No inside information about this sub-thread of the Vassar main thread, but if he sits out another season (i.e., does not transfer), he's basically saying he's done with basketball. If you're Vassar, and Collins has refused to take you back, and you don't like transferring to Alcorn State, I can see why he might retire.
So what does NU need next year?
- Thread starter Sec.112
- Start date
No inside information about this sub-thread of the Vassar main thread, but if he sits out another season (i.e., does not transfer), he's basically saying he's done with basketball. If you're Vassar, and Collins has refused to take you back, and you don't like transferring to Alcorn State, I can see why he might retire.
Oh, yeah, here's what we want, right?
Falzon, you score 10 a night, okay? Good.
Law, you have to score at least 10, too. Got it?
Lindsey, you are barely scoring some nights, but now you're gonna add another 7 points a night.
Oof, how likely is all of that?
We don't need ALL those things to happen...but SOME of them. A lot will come down to how Brown adjusts to the college game. If it's a smooth transition, we'll be tough next year. I'm not concerned about the other guys developing. I'm pretty certain they will. But Bmac HAS to have a solid backcourt compliment...and it sounds like we're counting on Brown...
Maybe (probably) Vassar will go away. I assume this year was a gift that won't keep on giving. Maybe we can give him a cheerleading scholarship instead. Can the guy punt? Anyway, a veteran 2 guard with skills and some size would also be a plus if it came to that.
While Pardon may eventually be better than Olah, he is not yet. Olah was very steady and knew where to be both on O and D. He did not commit a lot of dumb fouls and he had a nice mid range to three point shot that Pardon has not developed yet. Look at the times he was healthy. Sometimes he did not play to his height but overall he was pretty good for us. He will be missed till Pardon and Benson solidify their games
Don't we talk about potential every year? Wasn't there much hoopla about Falzon, Pardon, Demps, Mac, heading into this year? I think only Lindsey was agreed to really be a question mark among the masses. Go back, would you say any lived up to the preseason hype. Even Mac seemed to wear down again by late season. And the year before, the next big thing was Law.
We are not KY, Duke, Louisville. If a frosh is even close to D1 ready, it isn't going to be at star level. Ain't gonna happen. So resting hope on RI, Brown or Benson is a fools chase. They should be expected to be a non factor and maybe offer minor contributions in best case.
So then, what do we have?
Mac - known quantity, but based on NU history plus high usage, my prediction for next crippling NU injury
(No known quantity PG backup)
Lindsey - potential. Shows up, disappears, shows up, disappears - nothing to suggest change yet
Law - coming off season long injury, was strong on D, but O came around late - no way to know impact or recovery time from this year
Falzon - rough D, didn't show much O outside the inconsistent 3 - like Lindsey, great potential but unknown
Pardon - a good game or two, great potential but not even sure he can play long minutes without foul trouble
That's your starting 5. Lots of unknowns. The bench:
Lump - no O, presence for heavy minutes means Falzon did not progress as hoped
Tap - no D, and recurring foot problems. See Lump but also could be indicator that Law is not what we hoped for next year
Ash - who knows, couldn't earn much garbage time this year. Either CCC doesn't like to give experience or evaluated 35+ of Mac and Demps and the related risks was better than what Ash brought to the table.
Skelly - if he repeats this year, he is a quality backup 4. If he improves and sees more time, then either Law or Falzon fell short
I'm not going to bank on any diaper dandies at NU. Frosh appearance will more likely mean either injury or lack of development at a key rotation spot. Maybe one or two sees backup time in the rotation, but if we are to be any good, your starting five all need to improve (except Mac, he just needs some rest throughout the season IMHO). That's a lot of hopes.
Call me whatever you want, my koolaid drinking friends, but that is the hard real truth. Can all the potential show up, a diaper dandy be born, an NCAA birth finally arrive. Absolutely. But that's against the odds. Anybody brazen enough to bet me even money on NCAAs next year if you think I'm so wrong?
We are not KY, Duke, Louisville. If a frosh is even close to D1 ready, it isn't going to be at star level. Ain't gonna happen. So resting hope on RI, Brown or Benson is a fools chase. They should be expected to be a non factor and maybe offer minor contributions in best case.
So then, what do we have?
Mac - known quantity, but based on NU history plus high usage, my prediction for next crippling NU injury
(No known quantity PG backup)
Lindsey - potential. Shows up, disappears, shows up, disappears - nothing to suggest change yet
Law - coming off season long injury, was strong on D, but O came around late - no way to know impact or recovery time from this year
Falzon - rough D, didn't show much O outside the inconsistent 3 - like Lindsey, great potential but unknown
Pardon - a good game or two, great potential but not even sure he can play long minutes without foul trouble
That's your starting 5. Lots of unknowns. The bench:
Lump - no O, presence for heavy minutes means Falzon did not progress as hoped
Tap - no D, and recurring foot problems. See Lump but also could be indicator that Law is not what we hoped for next year
Ash - who knows, couldn't earn much garbage time this year. Either CCC doesn't like to give experience or evaluated 35+ of Mac and Demps and the related risks was better than what Ash brought to the table.
Skelly - if he repeats this year, he is a quality backup 4. If he improves and sees more time, then either Law or Falzon fell short
I'm not going to bank on any diaper dandies at NU. Frosh appearance will more likely mean either injury or lack of development at a key rotation spot. Maybe one or two sees backup time in the rotation, but if we are to be any good, your starting five all need to improve (except Mac, he just needs some rest throughout the season IMHO). That's a lot of hopes.
Call me whatever you want, my koolaid drinking friends, but that is the hard real truth. Can all the potential show up, a diaper dandy be born, an NCAA birth finally arrive. Absolutely. But that's against the odds. Anybody brazen enough to bet me even money on NCAAs next year if you think I'm so wrong?
Lumpkin only took about 1 3 pt shot a game and he hit 37% That is not the black hole you suggest.
As much as the lack of O from Lumpkin is frustrating, he only took about one per game and he hit 37% which is pretty reasonable. Not sure you are going to improve that much.
Thank you. Like Joni Mitchell sang, "you don't know what you got 'till it's gone"......relying on a true Sophomore and a true Freshman at Center in the Big 10 is going to be a challenge. Some nights will be OK, some awful. Next season is about development.
If you take out that stretch where Olah was injured or recovering, I would guess he came closer to 14-15 pts per game. And for Pardon to get there, he will have to improve a lot. Getting stronger will help both Pardon and Falzon and I would guess more strength will allow Falzon to go inside more.
In any other year, this years team would have been an NIT team. Lack of respect for the BIG hurt us more than our OOC schedule. It showed up in poor seedings and OSU going to NIT rather than NCAA and us being on the outside looking in.
Not buying the "BIG got disrespected thing" at all. It was a down year for the conference and it still sent half the league to the NCAAs. I haven't heard anyone crying foul over Ohio State being left out of the dance.
As far as NU is concerned, If you can't beat more than one team in the top half of your conference and don't challenge yourself in the OOC, you put yourself in a tenuous situation come selection Sunday. Virginia Tech did just that and ended up in the NIT.
There were factors that certainly went against NU this go around and they've been discussed in detail (bid thieves, issues with RPI formula, etc), but it really came down to this:
Record against Michigan, Ohio State, and Penn State: 1-5
Last edited:
Many of you rated Olah higher than I did. This will sound like a backhanded compliment, but all credit to Olah and the staff for getting him to the point where he could be a double-figures scorer in the Big Ten, but the kid was about as athletically-limited as you will see at the high major level. After a few minutes of watching Pardon, it was clear that he had miles better basketball feel and coordination. Frankly, I wish Collins had just stuck with Pardon for the remainder of the season after Olah went down. It's no mystery: guys are inconsistent when they get limited minutes or inconsistent minutes. I think Pardon is a better player right now.
The league wasn't THAT down at the top. Rutgers and unusually bad Minnesota and Illinois teams dragged us down at the bottom. MSU and Purdue lost games they probably win 19 times out of 20. Even with the two title game teams upset in the first round, still advanced three to the final 16. There is no way the regular season champion of the Big Ten with a 15-3 conference record should ever be seeded fifth, not when you had a Utah team that got run off the court by Gonzaga seeded at No. 3. Big 12 was the best balanced league this year, and I'll give the ACC a slight edge over the B1G due to their tourney performance (although a couple of ACC teams rally benefitted from busted brackets, which is why you want high seeds). The B1G was definitely superior to the SEC and Pac 12.
The second best team in the fifth best conference was a two seed. What's the problem?
Pardon has the athletic ability to be great, but he couldn't stay in many games this season without fouling ...
No matter how many times this gets trotted out, it's still never going to be true.
29% from three in conference play.
You also might want to take a look at some of his advanced stats in the conference.
The record against UM, OSU and PSU is just one of so many factors.
Every one of the last four teams in and first four teams out had AT LEAST 4 top-100 RPI wins.
I believe Long Beach State was the last at-large NIT bid. They had seven top-100 wins.
NU had 2 top-100 wins and no top-25 wins.
NU's non-bid had very little to do with the schedule. Monmouth, one of the first four teams out, had seven top 100 games. NU had 13.
Monmouth had nine 101-200 games. NU had eight.
The Cats couldn't win the front end of their RPI and they were too fat at the back end
Actually, I don't think Pardon is a great athlete. I do think he has an intuitive feel for the game. Again, players improve with consistent, significant minutes. Among other things, players learn how to play with fouls.
They were ranked #2 overall before winning the BTT. In the mean time, a Virginia team that neither won the conference or the ACC tourney got a one seed. While MSU got a two seed? Sorry but does not compute. Also Indiana and Purdue should have been 3 seeds.
Last edited:
Since they went to 64 teams, I do not know of a single case where an 11 BIG conference win team did not get into the NCAA. This year, OSU was the first. Only one 10 win team had not gotten in, PSU a couple years ago). Heck, MICH, a 12 win (including BTT) BIG team was in a play in game to get an 11 seed. Seedings also showed the lack of respect. Compare that to the favorable treatment of the PAC 12. 7 teams go tin ( Out of12) PAC 12 teams made it in and PAC 12 teams also got higher seeds and we saw how that worked out. I also believe that the seeding had an effect on a number of games. I would think that proper seeding would likely have resulted in 2 or more wins for the conference and likely more. In general, that is what I mean by a lack of respect.
And if OSU had been put in the NCAA, like they normally would have been, it is likely we would have been in the NIT. So based on what happened, regardless of our OOC schedule with the way the BIG was being treated it was highly unlikely that we getting in. Therefore,I repeat,lack of respect for the BIG was more instrumental in keeping us out than our OOC schedule
Last edited:
How many teams in the B1G now? So how many extra diluted wins? Rutgers? How about den Cornhuskers? Easier to get to 11 with a few more crappy teams in the league. Every year would have produced an IL and MN. But the bottom of the B1G was similar to NUs OOC schedule - crappy.
That conclusion does not follow.
The selection committee relies almost entirely upon RPI and related statistics like record vs. RPI top 100, and breaks "ties" generally by taking major conference teams. The last four teams in -- Wichita, Michigan, Tulsa, Vanderbilt -- were RPI 47, 57, 58, and 62 respectively. Ohio State at 74 wasn't getting in, and that has nothing to do with "respect" for the Big Ten. Likewise, NU at 115 wasn't getting into the NIT.
RPI is determined by strength of schedule, specifically opponents' winning percentage and opponents' opponents' winning percentage. Want a better RPI? Get a better non-conference schedule.
Or beat more good teams. I long ago argued that we needed more victories against top 100 (really top 50 teams) to make the NIT. Everyone we were competing for an NIT spot against beat more top 100 teams. That was our problem. It wasn't a lack of respect for the B1G. It was lack of quality wins. We could have potentially gotten more if we scheduled a better OOC, but we also had the opportunity to get some in conference. The problem is that we didn't get them anywhere. As such, your RPI analysis is on point. We could have had a higher RPI with more quality opponents and, more specifically, with more quality wins. But, we didn't...and that's why we were out. It's no great conspiracy.
Our challenge is a lack of known quantities, so we need some consistent night in and night out guys to emerge. BMac will be one, but we need at least one if not two more. IMHO, Law is poised to be one. No one knows exactly how he'll return from injury, but I also don't recall anyone being overly concerned about his readiness to return to a substantial role when recovered back when the injury occurred. So, the big question is whether he is poised to be a #2 or a #3 (and to a lesser degree what happens if injury issues linger.) But, who else? A lot of growth happens between year 1 and year 2, but I didn't see enough from Falzon, Lindsey, or Pardon to believe they will be the third guy. I saw enough to believe they CAN if they show substantial growth, but not enough to say they WILL. And Falzon or Pardon seem more likely candidates to me than Lindsey. Rap could also push this envelope, but counting on frosh to be primary options at NU isn't a good recipe for substantial success yet. I don't see it from Brown the way other guys do (I'm talking as a frosh), but I'll be pleasantly surprised if that emerges.
So, again IMHO, we may be looking at a season a lot like this year and that's where I'd bet $ if I bet $ on college players. BMac is the consistent. If we get more consistency from others and less injury issues, we move up. If we don't, we move down. Lots of potential, but too many ifs to make broad proclamations about our progress.
It's obviously true that, had we won more games against good teams, our NIT (or even NCAA, depending how many) resume would have been better.
But again, RPI is based on strength of schedule. Improving our non-conference schedule would have helped our RPI even if we didn't win any more top 100 games. That's the point.
I get that. I just don't think just scheduling a Dayton and Vandy instead of a MVSU or Chicago State would have helped our RPI enough to matter. Our RPI was in the 100's. We needed to beat somebody to move it substantially enough to make a difference.
This is true. If we replace wins over MVSU and Chicago State with losses to Dayton and Vanderbilt, our RPI remains basically unchanged. But then, if we lose every game we schedule up, we still don't deserve to be in the postseason.
Here's something interesting, though: using RPI Forecast, if we just didn't play Chicago State or MVSU, and didn't replace them on the schedule (or played D2/3 schools), our RPI would have been 14 spots higher. That's still likely not enough to reach the NIT, but that should demonstrate how bad scheduling hurts us. It's actually better not to play at all than it is to blow out a garbage team.
How do you figure it was the fifth-best conference? I'll give you the Big 12 and the ACC off their performance in the Big Dance. Who else?
Just going by rpi, like the committees do. In other words all the BIG "disrespect" is completely deserved and justified by the math. The worst big 10 in 15 years by some measures. Then add in that 10 teams in the country played a softer nc sos, and it's hard to get why people can't understand why we weren't even last 8 out of the nit.
More from RPI Forecast:
If we removed the four 300+ teams from our schedule and replaced them with four teams right around 200 -- in this case I used Bowling Green, George Mason, Western Michigan, and Fairleigh Dickinson -- winning those games improves our RPI to 94. That puts us squarely in NIT contention without adding a single "good win" to the schedule.
If we removed the four 300+ teams from our schedule and replaced them with four teams right around 200 -- in this case I used Bowling Green, George Mason, Western Michigan, and Fairleigh Dickinson -- winning those games improves our RPI to 94. That puts us squarely in NIT contention without adding a single "good win" to the schedule.
I don't care what the RPI said. The eye tests say a lot different. SEC had three teams in the tournament and barring an epic 14-point collapse in 44 seconds by Northern Iowa wouldn't have gotten a single team past the second round. Pac 12 showed nothing outside of Oregon. No way the B1G was worse than either of those conferences.
That's fine, but in a thread about the Big getting snubbed in the nit and ncaa we should probably use the measure they both use which isn't eye test, it's rpi (largely anyway).
What the teams do in the tourneys is irrelevant too (when discussing conference strength anyway) because the slots and seeds are already assigned by then so how they fare after the fact is moot. The teams aren't seeded according to how well the committees think they'll do, they're seeded only based on what they've done already.
And yet we won the ACC/B1G challenge against the almighty ACC. Yeah, we really sucked...lol
This is going to be interesting. I to was dead set on a two guard but really on thinking about it I think we could use a good big man to smooth the ride for Benson and Pardon. I mean a good big man and that would be a lot better than the last two, Joey and the guy from Yale. If all we can get at this time are players of that caliber, I would bring another freshman big man, if he can play sometime in the future, and red shirt him.
Of course this all depends on this Vassar deal, which I think will straighten itself out. If you think about Vassar hanging around, it really amounts to the same thing as a NCAA penalty for of all people NU who does damn near everything by the book and even gives these guys a great education on top of it.
Similar threads
