The College Sports Madness Top 144

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 5 years ago

eli#10 wrote:Who is the 6th man phenom? If he is a phenom I would think he would be starting.

Fatts.

Dowtin. Langevine. Fatts.

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 5 years ago

My BAD. I thought the reference was to Umass which caused the confusion to me.

rhodylaw · Unread post by **rhodylaw** » 5 years ago

RF1 wrote:Who then are the top 5 in the A-10 to be named? I myself was a bit surprised to see Umass rated so high at #88 and 6th in the A-10. Had not expected that.

A10 should be strong again this year after a couple years of struggling.

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 5 years ago

Eh, not sure I agree with that. More depth in the middle, but no definite NCAA teams like us/Bonnies last year, or Dayton/URI/VCU year before...I think next season brings a lot more parity from 1-10...but no clear cut favorites. The season following could be a special year for the league. 2019-20.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

bigappleram wrote:Eh, not sure I agree with that. More depth in the middle, but no definite NCAA teams like us/Bonnies last year, or Dayton/URI/VCU year before...I think next season brings a lot more parity from 1-10...but no clear cut favorites. The season following could be a special year for the league. 2019-20.

I am with you as well. I don't see a particularly strong A-10. Not having a team that came into the season with high expectations and being ranked will hurt the league for at large teams. If URI did not have that ranking last year and the Bonnies had not beaten the Rams at Olean, SBU would not have gotten an at large. As it is, they were one of the last four in.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 5 years ago

The Bonnies were last 4 in, and they would have still been that even if Davidson hadn't stolen a bid.

That's how much the committee thought of the A10 last season.

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 5 years ago

Agree also going into the league this year seems like no surefire NCAA teams last year we were

slytotherafters · Unread post by **slytotherafters** » 5 years ago

URI in at #78.

Thoughts?

Moto · Unread post by **Moto** » 5 years ago

Looks like Rhody's #78.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16524

bigappleram · Unread post by **bigappleram** » 5 years ago

Right about what I expected. Fair assessment. Variables that will either have us play better or worse than expected:

-Can Cyril stay out of foul trouble, continue to improve offensively, and be a consistent double-double threat
-Can Fatts convert from a spark plug to alpha
-Can Jeff convert from facilitator to instigator and attacker
-Will any of the holdover bigs contribute (Tertsea, Layssard, Preston)
-What type of year will Thompson have
-Which FR, if any, will make a significant impact

rhodyruckus · Unread post by **rhodyruckus** » 5 years ago

One other variable: will Cox start out a competent game coach or will it take some time and reps. During Hurley's first few years, we would complain quite a bit about his end of game and out-of-bounds-after-timeout play calls. However, during the NCAA runs the past few years their plays became quite good (of course the players running them didn't lack for execution either).

Da_Process_Survivor · Unread post by **Da_Process_Survivor** » 5 years ago

Moto wrote:Looks like Rhody's #78.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16524

so a NCAA bubble team...cant disagree with the placement

CHICO 78 · Unread post by **CHICO 78** » 5 years ago

Right about what I expected. Fair assessment. Variables that will either have us play better or worse than expected:

-Can Cyril stay out of foul trouble, continue to improve offensively, and be a consistent double-double threat
-Can Fatts convert from a spark plug to alpha
-Can Jeff convert from facilitator to instigator and attacker
-Will any of the holdover bigs contribute (Tertsea, Layssard, Preston)
-What type of year will Thompson have
-Which FR, if any, will make a significant impact

Can't disagree with #78 and I think the Big's success will be critical to how far this team goes.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 5 years ago

The thing that's different about this rebuild is the fact that everyone on the team is a winner.
The returning players only know what it's like to go to the dance. They know how to win. All the freshman come from winning programs and have only really seen us be winners. I think we will be playing with a confidence that most rebuilding teams don't have.
I don't think Fatts, Jeff, Christion or Cyril will have much of a problem in leadership roles.
Those guys will be good. Just gotta see how well our freshman can contribute.

reef · Unread post by **reef** » 5 years ago

Think we should be about 20 spots higher. They say only JH will be impact frosh but we know at least 3 of our frosh contribute significantly

SmartyBarrett · Unread post by **SmartyBarrett** » 5 years ago

This doesn't mean much of anything, but for what it's worth, Oakland was #78 last season.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/15058

Davidson was #84 a year ago.

Rhody_NYCT · Unread post by **Rhody_NYCT** » 5 years ago

This Top 144 is fun off-season stuff, but I think we are being underrated. Not sure these people really understand how much Cyril meant to the team the last few years...and if healthy, he would have been that much better. And #1 recruiting class in A10. Sorry but #78 and #5 in A10 is weak. We should be no lower than #60. Hope this #78 ranking gives the guys a little extra motivation. We will finish top 3 in A10 with a chance to win it. Let's go Rhody!

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 5 years ago

I assume Davidson will come in well ahead of us in this top-144 thing, and I've seen some of our fans post here to the effect that they are clearly one of the A-10 teams that is better than URI this coming year. I said it in another thread, but I just don't see it. Rather than re-write my explanation from that other thread, I'll just re-post that below. Long story short, I agree with NYCT that URI is being undervalued coming into the year. Putting pride aside, I think that is actually good for us. Nothing that matters at the end of the year will be determined by where we were slotted in a clickbait media list in August, but I'm not sure this team has the experience to carry the kind of bulls eye on its back that last year's team had to carry from Day 1.

TruePoint wrote:I respect the hell out of Kellan Grady and I like him to be A10 POY in ‘18-19. But in my opinion the Davidson love has gone way too far this offseason. It is not clear to me at all that their returning core of Grady/Gudmundsson/Pritchett is better than Dowtin/Russell/Langevine. Statistically, on a 100 minute basis, the URI trio averaged 32.9/15.4/10.8 and the Davidson trio averaged 38.6/11.9/10.7. They return a touch more scoring, we return a touch more rebounding. Keep in mind, though, that while adjusting these stats to reflect 100 minute averages reduces somewhat the degree to which Davidson relied on their 3 guys more than URI (Davidson’s trio used 96 minutes per game compared to URI’s trio using 69 minutes per game), the scoring numbers are probably slanted a bit towards Davidson’s guys just because how much more they were relied on and how many more shots they took even on a per minute basis than URI’s guys.

I think what is clear is that what will be coming in around our core is better than what will be coming in around theirs. I’m a huge fan of McKillop and his system and his ability to get more out of his roster than what seems reasonable on paper year in and year out, and I recognize that our coaching situation is, objectively, a bit of an unknown. But it is truly wild to me that nearly everyone is picking Davidson as one of the few teams with a shot to win the league and URI hasn’t really been in the conversation as a true contender at all. I don’t see it that way.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 5 years ago

TruePoint wrote:I assume Davidson will come in well ahead of us in this top-144 thing, and I've seen some of our fans post here to the effect that they are clearly one of the A-10 teams that is better than URI this coming year. I said it in another thread, but I just don't see it. Rather than re-write my explanation from that other thread, I'll just re-post that below. Long story short, I agree with NYCT that URI is being undervalued coming into the year. Putting pride aside, I think that is actually good for us. Nothing that matters at the end of the year will be determined by where we were slotted in a clickbait media list in August, but I'm not sure this team has the experience to carry the kind of bulls eye on its back that last year's team had to carry from Day 1.

TruePoint wrote:I respect the hell out of Kellan Grady and I like him to be A10 POY in ‘18-19. But in my opinion the Davidson love has gone way too far this offseason. It is not clear to me at all that their returning core of Grady/Gudmundsson/Pritchett is better than Dowtin/Russell/Langevine. Statistically, on a 100 minute basis, the URI trio averaged 32.9/15.4/10.8 and the Davidson trio averaged 38.6/11.9/10.7. They return a touch more scoring, we return a touch more rebounding. Keep in mind, though, that while adjusting these stats to reflect 100 minute averages reduces somewhat the degree to which Davidson relied on their 3 guys more than URI (Davidson’s trio used 96 minutes per game compared to URI’s trio using 69 minutes per game), the scoring numbers are probably slanted a bit towards Davidson’s guys just because how much more they were relied on and how many more shots they took even on a per minute basis than URI’s guys.

I think what is clear is that what will be coming in around our core is better than what will be coming in around theirs. I’m a huge fan of McKillop and his system and his ability to get more out of his roster than what seems reasonable on paper year in and year out, and I recognize that our coaching situation is, objectively, a bit of an unknown. But it is truly wild to me that nearly everyone is picking Davidson as one of the few teams with a shot to win the league and URI hasn’t really been in the conversation as a true contender at all. I don’t see it that way.

This is my opinion. All of it. I also think our schedule sets up well.

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 5 years ago

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

Rhody83 wrote:

Given how college basketball typically works, I can't help but fear that this new system is being put in place to further the benefit of the power conference teams. With nearly every move the NCAA takes, the non power schools seem to always get screwed.

rhodysurf · Unread post by **rhodysurf** » 5 years ago

RF1 wrote:
Rhody83 wrote:

Given how college basketball typically works, I can't help but fear that this new system is being put in place to further the benefit of the power conference teams. With nearly every move the NCAA takes, the non power schools seem to always get screwed.

Just replacing one flawed system with another

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 5 years ago

Bill Coen's Northeastern team comes in at #69. The Huskies had a great season last year, but it was marred by three losses to the eventual CAA NCAA entrant, College of Charleston. The expectation is Northeastern will turn that around and make the NCAA as they contend for second spot among New England's best D-1 teams.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

Obadiah wrote: ↑5 years ago Bill Coen's Northeastern team comes in at #69. The Huskies had a great season last year, but it was marred by three losses to the eventual CAA NCAA entrant, College of Charleston. The expectation is Northeastern will turn that around and make the NCAA as they contend for second spot among New England's best D-1 teams.

Northeastern looked headed to the tournament last year in the CAA Championship Game as it had a big early lead over Charleston. Cougars however, with the help of a very friendly crowd in nearby N Charleston rallied for the win. CAA Tournament will once again be on the same court before it moves to SW Washington DC to the WNBA Mystics new home arena (4,200 capacity) for 2020-2023. Huskies will have an easier route to the tourney if they do not have to face the Cougars again this season.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 5 years ago

Also noteworthy about Northeastern is that they play a tougher OOC schedule than URI. Their worst opponent is Boston U. whose last season RPI was 212.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

St Joe's comes in at #63:
http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16567

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 5 years ago

RF1 wrote: ↑5 years ago St Joe's comes in at #63:
http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16567

Eff St. Joes

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 5 years ago

PC comes in at #62 and a prediction of NIT post season.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 5 years ago

George Mason comes in at #61, another predicted NIT invitee.

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 5 years ago

Obadiah wrote: ↑5 years ago PC comes in at #62 and a prediction of NIT post season.

Wow. Will be interesting to see rj’s response to this. Friartown would flip out with an NIT post season.

RhodyKyle · Unread post by **RhodyKyle** » 5 years ago

Let's not take shot at RJ. The guy has been a valuable contributor to this forum for a while and isn't your typical PC fan. He is much more level-headed.

Obadiah · Unread post by **Obadiah** » 5 years ago

BC comes in at #60 which means according to this sports website, BC will be the best team in New England. Lots of controversy on that one!!

FWIW, this a summary of their ranking of the top NE teams:

#60 BC
#62 PC
#69 Northeastern
#78 URI
#88 UMass
#94 UConn
#105 Harvard

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

Obadiah wrote: ↑5 years ago BC comes in at #60 which means according to this sports website, BC will be the best team in New England. Lots of controversy on that one!!

FWIW, this a summary of their ranking of the top NE teams:

#60 BC
#62 PC
#69 Northeastern
#78 URI
#88 UMass
#94 UConn
#105 Harvard

Might as well add his other picks from New England:

#106 Vermont
#134 Hartford

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

Davidson comes in at #57. 2nd place in the A-10. Projected for the NIT. This means that College Sports Madness expects just one A-10 team (St Louis) to make the NCAA Tournament field.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16581

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 5 years ago

The balanced A10 needs to perform better OOC this year. Besting up on one another during conference play isn’t going to do anything for NCAA bid chances. We need some teams to win games against Top 25 and P5 opponents.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 5 years ago

Last year there was a dearth of quality wins. We were pretty alone up at the top most of the year.

It would be nice if VCU and Dayton can get back on track.
We know they can be top tier basketball programs and itll only help us if we can replicate their success.

Confident VCU will be back in no time, but Dayton is in a bit of a pickle with Anthony Grant.

josephski · Unread post by **josephski** » 5 years ago

PeterRamTime wrote: ↑5 years ago Last year there was a dearth of quality wins. We were pretty alone up at the top most of the year.

It would be nice if VCU and Dayton can get back on track.
We know they can be top tier basketball programs and itll only help us if we can replicate their success.

Confident VCU will be back in no time, but Dayton is in a bit of a pickle with Anthony Grant.

I fear Dayton lost all their momentum with the Grant hire. Prior to 2014 Dayton had only made the tournament 4 times in the past 20 years. Miller came in and after his first two seasons got Dayton to 4 straight NCAA tournaments. With Grant my guess is they're back on track to only making the occasional tournament appearance as opposed to being a top A10 team year after year.

PeterRamTime · Unread post by **PeterRamTime** » 5 years ago

josephski wrote: ↑5 years ago
PeterRamTime wrote: ↑5 years ago Last year there was a dearth of quality wins. We were pretty alone up at the top most of the year.

It would be nice if VCU and Dayton can get back on track.
We know they can be top tier basketball programs and itll only help us if we can replicate their success.

Confident VCU will be back in no time, but Dayton is in a bit of a pickle with Anthony Grant.
I fear Dayton lost all their momentum with the Grant hire. Prior to 2014 Dayton had only made the tournament 4 times in the past 20 years. Miller came in and after his first two seasons got Dayton to 4 straight NCAA tournaments. With Grant my guess is they're back on track to only making the occasional tournament appearance as opposed to being a top A10 team year after year.

Archie is as good a coach as any.
Grant is probably the next Brian Gregory.
There may be another Archie after Grant though.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 5 years ago

Rhody83 wrote: ↑5 years ago
Obadiah wrote: ↑5 years ago PC comes in at #62 and a prediction of NIT post season.
Wow. Will be interesting to see rj’s response to this. Friartown would flip out with an NIT post season.

It depends how the season plays out -- There are still a lot of red flags ... There are 5 upperclassmen on the roster. Only 1 of them you can surefire lock into a key role (Diallo). I think Isaiah Jackson and Maliek White will be forced into key roles but they will require significant development to fill those roles adequately. Then you have Kalif Young whose shown a few flashes and Emmitt Holt who has lost a ton of weight and no one knows what he can bring. The athleticism and potential of the roster mostly rides on the backs of Diallo and the underclassmen (MAL, Watson, Reeves, Duke). MAL will be the starting PG after playing below average at the position last year. Reeves and Dukes, while talented, are still only freshmen. Watson is the only one I feel confident about entering the season.

Now, I think NIT is the floor and there is definitely a Top 25 upside, but hopefully the strong OOC schedule can help shake the rust so the team is ready to play in January.

Rhody83 · Unread post by **Rhody83** » 5 years ago

That seems like a wide range rj - Top 25 to NIT. I don’t see them in the Top 25 even at their best.

rjsuperfly66 · Unread post by **rjsuperfly66** » 5 years ago

It's a ceiling, I'm not saying it would happen, but I'll tell you why I think it could happen.

1) I think Diallo can be a legitimate star. If he has improved his perimeter shooting, he's a 3 zone scorer. He was already good attacking the basket, and he has a rare but solid mid-range game. The addition of even a semi-consistent 3 point shot with force defenses to play him differently.

2) 2 years ago, Emmitt Holt averaged 12.5 points and 5 rebounds. How close can he come to giving you that? This frontcourt has the potential to be the deepest frontcourt of the Cooley era. But, that relies on Holt's health, and the development of Watson and Young. Cooley has been high on Young's improvements, and Watson showed some major flashes down the stretch of his freshman season.

3) I like Maliek White's game, and last year I thought he season was largely derailed by a significant knee injury in December. Even then, he showed some flashes of "spark." I'm hand-picking these games, but in his last 4 games in February, he averaged almost 10 ppg. Then he had segments of games where he did nothing. Hopefully a healthy summer of development will allow him to come off the bench and be that guard-scorer.

4) I would say most of the same things about Isaiah Jackson, although IJ was more impactful last season. But does his game have the ability to jump up one other level in his 5th season?

5) MAL - He sucked last year. If he can be an average BE PG, that should be good enough given the depth at the guard position. It's a major unknown. People forecast based off of last season, without allowing room for much improvement. If MAL cleaned up his game, that's a major addition.

6) Freshman - Can they contribute consistently? Who can contribute? How much can they contribute? 1 or 2 solid freshman contributions can add depth and make a big difference.

So dumbing it down:

[ ] Alpha Diallo = Star (15+ ppg, 6+ rpg, 3+ apg)
[ ] Holt + Watson + Young = 20+ ppg 10+ rpg
[ ] Maliek White = 8+ ppg, 35%+ from 3
[ ] Isaiah Jackson = 11+ ppg, 35%+ from 3
[ ] MAL = 8+ ppg, 5+apg, <2.5tpg
[ ] Freshmen = 15+ ppg

In a perfect storm, where 5 out of these 6 things happen (and I think all are reasonable although I'm not saying all are going to happen), I could see the team be a Top 25 team. I don't think they are going to be Top 10 or Top 15, but I think they can be very competitive. Conversely, 2 things happen, and the team is bubble team again trying to string together a few wins in February to make the tournament.

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

St Louis comes in at #53, the highest for A-10 teams and the only team predicted to make the NCAA Tournament.

http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16586

RF1 · Unread post by **RF1** » 5 years ago

The last possible opponent that URI will face this season has made the list. West Virginia, which URI will face at Mohegan Sun, comes in at #15 overall and #3 in the Big 12.

Also worth noting that URI's strength of schedule could greatly improve based on the teams it plays at the Diamond Head Classic. TCU is #20, Colorado is #71, and UNLV is #127. The other four teams in the field, including URI's first game opponent Bucknell, did not make this top 144 list. Would be best for URI to somehow end up facing #20 TCU out in Hawaii. All the other tournament teams except for possibly Colorado may well hurt the schedule rather than help.

#15 West Virginia - Conference Rank: #3 Big 12 - http://www.collegesportsmadness.com/article/16706