-
Hi Guest,
We've updated the site to combine all the forums that were part of the Big Sky Fans Network into one location. This will make it easier to navigate and participate in all the discussions for each school without having to have multiple accounts, etc. We are still working out some tweaks but please let us know if you notice anything.
With the migration, in some circumstances, your username could have been merged with one of your other usernames from the other forums. If this is the case, you can request to change your username in your account details page of your profile. -
Hi Guest, want to participate in the discussions, keep track of read/unread posts and more? Create your free account and increase the benefits of your eGriz.com experience today!
-
Guest, do want an ad free experience on BigSkyFans.com among other benefits? Upgrade your account today!
Simply click your profile name > account upgrades > BigSky Club > choose between the year long subscription (two free months) or month to month
Thanks for the continued support. Cheers!
2017-18, Way Too Early Predictions
- Thread starter oldrunner
- Start date
sacstateman
Active member
I can't argue too much with these predictions...maybe UNC and Portland a little too high and EWU and hopefully Sac a little too low...but overall, not a bad guess IMO....can't wait for the season to start so we can quit PREDICTING and start seeing some results....
oldrunner
Active member
Good breakdown scout.thescout said:
The thing that I would add is that UI will be better than last year, but not by much. The return of Callandret is the most significant development for them. He does make them better, but third to fist better? I'm not so sure about that. I see them moving up to second.
I look more at what teams were lacking last season and what they added for this coming year. For example, WSU and ISU were lacking in rebounding and interior defense. Both team added significantly in those aspects of the game. Both teams will finish better than they did last year.
I agree totally on UM. They have also added what they lacked and are a more complete team now.
As has been pointed out, the league is stronger, top to bottom. Road wins will be hard to come by. A team like UI, who only improves slightly, may find the going rough on the road.
Idaho does what few other Big Sky teams do: defend. And defense travels. I like the Vandals, but I must say the league as a whole looks a lot better this year. Proof is always in the pudding -- can the league break out of its recent pattern of pathetic non-conference performance? Until they do they will remain relegated to the bottom third of D-1 leagues.
oldrunner
Active member
UI's starting 5 look quite solid. They look okay at 7 deep, but after that they are relying on freshmen to fill the gaps. They are extra thin on the front line. In that respect, they look a lot like we did last year. Playing good D is one thing. Getting all of the defensive boards is another. They will be fine as long as there are no injuries or other problems that mess with that starting 5. I think that they don't get through league without injuries and that they give up far too many offensive boards. At home their guards may be able to carry them with their shooting and perimeter D. On the road life is a little bit harder. Maybe one or two of their freshmen can step up and make an impact. We will see.Bengal visitor said:
As far as OOC records go, it will be hard for the league to make any headway in that regard. If we are not able to bring quality games to our home floors, we will always be in this rut. This is really an NCAA issue. :wall:
oldrunner said:UI's starting 5 look quite solid. They look okay at 7 deep, but after that they are relying on freshmen to fill the gaps. They are extra thin on the front line. In that respect, they look a lot like we did last year. Playing good D is one thing. Getting all of the defensive boards is another. They will be fine as long as there are no injuries or other problems that mess with that starting 5. I think that they don't get through league without injuries and that they give up far too many offensive boards. At home their guards may be able to carry them with their shooting and perimeter D. On the road life is a little bit harder. Maybe one or two of their freshmen can step up and make an impact. We will see.Bengal visitor said:
As far as OOC records go, it will be hard for the league to make any headway in that regard. If we are not able to bring quality games to our home floors, we will always be in this rut. This is really an NCAA issue. :wall:
Most of the Big Sky is screwed as far as non-conference schedule is concerned. No quality D-1 program wants to travel to Pocatello, Greeley, Moscow or Flagstaff. Big Sky has to get some breakthroughs on the road and in pre-conference tournaments if it wants to improve its RPI. Don't hold your breath on NCAA action.
oldrunner
Active member
I have been rating SUU, NAU, Sac, and PSU towards the bottom of the league. With the exception of SUU, who appears to be a year off of actually making any headway, I would say that the other three are like wild cards. Those three have a lot of JCs and other transfers and that makes them quite unpredictable. In particular, Katz at Sacramento is known for finding some diamonds in the JC ranks. He may have done it again, who really knows? PSU is 90% JC transfers. There could be some hidden gem in there somewhere. NAU has a couple of DI graduate transfer guards who could help a little or a lot, who can predict that?
My experience has been that JC guys take a while to adjust to the DI game. We have usually got much more out of them in the second year than the first. However, there have been some exceptions to that rule. PSU has been a JC program for many years now. They have been good some years and not so good others. Sac has had a mix of JC and 4 year guys. They have also been up and down quite a bit. The teams that are more consistent have fewer JC guys and rely heavily on 4 and 5 year players.
My experience has been that JC guys take a while to adjust to the DI game. We have usually got much more out of them in the second year than the first. However, there have been some exceptions to that rule. PSU has been a JC program for many years now. They have been good some years and not so good others. Sac has had a mix of JC and 4 year guys. They have also been up and down quite a bit. The teams that are more consistent have fewer JC guys and rely heavily on 4 and 5 year players.
sacstateman
Active member
I can't help you on anything pertaining to SUU, NAU or PSU but about Sac, I may be able to help out a bit....I haven't seen any of the new guys play, so I will pretty much stay with the returners and a few stats about the incoming JC guys....In my eyes, we needed to shoot the ball better from outside all last season. Part of the reason for that was, 2 of our best shooters were injured for almost the entire season...Jeff Wu, who was a soph last year and expected to be one of our most reliable outside threats, played only 13 games last year before he finally shut it down...the games he did play were effected by a bad knee injury which he had to succumb to after trying to play through it...his stats were way down due to this injury....Izayah (Izzy in your eyes), who Coach Katz told me preseason, was the Hornets best shooter by far, got plantar fasciitas just as his freshman season was starting...this injury effected his shooting for the whole season but by the end of the season, the inflammation had come down some allowing him to shoot with less pain but still in pain....his numbers were up for the last 4-5 games because of this....Olds, you pointed out that our interior defense is important this year which I agree with...we have Josh Patton coming back as a sophomore center this year...he was the 4th leading shot blocker in the BSC last year even though he only averaged 9.7 minutes per game...that is pretty remarkable...if he can stay out of foul trouble (big "if" with shot blockers), he will be a great rim protector for us, as well as a decent offensive player too (shot 53%)...of course, with our best two players coming back (Justin Springs and Marcus Graves) we have a pretty good and stable base to add to...as far as our new JC faces are concerned, Christian Perez, 6'7" 215lbs, shot 46% from the field including 44% on threes with about 2 attempts per game, 13.6 pts and 6.8 rbs per game should help a bit and Calvin Martin, 6'6" and 235 lbs looks like a Nick Hornsby clone, body wise, averaged 8.4 rbs a game in less than 20 mins per game, should add some bulk to the front court as well....All in all, it's a crap shoot in my mind because I haven't seen the new guys but I think we stand a reasonable chance to be in the top 6 anyway....
oldrunner
Active member
Sounds like your undersized power forwards are good rebounders. If they are good defenders as well, I think you are right, Sac will be an improved team. I'm pulling for you. None of us are going to know much about these newcomers until we see them against other mid major talent. One thing that does seem to translate to a higher level is rebounding. That alone is huge. That is why I keep saying that ISU is going to be much improved, UM as well.
The competition for one of the byes will be intense. I don't see anyone getting through the BSC without at least 4 losses.
The competition for one of the byes will be intense. I don't see anyone getting through the BSC without at least 4 losses.
If Marcus Graves gets into a groove and Justin Springs continues to develop, like he has the past two years, then yes, I believe Sac will be a lot better. Problem with Sac is consistency and the floor QB. Marcus Graves isn't a very solid PG, but is a stellar 2. For Katz's game plan to be successful he needs a really good floor general. If he doesn't have that person, the Hornets tend to be really inconsistent. Springs in my opinion is one of the best bigs in the conference and perhaps the best rebounder right now. We will just have to see if Katz has recruited the necessary pieces to making Sac more consistent and possible contenders.
Personally, I believe and I'm changing from my original stance, that the preseason Sky rankings are, right now:
1. Idaho
2. Montana
3. Weber State
4. UNCO
5. Montana State
6. North Dakota
7. Sac
8. Eastern
9. Idaho State
10. Northern Arizona
11. Portland State
12. Southern Utah
Personally, I believe and I'm changing from my original stance, that the preseason Sky rankings are, right now:
1. Idaho
2. Montana
3. Weber State
4. UNCO
5. Montana State
6. North Dakota
7. Sac
8. Eastern
9. Idaho State
10. Northern Arizona
11. Portland State
12. Southern Utah
sacstateman
Active member
thescout said:
In conference games, he was first in assists and second in assist/turnover ratio...there are at least 12 returners this year with better rebounding numbers than Strings...in fact, Strings was not listed in the top 20 rebounders for last season....
oldrunner
Active member
Three point shooting is nice, but if you live by it you will also die by it. Better to have a good mix of inside out. Championship teams rebound and defend at a high level. Sometimes, you can create possessions by turning the other team over more than you do yourself. However, that is also a hit and miss deal. I was told, by a very good coach, a long time ago, that teams need to choose what they are, a rebounding team or a pressing team. The real problem comes when you can't do either one well. Also, like UI proved last year, you can play great defense, but if you give up too many offensive boards, it all went for nothing. Every great once in a while, you will find a team that is so great at scoring that they beat you with that alone. Those teams are rare, like the old Hank Gathers led LMU teams. You don't see it much any more. Those guys would press and dare you to get in a running game with them.
Hmmm...maybe I'm giving Sac too much credit then. Graves is a terrible outside shooter, slow defender and inefficient offensively other than passing and Strings isn't that great of a rebounder. I guess it is another bad year for Katz and the Sacramento State Hornets.
sacstateman
Active member
Well, we went from 6th in your initial ranking to 7th after you complimented us....from that I would prefer you diss us more...Now, let's look at your original post..."Graves isn't a very solid PG", Ok, let's look at that one, 14.2 pts at 42.2% from the floor, not the best but far from the worst (granted, 13.5% from the arc is terrible), 5.8 assists per game, 1st in the BSC (not bad for a guy you claim isn't a very solid PG)... 2.1 A/T ratio, 2nd in the BSC (again, not bad), guess your assessment is a tad off....Second assessment from you...."Springs IMO is one of the best bigs in the conference and perhaps the best rebounder right now", I agree with your assessment on the offensive end but rebounding has never been a strength of Justin's as his number show, 4.8 rbs per game is not that good for a forward but he does play alot on the outside...In my post, I tried to tell you about our weakness last year from the arc and how we hope we can improve upon that based on who we return...I haven't said anything about Weber's returning Pts, Rbs or assists but I think you may want to take a look at it...you have good players coming in but they will have to produce...
sacstateman
Active member
oldrunner said:Three point shooting is nice, but if you live by it you will also die by it. Better to have a good mix of inside out. Championship teams rebound and defend at a high level. Sometimes, you can create possessions by turning the other team over more than you do yourself. However, that is also a hit and miss deal. I was told, by a very good coach, a long time ago, that teams need to choose what they are, a rebounding team or a pressing team. The real problem comes when you can't do either one well. Also, like UI proved last year, you can play great defense, but if you give up too many offensive boards, it all went for nothing. Every great once in a while, you will find a team that is so great at scoring that they beat you with that alone. Those teams are rare, like the old Hank Gathers led LMU teams. You don't see it much any more. Those guys would press and dare you to get in a running game with them.
You're right Olds...you can live or die by the 3 pt shot but you guys basically lived on the 3 last year...you shot the **** out of the ball from beyond the arc....42% for a team is very good...My question is, Do you think you can continue to shoot the 3 that well without Senglin?....You have a few proven 3 pt shooters returning in Baker, Richardson and Harding but will that be enough to offset the loss of Senglin?
oldrunner
Active member
I totally agree. We think we have good rebounders, scorers, defenders, coming in, but the proof is in the outcomes, not the potential. Everybody but UI and MSU are in that boat. I think it is going to be a really interesting season. UI is a solid 7 deep, but thin on depth, mostly in the front court. They will probably be a unanimous pick for first in the preseason polls. The strongest back courts in the league look like UM, MSU, UNCO, and ND. The strongest front courts, unproven newcomers in the mix, looks like WSU, UM, and EWU. Overall depth, UM, WSU, UI, and ISU. To me, a dark horse in this whole thing is UNCO. They could be much better than anyone thinks. Also, complete enigma out there is PSU. They could be good or completely horrible.sacstateman said:
oldrunner
Active member
We have respectable 3 point shooters in the program, but I think you will see a shift in our approach. I don't think we will take as many threes as we did a year ago. Of course we will take them if left open, or in situations where we have to. Overall, the ball will be going inside more than not.sacstateman said:oldrunner said:Three point shooting is nice, but if you live by it you will also die by it. Better to have a good mix of inside out. Championship teams rebound and defend at a high level. Sometimes, you can create possessions by turning the other team over more than you do yourself. However, that is also a hit and miss deal. I was told, by a very good coach, a long time ago, that teams need to choose what they are, a rebounding team or a pressing team. The real problem comes when you can't do either one well. Also, like UI proved last year, you can play great defense, but if you give up too many offensive boards, it all went for nothing. Every great once in a while, you will find a team that is so great at scoring that they beat you with that alone. Those teams are rare, like the old Hank Gathers led LMU teams. You don't see it much any more. Those guys would press and dare you to get in a running game with them.
You're right Olds...you can live or die by the 3 pt shot but you guys basically lived on the 3 last year...you shot the **** out of the ball from beyond the arc....42% for a team is very good...My question is, Do you think you can continue to shoot the 3 that well without Senglin?....You have a few proven 3 pt shooters returning in Baker, Richardson and Harding but will that be enough to offset the loss of Senglin?
sacstateman said:
DUDE...I don't have all day to surf the net like you and I don't care about Sac State sports. So, if I was off on stats; SOOOOO THE FREAK WHAT! I'm not going to continue arguing about a team that is perpetually in the cellar, at best at 6 or 7 each year. At the end of the day your team ended up 13-18 and If he was such a spectacular PG, wouldn't you think, in a guard heavy conference, that Sac would have been better? Anyway, I still think Strings is one of the best rebounders in the Sky. He does a great job getting into position. Has a big, strong body, and can really jump. But, since Graves can't hit a damn shot, he has to play outside too much. He is too far away from the basket to grab more rebounds. If he was playing more in the paint, he would be around 8/9 a game. Strings is your best player.
sacstateman
Active member
Thanks for the diss....I guess that means we move up in your rankings then....