What we learned tonight in college basketball: all of the teams are the same

[champs99and04]

Every year during conference play - particularly the infant stages of it - it's as if a few hundred guys gathered at the YMCA, threw a bunch of jerseys into the middle of the court, and selected them at random from there. The teams that are supposed to be good don't just lose...they lose in a way that makes you wonder if it's their first time playing together.

Let's start in Morgantown, where the #1 team in the country - eight days removed from looking like they could beat the Spurs - turned the ball over 22 times and lost by double-digits despite shooting 10 of 20 from three. Oh, and West Virginia shot 47 free throws.

The number three team in the country drew an unranked Michigan team, playing without the services of their best player, and trailed pretty much wire-to-wire. The same Melo Trimble that looked like a sure-fire all-American on Saturday somehow scored two points and had more turnovers than assists. Inexplicable.

As I'm speaking, #17 Iowa State drops one in overtime to Texas, still without Cameron Ridley. In a sport full of bi-polar teams, Iowa State might take the cake. This is a team that can fall behind by 30 before the first TV timeout and tie the game by the second one.

Then there's Providence and Creighton...which words simply will not due justice. Providence shot under 30% from the field, 4 of 24 from the field, turned it over 15 times...and won. Creighton, among the best offenses in the country on KenPom, shot 25% from the field. It was a stunningly horrid display of basketball that ended in the most fitting way possible, with Kris Dunn - seemingly - bricking a jumper in the final seconds, when it somehow caught the forgiving part of the back iron and rolled in. That's your #12 team in the country.

The moral of the story is double-edged: one, good teams are going to perform inexplicably terribly at least a couple times during an 18 game conference schedule that involves lots of travel and greatly varying crowds/atmospheres/energy. Losing at home to Temple is a lot different than losing @ West Virginia or @ Michigan, but these are college things and weird things happen.

Perhaps most importantly as it relates to UConn, the aforementioned Texas and Michigan teams both scored big victories. If you weren't sure whether winning in Austin was anything to apologize for before tonight, you should be now that the Longhorns have added a second scalp (with UNC being the first) to a collection that will likely grow in a conference consisting of, seemingly, entirely top 25 teams. Without Ridley, it's hard to imagine them finishing better than .500 in conference, and they have a look of a bubble team. But the win in Austin, without Brimah, is one the committee will look fondly on, and they should.

Then there's Michigan. The more I watch them, the more convinced I am that they are going to be one of the best teams in the country when they get whole. If you like shooting and scoring, watch them. They have shooters out the a** (Duncan Robinson is about to become Jimmer and Doug McDermott's media love child) and they can space the floor with one of the best pick-and-roll guys in the country and a couple of skilled big's. They are going to have games where their lack of size is exposed (see the SMU game), but I'd be surprised if they didn't contend for the Big Ten title.

Add Ohio State to the equation, who is 3-1 in the Big Ten despite getting hammered at Assembly Hall on Sunday, and this team still has everything in front of them for as inconsistent as they've been.

 

[Mr. French]

The entire landscape is filled with similar teams this year. It's one of those years where the top 5 isn't much better than the 25-30, they are probably deeper, etc., but every team can be knocked off by "lesser" teams.

In short, there's a lot of parity this season, and no clear cut superior teams that jump out at you.

 

[Fishy]

I originally thought there were four or five very good teams this year - I overestimated.

I think Maryland and Michigan State might ultimately be the best teams this year, but they're not particularly good.

There are top 15 teams this year that wouldn't go .500 in one of the vintage Big East Conference years.

 

[Mr. French]

I originally thought there were four or five very good teams this year - I overestimated.

I think Maryland and Michigan State might ultimately be the best teams this year, but they're not particularly good.

There are top 15 teams this year that wouldn't go .500 in one of the vintage Big East Conference years.

Agreed. And there are teams that are better than others -- Kansas, Maryland, UNC at full health -- but every one of those teams is way more susceptible to "lesser" teams than previous years' best teams.

 

[superjohn]

At full strength I definitely think UNC is the best team.

 

[Matt1010]

UNC or OU would be my two non UConn picks for the national championship.

 

[champs99and04]

At full strength I definitely think UNC is the best team.

I agree. Their biggest opponent seems to be disinterest. People should be talking more about Brice Johnson.

Xavier is another interesting team to keep an eye on. Save one no-show against Villanova, they've been as impressive as anybody.

 

[caw]

I agree. Their biggest opponent seems to be disinterest. People should be talking more about Brice Johnson.

Xavier is another interesting team to keep an eye on. Save one no-show against Villanova, they've been as impressive as anybody.

Disinterest and defense. Roy always seems to prioritize scoring over defense. This team is no different in that regard.

 

[Devland]

Disinterest and defense. Roy always seems to prioritize scoring over defense. This team is no different in that regard.

And a UNC player walked into a classroom this year. It was a freshman that got lost going to the practice facility.

 

[Kitaman]

And amidst all of this, UConn is nowhere near peaking.

 

[huskyharry]

And amidst all of this, UConn is nowhere near peaking.

We have the talent...just need to play harder, smarter and with more confidence.
We can't miss 18 of our last 19 shots against anyone and hope to win.

 

[UConnTrumbull]

We just need to get to the tourney and we'll take it from there. I love college bball but the critics are right when they say the regular season doesn't matter. I've stopped caring about seeding and all that. As long as we make it to the dance and peak in March we're fine.

 

[HuskyHawk]

The speed at which the best players move through college...leaving after freshman or at most sophomore year, has provided much greater parity. A young, super talented team can certainly lose to a veteran squad of less talented players...or beat them. The volatility is higher with kids leading the charge. We certainly saw it in 2014, beating a very young, but very talented Kentucky team.

The question for those young teams is whether they figure it out by tournament time, and can play well several games in a row against good competition. Those veteran teams will usually be more consistent. My main concern with UConn at the moment is that we have a veteran team that should be very consistent, but which hasn't been yet. If we start to see Gibbs, Rodney and Miller each getting 12-18 a night, and Hamilton getting back to putting up consistent numbers, we will be a team nobody wants to play.

 

[Rico444]

If we can learn to consistently defend, we can play with anyone. I'm not supremely confident that's going to happen, but the potential is there. This team, when clicking on all cylinders, is terrific offensively.

 

[BigEast]

http://espn.go.com/blog/collegebask...r-simple-reminder-its-hard-to-win-on-the-road

It's really hard to win on the road.

It's a simple but useful reminder. Division I college basketball teams win roughly 70 percent of the time at home. This is a tried-and-true figure. It is consistent across massive sample sizes. It has been baked into the Ratings Percentage Index formula for years: A win on a neutral court counts as one win. A win on the road counts as 1.4, a win at home 0.6. More advanced projection systems, like those authored by Ken Pomeroy and Jeff Sagarin, bake home cooking right into the proverbial pie.

 

[gtcam]

The speed at which the best players move through college...leaving after freshman or at most sophomore year, has provided much greater parity. A young, super talented team can certainly lose to a veteran squad of less talented players...or beat them. The volatility is higher with kids leading the charge. We certainly saw it in 2014, beating a very young, but very talented Kentucky team.

The question for those young teams is whether they figure it out by tournament time, and can play well several games in a row against good competition. Those veteran teams will usually be more consistent. My main concern with UConn at the moment is that we have a veteran team that should be very consistent, but which hasn't been yet. If we start to see Gibbs, Rodney and Miller each getting 12-18 a night, and Hamilton getting back to putting up consistent numbers, we will be a team nobody wants to play.

This is where the problem lies for this UConn team. With Gibbs, Miller , Purvis and I will throw in DHam they have a team of very veteran players. But UConn is not what I would consider a veteran team when you look at the facy that they haven't played together that long. Yes the had a good part of the summer and the fall but I am not sure that constitutes "a long time" plus the experience of playing together against others has not been as long.
On the converse side, one would thing that experienced players such as these would find a way to score those 12-18 pts per game and grab their share of rebounds on a game in/game out basis. Only SG and RP have approached that consistancy - so far. I just don't get it how these guys can't put together games when they all are clicking - maybe it's not that easy.
IF that happens this could be a dangerous team but I haven't seen strong indications that it will any time soon.
Defense - that's an entirely differen story..................

 

[Towney007]

There hasn't been a single team this year that I feel has any real 'wow' factor to me. I'm not sure i'd have any of the top-5 teams even in my top 10 last year or the year before.

I don't think we're much of a National Title contender. Yet, at least. No real presence down low and we lack a true point guard. I think we have the talent to make a deep run, but we're an obviously flawed team that doesn't have an answer for any of its questions, I don't think. Next year - depending on what happens with Hamilton, etc. - we have a chance to take a colossal step forward and be a true top-10 team. If he's gone, then I'd say 2017-2018 we come rumbling back down the track with an outside shot to be really, really good next year. Recruiting's been the bees knees the last year or so.

Long story, short - we're on our way back to being UConn full time. Just not sure we're quite there. Yet, at least.

 

[Jay-Bone]

Every year during conference play - particularly the infant stages of it - it's as if a few hundred guys gathered at the YMCA, threw a bunch of jerseys into the middle of the court, and selected them at random from there. The teams that are supposed to be good don't just lose...they lose in a way that makes you wonder if it's their first time playing together.

Let's start in Morgantown, where the #1 team in the country - eight days removed from looking like they could beat the Spurs - turned the ball over 22 times and lost by double-digits despite shooting 10 of 20 from three. Oh, and West Virginia shot 47 free throws.

The number three team in the country drew an unranked Michigan team, playing without the services of their best player, and trailed pretty much wire-to-wire. The same Melo Trimble that looked like a sure-fire all-American on Saturday somehow scored two points and had more turnovers than assists. Inexplicable.

As I'm speaking, #17 Iowa State drops one in overtime to Texas, still without Cameron Ridley. In a sport full of bi-polar teams, Iowa State might take the cake. This is a team that can fall behind by 30 before the first TV timeout and tie the game by the second one.

Then there's Providence and Creighton...which words simply will not due justice. Providence shot under 30% from the field, 4 of 24 from the field, turned it over 15 times...and won. Creighton, among the best offenses in the country on KenPom, shot 25% from the field. It was a stunningly horrid display of basketball that ended in the most fitting way possible, with Kris Dunn - seemingly - bricking a jumper in the final seconds, when it somehow caught the forgiving part of the back iron and rolled in. That's your #12 team in the country.

The moral of the story is double-edged: one, good teams are going to perform inexplicably terribly at least a couple times during an 18 game conference schedule that involves lots of travel and greatly varying crowds/atmospheres/energy. Losing at home to Temple is a lot different than losing @ West Virginia or @ Michigan, but these are college things and weird things happen.

Perhaps most importantly as it relates to UConn, the aforementioned Texas and Michigan teams both scored big victories. If you weren't sure whether winning in Austin was anything to apologize for before tonight, you should be now that the Longhorns have added a second scalp (with UNC being the first) to a collection that will likely grow in a conference consisting of, seemingly, entirely top 25 teams. Without Ridley, it's hard to imagine them finishing better than .500 in conference, and they have a look of a bubble team. But the win in Austin, without Brimah, is one the committee will look fondly on, and they should.

Then there's Michigan. The more I watch them, the more convinced I am that they are going to be one of the best teams in the country when they get whole. If you like shooting and scoring, watch them. They have shooters out the a** (Duncan Robinson is about to become Jimmer and Doug McDermott's media love child) and they can space the floor with one of the best pick-and-roll guys in the country and a couple of skilled big's. They are going to have games where their lack of size is exposed (see the SMU game), but I'd be surprised if they didn't contend for the Big Ten title.

Add Ohio State to the equation, who is 3-1 in the Big Ten despite getting hammered at Assembly Hall on Sunday, and this team still has everything in front of them for as inconsistent as they've been.

I agree with everything you say and remain bullish on how good we can be, however, Texas's scalps are better than ours and if it comes down to that on Sunday I fear us standing there with inferior scalps in our hands to everyone else's. However, SMU's could just turn into Custer-eque.

 

[superjohn]

Clemson just beat Duke.

 

[SaeHusky]

Parody = a lot of bubble teams. Somehow someway we need to get out of this conference

 

[AZHuskiePop]

The speed at which the best players move through college...leaving after freshman or at most sophomore year, has provided much greater parity. A young, super talented team can certainly lose to a veteran squad of less talented players...or beat them. The volatility is higher with kids leading the charge. We certainly saw it in 2014, beating a very young, but very talented Kentucky team.

The question for those young teams is whether they figure it out by tournament time, and can play well several games in a row against good competition. Those veteran teams will usually be more consistent. My main concern with UConn at the moment is that we have a veteran team that should be very consistent, but which hasn't been yet. If we start to see Gibbs, Rodney and Miller each getting 12-18 a night, and Hamilton getting back to putting up consistent numbers, we will be a team nobody wants to play.

They don't have a veteran team they have a team of guys with experience .Some in cultures foreign to ours.. There is a huge difference. The job for any coach is to take that group and get them to optimize their skills into a single unit, whether they be experienced or inexperienced. Sometimes a single player through their will and talent can elevate the group simply by leadership. Think Kemba

 

[jibsey]

OK so Brimah comes back we get the shotblocking and the alterations. No not much offense or boards but enough to change positive. Now DHam is making shots along with Adams and even Omar. We can go on a streak and beat anyone. Sound familiar?

 

[caw]

I agree with everything you say and remain bullish on how good we can be, however, Texas's scalps are better than ours and if it comes down to that on Sunday I fear us standing there with inferior scalps in our hands to everyone else's. However, SMU's could just turn into Custer-eque.

SMU has to be salty this year. Legit top ten team, weak field and postseason ban. Heck without the ban, they may very well be ranked in the top 5. How crazy will it be if they go undefeated this year (which is a legit possibility)? Then they lose at least Moore, Torbert and Kennedy as fifth year seniors and they lost Frazier. Ouch.