2016-17 pre-season polls

Irish27 · Post by **Irish27** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:08 pm

It's never too early to look ahead to next year.

UofA is #12.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... -2016-2017" target="_blank

Irish27 · Post by **Irish27** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:09 pm

#13 here.
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-basketb ... -2016-2017" target="_blank

az91 · Post by **az91** » Tue Apr 05, 2016 5:54 pm

It is tough to say how good we will be until the recruiting picture clears up.

CatsbyAZ · Post by **CatsbyAZ** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:25 pm

az91 wrote:It is tough to say how good we will be until the recruiting picture clears up.

It's lazy polling. Take all the brand schools and pile them at the top until the season approaches. Kansas for one is in no way top 5 going into the season. Too much lost at the top and as for their depth, it hasn't even played. Should be called the Benefit-of-the-doubt poll.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:41 pm

When the dust settles from guys going pro and late commits, expect AZ to be ranked around 15th.

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:42 pm

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:52 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:When the dust settles from guys going pro and late commits, expect AZ to be ranked around 15th.

Nope, 3-8 max

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:55 pm

Jefe wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:When the dust settles from guys going pro and late commits, expect AZ to be ranked around 15th.
Nope, 3-8 max

With or without TF?

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 4:59 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:With or without TF?

I think we all assume he's ours at this point. He better be, Im a huge fan already

We're already 12th without him. How do we get worse bringing in 3-4 more guys?

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Wed Apr 06, 2016 5:14 pm

Jefe wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:With or without TF?
I think we all assume he's ours at this point. He better be, Im a huge fan already

We're already 12th without him. How do we get worse bringing in 3-4 more guys?

I think we're getting him too. 3 or 4 more guys? Do you mean in addition to our current class? Pretty sure it's TF, maybe a senior transfer, and we're done.

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:34 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:I think we're getting him too. 3 or 4 more guys? Do you mean in addition to our current class? Pretty sure it's TF, maybe a senior transfer, and we're done.

Watch Millers presser from yesterday. He said he is bringing in 6 or 7 for this upcoming season and 7 more for 2017.

SCCats · Post by **SCCats** » Thu Apr 07, 2016 1:42 pm

Beachcat97 wrote:When the dust settles from guys going pro and late commits, expect AZ to be ranked around 15th.

Bet time? I'll take 13 or better you take 14 or worse in some poll that comes out (we will decide which one) in August or sept area.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 6:57 pm

So TF is going to move us into the top 10. Probably ahead of OR.

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:13 pm

No way Arizona is outside top 10 now. Most people with functional brains will likely have us in the top 8

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Wed Apr 13, 2016 7:31 pm

rgdeuce wrote:No way Arizona is outside top 10 now. Most people with functional brains will likely have us in the top 8

Yep. This is one of the most loaded teams CSM has had. I'd feel better with a NJ or Zeus type on the roster, a senior leader, but you can't have it all. I love the look of this team.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Thu Sep 29, 2016 2:09 pm

http://www.cbssports.com/college-basket ... ng-begins/" target="_blank

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Sun Oct 02, 2016 10:03 pm

Except that Gary Parrish doesnt know shit about sports

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:35 am

Beachcat97 wrote:http://www.cbssports.com/college-basket ... ng-begins/

I like that teams have moved up and down in that ranking.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:36 am

Who should be higher/lower?

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 8:54 am

Beachcat97 wrote:Who should be higher/lower?

With zero games played? Rankings are semi-irrelevant and movig people up and down is super irrelevant. There's a little prestige bump, but that is it.

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:32 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:Who should be higher/lower?
With zero games played? Rankings are semi-irrelevant and movig people up and down is super irrelevant. There's a little prestige bump, but that is it.

Oh, come on. We have the rosters. There are lots of returning players on these top ranked teams. The games don't start for a while. There's no harm in discussing who should be ranked where to start the season. Why even have this thread?

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:41 am

Beachcat97 wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Beachcat97 wrote:Who should be higher/lower?
With zero games played? Rankings are semi-irrelevant and movig people up and down is super irrelevant. There's a little prestige bump, but that is it.
Oh, come on. We have the rosters. There are lots of returning players on these top ranked teams. The games don't start for a while. There's no harm in discussing who should be ranked where to start the season. Why even have this thread?

I think it's silly to have people moving up and down vs the last preseason poll.

The entire exercise in preseason polls, it's ok, if not hugely meaningful.

Chicat · Post by **Chicat** » Mon Oct 03, 2016 10:49 am

I like it that losing Spellman was significant enough to drop Nova in his poll, but inconsequential enough that it was worth only one spot. As if there is some demonstrable difference before anyone has played a game between #3 and #4. If Spellman was so good that him not playing means Nova will be worse, why not move them out of the top ten? Is Parish saying he was worth one win? Because that's about the difference between those slots. Which begs the question, if they're still a Final Four caliber team why move them down at all?

Hint: For the clicks!

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 9:16 am

13. Arizona

I am all-in on Arizona's talent. Sean Miller's team is young but boy will they be fun to watch grow. Let's cover the vets first. Kadeem Allen and Dusan Ristic are level-above glue guys. Allonzo Trier will be an All-American candidate, as he's likely to lead the team in scoring. Lauri Markkanen's going to be a top-five freshman of impact nationally. Kobi Simmons and Rawle Alkins are five-star frosh as well. If Ray Smith, who sat out last year with an ACL tear, is healthy enough to play 20 minutes per game, then what's not to like here? Gobs of potential.

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 11:49 am

Dusan is a level-above glue guy?

Or one of the best offensive low post players in the nation with tons of questions on the defensive end?

Goes without saying, if this same exact team had Duke or Kentucky written across their chest they are a top 5 team for most of these dudes.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 12:00 pm

rgdeuce wrote:Dusan is a level-above glue guy? Or one of the best offensive low post players in the nation with tons of questions on the defensive end?

Goes without saying, if this same exact team had Duke or Kentucky written across their chest they are a top 5 team for most of these dudes.

That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.

UofAlum05 · Post by **UofAlum05** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 12:55 pm

I actually don't mind not being rated in the Top 10 to start the year. Almost takes the pressure off a little bit. If Trier is all good (knock on wood) then I actually think this team is one of the better/more complete ones in the Miller era. Call me crazy.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 1:09 pm

I have higher hopes in some key areas vs last year.

Defense--I loved Gabe and Ryan, but they are both addition by subtraction in this area. Neither was going to give any more than competent D. The replacements aren't a sure thing yet, but we have a lot more potential. Ray is the long defender that Tollefsen wasn't. We'll miss Zeus, but that's it.

Ballhandling--I feel like I'm harping on Gabe, but he was never a strong option. Trier (fingers crossed) should be better than last year. Having Kadeem, Rawle and Ray on the wing is a far better ball security lineup than one involving Gabe and Tollefsen.

Offensive variety--Last year, we got very little penetration from our perimeter players. Tollefsen and Gabe weren't going to get to the rim. Kadeem and PJC struggled with getting a cushion because their jumpers were streaky. This year, Trier and Rawle are strong penetrators, KA and PJC should flash improved, more consistent J's and Ray has to be better than Tollefsen.

psiclist23 · Post by **psiclist23** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 3:10 pm

84Cat wrote:

13. Arizona

I am all-in on Arizona's talent. Sean Miller's team is young but boy will they be fun to watch grow. Let's cover the vets first. Kadeem Allen and Dusan Ristic are level-above glue guys. Allonzo Trier will be an All-American candidate, as he's likely to lead the team in scoring. Lauri Markkanen's going to be a top-five freshman of impact nationally. Kobi Simmons and Rawle Alkins are five-star frosh as well. If Ray Smith, who sat out last year with an ACL tear, is healthy enough to play 20 minutes per game, then what's not to like here? Gobs of potential.

I saw that, too. Here are the rankings of all our opponents. We should do well in the preseason.

College of Idaho
Chico State
Michigan State 8
Cal State Bakersfield 135
Sacred Heart 307
Northern Colorado 339
Santa Clara 117
Vanderbilt 61 / Butler 41
Texas Southern 193
Gonzaga 15
UC Irvine 106
Missouri 162
Grand Canyon 109
Texas A&M 28
New Mexico 68
California 22
Stanford 87
Utah 53
Colorado 38
ASU 81
USC 66
UCLA 11
Washington State 137
Washington State 44
Oregon State 77
Oregon 7

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 4:29 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.

#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.

prh · Post by **prh** » Wed Oct 19, 2016 5:16 pm

rgdeuce wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.
#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.

You must have missed UCLA in there...that seems dubious

Main Event · Post by **Main Event** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 8:44 am

11th in the first coaches poll. 1st game vs number 9 Michigan St

http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/ba ... ches-poll/" target="_blank

Beachcat97 · Post by **Beachcat97** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 10:06 am

Main Event wrote:11th in the first coaches poll. 1st game vs number 9 Michigan St

http://sportspolls.usatoday.com/ncaa/ba ... ches-poll/" target="_blank

And MSU will be without Schilling:

http://www.espn.com/mens-college-basket ... ee-surgery" target="_blank

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 10:17 am

rgdeuce wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.
#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.

I'm a big believer that preseason polls are for entertainment purposes. We have a lot of potential, but how we come together over the season vs how other teams come together...who knows.

We've been the top 5 team before. This year, I'm all about the end result. There are a few titans (Duke, Kentucky) this year, and then a lot of teams that could rise or fall.

gronk4heisman · Post by **gronk4heisman** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 11:37 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
rgdeuce wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.
#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.
I'm a big believer that preseason polls are for entertainment purposes. We have a lot of potential, but how we come together over the season vs how other teams come together...who knows.

We've been the top 5 team before. This year, I'm all about the end result. There are a few titans (Duke, Kentucky) this year, and then a lot of teams that could rise or fall.

Out of curiosity what make Kentucky a titan this year? They return Briscoe and Humphries and nothing else and I would argue their recruiting class is only slightly better than ours (Including Ray Smith for us, and trusting my eyes that Gabriel is about 50 spots to high). I think it is Duke, then a huge gap, then Oregon with a lot of who knows after that.

rgdeuce · Post by **rgdeuce** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 12:53 pm

prh wrote:
rgdeuce wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.
#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.
You must have missed UCLA in there...that seems dubious

My workday ended so I had to stop there, but UCLA and Kentucky (considering how high they were) as mentioned after my post were two more of the four teams I was thinking of specifically. UCLA was a below 500 team last year, so you gotta look at that and their generally underachieving coach and sloppiness of play while under him in with the big picture. I think they are going to be a tough team this year dont get me wrong.

I aint mad at the coaches poll. 11 is fair, yet I still think we are better than Michigan State and Wisky, but i'm not going to nitpick at a spot or two.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Thu Oct 20, 2016 2:55 pm

gronk4heisman wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote:
rgdeuce wrote:
Spaceman Spiff wrote: That article drops a ton of praise and then actually rates us in a way that more reasonably corresponds to where we stand (at least at this point). I think we have potential to rise, but #13 is not crazy. The level of praise for Dusan and Kadeem is a little optimistic for now.
#13 isn't crazy, but you look at several teams ahead of us and you scratch your head. Namely, Michigan State. Five of their top 6 scorers, all gone. Basically return one starter (a 9 ppg guy) and three rotation guys. You mean to tell me the #12, 20, 33 and 41 recruits are that much better than 21, 22, 28 and 31? Especially when the 21 is Lauri and he is lookin like a top 10 guy right now? We bring more back as well.
I'm a big believer that preseason polls are for entertainment purposes. We have a lot of potential, but how we come together over the season vs how other teams come together...who knows.

We've been the top 5 team before. This year, I'm all about the end result. There are a few titans (Duke, Kentucky) this year, and then a lot of teams that could rise or fall.
Out of curiosity what make Kentucky a titan this year? They return Briscoe and Humphries and nothing else and I would argue their recruiting class is only slightly better than ours (Including Ray Smith for us, and trusting my eyes that Gabriel is about 50 spots to high). I think it is Duke, then a huge gap, then Oregon with a lot of who knows after that.

I'm not sure I agree about recruiting. They are bringing in 5 five star players. I would add in Hawkins and Willis as competent vets.

Any of that 9 deep would have players who can handle major minutes. 6 total five star guys. Monk, Adebayo and Fox are all going to be major contributors from the get go. I can be sold that Gabriel and Killeya-Jones might take time, but they aren't immediately needed.

I'm not a huge Briscoe fan, but he is a solid guarantee at PG that we don't have. If we come together in the right way, we could rise to Kentucky's level, but we need that break.

Main Event · Post by **Main Event** » Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:16 am

97cats · Post by **97cats** » Mon Oct 31, 2016 9:41 am

the only pre-season poll that matters -- there is a direct correlation to being in the pre-season top ten of the AP and who reaches the Final Four.

good to see

KaibabKat · Post by **KaibabKat** » Mon Oct 31, 2016 10:53 am

Tidbits to ponder:

Only 7 of the past 32 NCAA Champions have not been ranked in the top 10 of the preseason AP poll.

18 of the past 32 NCAA Champions have been ranked in the top 4 of the preseason AP poll.

In 1997 Arizona won the NCAA Championship while being ranked 19th in the preseason AP poll. Only 4 teams that were ranked lower have ever won that tournament.

The median ranking, in the preseason AP poll, of the past 32 NCAA champions is 3.

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:40 pm

The Top 10 streak starts over again

Olsondogg · Post by **Olsondogg** » Mon Oct 31, 2016 3:49 pm

I can only assume from that top 10 poll that we will be playing Wisconsin in the Elite 8 game...

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:04 pm

#10 AP(nc)
#9 Coaches(+1)

Had we lost to MSU we would have dropped 8+ spots

scumdevils86 · Post by **scumdevils86** » Mon Nov 14, 2016 12:09 pm

ridiculous but yup.

YoDeFoe · Post by **YoDeFoe** » Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:44 pm

Jefe wrote:#10 AP(nc)
#9 Coaches(+1)

Had we lost to MSU we would have dropped 8+ spots

Deservedly so.

Spaceman Spiff · Post by **Spaceman Spiff** » Mon Nov 14, 2016 2:55 pm

Jefe wrote:#10 AP(nc)
#9 Coaches(+1)

Had we lost to MSU we would have dropped 8+ spots

At only 1-0, I wouldn't expect a ton of movement. We were the favorite vs MSU, and it looked like a #10 vs #12 game should look. Had we rolled them by 15-20, maybe we climb, but not when you are down 15 and win at the buzzer.

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Tue Nov 15, 2016 3:09 pm

Baylor is taking it to Oregon right now. Ducks are down 14 with 4 mins left

EVCat · Post by **EVCat** » Tue Nov 15, 2016 4:17 pm

Brooks is apparently very important to the Ducks.

Been waiting for Dorsey to come back to earth. Waited a full season. He struggled without Brooks, and Benson was awful. Boucher was limited with fouls, but still...they got run almost wire to wire.

84Cat · Post by **84Cat** » Mon Nov 21, 2016 10:41 am

Not preseason anymore

Jefe · Post by **Jefe** » Mon Dec 05, 2016 4:22 pm

At least one streak is still alive

Login • Register