Isaac Humphries 7'0" 245, 2016 to Kentucky

[AndShock]

Who knows what the FF teams record would have been if not for the injuries during the regular season.

We didn't lose to Kentucky because they were a loaded team. They won by 2 points. I know it's hard for me to grasp during these heady times but you can't win every game regardless of how good you are.

And I don't understand how college basketball is down right now. Would you prefer the days when UCLA was on it's run?

Just take a look at some of the rosters for next year and compare them to previous years. A Mark Turgeon coached team will probably be #1 next year at some point next year. Maybe "that level" allows him to reach national championship caliber, but I'd lean towards next year just not being loaded with great teams.

If we play that UK game 10 times over, we probably win somewhere between 4-6 of them. That was a very even game. It's hard to go undefeated and the percentages caught up with us. Right now I'm not seeing any NBA teams in college basketball next year. Maybe some teams and players step up and they will be better than UK these last 2 years. It's all speculative right now. I'm just saying when I look at the rosters for next season, I'm not seeing any major roadblocks. UK/KU are popping up in everyone's top 3 and those rosters aren't exactly super impressive.

As for the Final Four team, maybe they were great.Would they still be considered great if they had lost to Gonzaga by 10 points? That's where it was headed before one of the most impressive offensive surges I have ever seen. ;If we play Gonzaga 10 times, how many times do we win that one? 2-3 maybe? One, two, three shots going in or out could be the difference between being remembered forever and considered "great" and just being a 9 seed that lost in the 2nd round. I don't think anyone considers them great if they lose that game. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the team was just able to step up in a clutch moment and knew what had to be done and if they played through that same scenario 10 times they would win that game 10 out of 10 times. ;I don't have the answer to that, I just have my interpretations of how things went down.

[MadaboutWu]

As for the Final Four team, maybe they were great.Would they still be considered great if they had lost to Gonzaga by 10 points? That's where it was headed before one of the most impressive offensive surges I have ever seen. ;If we play Gonzaga 10 times, how many times do we win that one? 2-3 maybe? One, two, three shots going in or out could be the difference between being remembered forever and considered "great" and just being a 9 seed that lost in the 2nd round. I don't think anyone considers them great if they lose that game. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the team was just able to step up in a clutch moment and knew what had to be done and if they played through that same scenario 10 times they would win that game 10 out of 10 times. ;I don't have the answer to that, I just have my interpretations of how things went down.

Meh, Gonzaga was a great team as well. We could easily have lost by 10. If we play the series starting down 7 or whatever with 5 to go, we lose most of those. But what proportion do we win if you reset the games from when we are up by about 10 midway through the first half? I think we split a series of 10 against them (playing the full game that is).

[Ricardo del Rio]

Because we lost I think there is a prevailing thought that that WSU lucked their way into getting close to winning.

UK was a single bucket from getting blown out of the game.

Then in the 2nd half they were a banked 3 (and as opposed to Baker, NOT FOULED) from being all but dead and buried. It was a game between 2 teams that had every chance to be National Champs. They won that one.

It happens.

I swear that I will never forget the banked 3. It was just not your standard banked 3. It was a God awful lucky, once in a lifetime, banked 3.

[pie n eye]

Just take a look at some of the rosters for next year and compare them to previous years. A Mark Turgeon coached team will probably be #1 next year at some point next year. Maybe "that level" allows him to reach national championship caliber, but I'd lean towards next year just not being loaded with great teams.

If we play that UK game 10 times over, we probably win somewhere between 4-6 of them. That was a very even game. It's hard to go undefeated and the percentages caught up with us. Right now I'm not seeing any NBA teams in college basketball next year. Maybe some teams and players step up and they will be better than UK these last 2 years. It's all speculative right now. I'm just saying when I look at the rosters for next season, I'm not seeing any major roadblocks. UK/KU are popping up in everyone's top 3 and those rosters aren't exactly super impressive.

As for the Final Four team, maybe they were great.Would they still be considered great if they had lost to Gonzaga by 10 points? That's where it was headed before one of the most impressive offensive surges I have ever seen. ;If we play Gonzaga 10 times, how many times do we win that one? 2-3 maybe? One, two, three shots going in or out could be the difference between being remembered forever and considered "great" and just being a 9 seed that lost in the 2nd round. I don't think anyone considers them great if they lose that game. Maybe I'm wrong. Maybe the team was just able to step up in a clutch moment and knew what had to be done and if they played through that same scenario 10 times they would win that game 10 out of 10 times. ;I don't have the answer to that, I just have my interpretations of how things went down.

Fair enough, Its just way too early for me to try and speculate whether next year will be up or down whatever that even really means. Like you said varies from person to person. It just bothers me for some reason when I hear people talk about college basketball being down. Like when was it up? And how much difference is there really between down and up?

[Shocker1976]

The Final Four team was great when they got healthy.

As I recall the recent Final Four Shockers were undefeated (9-0) when three starters (Hall, Baker and Wessel) went out of rotation due to injuries. Hall came back in January and the Shockers played better and when Baker returned in February - the run to the Final Four began! Evan did not return to play that year.

[Uncle Rico]

Because we lost I think there is a prevailing thought that that WSU lucked their way into getting close to winning.

UK was a single bucket from getting blown out of the game.

Then in the 2nd half they were a banked 3 (and as opposed to Baker, NOT FOULED) from being all but dead and buried. It was a game between 2 teams that had every chance to be National Champs. They won that one.

It happens.

I think UK played out of their a$$es that game. They hit shot after shot that they hadn't hit all year long. We played well that game, UK played great. I think we would have won that game 7-8 times out of 10. UK had more individual talent, but we were the better team by far. If that game would have been for all the marbles, it would have been an all-time classic remembered by everyone.

[choida]

The Final Four team was not a great team. The undefeated team was great but ran into a loaded UK squad. There won't be any loaded teams to run into next year.

Crack kills... Getting the final four means you are great...

[pinstripers]

Who is this Humphries guy?

[wsushox1]

I think UK played out of their a$$es that game. They hit shot after shot that they hadn't hit all year long. We played well that game, UK played great. I think we would have won that game 7-8 times out of 10. UK had more individual talent, but we were the better team by far. If that game would have been for all the marbles, it would have been an all-time classic remembered by everyone.

It's not as if UK turned around and pooped the bed after they played us. They did go on to the National Championship game.

[shockmonster]

So Wichita State has interest in this kid, but has made no offer, correct? At least, not that has been published by anybody (a quick visit to Verbal Commits shows absolutely nothing on our interest in Humphries).

Can anybody explain the whole offer process? Who makes it public? Is it the athlete? I wouldn't think the coaching staff would be able to make such an announcement so I'm curious how all of the offers are made known and how much credence to put into such reports.

It's been documented that he visited. I would seriously doubt that he would make a visit of any kind unless some kind of offer was extended first.

[Shoxfan11]

It's not as if UK turned around and pooped the bed after they played us. They did go on to the National Championship game.

They did, but without WCS. We got by far their best effort.

[WstateU]

Crack kills...

Please notify these ‘social’ groomers…

[Bluzrover]

It's been documented that he visited. I would seriously doubt that he would make a visit of any kind unless some kind of offer was extended first.

Other than here and Sully's article, where else was it documented? I'm not arguing, truly curious where you saw that.

And FWIW, I would agree that someone wouldn't visit unless an offer has been made or extended but, again, just haven't seen anything other than interwebz speculation about our interest in him or his interest in WSU.

[pinstripers]

Many visit prior to the offer.

[Cdizzle]

Other than here and Sully's article, where else was it documented? I'm not arguing, truly curious where you saw that.

And FWIW, I would agree that someone wouldn't visit unless an offer has been made or extended but, again, just haven't seen anything other than interwebz speculation about our interest in him or his interest in WSU.

Suellentrop documented that he visited. He doesn't usually 'speculate' without calling it such. He stated it as fact. That would seem to indicate some fairly serious level of interest from both parties.