2023-2024 MBB computer projections thread
- Thread starter Sigmapolis
- Start date
-
- Tags
- bracketology cyclones net quad rankings
The 2000 team that finished 10th in Kenpom is best in program history in Kenpom era. So this year has the potential to finish higher than that.
The 2000 team would wipe the floor with any other team in school history including this year. Fizer and Tinsley were on another level and we don't have anyone on the roster comparable right now.
That team had a National Title ceiling, I'd put us at an Elite 8 ceiling right now.
Probably should could argue this for days in a different thread. I was curious on the historical perspective of this team based on the analytics.
My take away is that the 2000 team was not nearly the "analytical darling" that the current team is.
The "feeling" for the teams is very different too - I think in part because I feel like this team hasn't really put together a complete game in a while, they just keep pulling out wins. A lot of that has to do with the fact that basically every game is against a tournament team, but it also feels like they could play better.
The game at TCU, we forced 26 turnovers, but got out rebounded badly and only won by 1. At home we won by 15, but we only forced 9 turnovers and were still outrebounded.
The Kansas game was awesome - and we finally put together a great shooting game, but it was a very close game because we lost our defensive identity and let them score at the rim at will
Hopefully we keep improving and put it all together - specifically on Monday, 2/19 would be nice.
What impresses me most about this team is they have proven they can win in a multitude of ways: creating turnovers, hitting 3s, bullying in the paint, grinding out tough D without creating a lot turnovers, etc.
After creating 27 TOs last time out agains TCU and winning by 1, who would have predicted that ISU would beat them by a dozen while only turning them over 12 times?
After creating 27 TOs last time out agains TCU and winning by 1, who would have predicted that ISU would beat them by a dozen while only turning them over 12 times?
Man DePaul is terrible lol
How the heck is TJ doing this with a team that features zero P6 transfers (unless you count Tre King from Georgetown, though he never played a minute for them) and one 4* recruit.
Yeah there's a 5* recruit on the roster but he can't even find minutes.
Yeah there's a 5* recruit on the roster but he can't even find minutes.
I think it's really important to have bigs who are capable and old. CW has really hammered home how tough it is for young talented players like Omaha to compete against 24 year olds. Then you extrapolate out how hard it is to find capable big men on the transfer market and think about how we have 3 in Jones, Ward, and King. Our guards are great, but a lot of teams have great guard play.
I was just thinking about that yesterday - about how next year, if everyone who has eligibility comes back, we really just need ~30 minutes of "paint enforcer" from the transfer pool. Too early to think about next year, and those guys don't grow on trees, but it's a well-defined role with minutes, we should be able to find a couple.
Torvik's TournyCast seed predictions for ISU
1: 27.3%
2: 35.6%
3: 26.3%
4: 9.1%
5: 1.3%
6: 0.3%
7: 0.1%
8-16: 0%
1: 27.3%
2: 35.6%
3: 26.3%
4: 9.1%
5: 1.3%
6: 0.3%
7: 0.1%
8-16: 0%
Roughly a 80% chance at least a top 3 seed in February. Not too shabby.
I don't know about "wipe the floor". This year's Houston team is likely as good or better than the 2000 team, and we already beat them.
We're probably at the point where comparing the '99-'00 team to this year is valid. This years team definitely has a deeper roster while Tinsley and Fizer would probably be the best two players on the court. This years team is a better defensive team, slightly. While the '99-'00 team was better offensively, particularly in the half court. If the two teams played each other 10 times both teams feel like they would get at least 3 or 4 wins. Personally I'd still give the edge to the '99-'00 team, but this years team still has time to grow.
I've rewatched a lot of those games from 2000 recently and while there's no debating who the two best players are, there's also no debating that this squad is shaping up to be far more well-rounded.
In the tournament back in 2000 the squad struggled when Fizer couldn't get his. Good defenses like Auburn and Michigan State were really able to key in on him and we had to rely heavily on chucking. Tinsley hit an inordinate amount of threes at a high clip in the tournament when they were sorely needed. He was overall a poor 3 point shooter in the regular season.
There really isn't anybody to defensively "key in" on, on this roster - other than Milan's long shooting. We don't rely heavily on a Fizer-like dude. We also aren't forced to give significant minutes to a Stevie Johnson type on the current squad - specialists that don't give much offensively.
I'd pit the current squad against the 2000 group and feel confident the results would be roughly 50/50. And I don't think this squad has maximized its potential either.
Fizer and Tinsley were both as good as Shed, if not better.
NBA players aren't bigger, but they are faster, stronger, and more skilled than players of previous generations. We've advanced so much in terms of training and nutrition even since the 1990s. Schemes have become much more sophisticated and intricate on both sides of the both compared to decades past.
The same is true in college. Fizer and Tinsley were great for their era, but I'm not sure they'd be so exceptional in terms of size and strength and skills compared to college players now.
There's no way to test this, of course. But maybe Fizer doesn't find Rob Jones as easy to bully on the block compared to a big man in the same percentile of college players in the 1990s. And Tinsley finds that Lipsey's lateral quickness and cleverness on both ends of the floor is equally frustrating to him.
And then the modern Cyclones start chuckin' but makin' threes and it's all over.
A singular vision for what the program is and will be + unselfish players having 100% knowledge of and commitment to their role + some INCREDIBLY perfect fits with no turds in the punchbowl.........this group just seems so good together. So much better than the sum of the parts.