Iowa State an Early 9 Seed In Tournament Prediction

[BeastCY]

So the most recent Joe Lunardi projected NCAA Tournament bracket has Iowa State as a 9 seed. I would like to think they are a bit higher, but it's hard to tell with such a new lineup. Any predictions on here? Big 12 Conference will be rough this year, as always!

 

[Jeremy]

I think it's fair considering we're many months before tip-off of exhibition with a ton of unknowns.

We have a ton of scoring to pick up somewhere. We're going to have to 1) hope all the transfers can adapt to the big move up in competition and even exceed their prior stints, 2) get Tamin to hit some jumpers and 3's at a decent enough clip, and 3) Milan and some others hit the ground running and can spread the floor by conference time.

On paper, we have a lot of great pieces... but they're going to be extremely young and/or moving up 1 or 2 tiers. The ceiling is higher than the last 2 seasons just based on talent, but people are going to be expecting way too much from some of the youngsters.

Even with the upgrade in talent potential, I could see a very similar season to last year as we're trading a highly experienced, lower ceiling team for a very inexperienced, higher ceiling team.

 

[peteypie]

I think it's fair considering we're many months before tip-off of exhibition with a ton of unknowns.

We have a ton of scoring to pick up somewhere. We're going to have to 1) hope all the transfers can adapt to the big move up in competition and even exceed their prior stints, 2) get Tamin to hit some jumpers and 3's at a decent enough clip, and 3) Milan and some others hit the ground running and can spread the floor by conference time.

On paper, we have a lot of great pieces... but they're going to be extremely young and/or moving up 1 or 2 tiers. The ceiling is higher than the last 2 seasons just based on talent, but people are going to be expecting way too much from some of the youngsters.

Even with the upgrade in talent potential, I could see a very similar season to last year as we're trading a highly experienced, lower ceiling team for a very inexperienced, higher ceiling team.

Which is why if this happened, I would not want to be in Michigan States shoes as a 1 seed. This ISU team might lose some clunkers they shouldn't, but they also have enough young talent to compete with anybody if things are clicking

 

[ClonesFTW]

This is going to be a team that performs better in March than in Nov/Dec which is somewhat the opposite of the two most recent teams. I could see us in that 8-11 spot on Selection Sunday coming in with confidence.

 

[Jkclone15]

9 seed seems reasonable. Given this is such a young team they will probably have some head scratching losses mixed in with big wins. I could easily see them much higher though if everything clicks early.

 

[mitchforcy]

9 seed seems fair given the unknown quantities but this is going to be an uber talented team. I would guess we end up as a 9 seed at the very least.

 

[snowcraig2.0]

I'd be thrilled with that.

 

[exCyDing]

Totally fine with that. It's hard to expect Otz to take the next step (B12 titles/high seeds/deep runs) when he's turning over so much production from year to year. It sure looks like he has some pieces that are going to play big parts, and be around for a couple of years to build some continuity in the program. If things go well enough this year, the expectations get raised for '24-25.

 

[HFCS]

Doesn't make sense to me adding up:
- Tournament team two years straight
- Elite recruiting class
- Solid transfer class
- Coaching stability

Show me 32 programs in better position collectively in those areas.

Everybody turns over a ton of players now. Most are doing it bringing in inferior players to what ISU has in the pipeline and with more question marks at head coach.

 

[Cyinthenorth]

Doesn't make sense to me adding up:
- Tournament team two years straight
- Elite recruiting class
- Solid transfer class
- Coaching stability

Show me 32 programs in better position collectively in those areas.

Everybody turns over a ton of players now. Most are doing it bringing in inferior players to what ISU has in the pipeline and with more question marks at head coach.

We are losing over 50ppg, without considering the other production lost

Holmes 13.3 ppg
Gabe 12.6
Grill 9.5
Osun 8.2
Kunc 7.1

I am not too upset about it. You are right in that there is quite a bit of turnover at most places anymore, but we are replacing essentially what equates to a starting lineup and are still getting the benefit of the doubt of being a 9-seed, which translates to a fringe top 25 team. Right about on par with TJs first 2-teams. I'm not sure it's even a little off base to be honest. I haven't dissected the schedule yet, but I'd figure that to be about right given what we know.

The difference between this team and the first 2-teams is the ceiling feels a little higher. We have legit talented offense players now, and more than just one. 9 seed seems like a solid baseline to me, and if things gel better/more quickly maybe they are a 3 or 4 seed come March.

 

[HFCS]

We are losing over 50ppg, without considering the other production lost

Holmes 13.3 ppg
Gabe 12.6
Grill 9.5
Osun 8.2
Kunc 7.1

I am not too upset about it. You are right in that there is quite a bit of turnover at most places anymore, but we are replacing essentially what equates to a starting lineup and are still getting the benefit of the doubt of being a 9-seed, which translates to a fringe top 25 team. Right about on par with TJs first 2-teams. I'm not sure it's even a little off base to be honest. I haven't dissected the schedule yet, but I'd figure that to be about right given what we know.

The difference between this team and the first 2-teams is the ceiling feels a little higher. We have legit talented offense players now, and more than just one. 9 seed seems like a solid baseline to me, and if things gel better/more quickly maybe they are a 3 or 4 seed come March.

Isn't every team losing a ton these days and not all are replacing it with the recruiting/transfer class we have?

I really don't see how any team that hasn't been in the tournament the past two years could be ahead of any team with a proven coach and ISU's incoming players. Just in that snippet of the rankings along...why is Colorado possibly better? Worse hs class. Much worse transfer class. No tournaments recently.

I'm not "upset" in the slightest, but it seems completely irrational to me.

More and more I just view it as:
1 - Do you have continuity with a good coach
2 - Do you have great transfers and hs players coming in

Looking at that criteria it's hard to put ISU much lower than 20-25 range.

What teams "bring back" is slipping into irrelavence compared to what it used to mean. Maybe here or there with a rare elite player who isn't what the NBA wants, but for the most part it seems like making sure your incoming players are great along with a great staff is all that matters.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Totally fine with that. It's hard to expect Otz to take the next step (B12 titles/high seeds/deep runs) when he's turning over so much production from year to year. It sure looks like he has some pieces that are going to play big parts, and be around for a couple of years to build some continuity in the program. If things go well enough this year, the expectations get raised for '24-25.

I know this is a small sample size, but the first TJ team only had three returners (was going to be six but eventually ended up as only three when Foster, Hinson, and Johnson left the program), the second one only had four(-ish), and the third one we're going into is only going to have five returners.

2022 = Conditt, Jackson, Walker (minus Foster, Hinson, and Johnson)
2023 = Grill, Jones, Kalscheur, Kunc (+2/3rds of a season from King off a redshirt)
2024 = Jones, King, Lipsey, Ward, Watson

Add to that with the 2023 group definitely being the strongest returning cohort of the three.

I essentially view them as de facto year-to-year at this point. Maybe you are right and Tamin is a Cyclone for life, Gilbert/Jones/Paveletzke can't transfer again, Watson ends up living up to his potential and doesn't want to transfer for whatever reason, and the three returning freshman (assuming Omaha is almost guaranteed to leave after one season here) are ready to have significant impacts as sophomores. All maybes.

Just as likely is about half of that happens and TJ is looking for 2-4 next spring.

And that's just how it is going to be and it's... fine.

 

[Sigmapolis]

Isn't every team losing a ton these days and not all are replacing it with the recruiting/transfer class we have?

Torvik has some metrics to quantify this across programs.

I will use the Big 12 as to benchmark the Cyclones against their peers.

Iowa State is just about in the middle of the conference in terms of returning minutes --



UCF coming into "the SEC of college basketball" with a completely new roster (almost) equals yikes.

It is the least experienced roster coming into next season, though. A lot of the other teams have returning upperclassmen with long tenures at their school or upperclassmen transfers.

Iowa State is lacking those assets so --



The team last year was full of low-ceiling but high-floor grown men in their early- or mid-20s. The team next year is going to be full of kids relative to that without nearly as much live-fire experience against college players or Big 12 players, though those kids have a lot more talent and much higher ceilings.

We'll see how it works out. But TJ is going into battle with a very young team. Iowa State is going to be one of the least-experienced teams in the country. Here is the bottom of the whole list --



11th from the absolute bottom of the list.

 

[Jeremy]

Isn't every team losing a ton these days and not all are replacing it with the recruiting/transfer class we have?

I really don't see how any team that hasn't been in the tournament the past two years could be ahead of any team with a proven coach and ISU's incoming players. Just in that snippet of the rankings along...why is Colorado possibly better? Worse hs class. Much worse transfer class. No tournaments recently.

I'm not "upset" in the slightest, but it seems completely irrational to me.

More and more I just view it as:
1 - Do you have continuity with a good coach
2 - Do you have great transfers and hs players coming in

Looking at that criteria it's hard to put ISU much lower than 20-25 range.

What teams "bring back" is slipping into irrelavence compared to what it used to mean. Maybe here or there with a rare elite player who isn't what the NBA wants, but for the most part it seems like making sure your incoming players are great along with a great staff is all that matters.

TJ’s first team he struck lightning in a bottle with 1) transfers overperforming (i.e. Brockington), 2) a freshman PG that played near the top of his conference peers, 3) very unique gelling early, and 4) great matchups.

Last year we were good but not great because we didn’t have a lot of scoring options, and those that we did have weren’t consistent. But TJ still made them competitive and got to the dance on the back of elite defense. The floor was high because of experience and defense. The ceiling was fairly low given the makeup of the roster and lack of true offensive weaponry.

This year we lose all of our offensive productivity, but have a great freshman class and good transfers. On paper that sounds like we should be good… but losing 50+ pts/game and replacing with freshmen and transfers isn’t necessarily a huge net positive short-term. True, a lot of teams bring in big transfer classes nowadays, but they typically have a core of program players that step up into starting roles along side them. We don’t have a ton of that yet, and little offensively, simply because of how TJ had to jump-start and reset the program.

None of the transfers are proven Big 12 caliber offensive threats yet. Some struggled to score consistently a level down. They’re good, don’t get me wrong, but not absolutely huge upgrades from last year until we see somebody be the next Brockington.

For freshmen, our biggest prize (Omaha) is an elite defender more than elite scorer right now. He could score 25 in a game, but I think he’s going to be more up and down than some expect on that end of the floor. Milan is going to be great, but again, people are going to expect a true freshman to come in and score 15+/game day one. That’s the exception, not the norm.

I really think this is the first year of a 2-3 year depth building process of getting our core guys that we annually add transfers around and each year should end better than the prior. This is the first true elite recruiting class, but they’re all freshmen.

Just trying to keep expectations in check. Ideally, we need to score 10-15 or more points per game than we lost to get to that next level. That may be a year away. I expect the dance this year, but it's hard to say we can right now be top tier great.

 

[Jeremy]

Torvik has some metrics to quantify this across programs.

I will use the Big 12 as to benchmark the Cyclones against their peers.

Iowa State is just about in the middle of the conference in terms of returning minutes --

View attachment 113682

UCF coming into "the SEC of college basketball" with a completely new roster (almost) equals yikes.

It is the least experienced roster coming into next season, though. A lot of the other teams have returning upperclassmen with long tenures at their school or upperclassmen transfers.

Iowa State is lacking those assets so --

View attachment 113683

The team last year was full of low-ceiling but high-floor grown men in their early- or mid-20s. The team next year is going to be full of kids relative to that without nearly as much live-fire experience against college players or Big 12 players, though those kids have a lot more talent and much higher ceilings.

We'll see how it works out. But TJ is going into battle with a very young team. Iowa State is going to be one of the least-experienced teams in the country. Here is the bottom of the whole list --

View attachment 113684

11th from the absolute bottom of the list.

Beautifully said.

 

[HFCS]

TJ’s first team he struck lightning in a bottle with 1) transfers overperforming (i.e. Brockington), 2) a freshman PG that played near the top of his conference peers, 3) very unique gelling early, and 4) great matchups.

Last year we were good but not great because we didn’t have a lot of scoring options, and those that we did have weren’t consistent. But TJ still made them competitive and got to the dance on the back of elite defense. The floor was high because of experience and defense. The ceiling was fairly low given the makeup of the roster and lack of true offensive weaponry.

This year we lose all of our offensive productivity, but have a great freshman class and good transfers. On paper that sounds like we should be good… but losing 50+ pts/game and replacing with freshmen and transfers isn’t necessarily a huge net positive short-term. True, a lot of teams bring in big transfer classes nowadays, but they typically have a core of program players that step up into starting roles along side them. We don’t have a ton of that yet, and little offensively, simply because of how TJ had to jump-start and reset the program.

None of the transfers are proven Big 12 caliber offensive threats yet. Some struggled to score consistently a level down. They’re good, don’t get me wrong, but not absolutely huge upgrades from last year until we see somebody be the next Brockington.

For freshmen, our biggest prize (Omaha) is an elite defender more than elite scorer right now. He could score 25 in a game, but I think he’s going to be more up and down than some expect on that end of the floor. Milan is going to be great, but again, people are going to expect a true freshman to come in and score 15+/game day one. That’s the exception, not the norm.

I really think this is the first year of a 2-3 year depth building process of getting our core guys that we annually add transfers around and each year should end better than the prior. This is the first true elite recruiting class, but they’re all freshmen.

Just trying to keep expectations in check. Ideally, we need to score 10-15 or more points per game than we lost to get to that next level. That may be a year away. I expect the dance this year, but it's hard to say we can right now be top tier great.

Agree with all of this.

HIGHLY doubtful in this age where almost every team starts over every single season that 32+ teams have less of those question marks than a program with our coach, transfer class, home court advantage, and HS recruiting class.

People can misconstrue that as being "ANGRY" but I'm really not, I just see no logic behind it. Like what's the logic of having Colorado in front of ISU. What metric? They return more? That's not even 00s thinking, that's like early 90s thinking.

I'd be giddy if they all picked us dead last, it was fun in the Hoiberg years to be picked 8th every single season and finished 3rd place on average. It was illogical then too, the prognosticators basically ignored when we had can't miss transfers coming in.

As fans we don't need to check expectations, we can or we can chose not to.

 

[CycloneRulzzz]

I would love to get some revenge on msu although we will never get true payback.

 

[FriendlySpartan]

Agree with all of this.

HIGHLY doubtful in this age where almost every team starts over every single season that 32+ teams have less of those question marks than a program with our coach, transfer class, home court advantage, and HS recruiting class.

People can misconstrue that as being "ANGRY" but I'm really not, I just see no logic behind it. Like what's the logic of having Colorado in front of ISU. What metric? They return more? That's not even 00s thinking, that's like early 90s thinking.

I'd be giddy if they all picked us dead last, it was fun in the Hoiberg years to be picked 8th every single season and finished 3rd place on average. It was illogical then too, the prognosticators basically ignored when we had can't miss transfers coming in.

As fans we don't need to check expectations, we can or we can chose not to.

Colorado is bringing back two All Pac12 players with NBA potential and landing the 7th best player from the 2023 recruiting class. Also the last impression people got of ISU was an amazing defensive team that simply could not put the ball in the bucket. When you lose the offensive production on a team that already struggled to score that’s a big hole that the staff needs to address. Also the 8/9 seed is legit a coin flip so I wouldn’t say Colorado is ranked higher they just have a much easier path in the pac12 to get that seed.

For the record I do not want to play a team with ISU’s caliber of defense ever in the tournament.

 

[jctisu]

I had us as a 7 seed as my prediction coming into the season. I will stick with that as the scoring may still be difficult and it’s tricky to expect freshmen to adapt as quickly to the defense we play so we will likely take a step back there, but I think as the conference season gets here this team will start to build some real identity and wins in the Big 12 are huge toward a resume for March.

 

[HFCS]

Colorado is bringing back two All Pac12 players with NBA potential and landing the 7th best player from the 2023 recruiting class. Also the last impression people got of ISU was an amazing defensive team that simply could not put the ball in the bucket. When you lose the offensive production on a team that already struggled to score that’s a big hole that the staff needs to address. Also the 8/9 seed is legit a coin flip so I wouldn’t say Colorado is ranked higher they just have a much easier path in the pac12 to get that seed.

For the record I do not want to play a team with ISU’s caliber of defense ever in the tournament.

I only picked them because they happen to be in the same article. They're bringing in effectively one recruit from a team that missed the dance (who is ranked similarly to ISU's top recruit). ISU is bringing in a large high rated class of hs players and transfers...and has been winning in a conference that is on a different level.

ISU always gets ignored or underrated in these sort of things, it's not "getting angry", just looking at it honestly. There's also no longer question marks at coach and Hilton is a real edge that only 10-12 teams might have. I just don't see dozens and dozens of programs with the upside that ISU has right now in this specific moment. I see maybe 20, 32-35 is pushing it.

With the coaching stability and recruiting classes we have coming in and how most teams now start over every year, I fail to see how it makes any sense to have us that much lower than 20-25...unless it's just a "sexy brand" contest which is what these often inevitably are.

What is the metric? I think anything other than coaching stability and transfer/hs recruit ranking is becoming incredibly irrelevant. Maybe give teams a slight bump if they have an amazing home court and fan support that carries through year to year but ISU is covered there.

There's no way I'd trade places with many of these teams that have:
- Less stability in the staff
- Lower ranked hs classes
- Lower ranked transfer classes
- Have missed the tournament the past year or two (regardless of how much 'is back')
- An indifferent fan base and little home court advantage