As a reminder, last week (Jan. 12) we had this gem:
With four teams in the RPI's top 30, the Atlantic 10 has become the nation's most formidable "mid-major" conference.
From this past Saturday’s Big O we get this bit of wisdom:
The ACC's RPI will remain high because it doesn't have any abysmal teams like other power conferences do.Link: Charlotte.com
What about the blurb about I would take ACC point guards over any other conference point guards.
[QUOTE=run49er;286950]
From this past Saturday’s Big O we get this bit of wisdom:
[QUOTE]The ACC’s RPI will remain high because it doesn’t have any abysmal teams like other power conferences do.
[/QUOTE][/QUOTE]
What? The ACC has two very good teams and that’s it. The rest of the league is no where as good as years past.
UNC
Duke
Clemson
and the rest…all will hover between 60 and 100 in the RPI.
[QUOTE=Charlotte2002;286957]UNC
Duke
Clemson
and the rest…all will hover between 60 and 100 in the RPI.[/QUOTE]
Not sold on Clemson yet.
I’m a ken that would take 49ers over the acc. Lol.
So, in RPI terms, I’d say below 150 is abysmal.
SEC: Kentucky 179, LSU 190.
Big 12: Nebraska 163
Big East: St. John’s 151, Rutgers 209
Pac 10: Oregon State 236
Big 10: Iowa 173, Michigan 177, Northwestern 202.
Lowest in ACC: 84
From an RPI perspective, ACC teams less likely than other power conferences to take an RPI hit from a conference opponent. Not sure how what Ken said is wrong, to be honest. It’s a statement of fact.
That is why I put Clemson in the top 3. Obviously UNC and Duke are the only 2 that will likely compete for a Final Four, but Clemson is most likely better than the remaining teams in the ACC.
If you think about it though, what conferences have 3 teams that could compete for a final 4 spot.
ACC - UNC, Duke
A-10 - Xavier, Dayton (both pushing it since Xavier sucks on the road and Dayton depends maybe too much on a freshman big man that is hurt)
Big East - Georgetown, Pitt (if Fields comes back), Marquette (but they’ve looked like crap lately)
Big 10 - Indiana, Michigan State
Big 12 - Kansas, Texas, Texas A&M
C-USA - Memphis
Horizon - Butler
Pac-10 - UCLA, Washington St.
SEC - Tennessee
IMO, Memphis, Kansas & UNC are above the rest, throw in UCLA, although slightly below the other 3, but has been a Final Four fixture since Howland. March Madness is going to be INSANE this year.
From an RPI perspective, ACC teams less likely than other power conferences to take an RPI hit from a conference opponent. Not sure how what Ken said is wrong, to be honest. It's a statement of fact.
Mike, I think you missed the point and correct me if I’m wrong Run. You have to think about the comments from a 49er perspective, not ACC. In one line he says that the A10 has 4 teams in the top 30 RPI, but are a “mid-major” conference because the other teams in the conference are “abysmal”. But then a few days later he mentions other conferences has having “abysmal” teams, yet they are considered as a “power” conference.
It’s a good example that the term “mid-major” doesn’t accomplish anything other than let the “power” conferences feel superior.
I hate those labels, for exactly that reason. They accomplish nothing other than irritating people.
There’s nothing wrong with Ken’s logic, though, if you take the comments on their face.
A10 has six teams at 146 or lower in the RPI. Can’t tell me that doesn’t hurt. Many of those teams you guys are ready to boot from the face of the planet, not to mention the conference.
I hate those labels, for exactly that reason. They accomplish nothing other than irritating people.There’s nothing wrong with Ken’s logic, though, if you take the comments on their face.
A10 has six teams at 146 or lower in the RPI. Can’t tell me that doesn’t hurt. Many of those teams you guys are ready to boot from the face of the planet, not to mention the conference.
I agree those teams suck. But where do you draw the line? With your’s or Ken’s logic, then every league is a “mid-major” other than the ACC because they have the least “abysmal” teams.
What about the blurb about I would take ACC point guards over any other conference point guards.
funny thing is the best PG in the country plays in the Big 12…man by the name of DJ Augustin
[QUOTE=danecookistheman;287091]funny thing is the best PG in the country plays in the Big 12…man by the name of DJ Augustin[/QUOTE]
I would take Eric Gordon (IU), Darren Collison (UCLA), Drew Nietzel (MSU), Drew Lavender (XU), as well as Augustin as you mentioned over ANY point guard in the ACC. Please, who does the ACC have? Ty Lawson? Greg Paulus? Tyreece Rice? What a joke of a comment.
[QUOTE=danecookistheman;287091]funny thing is the best PG in the country plays in the Big 12…man by the name of DJ Augustin[/QUOTE]
Top PGs off of the top of my head…
DJ Augustin
Derrick Rose
Drew Neitzel
Ty Lawson
Darren Collison
Derrick Lowe
Dominic James
Vasquez (MD)
Fields (Pitt)
the best PG of the group, Ronald Steele is out for the season.
IMO Lawson is even a bit overrated, he is amazingly quick, but he is out of control often and isn’t a great shooter. Paulus has improved his shooting, but he is a hot head and out of controloften as well, but I don’t trust him vs. a tall, good, atheltic PG like Manyor of VCU.
Top PGs off of the top of my head....DJ Augustin
Derrick Rose
Drew Neitzel
Ty Lawson
Darren Collison
Derrick Lowe
Dominic James
Vasquez (MD)
Fields (Pitt)the best PG of the group, Ronald Steele is out for the season.
IMO Lawson is even a bit overrated, he is amazingly quick, but he is out of control often and isn’t a great shooter. Paulus has improved his shooting, but he is a hot head and out of controloften as well, but I don’t trust him vs. a tall, good, atheltic PG like Manyor of VCU.
Maynor is 6’2", Paulus is 6’1"… doubt that hurts Paulus… the speed definitely does, but his foot injury last year hurt him, b/c he is night and day different this season. Although he still doesn’t belong with the group you mentioned… Vasquez doesn’t quite yet for me, too inconsistent and out of control at times, but he’s only a sophmore, and at other times can be damn amazing.
I would take Eric Gordon (IU), Darren Collison (UCLA), Drew Nietzel (MSU), Drew Lavender (XU), as well as Augustin as you mentioned over ANY point guard in the ACC. Please, who does the ACC have? Ty Lawson? Greg Paulus? Tyreece Rice? What a joke of a comment.
Top PGs off of the top of my head....DJ Augustin
Derrick Rose
Drew Neitzel
Ty Lawson
Darren Collison
Derrick Lowe
Dominic James
Vasquez (MD)
Fields (Pitt)the best PG of the group, Ronald Steele is out for the season.
IMO Lawson is even a bit overrated, he is amazingly quick, but he is out of control often and isn’t a great shooter. Paulus has improved his shooting, but he is a hot head and out of controloften as well, but I don’t trust him vs. a tall, good, atheltic PG like Manyor of VCU.
You guys are forgetting Sherron Collins who might be the most important piece to the Jayhawk team this year. Hell, I would even take Russell Robinson over anybody the ACC has (except Lawson).
The Big 12 has really good pg play with Augustin, Stefhon Hannah at Mizzu, Collins at KU
[QUOTE=casstommy;287108]You guys are forgetting Sherron Collins who might be the most important piece to the Jayhawk team this year. Hell, I would even take Russell Robinson over anybody the ACC has (except Lawson).
The Big 12 has really good pg play with Augustin, Stefhon Hannah at Mizzu, Collins at KU[/QUOTE]
I was just going on guys I have seen play this season, I have not seen any Big 12 other than Texas.
I forogt Lavender in my list somehow…
Also on Manyor, he is long and I doubt Paulus is even close to his listed 6’1" or he would have played college football if he was as good as he was supposed to be at footbal (more pro potential).
I just want to put my 2 cents in on what I think “abysmal” is. 150 just sounds way too high to me. There are now 341 teams in D1 basketball. Are you saying there are almost 200 teams of absolutely worthless basketball down there? I’m not saying that 150+ is good at all, but abysmal is a really powerful word. I dunno… just doesn’t feel right.
I will say that I’m not really upset with Richmond, SLU, or Fordham in that regard, but I suppose my standards could be off. We in the A10 have to worry about our teams going over 300 so who knows.
At 150, you have no shot of making either the NCAAs as an at-large or the NIT. That’ll get you fired in a hurry if you’re a coach. Sounds pretty abysmal to me. I’d say any RPI outside the top 150 means you’re not helping your conference get where it wants to go, no matter what conference you’re talking about.
At 150, you have no shot of making either the NCAAs as an at-large or the NIT. That'll get you fired in a hurry if you're a coach. Sounds pretty abysmal to me. I'd say any RPI outside the top 150 means you're not helping your conference get where it wants to go, no matter what conference you're talking about.
I agree, especially when you consider that some of these teams can have big nights where they play really well against a conference opponent, like us, and hurt our rpi big time.