Preseason SEC outlook/predictions

#26
#26
Rickster said:
One thing I will be watching closely will be how Miss St does without Vic. The talent did not bolt (yet) so will the team continue to improve at the same rate as when Vic was there or do they stagnate putting in a new offense and defense.
Click to expand...
If the players stay, I think they will continue to do well. They are a really talented team and deep at all positions. Unless Nikki follows Holly's footsteps, I think that MSST will be able to sustain their momentum.
 
#27
#27
I don’t see Missouri being better than Lady Vols. I think we’re going to be more competitive than people give us credit for at this point. Here is the 2020-2021 SEC schedule:

Home: Arkansas, Auburn, Florida, Ole Miss and South Carolina. Away: Alabama, LSU, Mississippi State, Missouri and Texas A&M. Home and Away: (play twice). Vanderbilt, Georgia and Kentucky.

We can win the home games....maybe not SC. Away we’ll beat AL and LSU.

I think we’ll beat Vandy and Georgia home and away. We’ll split KY as we win at home probably lose on the road.

Then we have UCan’t at home, and I think we upset. Anyone hear about the rest of the schedule?
 
  • Like
Reactions: VolBall09 and krichunaka
#32
#32
1reVOLver said:
True.

asgr rank 185 of 350 ranked

Prospects nation rank 144
position rank 33
4 star

Blue Star rank 86

ESPN Hoopgurlz 3 star
position rank 29
Click to expand...
Prospect Nation is a little weird with their stars.

1-30 are all 5 star
31-150 are all 4 star.
 
#34
#34
Our team totally depends on the improvement of Horston and Key and better play off the bench. Last season we were weak at the four position and point guard as far as scoring efficiency. Green appears to be a huge upgrade to the four position and we will need Horston to be a far better player than she was as a freshman. The same goes for Key. If all this happens were definitely in the running for a top four finish in the league. The 70.20 ppg we scored needs to go to about 77 and the free throw percentage has to go over 70 percent as a team. The field goal percentage needs to be above 45 percent as a team. A lot of question marks certainly and we'll get a lot of answers because if were not getting player development were in a lot of trouble going forward. Our starting five appears to be Key, Green, Davis, Burrell, and Horston. If Horston and Key can do their part in that group looks like a very efficient starting five that could cause a lot of defensive problems for any team. Then you hope that you can bring on the bench without losing very much on the floor. Last season when they came in things went badly. Were certainly hoping even though very young that the bench can give us more steady play than last season. Depending on development I see us in a group of SEC teams ranked 3 to 8 and we could finish as low as eighth and as high as three all depends on how players have improved both their basketball skills and their mental approach to the game. Last season we consistently got beat in shot attempts per game in the SEC because we lost the turnover battle. In some game we had a shot deficit of close to 20 attempts and that is why we lost more than any other reason several key games. If someone is getting 20 more shot attempts in a game your chance of winning goes way way down. I think that will be the largest factor of our success or failure. We'll either have to lower our turnovers and force the opponent into more turnovers. We can't give up 14 steals while we only get three. Being able to create more shot attempts than the opponent is how you win last year we were going in the opposite direction so this is a key stat we'll have to turn around. Being able to make free throws at a high percentage is huge as well. I can think of three games we lost in SEC play because of poor free throw shooting. So much we need to be improved on hopefully it will all come together.
 
  • Like
Reactions: Only1COJ, VOLSanon, FabSmokyVol and 1 other person
#36
#36
Coach Jumper said:
On this we can agree
Stars are for galaxies
Click to expand...
I don't mind attributing star ratings and having some quantitative rating of a player based on evaluations. But looking at Hoopgurlz...the top 21 are given a "98" rating and the top 53 are 5-star players. All the top 100 players (and possibly more) are at least a 4-star and "91" rating.

This would be a more meaningful evaluation if they weren't afraid to give some more 3-star designations and <90 scores.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1reVOLver and Rickster
#37
#37
Amb3096 said:
I don't mind attributing star ratings and having some quantitative rating of a player based on evaluations. But looking at Hoopgurlz...the top 21 are given a "98" rating and the top 53 are 5-star players. All the top 100 players (and possibly more) are at least a 4-star and "91" rating.

This would be a more meaningful evaluation if they weren't afraid to give some more 3-star designations and <90 scores.
Click to expand...

There are 12 WNBA teams
12 - 5 stars
24 - 4 stars
48 - 3 stars
96 - 2 stars
192 - 1 star

Do this, then, you make them work for their rank.
Right now, I equate the present star system with "participation trophies"
 
  • Like
Reactions: Only1COJ
#38
#38
Coach Jumper said:
There are 12 WNBA teams
12 - 5 stars
24 - 4 stars
48 - 3 stars
96 - 2 stars
192 - 1 star

Do this, then, you make them work for their rank.
Right now, I equate the present star system with "participation trophies"
Click to expand...
Are you suggesting that each team rank one of their players a 5 star, 2 players a 4 star, 4 players a 3 star...
Or, linking college players star ratings to the amount of WNBA teams ?
On edit
 
#39
#39
Coach Jumper said:
There are 12 WNBA teams
12 - 5 stars
24 - 4 stars
48 - 3 stars
96 - 2 stars
192 - 1 star

Do this, then, you make them work for their rank.
Right now, I equate the present star system with "participation trophies"
Click to expand...
I didn't want to say it, but yeah...participation trophy is about right. One would think that it would be a bell curve distribution, with the overwhelming majority of players listed as 3 stars. Honestly, once you get below 3 stars, it's probably not even worth an eval.
 
#41
#41
Amb3096 said:
I didn't want to say it, but yeah...participation trophy is about right. One would think that it would be a bell curve distribution, with the overwhelming majority of players listed as 3 stars. Honestly, once you get below 3 stars, it's probably not even worth an eval.
Click to expand...

exactly...
There are presently 12 WNBA teams,
thus 12 “elite of the elite” positions (5 star ratings)

Then go exponentially to the other star classifications
24 frour stars
48 three stars
etc
Forget the 4.5 etc and make the players 9and the rankers) earn their spots.

Right now HoopGurlz top 100 has
53 5-stars
46 4-stars
1+ 3-stars

In my system it would be
12-5 stars
24-4 stars
48-3 stars
16+ 2 stars
This holds the raters more accountable.
As it is by having so many 5/4 stars they are both improving their odds to get the right ones and disproving their assessments by how many fail to hold their rankings once out of HS
 
#43
#43
Coach Jumper said:
As it is by having so many 5/4 stars they are both improving their odds to get the right ones and disproving their assessments by how many fail to hold their rankings once out of HS
Click to expand...

I'd even say that by definition, a 4 star player shouldn't be sitting at the end of the bench in warmups.

5-star - ready to start for a top 25 team
4-star - starter for the rest of the good teams or a dependable rotation player for the top teams
3-star - project. Could see minutes in most games, but will have limited minutes against the elite teams until they get more experienced.
2-star - project. Mostly a practice player. Could get into games against lesser competition as they grow in skills (Kamara Harris would be perfect example of this).
 
  • Like
Reactions: Rickster and 1reVOLver
#46
#46
Amb3096 said:
I'd even say that by definition, a 4 star player shouldn't be sitting at the end of the bench in warmups.

5-star - ready to start for a top 25 team
4-star - starter for the rest of the good teams or a dependable rotation player for the top teams
3-star - project. Could see minutes in most games, but will have limited minutes against the elite teams until they get more experienced.
2-star - project. Mostly a practice player. Could get into games against lesser competition as they grow in skills (Kamara Harris would be perfect example of this).
Click to expand...
I think we're both on the same track
 
  • Like
Reactions: stlvolsfan
#47
#47
Coach Jumper said:
You're right, when I think of the newbies, I often forget that Marta is a true freshman...It's the overseas thing that escapes me.

I see all 3 our freshmen and our grad transfer as being immediately beneficial
Click to expand...
Just kidding with ya!

Yes, all four will be beneficial in one way or another. Looks like a deep roster.
 
  • Like
Reactions: stlvolsfan and Coach Jumper
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.

VN Store



Back
Top