Will keep this brief, because @dave92 has reminded me that it may behoove me to be a more productive member of society before the thanksgiving break.
Things Iâve liked so far on offense:
Getting more points off turnovers
Getting more 2nd chance buckets
Much higher usage, slightly more efficient Reece
Higher usage, much more efficient RD (and shooting well from the line!)
Shooting well as a team, esp. from 3
Blakeâs offense in general
Dante as a change of pace
Things I havenât liked:
Wouldâve expected a bit more rim pressure (at least, I was hoping for it)
Not much ball screen except as a brief look in sides, or getting into sides, or the odd quick hitter
Not shooting nearly enough threes for a team that shoots so well
Dante as a change of pace mostly only leading to Dante shooting from the midrange
Hoping we donât get into the Gard-Tony dance-off thing, where the one of them is like âYou call that deliberate? I will show you deliberate!!â But I fear we mightâŚ
On ball screens, one issue is that itâs a little too easy to just duck under a ball screen against Reece right now; heâs either got to take and make a couple of threes off of that, or we have to start connecting on some quick re-screens to open up some gaps for Reece to playmake.
Couple things that puzzle me about this poll. How does UNC move up 6 spots after beating UC Riverside at home? Also, how does Texas move up 4 spots after needing a buzzer beater to beat Louisville?
Also, Miami is not a top 10 team. They may be in a couple months, but they are not there now, imo.
No, actually they didnât, with the exception of FAU. Ultimately it doesnât really matter, but it makes no sense to me at all. There are top 25 rankings from national guys on X that make much more sense.
For those of you who like a ranking system with smarter, more well-informed, and more handsome voters (not to mention better taste in sports message boards), sources close to the Elite 8 poll tell me it will be back next Monday, or so, after some Feast Week over-reactions.
Probably depends what you mean by accurate. I suspect itâs returning the correct answer, per the algorithm. But itâs limited sample size and I think even the âno preseason adjustmentâ numbers include the preseason adjustment for opponents. I donât think itâs worth much for a few more games, but also, itâs fun, and it helps keep me away from my job, which, if not yet abundantly clear, Iâm clearly looking for.
(just to be clear @EmbracePaceUVA thatâs the OEff number â #6 DEff and #8 overall)
Until sometime in Jan. or so, Torvik and KenPom include their preseason numbers in the data, and they fade away slowly. That is, heavily influenced by preseason after game 1, and successively less so, as games go by. I like Torvik this part of the season because his website lets the user manually remove the preseason adjustment, but Ken doesnât.
Hate to agree with Goodman but I was about to make the same point. If they want to keep doing the media poll, which I would be fine if they didnât, it needs to be modernized. Itâs setup as if it were still the 1970s when college sports was regional. Now itâs easy to choose a group of reputable national writers who would do a far better job.
Regarding the âwithout preseason adjustmentâ at the end of the day the underlying algorithm still includes the same assumptions that led him to suggest Dunn would play <5% of minutes this year. His preseason projection for UVa was so absurd that I donât think he can be taken seriously.
People need to remember thereâs a human(s) behind all of this data and just like the humans that vote in the AP poll, they have flaws, biases, and assumptions that impact their rankings.