SEC 2020-2021 early look/predictions

[SCspur]

Jackson is clearly a better player than Beale at this point.

It’s Beal and I have a different opinion. Like I said Jackson is better offensively and Beal is better defensively so I consider them equal rather than one being better than the other. In head to head matchup I felt like each of them got the better of the other in each game. Jackson in Columbia and Beal in Greenville. Saying Jackson is clearly better is saying she has the most complete game which is far from the case.

 

[bballnut90]

It’s Beal and I have a different opinion. Like I said Jackson is better offensively and Beal is better defensively so I consider them equal rather than one being better than the other. In head to head matchup I felt like each of them got the better of the other in each game. Jackson in Columbia and Beal in Greenville. Saying Jackson is clearly better is saying she has the most complete game which is far from the case.

That's like saying Mikayla Pivec is equal to Sabrina Ionescu since Pivec is a better defender while Sabrina is better offensively.

Literally anyone who isnt a massive SC homer would say Jackson is clearly the better player.

 

[SCspur]

That's like saying Mikayla Pivec is equal to Sabrina Ionescu since Pivec is a better defender while Sabrina is better offensively.

Literally anyone who isnt a massive SC homer would say Jackson is clearly the better player.

When you say Jackson is clearly better I have a right to disagree. Your comparing freshman to seniors is crazy when they literally just started their careers. I believe Jackson is better offensively but not better overall. You can say she’s a better offensive player but not “clearly” a better player.

 

[jumpstart]

That's like saying Mikayla Pivec is equal to Sabrina Ionescu since Pivec is a better defender while Sabrina is better offensively.

Literally anyone who isnt a massive SC homer would say Jackson is clearly the better player.

The "better player" is subjective because of what each player "needed" to bring to the team. Miss. St. "needed" Jackson to score but South Carolina did not "need" Beal to score so they relied on her defense. Those are the parts of the equation that gets lost when uninformed, side bar evaluators try to say who is the better player. They both played the part they were asked to play and so using the comparison about offense vs defense as a measuring stick is idiotic at best....and totally dishonest.

 

[SimpleDawg]

The "better player" is subjective because of what each player "needed" to bring to the team. Miss. St. "needed" Jackson to score but South Carolina did not "need" Beal to score so they relied on her defense. Those are the parts of the equation that gets lost when uninformed, side bar evaluators try to say who is the better player. They both played the part they were asked to play and so using the comparison about offense vs defense as a measuring stick is idiotic at best....and totally dishonest.

No idea what games you think we needed Rickea to score. Maybe Auburn, and Kentucky. Most of the other games, Mississippi State is as balanced as South Carolina is, and would've won the games we had won with Matharu in Rickea's place.

Of course you can't take Rickea out of the games otherwise it's a different team. Just like you can't take Boston out of the games for SC either.

Wasn't it a collective effort that nearly upset SC in Columbia? Everybody contributed in that game, including the entire Mississippi State 2nd team.

 

[militarydog]

The "better player" is subjective because of what each player "needed" to bring to the team. Miss. St. "needed" Jackson to score but South Carolina did not "need" Beal to score so they relied on her defense. Those are the parts of the equation that gets lost when uninformed, side bar evaluators try to say who is the better player. They both played the part they were asked to play and so using the comparison about offense vs defense as a measuring stick is idiotic at best....and totally dishonest.

I literally laughed out loud.

Let’s review: It’s subjective but if you don’t agree with me you are uninformed, idiotic, and dishonest.

Well done.

 

[SCGamecock]

Based on that reasoning, I could say Taylor > or = Henderson based on her defense being better.

You're essentially giving SC a 5 out of 5 advantage, homerist.

I’ll try not to be a homer

PG - Henderson v Taylor... Taylor seems like a game manger to me but she will get a chance to do more under Nikki.

I don't see how either Taylor or Henderson gets an edge on the other. Henderson is clearly a better scorer than Taylor but Taylor has proven she can run the show and play efficiently unlike Destanni. Destanni's role was to bring scoring and energy off the bench, so she could be a stronger decision maker while she's running the show, but at this point I don't think anyone objectively can say one has the edge over the other right now.

My take is:

Taylor = Henderson...outlined above

Cooke > Matharu...Matharu was excellent in limited minutes but Cooke is the clear choice headed into next year

Beale < Jackson....no brainer

Saxton/Amihere = Cooks...haven't seen enough of Cooks but she had decent numbers at Michigan State. I think Saxton/Amihere will fill in well at the 4. Hard to give one team a clear edge IMO.

Boston > Carter...no brainer. Carter is good but the gap between the 2 is enormous.

So 2-1 for SC with 2 ties. The gap between Boston and anyone she goes up against is a huge difference maker.

Most important though is that SC has a far more proven coach and players who know her system and coaching style. Mississippi State doesn't, which further puts them behind SC IMO. SC is a legitimate title threat, Mississippi State a potential final four threat. Both should finish top 2 in the SEC and hopefully we get a great matchup during the regular season again.

Basically this.

Anybody saying Taylor is better than Henderson is homering, just like anybody saying Beal is better than Jackson.

Taylor has shown us she can manage a game. Destanni has shown us she can score, especially from deep. Both have the opportunity the next few seasons to show us the complete package. Jury is still out. I can’t even give Taylor an edge over Destanni defensively because Henderson is a good defender. I’m willing to call this a wash, but we’ll know who’s better very soon.

Jackson vs. Beal is intriguing. I think Jackson has SEC POY potential next season (she’ll have plenty of competition playing in a league with Howard, Boston and Cooke). Beal is an exceptional defender already and has the body to be a serious mismatch on offense (bully ball). As she develops her offense will match her defense, but she isn’t consistent as a scorer from the wing. Do I think she’ll get there? Yes. Jackson is so good on offense already and gives you just enough defensively that you really have to gameplan for her. Jackson wins right now.

Cooke v Matharu - Cooke. Both are good from deep. Cooke has improved her shot choice tremendously. What separates Cooke from other guards is her freakish athletic ability and her ability to hit shots in the lane after contact. She has that extra gear that the really elite ballers have.

Boston v Carter - Boston. Easily. One just won the Lisa Leslie award for nation’s best center... as a freshman. One is also not really a center, but she does a great job filling that role.

Saxton/Amihere v Cooks - a wash right now. Cooks looked like a top 3 player in her class to me out of high school. Not sure where she is now because I haven’t seen her recently. Saxton is good at what she does but doesn’t have a super high ceiling IMO, we’ll see. She’s tough and gritty, you want players like her on your bench. Amihere IMO has the highest ceiling of all three (and possibly of all SCs freshmen). She was #1 in her class at one point but was hampered by injury. Amihere has shown glimpses of how good she can be throughout SCs season but she’s horribly inconsistent. She can slash to the rim, handle the ball and shoot the three. She just needs more time to develop. I’m calling this a wash right now.

2 for SC. 1 for State. 2 evens.

 

[SimpleDawg]

@SCGamecock

It wasn't me who said Taylor > Henderson. I don't actually have a choice between the 2. I guess we know that Henderson has a more varied scoring arsenal, but Taylor has 63 steals vs Henderson's 39, so that's one area you can look at. Also Taylor wins assists easily (151 vs 93), and has less turnovers though not a lot between the two there.

Again, I'm not arguing whose better, but I think that stat (creating more opportunities for her teammates) can offset the scoring average stat (5.6 vs 8.6). Taylor plays slightly more minutes though (25.6 vs 23.4). Again, I feel like this is one where the Mississippi State fans say Taylor and the South Carolina fans say Henderson. You can actually make a case for either easily. I don't think there's a clear separation.

I agree with you on Cooke's burst and athleticism, I'm definitely impressed with her on that and think that sets her apart. Though, the thing separating Matharu is how easily and effortlessly she scores. She has the natural scoring skills, with pickpocket hands. Just a very deft, finessed player. Her 9.9 minutes is the reason her stats aren't as high. Again, for this one I say Cooke for now, but once they both have equal minutes... we'll see if you can make a different type of case.

No arguments on anything else for now.

 

[bballnut90]

@SCGamecock

It wasn't me who said Taylor > Henderson. I don't actually have a choice between the 2. I guess we know that Henderson has a more varied scoring arsenal, but Taylor has 63 steals vs Henderson's 39, so that's one area you can look at. Also Taylor wins assists easily (151 vs 93), and has less turnovers though not a lot between the two there.

Again, I'm not arguing whose better, but I think that stat (creating more opportunities for her teammates) can offset the scoring average stat (5.6 vs 8.6). Taylor plays slightly more minutes though (25.6 vs 23.4). Again, I feel like this is one where the Mississippi State fans say Taylor and the South Carolina fans say Henderson. You can actually make a case for either easily. I don't think there's a clear separation.

I agree with you on Cooke's burst and athleticism, I'm definitely impressed with her on that and think that sets her apart. Though, the thing separating Matharu is how easily and effortlessly she scores. She has the natural scoring skills, with pickpocket hands. Just a very deft, finessed player. Her 9.9 minutes is the reason her stats aren't as high. Again, for this one I say Cooke for now, but once they both have equal minutes... we'll see if you can make a different type of case.

No arguments on anything else for now.

Matharu was a really phenomenal scorer in her limited playing time. I could never figure out how Vic was using her.....limited minutes much of the season, then tore it up against SC in limited minutes which earned her more playing time the next two games, then back to the bench for a while before unleashing her again at the end of the season. When she played, she produced. In the 13 games that she played 10+ minutes she scored double figures in 10 of them. She averaged 28 ppg per 40 minutes of play and honestly looked electric when she was on the court. No idea why she didn't get more minutes throughout SEC play. Have to give the edge to Cooke right now since Zia was a proven commodity all year but Matharu is going to be one to watch.

In regards to Taylor/Henderson, another name to look out for is Mingo-Young who is a more capable scorer and playmaker than Taylor. I imagine Vic was planning to use these two similarly to how he used Holmes/William, as he effectively had 2 very capable and solid point guards who brought different elements to the table.

 

[SCGamecock]

@SCGamecock

It wasn't me who said Taylor > Henderson. I don't actually have a choice between the 2. I guess we know that Henderson has a more varied scoring arsenal, but Taylor has 63 steals vs Henderson's 39, so that's one area you can look at. Also Taylor wins assists easily (151 vs 93), and has less turnovers though not a lot between the two there.

Again, I'm not arguing whose better, but I think that stat (creating more opportunities for her teammates) can offset the scoring average stat (5.6 vs 8.6). Taylor plays slightly more minutes though (25.6 vs 23.4). Again, I feel like this is one where the Mississippi State fans say Taylor and the South Carolina fans say Henderson. You can actually make a case for either easily. I don't think there's a clear separation.

I agree with you on Cooke's burst and athleticism, I'm definitely impressed with her on that and think that sets her apart. Though, the thing separating Matharu is how easily and effortlessly she scores. She has the natural scoring skills, with pickpocket hands. Just a very deft, finessed player. Her 9.9 minutes is the reason her stats aren't as high. Again, for this one I say Cooke for now, but once they both have equal minutes... we'll see if you can make a different type of case.

No arguments on anything else for now.

Matharu was honestly a major recruiting find for State. I watch her play and I’m confused how she wasn’t more heavily recruited by other powers. She definitely has a shooters mentality and she can really light you up if you’re not pressuring her. She’s probably already the best pure shooter on your roster (although I think you all are going to love Madison Hayes). I think Matharu has room to grow offensively as far as attacking the basket... she’s a smaller guard and slight though so I don’t think she’s ever going to be thought of as a slasher. But her shooting is good enough that she can just live on the perimeter to be honest.

 

[stwainfan]

What kind of impact will Marta Suarez have this year?

 

[jumpstart]

No idea what games you think we needed Rickea to score. Maybe Auburn, and Kentucky. Most of the other games, Mississippi State is as balanced as South Carolina is, and would've won the games we had won with Matharu in Rickea's place.

Of course you can't take Rickea out of the games otherwise it's a different team. Just like you can't take Boston out of the games for SC either.

Wasn't it a collective effort that nearly upset SC in Columbia? Everybody contributed in that game, including the entire Mississippi State 2nd team.

You were not comparing Boston to Jackson.....you were comparing her to Beal...Jackson has a scoring and defensive role while Beal has a defensive role and scoring is an option less used....and Miss St is not as balanced as South Carolina. I have no dog in this fight and I couldn't care less about who is better but you make claims based on things that have no real reliable stance.....Miss St has a very good team but they are not on the South Carolina level as of now.

 

[DefenseBB]

The simple joke of this is the discussion like MSU is SC’s equal, they AREN’T. No one but an MSU fan would think that in paper MSU=SC. SC is a preseason favorite to win it all, MSU will be lucky to be in the top 8. There is a big gap from the top 3 to the next 5. I will be impressed if MSU makes it to the Elite 8 next year and almost as impressed if they make it to the SEC Final.
I blame @SECbbfan24 for this lunacy that if LSU actually had a good coach, more diverse discussion could occur instead of a probable 8th place finish or worse next year!

 

[dws3665]

Clearly we need to rename the thread: MSU vs SC throwdown.

 

[SECbbfan24]

I blame @SECbbfan24 for this lunacy that if LSU actually had a good coach, more diverse discussion could occur instead of a probable 8th place finish or worse next year!

Pokey Chatman brought in some great great talents over the years. Unfortunately we have not had players like the caliber of Sylvia Fowles or Seimone Augustus in a long time.



I was tempted to post the Sylvia Fowles highlights vs UCONN in the 2007 regional final but I don't want to get in trouble

 

[Plebe]

Pokey Chatman brought in some great great talents over the years. Unfortunately we have not had players like the caliber of Sylvia Fowles or Seimone Augustus in a long time.



I was tempted to post the Sylvia Fowles highlights vs UCONN in the 2007 regional final but I don't want to get in trouble

LSU has long been one of my favorite teams to watch and root for, going back to the Marie Ferdinand years (and she is one of my favorite undersung players of all times).

I was especially heartbroken the year they lost a really close game to TN in the Final Four.

The recruiting really dried up after Van Chancellor took over. Nikki has done just barely well enough to not get fired (yet). Her best finishes were a Sweet 16 in years 2 and 3. She hasn't won an NCAAT game since 2014.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

LSU had a great run under Chatman who was rightfully dismissed. I think Van was a great coach but probably not a great hire since he was in his twilight years and probably didn’t have much gas left in the tank.

fargas’ lack of success has surprised me somewhat because she did well in her short time at UCLA. I’ve wondered about the schools commitment to basketball since she has done little to bring in fans, never seems to be in the mix for big recruits and just seems
to win enough to keep the administration happy.
It’s a shame both Duke and LSU leadership appear to be uninterested in bringing their programs back to a high level.

 

[SECbbfan24]

LSU had a great run under Chatman who was rightfully dismissed. I think Van was a great coach but probably not a great hire since he was in his twilight years and probably didn’t have much gas left in the tank.

fargas’ lack of success has surprised me somewhat because she did well in her short time at UCLA. I’ve wondered about the schools commitment to basketball since she has done little to bring in fans, never seems to be in the mix for big recruits and just seems
to win enough to keep the administration happy.
It’s a shame both Duke and LSU leadership appear to be uninterested in bringing their programs back to a high level.

Van did a really poor job coaching his teams at LSU based on the talent. I know he had success in the past but it was just not working out in BR. He recruited decently but not close to the level of Pokey. He landed many top 100 players although he struggled to mold a team with an identity. Van hovered around 19-20 wins for 3 years afters Fowles left.

Nikki seemed like a hot hire at the time because of her record at UCLA and the fact that she was a Summitt disciple. Nikki was solid at UCLA although did not do much in the NCAAT. Many don't realize after she left, some of her recruiting issues (foreshadowing) left some major holes and issues for UCLA and it took a few years for Cori Close to right the ship.

Nikki came to LSU with some solid talent in place (many top 100 kids). In all honesty her teams the first few years were some of her most talented teams and she has yet to keep or upgrade the talent since she has been here. We simply do not have enough good players. She has gotten some really good kids, Moncrief, Mitchell, Danielle Ballard but was later dismissed. Chloe Jackson was a major surprise before bolting to Baylor. The issue with Nikki isn't a great recruiter, she doesn't attempt to go after the big fish very much on the recruiting trail a lot. She settles for much less and is much more concerned with building a team around defense instead of recruiting top talent that is well rounded and work towards molding it. Her teams may play good defense but it lacks the athletes necessary to execute at a top level offensively and on the boards. Which is why LSU is rarely in the top 25 and is a fringe seed in the NCAAT. You have to recruit kids who can score too. There is much more to the equation than playing good defense.

Our last AD Joe Alleva is now gone so things are much different moving forward. She is winning barely enough to keep her job as of now. Although, the attendance and booster donations speak volumes on the current support of the program. I don't think Nikki is a bad coach at all but she lacks in critical areas that keep us from getting over the hump competing for SEC titles or making NCAAT runs.

 

[MSSportsGuy]

Van did a really poor job coaching his teams at LSU based on the talent. I know he had success in the past but it was just not working out in BR. He recruited decently but not close to the level of Pokey. He landed many top 100 players although he struggled to mold a team with an identity. Van hovered around 19-20 wins for 3 years afters Fowles left.

Nikki seemed like a hot hire at the time because of her record at UCLA and the fact that she was a Summitt disciple. Nikki was solid at UCLA although did not do much in the NCAAT. Many don't realize after she left, some of her recruiting issues (foreshadowing) left some major holes and issues for UCLA and it took a few years for Cori Close to right the ship.

Nikki came to LSU with some solid talent in place (many top 100 kids). In all honesty her teams the first few years were some of her most talented teams and she has yet to keep or upgrade the talent since she has been here. We simply do not have enough good players. She has gotten some really good kids, Moncrief, Mitchell, Danielle Ballard but was later dismissed. Chloe Jackson was a major surprise before bolting to Baylor. The issue with Nikki isn't a great recruiter, she doesn't attempt to go after the big fish very much on the recruiting trail a lot. She settles for much less and is much more concerned with building a team around defense instead of recruiting top talent that is well rounded and work towards molding it. Her teams may play good defense but it lacks the athletes necessary to execute at a top level offensively and on the boards. Which is why LSU is rarely in the top 25 and is a fringe seed in the NCAAT. You have to recruit kids who can score too. There is much more to the equation than playing good defense.

Our last AD Joe Alleva is now gone so things are much different moving forward. She is winning barely enough to keep her job as of now. Although, the attendance and booster donations speak volumes on the current support of the program. I don't think Nikki is a bad coach at all but she lacks in critical areas that keep us from getting over the hump competing for SEC titles or making NCAAT runs.

Nikki, like another Summitt protege, seems like a good person. Her coaching acumen could even be higher than we think, but she has not done a good job at recruiting. Part of that responsibility is also with the staff but the head coach is who ultimately puts the staff together.

maybe the new AD will shake some things up. It’s not that I want MSU to have more competition as McCray will certainly have to stay on her toes to keep us elite but ratherI think LSU has demonstrated they will support a winning team and it would be good to have them back in the SEC conversation.

 

[Dwilliams02]

Van did a really poor job coaching his teams at LSU based on the talent. I know he had success in the past but it was just not working out in BR. He recruited decently but not close to the level of Pokey. He landed many top 100 players although he struggled to mold a team with an identity. Van hovered around 19-20 wins for 3 years afters Fowles left.

Nikki seemed like a hot hire at the time because of her record at UCLA and the fact that she was a Summitt disciple. Nikki was solid at UCLA although did not do much in the NCAAT. Many don't realize after she left, some of her recruiting issues (foreshadowing) left some major holes and issues for UCLA and it took a few years for Cori Close to right the ship.

Nikki came to LSU with some solid talent in place (many top 100 kids). In all honesty her teams the first few years were some of her most talented teams and she has yet to keep or upgrade the talent since she has been here. We simply do not have enough good players. She has gotten some really good kids, Moncrief, Mitchell, Danielle Ballard but was later dismissed. Chloe Jackson was a major surprise before bolting to Baylor. The issue with Nikki isn't a great recruiter, she doesn't attempt to go after the big fish very much on the recruiting trail a lot. She settles for much less and is much more concerned with building a team around defense instead of recruiting top talent that is well rounded and work towards molding it. Her teams may play good defense but it lacks the athletes necessary to execute at a top level offensively and on the boards. Which is why LSU is rarely in the top 25 and is a fringe seed in the NCAAT. You have to recruit kids who can score too. There is much more to the equation than playing good defense.

Our last AD Joe Alleva is now gone so things are much different moving forward. She is winning barely enough to keep her job as of now. Although, the attendance and booster donations speak volumes on the current support of the program. I don't think Nikki is a bad coach at all but she lacks in critical areas that keep us from getting over the hump competing for SEC titles or making NCAAT runs.

I agree with everything you stated.

 

[SECbbfan24]

Nikki, like another Summitt protege, seems like a good person. Her coaching acumen could even be higher than we think, but she has not done a good job at recruiting. Part of that responsibility is also with the staff but the head coach is who ultimately puts the staff together.

maybe the new AD will shake some things up. It’s not that I want MSU to have more competition as McCray will certainly have to stay on her toes to keep us elite but ratherI think LSU has demonstrated they will support a winning team and it would be good to have them back in the SEC conversation.

I like Nikki. She is very knowledgable and there are things she does really really well. She actually did one of her best coaching jobs this season prior to Mitchell going down with the wheels coming off after. We struggle a lot offensively. LSU will actually run plays, set screens, etc but we do not have the athletes who can consistently execute or shoot from 3 or midrange. That is 100% on her for not recruiting well enough.

LSU will support a winning team and a good product on the floor. Gymnastics program went from empty PMAC to 12,000 fans a meet every Friday night since they started competing for championships.

 

[bballnut90]

I like Nikki. She is very knowledgable and there are things she does really really well. She actually did one of her best coaching jobs this season prior to Mitchell going down with the wheels coming off after. We struggle a lot offensively. LSU will actually run plays, set screens, etc but we do not have the athletes who can consistently execute or shoot from 3 or midrange. That is 100% on her for not recruiting well enough.

LSU will support a winning team and a good product on the floor. Gymnastics program went from empty PMAC to 12,000 fans a meet every Friday night since they started competing for championships.

Seems to be a common theme among former Tennessee players who now coach. Usually get decent athletes but do not land a lot of quality shooters who can space the floor. Offense is mediocre, team's are very tough defensively and aggressive attacking the glass. Similar to Pat but she got top notch kids and they all worked their butts off. Rarely did they have good A/TO ratios or a slew of top notch shooters but they were in the title mix year in year out.

This style can still work if you have the horses, with SC being the best example, but the defense/toughness style does seem to be disappearing. Even SC this year looked much more fluid offensively than they have the last several seasons.

If teams want to be great in today's day and age, they need better talent or better offensive flow, plain and simple. The last several years have evolved big time offensively with teams like Mississippi State, Baylor, UCONN, Oregon and Notre Dame all putting together really good offensive teams that utilize tremendous spacing, decision making and overall ball movement. Each team is different in what they prioritize (pick and roll, weave offense, high low, etc) but all of these programs have had strong execution on the offensive end and that's the biggest reason why they've had championship caliber teams the past 5 years.