Charlie Creme preseason rankings

[Phil]

One more thing I am sure sitting out makes her more ready to play.

Really?

If coaches beleived this, they'd be sitting players out of games during the regular season, and not because of injury. I don't see that happening.

Do you think Tuck is less ready to play, having served as the captain of the U19 team and led her team to the gold medal?

(hey, your a fine visitor, and I'm just having fun with words, don't take this too seriously.)

 

[Icebear]

Sarcasm alert!

 

[CL82]

Gotta love this statement - "Jessica Washington and Diamond DeShields get to Chapel Hill and could join rising sophomore Xylina McDaniel as the best young trio in the nation".

Perhaps they will be the new "Three who will watch" ...UConn win another national championship.

The good news is that they are a young trio, so they may get to watch UConn win several.

 

[bruinbball]

Notre Dame got Taya Reimer- they will still be ver competitive!!! We tried for her desperately. No Carolina got Steph Mavunga also I think. uC tried hard for her too. NC is going to be vey athletic and dangerous!

Taya Reimer is no Skylar Diggins. I do feel that Jewell Loyd will fill the leadership hole left by Diggins departure. Diggins had the winners pedigree coming into ND, Reimer does not have that, but if Muffet can get that fire into Reimer, then watch out.

 

[meyers7]

Faster is not always better.

ummm, yea it is.

 

[Icebear]

I expect Jewel Loyd to make people forget Skylar very quickly.

 

[doggydaddy]

I expect Jewel Loyd to make people forget Skylar very quickly.

Doubtful.

 

[bruinbball]

Regardless of performance and stats, she will never receive the attention Skylar did and it's unfortunate.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

 

[Icebear]

Regardless of performance and stats, she will never receive the attention Skylar did and it's unfortunate.

Sent from my SPH-L900 using Tapatalk 2

Sadly this is likely to be very true. I see Jewel, however, as a much better overall performer.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Interestingly, I think in recent preseasons, most considered UConn, Baylor, Notre Dame and possibly Stanford as almost locks to get to the Final Four. Anybody else would've been considered an upset or surprise. This year it seems less is certain. Certainly Duke has the pieces in place, but they've yet to do it. Notre Dame seems possible, but there is the lingering doubt of life after Skylar. Diggins really resurrected Notre Dame in a way, because they had not been an "elite" team in roughly a decade before her. She really elevated the program and McGraw. They seem to have capitalized with the recruiting mojo, but I'm not convinced all their incoming freshman are quite as good as advertised. I am curious to see if Mabrey gets out of the doghouse.

How soon we forget! Last season Notre Dame was 7th in the AP preseason poll (LINK), and even after a third of the season, Charlie Crème still wrote that there was no way Notre Dame could get a top 4 seed, as even if they defeated UConn, they could not jump over Stanford or Duke. This season Charlie discounts Notre Dame as well (ranked 10th in his very early poll). We'll see!

Part of Mabrey's issue was the freshman 15 she apparently picked up last season that displaced her confidence and quickness (LINK). She lost the weight this summer and so we'll see how her play responds this fall.

 

[Fightin Choke]

Also, if we want to discuss far too early preseason polls, here is another (LINK). Surprisingly, UConn is #1 in this poll as well, with the rest of the top 10 filled with the usual suspects. Do these writers lack creativity? Just once I would like to see Lamar in the top 10. At least Notre Dame is above Nebraska in this poll.

 

[stwainfan]

Not necessarily, when you are not playing you are not getting better. Rust might have set in and it will probably take a while for her to reach the level she was at before getting hurt.

If there is any rust she has a couple of exhibition games to work it out. So that should help her get back in the flow of game.

 

[UcMiami]

Might as well weigh in - these are observations in no particular order:
Uconn - no question at #1, but after that I really really have no clue. I agree with the usual suspects being in the mix, but ...
Duke - they always seem to disappoint. On paper they are strong and they usually have strong regular seasons with a few real clunkers thrown in. NCAAs have been a consistent disappointment in that they always lose a round or two before they should.
Maryland - I was actually really impressed with their play last year - I thought they made a commitment to defense and given the losses in their backcourt performed much better than they should have. I think that should help them next year with the players returning from injury.
UNC - lots of new talent, but ... they are going to have serious growing pains and I don't think their coaching is strong enough to build a really good team. They will beat up on weak teams because of talent but will struggle against good teams.
ND - agree that chemistry and coaching are strong points and losing Diggins will be a blow to that - she was much more than her stats in terms of leading the team. They have good talent and Muffet has done a really good job of balanced recruiting over the last 'x' years so that continuity is maintained even with significant graduations. They should be strong, but how strong depends on how well Diggins leadership is passed on to ?
TN - I was really impressed with Graves on team USA - better and tougher player than I had thought (just haven't seen her play enough.) The question mark as always with TN is their guards and their offensive system. I was impressed with Holly's results last year in a very difficult transition. Again, didn't see them play enough to get a feel for the offense - no knock on Pat here, but if Holly has actually installed a system better than toss it at the rim and then rebound like crazy, I think TN could be very strong. But are the guards good enough to execute a disciplined half court offense?
Kentucky - they win based on defense, steals, and fast break - works great against weak teams and undisciplined teams - fails against good passing teams that do not give up the transition baskets. When they have to win in the half court, they don't.
Louisville - great run and they do get some injured players back, but ... Jeff is a very good coach and he overachieves with the talent - he has a huge roster, but few really really good players. Hard to win it all without at least one superstar.
Baylor - love Sims and I think Kim is a good coach, but I think she got too much credit for Griner. It is going to be a tough year with all the losses - will be really surprised, even with a weak schedule and maybe a less strong Big 12 if they get ranked above say 8 and they could drop out of the top 10.
Stanford - they just keep rolling. Tough recent loss, but they have talent and a superstar and a perhaps easier road out west. It remains really tough for west coast teams re scheduling - to play the strength of WCBB they either have long road trips across multiple time zones, or have to convince those strong teams to make the reverse long trip. I really don't understand why they have been unable to raise the level of the PAC the way Uconn was able to spread the wealth in the BE.
Oklahoma - Don't really know how Cole does it year after year - since the Paris sisters she never seems to hit the jackpot in recruiting, but her teams always seem to overachieve - maybe she is a really good coach?
PSU - could be very good - seem to have their act together after years of languishing. Is there enough in the BIG to challenge them?

 

[KnightBridgeAZ]

Might as well weigh in - these are observations in no particular order:
UNC - I don't think their coaching is strong enough to build a really good team. They will beat up on weak teams because of talent but will struggle against good teams.
Stanford - I really don't understand why they have been unable to raise the level of the PAC the way Uconn was able to spread the wealth in the BE.
Oklahoma - Don't really know how Cole does it year after year - since the Paris sisters she never seems to hit the jackpot in recruiting, but her teams always seem to overachieve - maybe she is a really good coach?

UNC - the prediction is probably correct, but I wouldn't put it to "bad" coaching. Like your comments about Kentucky, Sylvia plays a certain style. I think she teaches her style quite well and recruits players that fit in. But, like Ky and Rutgers for that matter, there are some games that her style just won't do it.
Stanford - really, my comment is also re: UConn raising the level of the Big East. In some ways they did - for example, CVS stated that she would never have come to RU if they were not in the conference with UConn. Likewise, the presence of UConn probably made other coaching jobs in the conference appealing. And made it a prestigious conference for recruits, and helped RPI. But Stanford being on the left coach isn't going to make the other PAC schools appealing to nationwide recruits, doesn't have the cachet of UConn anyway, doesn't drive up RPI of the conference for the reasons the poster and I have stated elsewhere - and has attracted some anticipated decent coaching. They just didn't all work out.
Oklahoma - Given the talent and the fact she is a fine coach, you may be right that they over-achieve. But I can't tell you how many threads Oklahoma would appear in as needing a new coach if you didn't like Sherri Coale. Because the truth of the matter, she built a solid program that shows no potential for joining the upper echelon of teams. I like her and I actually have no problem with a team performing at that level (RU included) but I know there are posters on here who do when it is some other team.

 

[Outside Shot]

What's interesting about McCallie is that she got Michigan State to a Final Four, but Duke teams with more talent didn't get as far. There are many variables that can affect things and I actually mean this more as a defense of her than a criticism. Maybe they'll put it together this season?

 

[UcMiami]

KnightsBridge - interesting comments. The thing with the PAC is that the west coast is a very talent rich region of the country with really strong HS/AAU competition, so keeping talent as opposed to bringing talent in should be easier. And the quality of the schools and their 'attractiveness' is pretty good with Cal, USC, and UCLA (not meaning to diss the others, just don't know enough re academics/environments.)
I think Oklahoma is a tough sell outside of Texas/Oklahoma - sorry, but 'Come see beautiful Oklahoma' bombed as a marketing tool! What I like about Coale the coach is that she gets the best out of what she has, as a recruiter not so much. (And I was really impressed with the USA team - I thought it was a flawed team she was given, but they were still able to dominate while being height challenged.)

And I didn't say 'bad coaching' just wondering if it is strong enough at UNC. Running an offense only system that doesn't worry about turnovers or defense is fraught with danger, especially when you go against the other really talented teams. And with the large talented freshman class there may be some serious chemistry issues.

By the way - I left Rutgers out of my comments because I just don't know what is going on there any more. Some great recruiting followed by some serious talent transferring out - seems a little broken as a program, but again, I just don't know.