Where Do We Really Stand?

[ShockTalk]

A number of things that have happened and that have been said, have made me take a step back to pause. Just where is the Shocker basketball program in its development? Some are being critical of coaching decisions, some of the soft schedule (I've done that), the team's let down at Drake and CU, and possibly losing any chance at an at-large berth.

Perspective: 1) Where did others and where did we as Shockers fans think this team would be at the beginning of the season? 2) Why did we have such a soft schedule and HCGM seeming to not be that concerned about it? 3) Criticism of coaching decisions, in particular, not calling more time outs, yet others says "his style is to let this "young" team work through it" 4) TurFin's comment "Sit with a coach grading film and you'll understand your views about the game are very elementary." and 5) Just where do we think we are now?

So I took a look at the other mid-major teams that are ranked in the top 25 of either the AP or ESPN and how WSU stacked up.

The first column after the name is total non-con games, second is true road games, third is neutral court games, fourth is solid (not neccesarily quality) opponents, and fifth is solid opponents that didn't work out as well. I consider a solid opponent as one who will most likely be above 200 RPI, if not above 150 RPI. No, I didn't go to a lot of trouble to look at all the opponents RPIs, but "eye-balled" it and looked up a few records.

WSU 12 / 2 / 2 / 4 / 3
UNI 10 / 3 / 2 / 4 / 4
UAB 14 / 5 / 2 / 6 / 4
BYU 16 / 5 / 2 / 9 / 2
NM 15 / 4 /1 / 9 / 4
Btlr 11 / 4 / 4 / 7 / 3 (UE Aces worst opponent)
Tmpl 15 / 7 2 / 10 / 3
Zags 14 / 2 / 4 / 8 / 3

Average of the other 7 teams:
13.5 / 4.3 / 2.4 / 7.6 / 3.3

All these teams, except Butler, have better records than we do, (they're 16-4).

Dose of reality: Just perhaps, our coaching staff does understand this team much better than we, the fans and coach them as such. They scheduled fewer % road/neutral games than the other teams and a softer schedule. I would venture that having the "average" schedule above, we'd be more like 15-6 or 14-7. Good, improved, but not in the same caliber as the other teams above.

We are a tad bit spoiled after our Sweet 16 run, although I think many would agree that we probably over-achieved that year. We want more and there's nothing wrong with that. We are fans! This is a fan board and nothing wrong about airing out one's opinion for discussion.

:wsu_posters: :wsu_posters:

[vbird53]

Solid discussion. The only thing I'd debate is that I don't believe for a minute that we over-achieved in 2006. That Sweet 16 run was legit. If anything, I would argue that we fell short in losing to George Mason again, certainly a team we could have beaten.

[ShockTalk]

Solid discussion. The only thing I'd debate is that I don't believe for a minute that we over-achieved in 2006. That Sweet 16 run was legit. If anything, I would argue that we fell short in losing to George Mason again, certainly a team we could have beaten.

Over-achieving might be a little strong, as I do feel they were VERY deserving. Nevertheless, do not short change George Mason. They beat us on our home court and beat Michigan St, UNC, WSU, UConn in the tourney before losing to #1 Florida. That's a little better than beating Seton Hall and Tennessee.

The next year, minus Miller and some "chemistry", that same Shocker squad dropped from 26-9 to 17-14 overall and from 14-4 to 8-10 in the Valley with no post season. Respectfully, I'll go with "maxed out" (if not over-achieved) in 05-06 and under-achieved in 06-07.

[Speed]

I would say that so far this WSU team has exceeded pre-season expectations.

But:
The Creighton & Drake losses were dissapointing. The Illinois State road game was quite winnable. During the course of a season a game like these three can be expected.

I would say that we are at a point where the season can be defined. A strong finish can restore national attention, provide hope for a possible MVC season championship & provide momentum going into St. Louis.

I won't say that WSU fans are spoiled. THere have been many more lean times than not in the past 15-20 years. The team is provided with top-notch ammenities & travel accomodations. There are also 10000+ at every game.

WSU spends competitive money for a coach with a solid resume, reputation and aspirations. I think the last two coaches have represented good choices for WSU. I see no reason why WSU shouldn't be consistenly in the top 3 in the MVC and competitive on a national scale each and evey year.
:wsu_posters: :wsu_posters:

[ShockTalk]

You have MVC teams that are capable of winning every Valley game and those that are not. Fortunately, we're in the former group. That doesn't mean, however, that you're going to win them all or are expected to win them all. Somewhere within reasonable expectations is where a team will land.

These next couple of games could be very pivotable on how the rest of the season pans out. This team, unlike UNI, has a lot of upside potential to be tapped. Also, unlike UNI, they haven't been there before and their mental toughness is still very much in question.

Believe me - as a fan, that Sweet 16 run spoiled me. I've gone to games since the days of Warren Armstrong. So after that long dry spell of the 90's, and now I've drunk of that "Victory Chalice", I've gotta have more! Nothing rational about it. That's why its hard to temper one's enthusiasm and understand one's own disappointments when certain things don't happen as hoped for.

[AndShock]

I think the one of the things with the ISU, Creighton, and Drake games, is that we played all of those teams during their best stretch in the MVC season. It doesn't excuse the losses, but I think it provides some reasoning as to why they happened. I think if we catch Creighton or Drake at the beginning of the MVC season and we win both those games.

[ShockTalk]

I think the one of the things with the ISU, Creighton, and Drake games, is that we played all of those teams during their best stretch in the MVC season. It doesn't excuse the losses, but I think it provides some reasoning as to why they happened. I think if we catch Creighton or Drake at the beginning of the MVC season and we win both those games.

Drake, yes, Creighton, probably didn't make any difference. Creighton's not much different now than then (expect for the recent addition by subtraction :lol: ). They went 5-6 non-con, 5 home games, 3 roadies, and 3 neutral court and all non-home games were agasinst good competition. I'm not sure we'd gone 7-4 at best.

[SB Shock]

I would say that so far this WSU team has exceeded pre-season expectations.

At this point in the season, WSU is pretty much meeting pre-season expectations. They are:

14-1 in Expected wins [-1]
2-0 in tossup games [+1]
0-3 in expected losses [0]

The real problem in my mind is they could be exceeding pre-season expectation by not losing to CU and DU. The these 2 teams were very susceptible to lose had WSU came to play.


Expected wins
Fairleigh Dickinson (W)
Cleveland St (W)
Alcorn St (W)
Texas S. (W)
SC Upstate (W)
UMKC (W)
TC (W)
ND State (W)
Drake (W)
Bradley (W)
MSU (W)
Ind St (W)
UNI (W)
Drake (L)

Expected Losses
Pittsburgh (L)
ISU (Red) (L)
CU (L)

Toss Up
Iowa (W)
TT (W)

[Speed]

OK, at this point what finish is an acceptable result?
I would like no worse than a 2 seed going into St. Louis, which would exceed pre-season expectations.

Until the Dake loss I liked our chanced for a bid into the NCAA's. I was working on something to post that compared WSU to top 25 teams and two projections that left WSU out. I thought WSU was deserving. I scrapped that after Saturday. I don't think the NCAA's are out of the question. I think WSU is capable of winning the MVC Tournament. But it is foolish to leave that as the last option.

But a high NIT seed and some more home games would be OK.

[SB Shock]

OK, at this point what finish is an acceptable result?
I would like no worse than a 2 seed going into St. Louis, which would exceed pre-season expectations.

The real problem is WSU could have a acceptable finish and be in the play-in game due to the fact that the MVC is eating it's own and there is no seperation (except for UNI). That is why the CU and DU losses hurt some much. They could have had a 2-3 game cushion.

Until the Dake loss I liked our chanced for a bid into the NCAA's. I was working on something to post that compared WSU to top 25 teams and two projections that left WSU out. I thought WSU was deserving. I scrapped that after Saturday. I don't think the NCAA's are out of the question.

I agree. The DU (and to a lesser extent the CU loss) just makes WSU road a little harder. They are going to need to get it figured out how to actually play 40 minutes every game and win a couple now that they were not expected to or win all the "toss-up" games.

I think WSU is capable of winning the MVC Tournament. But it is foolish to leave that as the last option.

Again I agree. You have to think that WSU is due, but untill this team is capable of playing consistently for 40 minutes, it is probably foolish to think they can play 40 minutes three times in a row.

This team is capable of doing whatever they want to do, it is really matter of do they really want it. After the DU game, I'm not sure what they want.

[Speed]

[quote="SB Shock"]

OK, at this point what finish is an acceptable result?
I would like no worse than a 2 seed going into St. Louis, which would exceed pre-season expectations.

The real problem is WSU could have a acceptable finish and be in the play-in game due to the fact that the MVC is eating it's own and there is no seperation (except for UNI). That is why the CU and DU losses hurt some much. They could have had a 2-3 game cushion.

A win tonight creates space, avenges a previous loss & turns the momentum that was lost on Saturaday>