Terrico White hires an agent.
- Thread starter Hanmudog
- Start date
It's going to really suck this next year. Arkansas has already thrown in the towel. Auburn is Auburn, except with all their good seniors gone. LSU and Alabama may actually have a chance to win the division next year.
I don't see a single team in the West that I would project as an NCAA team going into next season. At least this past year in pre-season, both Ole Miss and MSU were projected to make the field out of the West. I don't think anyone will even be projected to make it pre-season.
ETA: I'm projecting no SEC West teams in the dance for the 2nd year in a row, which will make 1 SEC West at large bid in a 3 season period. Is there a weaker basketball division in any major conference? Not even close.
I don't see a single team in the West that I would project as an NCAA team going into next season. At least this past year in pre-season, both Ole Miss and MSU were projected to make the field out of the West. I don't think anyone will even be projected to make it pre-season.
ETA: I'm projecting no SEC West teams in the dance for the 2nd year in a row, which will make 1 SEC West at large bid in a 3 season period. Is there a weaker basketball division in any major conference? Not even close.
1. Warren
2. Gaskins (gasp) or that Nick Williams kid who transferred from Indiana.
3. Graham
4. Henry
5. Buckner
For the most part, it's still a starting 5 that all played together last year, but the problem is our bench is gone, and that's an NIT caliber starting 5 at best anyway. I think we'll have enough players to win 7 or 8 SEC games, especially in a weak SEC again, and we'll probably make the NIT again, but we won't have enough to be able to make the dance.
2. Gaskins (gasp) or that Nick Williams kid who transferred from Indiana.
3. Graham
4. Henry
5. Buckner
For the most part, it's still a starting 5 that all played together last year, but the problem is our bench is gone, and that's an NIT caliber starting 5 at best anyway. I think we'll have enough players to win 7 or 8 SEC games, especially in a weak SEC again, and we'll probably make the NIT again, but we won't have enough to be able to make the dance.
DawgatAuburn said:
I love it that both of us have "shared" West banners twice in the last 4 seasons with neither team making the tourney. Here is a quick list of the at large NCAA bids from the West in recent years:
2007: Arkansas
2008: Arkansas, MSU
2009: LSU (MSU got the auto-bid)
2010: ...
2011: I'm expecting none
So that's 4 at large bids in the last 4 seasons. I'm expecting it to be 4 at large bids over 5 seasons, unless LSU's incoming freshman class is better than I expected. That, or unless Sidney turns out to be some sort of monster that can carry your team to a 10 seed.
1. I never said jack about winning the West being a big deal
2. This year's Ole Miss team was NIT worthy next year's will not be no matter how much the West sucks.
If Bost returns and Sidney is half way decent then I think we will be the favorites to win in a weak West division. LSU is going to suck massive donkey balls next year.
2. This year's Ole Miss team was NIT worthy next year's will not be no matter how much the West sucks.
If Bost returns and Sidney is half way decent then I think we will be the favorites to win in a weak West division. LSU is going to suck massive donkey balls next year.
Everyone who thinks next year's team will be worse than this years isn't familiar with words like "bench," "backup," or "Sidney."
Ok, I will play. By Bench, Im guessing you mean freshmen that have never seen SEC play. By backups I think you mean people that are currently injured and werent great when they werent. And Sidney, would be the guy that cant play the first 9-10 games next year. So by my estimation I think the people that say it will be a worse team are spot on.
There is no way you guys can lose White, Polyniece, and Holloway and be as good as last year. If yall are as good as last year then you will run away with the West next season.
I will be surprised if either State or Ole Miss wins more than 20 games next season. </p>
I will be surprised if either State or Ole Miss wins more than 20 games next season. </p>
Hump4Hoops said:
At this point in time, saying we will be better next year when we are losing Barry, Jarvis, Ravern, Osby, and possibly Dee is about as spot on as saying that the NJ Nets were really the best team in the NBA this season...
If everyone that comes in is spectacular and Renardo actually ever plays AND lives up to his hype, then yes I will agree that there is a POSSIBILITY, however small it may be, that we could be better next year than this year. Lots of huge IFs in that line of thinking though.
when we went like 8-2 to finish the season without him playing hardly at all. Terrico and Holloway hurt, for sure, but Henry and Buckner should be much better, plus four star big man Cox is coming in. Four star point guard Nelson coming in, plus I expect Warren to be better, especially since he had a year long layoff and rehab before last season. Add Nick Williams, who averaged 9/4.5 as a freshman at Indiana. I am not saying we make the dance, but we should be mediocre again. We would be a good team with Terrico and Holloway, and mediocre without them. I'm looking forward to Buckner and Henry actually getting some decent minutes, as I never understood why they didn't play more this year.
Hell, just erasing the 16 minutes Cranston played should be a plus.
Hell, just erasing the 16 minutes Cranston played should be a plus.
Hanmudog said:
Instead, we're losing 2 key contributors, like just about everyone else.
Will MSU be better by losing Varnado, Bost, Johnson, Stewart, and Osby but adding Sidney? Will Arkansas be better losing Fortson? Wait...don't answer that.
Seriously, everyone loses players. I don't think we'll be better than an NIT team, but I don't think it's unreasonable to say we could be as good as we were this past year barring Kneepocalypse 2.0.
We lost two very key players. Polynice was obviously a problem late in the year, so I don't count losing him as a key loss. We'll probably do like OP says, and we'll flirt with the bubble and then look to pad AK's NIT Hall of Fame resume.
Hump4Hoops said:
I am familiar with the reality that those who are on the bench and in backup roles are not as good as those starting. And when 2 high impact starters graduate, a rotation be bench player leaves, and 2 more starters are on the edge of leaving, that means thosebackup players become starters. And those that were benchers become the backup players.
Since our backup AND bench players wont develop in the next 6 months into players that are suddenly capable of being great, next year is shaping up to be worse than this year.
At least from a talent standpoint.
Yes Sidney is uber talented. He is also uber out of shape(still), will have taken a year and a half off from competitive basketball, and is only 1 man. He may be great, but he cant carry a team to the success that we had last season(which isnt exactly greatness).
I think if we play the following lineup to start the season, we will be decent:
Bost (35) / Beckham (5)
Steele (?) / Bryant (?) cross fingers here.
Benock (Just threw up a little in my mouth....?) / Turner (?)
Turner (30) / [Osby leaving kills us here early] (Lewis???10)
Kodi (35) / Bailey~Reik~Lewis (5)
Realist/Pessimistically I figure Baileyand Smith are eachtoast and won't contribute much at all.
The two new guys at the 2 have to come in and be able to contribute good minutes quickly. If they are better than advertised, perhaps we could slide one down to get some minutes at the 3 and allow Benock to spend more time on the bench. Either way we have some proven offense out of Kodi, Bost and Phil.
I think that if we prank around with trying to find too many minutes for Reik/Lewis (as well as Benock) early in the year we are screwed. With wholesale substitution patterns early "trying to find the rightrotation, etc...." we are going to be ******.We have to play make it or break it in these early games to get our win total up and not allow losses to marginal teams. Assume Sidney is ready @ game nine and all of a sudden wereplaceKodi with Sidney atcenter and moveKodi to power forward.Phil slides up to play 38 min per gameat3 almost completely taking Benock off the court or worst case, both of the new guys suck and Phil has to pick up minutes at the 2.
My statements largely revolve around getting the best players on the floor for the most minutes possible.
For some reason Coach Stansbury has a simplistic approach where we are two deep at each position regardless of talent level and the backup player has to sub in regardless of game situation or productivity of said player at predeterminedtime intervals. This statement sums it up pretty well for me and it makes me want to bang my head against the wall.
Here is hoping for something different after 12 years of the same.
Bost (35) / Beckham (5)
Steele (?) / Bryant (?) cross fingers here.
Benock (Just threw up a little in my mouth....?) / Turner (?)
Turner (30) / [Osby leaving kills us here early] (Lewis???10)
Kodi (35) / Bailey~Reik~Lewis (5)
Realist/Pessimistically I figure Baileyand Smith are eachtoast and won't contribute much at all.
The two new guys at the 2 have to come in and be able to contribute good minutes quickly. If they are better than advertised, perhaps we could slide one down to get some minutes at the 3 and allow Benock to spend more time on the bench. Either way we have some proven offense out of Kodi, Bost and Phil.
I think that if we prank around with trying to find too many minutes for Reik/Lewis (as well as Benock) early in the year we are screwed. With wholesale substitution patterns early "trying to find the rightrotation, etc...." we are going to be ******.We have to play make it or break it in these early games to get our win total up and not allow losses to marginal teams. Assume Sidney is ready @ game nine and all of a sudden wereplaceKodi with Sidney atcenter and moveKodi to power forward.Phil slides up to play 38 min per gameat3 almost completely taking Benock off the court or worst case, both of the new guys suck and Phil has to pick up minutes at the 2.
My statements largely revolve around getting the best players on the floor for the most minutes possible.
For some reason Coach Stansbury has a simplistic approach where we are two deep at each position regardless of talent level and the backup player has to sub in regardless of game situation or productivity of said player at predeterminedtime intervals. This statement sums it up pretty well for me and it makes me want to bang my head against the wall.
Here is hoping for something different after 12 years of the same.
Hanmudog said:
I'm not a big AK supporter by any means anymore, but we're probably going to find our way to the bubble again next year and end up a 3-4 see in the NIT, maybe slip all the way to a 5. We'll have enough players to win some games but not enough to make the NCAA.