Who’s number 1 now? | Page 4 | The Boneyard

Who’s number 1 now?

Sorry, what are we debating? Which top 5 team is marginally deeper, with highly talented players as deep as the third string, or which has produced marginally better performances, among several probable All-American candidates?

Me, I'm just delighted there's so much good basketball to be seen on the Best Coast. I'd LOVE 3 years of debating whether Sabally's or Jones's near perfect games are more impressive. We're already winning if this the best one can split hairs.
 
Statistically UConn is playing the best defense so far this year. They have not allowed a single point scored against them. You can not get any better than that.
 
willtalk said:
Statistically UConn is playing the best defense so far this year. They have not allowed a single point scored against them. You can not get any better than that.
Expand ...

I beg to differ. Northwestern hasn’t been scored on yet this year. Clearly, their defense is better than UConn’s. Florida A&M might well have the best defense in the nation since I can guarantee they won’t be scored on this year with their ironclad defense.
 
Right now I dont care whos number 1 in the polls. UConn has the best team in WCBB and thats it as far as I am concerned. We wont know how good they are right now however the future is right around the corner and Im dying just waiting for the weekend to start.
 
This season more than most, we will need to get at least 10-15 games in to see what teams are really capable of. There are teams that have yet to play their first game going up against teams several games in and teams that will be missing key players and key practice time due to Covid restrictions. These factors can severely skew statistics and trends early on.
 
SCGamecock said:
Its all up in the air. Nobody looks unbeatable to me and it’s really not worth ranking until more top 25 teams start playing more top 25 teams. Everybody looks like a national champion beating up on Wichita Directional Academy. When you play teams that match your ability then your flaws are exposed... as we’ve already seen with SC and others.
Expand ...
Kind of self-serving comment coming from a "juggernaut" team that just lost to an underrated NC State team...Of course you have to say that, otherwise you can't justify a #1 rank or banner...:rolleyes:

Having watched Stanford twice and Oregon once, I would say that @Floridaduck is "DaffyDuck" as Stanford IS Deeper than Oregon and has as much experience OR MORE than Oregon.
This Stanford team could be unbeatable if Tara can get over the last 28 years of big game stinkers once she gets to the Final Four. To be fair, to me, this is her deepest team ever. Time will tell.

Edit-Floridaduck's comment so flustered me, I did some research. Oregon has exactly 4 players who played previous to this year, with 1 (Mikesell) elsewhere. That means they have a grand total of 80 combined starts for Oregon (76 by Boley). Meanwhile, Stanford, returns 10 Players with 254 starts combined. But yeah, Oregon is as experienced as Stanford...:confused:
 
Last edited:
.-.
Edit-Floridaduck's comment so flustered me, I did some research. Oregon has exactly 4 players who played previous to this year, with 1 (Mikesell) elsewhere. That means they have a grand total of 80 combined starts for Oregon (76 by Boley). Meanwhile, Stanford, returns 10 Players with 254 starts combined. But yeah, Oregon is as experienced as Stanford...:confused:
[/QUOTE]
Sorry to confuse you. The comment I quibbled about was "deeper". I also posted that Stanford depth is more experienced (by far) and the Card is certainly favored to win the Pac 12. Oregon does appear to have 12 players capable of playing successfully at the Pac 12 level. As does Stanford. Two very deep benches giving both coaches injury insurance, versatility, and match up combinations.

Stanford has the more experienced bench and players have been coached up and played together enough to mesh on offense and defense.

As a team Oregon is a work in progress that way. But that doesn't negate the fact that Oregon is 12 deep... equal in depth, not less deep. We'll see how it all works out.
Stanford is #1 and the Pac-12 favorite without a doubt.
 
Last edited:
Floridaduck said:
Edit-Floridaduck's comment so flustered me, I did some research. Oregon has exactly 4 players who played previous to this year, with 1 (Mikesell) elsewhere. That means they have a grand total of 80 combined starts for Oregon (76 by Boley). Meanwhile, Stanford, returns 10 Players with 254 starts combined. But yeah, Oregon is as experienced as Stanford...:confused:
Expand ...
Sorry to confuse you. The comment I quibbled about was "deeper". I also posted that Stanford depth is more experienced (by far) and the Card is certainly favored to win the Pac 12. Oregon does appear to have 12 players capable of playing successfully at the Pac 12 level. As does Stanford. Two very deep benches giving both coaches injury insurance, versatility, and match up combinations.

Stanford has the more experienced bench and players have been coached up and played together enough to mesh on offense and defense.

As a team Oregon is a work in progress that way. But that doesn't negate the fact that Oregon is 12 deep... equal in depth, not less deep. We'll see how it all works out.
Stanford is #1 and the Pac-12 favorite without a doubt.
[/QUOTE]
“Pac 12 favorite without a doubt?” Seems like there is plenty of doubt being expressed by others. Experience is over-rated as a barometer for success in college basketball, especially when you are talking about elite recruits. No one can argue that Oregon has the fewest returning starters, fewest players with Pac 12 experience, fewest players with college game experience in the Pac 12 and perhaps in the entire NCAA. Yet they are clearly an elite team and I argue that there are less than a half dozen teams (including Stanford) who have any chance of beating them.
 
LOhunter said:
Yet they are clearly an elite team and I argue that there are less than a half dozen teams (including Stanford) who have any chance of beating them.
Expand ...
I have them at #6 but i will take #8 (LOL). Sunday's game at Corvallis is a real test and the wheels could come off playing such a high talent team. Looking forward to how the new players mesh in that one.
 
saywho said:
Stanford is playing a higher level of defense up til this point, in my opinion. Not sure changing the adjective fronting it is really changing my opinion. So, I will just stick to being blunt about my opinion without the adjectives :)
Expand ...
To play a high level of defense a team needs to face a high level offense. Let me know when Stanford faces one.
 
Alydar said:
To play a high level of defense a team needs to face a high level offense. Let me know when Stanford faces one.
Expand ...
Just look at their 2020-21 PAC-12 schedule and you can probably figure it out :)
 
Alydar said:
To play a high level of defense a team needs to face a high level offense. Let me know when Stanford faces one.
Expand ...

The comment was in regards to a comparison vs Oregon. Let me know which high level offense Oregon has faced to this point. They haven't. So the comparison of their defenses against sub-par offenses is pretty even at this point. Oregon will have the first real test this weekend though against OSU. Stanford still has some time before they get any real challenge (probably UCLA in a couple weeks).
 
.-.
DefenseBB said:
Kind of self-serving comment coming from a "juggernaut" team that just lost to an underrated NC State team...Of course you have to say that, otherwise you can't justify a #1 rank or banner...:rolleyes:

Having watched Stanford twice and Oregon once, I would say that @Floridaduck is "DaffyDuck" as Stanford IS Deeper than Oregon and has as much experience OR MORE than Oregon.
This Stanford team could be unbeatable if Tara can get over the last 28 years of big game stinkers once she gets to the Final Four. To be fair, to me, this is her deepest team ever. Time will tell.

Edit-Floridaduck's comment so flustered me, I did some research. Oregon has exactly 4 players who played previous to this year, with 1 (Mikesell) elsewhere. That means they have a grand total of 80 combined starts for Oregon (76 by Boley). Meanwhile, Stanford, returns 10 Players with 254 starts combined. But yeah, Oregon is as experienced as Stanford...:confused:
Expand ...

Agree this is Tara's deepest team ever and they have a lot of potential. Never been a huge fan of Tara's coaching though, not allowing any set of players to really gel before swapping them all out. So, I never put too much credence in them winning it all. But who knows ... as you said, time will tell.
 
saywho said:
The comment was in regards to a comparison vs Oregon. Let me know which high level offense Oregon has faced to this point. They haven't. So the comparison of their defenses against sub-par offenses is pretty even at this point. Oregon will have the first real test this weekend though against OSU. Stanford still has some time before they get any real challenge (probably UCLA in a couple weeks).
Expand ...

Sorry. I took the comment as implying that Stanford has shown that it has a strong defense.
 
Alydar said:
What does that have to do with their schedule up till now?
Expand ...
Didn't Stanford have their schedule changed due to Covid? Or are you saying they should have played tougher teams despite that?
 
Love that we simultaneously aren't deep and the proof is our starters are in too much, but we also do hockey line substitutions so no one can ever get into their groove. Which is it?

BTW: Another flaw is that at least one player on the team didn't get a perfect SAT score. What mediocrity!
 
sivad40 said:
Didn't Stanford have their schedule changed due to Covid? Or are you saying they should have played tougher teams despite that?
Expand ...

Yes to the first and no to the second. The fact remains that they played a patsy and the bottom of the PAC12. Lets not characterize their offense/defense or anyone else's for that matter until that PAC12 schedule starts. Did I see that the first meaningful game is Jan 1?

And this in no way means I don't see the Trees around at the end.

As far as Oregon vs Stanford I have no opinion.
 
.-.
DefenseBB said:
Kind of self-serving comment coming from a "juggernaut" team that just lost to an underrated NC State team...Of course you have to say that, otherwise you can't justify a #1 rank or banner...:rolleyes:

Having watched Stanford twice and Oregon once, I would say that @Floridaduck is "DaffyDuck" as Stanford IS Deeper than Oregon and has as much experience OR MORE than Oregon.
This Stanford team could be unbeatable if Tara can get over the last 28 years of big game stinkers once she gets to the Final Four. To be fair, to me, this is her deepest team ever. Time will tell.

Edit-Floridaduck's comment so flustered me, I did some research. Oregon has exactly 4 players who played previous to this year, with 1 (Mikesell) elsewhere. That means they have a grand total of 80 combined starts for Oregon (76 by Boley). Meanwhile, Stanford, returns 10 Players with 254 starts combined. But yeah, Oregon is as experienced as Stanford...:confused:
Expand ...
I dont think anyone is saying that Oregon is more experience than Stanford. Just better depth (not more experienced, but more talented)
 
Covid is really challenging things for the rankings no doubt. The top 2 teams (Louisville should be behind UConn) have barely played. And the lack of non conference games of course makes it even harder. Especially the pac 12, even their few non conference games aren’t with any good opponents. This entire season might get an asterisk next to it when it’s all over.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,291
Messages
4,561,653
Members
10,455
Latest member
UConnGabby


Top Bottom