bet? I'm down.

10 spot cushion means Michigan has to be ranked 24th or higher, right? And does that mean the poll after the NCAA Tournament is complete?

 

[Wall2Boogie]

Second post about Louisville within TT.

When he comes up with round 3 there will be a third

 

[UL_1986]

When he comes up with round 3 there will be a third

You’ll be on your 6th mention of us by then.

Rent free little dude.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

So avatar bet? I'm down.

10 spot cushion means Michigan has to be ranked 24th or higher, right? And does that mean the poll after the NCAA Tournament is complete?

Let’s say top 25 Kenpom team.

 

[dukedevilz]

Let’s say top 25 Kenpom team.

I think that will improve your odds a little bit, but sure, why not. One month?

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I think that will improve your odds a little bit, but sure, why not. One month?

Deal

 

[CB3UK]

Good stuff OP. Im dipping my toes back in basketball waters as the season approaches. Been so geared up for baseball and football, havent really paid attention to whom might be worth keeping tabs on this season aside from the usual suspects.

 

[Dylanvu32]

Just a couple of notes pertaining to teams in the 26-50 range:

-I had St.John's at #37 before Mustapha Heron was declared eligible. I didn't feel the need to rewrite all of the rankings and update the screenshots. So, I think I might argue that SJU could be a top 30 team.

-I originally had New Mexico in my top 40. I took them out of my top 50 shortly after the season-ending injury to JaQuan Lyle.

No love for vanderbilt?!?

 

[OxfordCommaDore]

No love for vanderbilt?!?

#46. I'm cool with that to start the year. Hell, I'll be happy if we end the year there. Top half of the SEC and on the good side of the bubble.

Our ceiling is definitely higher than that. But realistically, our floor is also lower. Lots of unanswered questions with this team. We probably won't be able to answer them until we're in the thick of conference play. Hoping for a really fun season.

 

[dukedevilz]

#46. I'm cool with that to start the year. Hell, I'll be happy if we end the year there. Top half of the SEC and on the good side of the bubble.

Our ceiling is definitely higher than that. But realistically, our floor is also lower. Lots of unanswered questions with this team. We probably won't be able to answer them until we're in the thick of conference play. Hoping for a really fun season.

Agreed. Vandy is an intriguing team. Fairly similar to LSU; rosters with high turnover that include multiple talented freshmen. Vandy doesn't have an experienced player of the caliber of Tremont Waters, however. But I don't think it would be unrealistic to see them in the Sweet 16... or the NIT.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I look at their complete roster, and I see a lot of question marks. Outside shooting must improve. Simpson & Matthews, the two leading returning scorers, are both very mediocre in that aspect. The incoming freshmen look good, but they don't appear to be instant impact players.

No doubt I'm wrong about several things. Projecting teams that have such a high turnover is incredibly hard. How good will the freshmen be? What kind of progression will the upperclassmen make? I like the RSCI rankings because it's the composite rankings from multiple recruiting services. Brazdeikas had a range of 41-99 in his rankings, FWIW.

Looks like 99 was actually his composite score. Did he re-classify at all? I see him listed as a 5-star recruit on rivals, but I don't see him ranked anywhere when I scroll down the class of 2018. ESPN didn't rank him for whatever reason. I can't really make a judgement because I haven't seen him play. 247 recently published an article and had him as the #5 incoming freshmen in the Big 10 (behind Romeo Langofrd, Jalen Smith, Ayo Dosunmu, and Daniel Oturu). So I take that he'll be a solid player, possibly starting.

The 2017 Michigan team still had 3 reliable shooters that were returning in Wagner, Rahkman, and Robinson... Maybe Poole, Livers, and Brazdeikis carry the load this year. I don't know. I could be wrong. I'm just not completely wowed when I look at the roster. Time will tell.

Edit: Okay, I was just looking at the AAU stats for Brazdeikis and Brandon Johns.. Brazdeikis shot 26.6% from 3, while Brandon Johns shot 43.6%. It will be interesting to see how the minutes are distributed. Also, how many minutes would you expect from Jon Teske? Is he going to start? He certainly wouldn't stretch a defense the same way Mo Wagner would.

Brazdeikas shot 26.6% from 3 in the D1 Circuit AAU games. 21 for 79 is a solid sample size, IMO. So I wouldn't expect proficiency in that department. Johns, yes, he appears to have a nice touch. How much will he play? Between Simpson, Matthews, Brazdeikas, and Teske, you have 4 guys that will play significant minutes that will struggle to stretch a defense. That is concerning to me.

As far as overemphasizing shooting, no, I don't think so. 203 of the 351 D1 schools had an effective shooting percentage of 50% or greater. That is significant. It means that offenses are much, much more effective than defenses. The whole "defense is just as important" argument is a sham in the sense that defenses don't stop offenses 50% of the time. They just don't. And that link I provided for doesn't account for free throws, which means way more than 203 teams would have a true shooting percentage north of 50%.

But again, this is simply a projection. I could be way, way off. I probably am. I'll stand by my picks, nonetheless.

 

[dukedevilz]

lol. You're really enjoying this, aren't you?

Looking back at what I said, I don't think I was overly critical. Look at some of my statements that you quoted:

"No doubt I'm wrong about several things. Projecting teams that have such a high turnover is incredibly hard. How good will the freshmen be? What kind of progression will the upperclassmen make?"

Brazdeikis has been one of the biggest surprises in the country. I'm not sure many people saw that coming. He's playing like an All-American. Matthews and Simpson are more are less where they were last year. Poole, Livers, and Teske have certainly been pulling their own weight. Solid improvements from those three.

"The 2017 Michigan team still had 3 reliable shooters that were returning in Wagner, Rahkman, and Robinson... Maybe Poole, Livers, and Brazdeikis carry the load this year. I don't know. I could be wrong. I'm just not completely wowed when I look at the roster. Time will tell."

3-point shooting still isn't great collectively, but the defense more than compensates for that deficiency. Those three aforementioned players have been shooting well, but as a team 35% certainly isn't off the charts. But this Michigan team is very, very good. After a few games I absolutely think they're a Final Four Team/Championship caliber team.

But again, this is simply a projection. I could be way, way off. I probably am. I'll stand by my picks, nonetheless.

I was way off, but as I mentioned several times, projecting success is incredibly hard when turnover is high, you don't know how good the recruits are, and you don't know how the returning players will progress. I was wrong. It was simply an educated guess based on the available data that I had.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

lol. You're really enjoying this, aren't you?

Looking back at what I said, I don't think I was overly critical. Look at some of my statements that you quoted:

"No doubt I'm wrong about several things. Projecting teams that have such a high turnover is incredibly hard. How good will the freshmen be? What kind of progression will the upperclassmen make?"

Brazdeikis has been one of the biggest surprises in the country. I'm not sure many people saw that coming. He's playing like an All-American. Matthews and Simpson are more are less where they were last year. Poole, Livers, and Teske have certainly been pulling their own weight. Solid improvements from those three.

"The 2017 Michigan team still had 3 reliable shooters that were returning in Wagner, Rahkman, and Robinson... Maybe Poole, Livers, and Brazdeikis carry the load this year. I don't know. I could be wrong. I'm just not completely wowed when I look at the roster. Time will tell."

3-point shooting still isn't great collectively, but the defense more than compensates for that deficiency. Those three aforementioned players have been shooting well, but as a team 35% certainly isn't off the charts. But this Michigan team is very, very good. After a few games I absolutely think they're a Final Four Team/Championship caliber team.

But again, this is simply a projection. I could be way, way off. I probably am. I'll stand by my picks, nonetheless.

I was way off, but as I mentioned several times, projecting success is incredibly hard when turnover is high, you don't know how good the recruits are, and you don't know how the returning players will progress. I was wrong. It was simply an educated guess based on the available data that I had.

The elite defense was predictable based on who Michigan returned. I tried to tell you that the defense would be good enough to make up for offensive weak spots enough to be a top 25 team. The predictable defense gave Michigan a solid floor IMO with the ceiling being dependent on offensive development.

 

[WeAreDePaul]

Hail is a massive homer, but he ended up being 100% right on this one. Michigan looks like a F4 favorite and maybe even better than last year.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

Hail is a massive homer, but he ended up being 100% right on this one. Michigan looks like a F4 favorite and maybe even better than last year.

Better than even I thought they’d be, especially early.

 

[WeAreDePaul]

Better than even I thought they’d be, especially early.

I agree, you were thinking this is a top 15 team. Turns out they are more like a top 5 team. And very fun to watch too. really like the step Poole has made this year.

 

[hailtoyourvictor]

I agree, you were thinking this is a top 15 team. Turns out they are more like a top 5 team. And very fun to watch too. really like the step Poole has made this year.

I should start believing in Michigan more

 

[CO_hawk]

NO Iowa?

 

[dukedevilz]

These were preseason projections. So yes, probably wrong on that one too. I considered them, as I believe they have just about everyone back from last year. But I usually balk on picking sub .500 teams from the prior season, just because I normally feel that the ceiling is fairly low. I did include a few sub .500 teams - St.John's, Minnesota, Vanderbilt, and Iowa State