Bear Down Wildcats

Games start today - preseason polls and rankings are complete. The Massey Composite is probably as good as any measure of how various teams are regarded nationwide by people (and computers) that follow this sort of thing. ARIZONA surprisingly (at least to me) comes in at #4 in that composite. The Cats are ranked as high as #1 by Kirkpatrick and as low as #27 by Logan. Here are the top 10 as well as the other teams in the PAC-12:

1. North Carolina

2. Virginia

3. Villanova

4. ARIZONA

5. Duke

6. Kentucky

7. Kansas

8. Wisconsin

9. Wichita State

10. Gonzaga

15. Utah

29. Oregon

32. UCLA

41. California

57. Stanford

65. The Normal School

76. Colorado

78. Oregon State

109. USC

125. Washington

144. WSU

Looks to me like the majority of people on these UA message boards are a bunch of pessimists (and are way too enamored of California).

Final Four or Bust!

http://www.masseyratings.com/cb/compare.htm

KaibabKat wrote:
Looks to me like the majority of people on these UA message boards are a bunch of pessimists (and are way too enamored of California).

not me

Hey, I'm trying to weigh myself down as much as I can with much-advised low expectations, and I still can't help being excited for what this team could achieve. The combination of senior experience, incoming talent, the possibilities for getting the right players on the floor in the best positions, and on Mr. Ryan Anderson just raise my optimism like a helium balloon a crack.

Cal has a lot on paper but they need to show me they can compete and work get her, as does Arizona

4 sounds high to me. Think we're ranked where we should be, at least for now. Let's see how we look tonight and in these huge OOC games coming up.

We have zero players playing the same role as next year. We could be very, very good. We could also have people fail to adjust and not be so good.

Upside: we can hang that preseason Final Four banner.

Cal has a lot more to show than Arizona, just because its coaching staff hasn't proved squat besides it can recruit.

Takes much more than having the horses to win in college hoops. Otherwise, we'd bow down before Kentucky's recruiting banners.

Besides, Calipari is an expert ego manager. Jury's still out on Cuonzo.

Beachcat97 wrote:4 sounds high to me. Think we're ranked where we should be, at least for now. Let's see how we look tonight and in these huge OOC games coming up.

But our composite ranking is 4.

Longhorned wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:4 sounds high to me. Think we're ranked where we should be, at least for now. Let's see how we look tonight and in these huge OOC games coming up.

But our composite ranking is 4.

I misspoke. I meant that the AP and Coaches' rankings have us where we should be.

I will care about rankings come March 1st

Love the potential of this team. Get steady pg play and we will excel. Best offensive club IMO in the Miller years

They're #1 in my heart.

Chicat wrote:They're #1 in my heart.

Is your heart on this year's selection committee?

I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Yeah, me too. That's been the trend recently. See Duke and UK. Guys in their 20s are great, but not as great as Okafor, Jones, and Wiggins.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Yea, but our starting lineup has three guys with power conference talent out of high school, and so does most our bench as well. It's easy for some of those smaller schools to have a slew of guys who have played 2 or 3 years already. Maybe they click at the right time and go far in the NCAAs , or get hot for a game or two and send guys packing. But Zeus and Gabe have been there their entire time here at Arizona. Anderson played three full years in best conference in the country and was his team's best or 2nd best player all three. Allen, despite starting out a JC, appears to be a great D1 level defender, we will hold reservations on the offense until we see more floor time. Tollefsen at worst looks to be a top of the line mid-major talent.

I think the mix of experience with top level talent, along with the versatility and different styles of play will be a nice blend that will suit us well come March. I think that blend helps alleviate a lot of the possible pains of losing four starters to the league/d-league. Only a few schools that can lose that and be right back there the next year, Kentucky, Duke, and maybe one or two others with a really nice recruiting class.

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

rgdeuce wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Yea, but our starting lineup has three guys with power conference talent out of high school, and so does most our bench as well. It's easy for some of those smaller schools to have a slew of guys who have played 2 or 3 years already. Maybe they click at the right time and go far in the NCAAs , or get hot for a game or two and send guys packing. But Zeus and Gabe have been there their entire time here at Arizona. Anderson played three full years in best conference in the country and was his team's best or 2nd best player all three. Allen, despite starting out a JC, appears to be a great D1 level defender, we will hold reservations on the offense until we see more floor time. Tollefsen at worst looks to be a top of the line mid-major talent.

I think the mix of experience with top level talent, along with the versatility and different styles of play will be a nice blend that will suit us well come March. I think that blend helps alleviate a lot of the possible pains of losing four starters to the league/d-league. Only a few schools that can lose that and be right back there the next year, Kentucky, Duke, and maybe one or two others with a really nice recruiting class.

Good post. You guys are elevating my expectations for this team.

Not sure that is a good thing. Can you imagine how you will react if UA loses to UCLA and or ASU in January

PHXCATS wrote:Not sure that is a good thing. Can you imagine how you will react if UA loses to UCLA and or ASU in January

Well, those would be upsets. This team will have to learn how to win on the road against good competition. I don't think either game you mention is an "easy win." But I do expect that we'll be favored in both.

Merkin wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Hey if we had both I'd be all for it. That starting lineup you posted legitimately has maybe 2 borderline NBA draftees on it and if I consult the best in the business that lineup has zero NBA draftees http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2016/" target="_blank. That doesn't exactly qualify as talent with experience.

For 90% of college basketball that qualifies as a lot of experience and a lot of talent.

Inspiring optimism: Tarc's experience and leadership; Anderson's talent and consistency, our depth

Inspiring something less that optimism but not yet skepticism: our defense, Tollefsen as our starting 3, York as our go to guy, our assist/TO ratio among our PGs

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Hey if we had both I'd be all for it. That starting lineup you posted legitimately has maybe 2 borderline NBA draftees on it and if I consult the best in the business that lineup has zero NBA draftees http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2016/" target="_blank. That doesn't exactly qualify as talent with experience.

Christ...well I might as well cancel the pac 12 network and sandbag this season.

We don't have talent to win it all...Shake my head...

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

BYU.

We are going to be fine and with miller at the helm our ceiling is as high as it ever has been and we are a dangerous and fun team to win it all.

We no longer rebuild, we annually reload.

Bear down, go cats.

I'll be cool with a sweet 16, maybe we finally get lucky break in the brackets and we get a favorable matchup and go further. On paper and from the little i've seen, I just don't see it but I would absolutely love to be wrong

ASUHATER! wrote:For 90% of college basketball that qualifies as a lot of experience and a lot of talent.

Absolutely, AH.

Whether we have draft ready or draft potential players can be a signal, but certainly isn't a valid approach to evaluate our team.

Our team. We have a group of 7/8/9 players of high value individually and weighted in the aggregate. To describe the relative value of our team vis-à-vis the D-1 pile, we're trying to weigh our individual's talents and experience in the aggregate.

And from that perspective many of us are pretty turned on. So are some of these comparative rating organizations whose evaluators are obviously aware we're bereft of top 30, perhaps even top 60 League draft potentials at least at this time.

Bear Down!

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Hey if we had both I'd be all for it. That starting lineup you posted legitimately has maybe 2 borderline NBA draftees on it and if I consult the best in the business that lineup has zero NBA draftees http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2016/" target="_blank. That doesn't exactly qualify as talent with experience.

I can think of three teams that werent absolutely loaded with NBA talent, or had some guys who became great players but were only freshmen at the time. Maybe our freshmen arent on the same level as a guy like Simon or Salim, but:

Derrick Williams and who else? Solo was an NBA guy but wasnt an impact player at the time. First in conference and an Elite 8

After wright, RJ, Gil and Woods left; Gardner (great college player, not NBA player) Walton was solid but not a beast, and Anderson (good college player only) and freshmen Salim and frye: 2nd in Pac and sweet 16

Jason Terrys senior year after Bibby Simon Dickerson left. Had Bramlett who was quality, and RJs class who were all freshmen: 2nd in Pac, first rd loss (but how many great teams of ours had that happened to before)

If you think this years team is vastly inferior to those teams you are crazy. Two of those years were supposed to be rebuilding years after losing the house on two teams that played in an NCAA title game the year before. The other was a year after Miller took over a trainwreck.

And Anderson keeps playing like this the dude is going to be an NBA player. He is a plus rebounder, more athletic and a much better motor than Bash, is aggressive and can finish around the rim, and has a solid shooting touch that will keep lengthening out with time. I can see defense being a concern at the next level but he has decent athleticism and got a lot stronger which helps. He's smart and has a nice skill set. He has some positives that I think hang with or maybe even exceed what some of the undersized NBA fours had when they were in college. he's what, an inch off the average PF height at 6'8? From what ive seen so far, theres nothing I havent seen from him that leads me to believe he doesnt sneak in as a second round pick and finding a way to be productive in the pro game like a Leon Powe or Glen Davis (minus the bulk).

Id be shocked if Tarc isnt drafted. I dont care what the draftexpress says. For a 7 footer hes athletic and can run the floor. Hes a smart defender. His shooting touch has continued to improve and his hands have looked to soften up. Ive seen some pretty worthless 7 footers stick around in the league.

Triers first round talent with time. Simons been comped w Geary on here, who had a brief stint in the league. Maybe he becomes a poor mans Iguodala. I remember him sneaking onto the radar and surprising our fans. Scouts loved him despite his limited shooting here. And you dont need NBA talent to have great teams, weve seen countless college studs who took their teams deep in the tourny and never sniffed the league.

CalStateTempe wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Hey if we had both I'd be all for it. That starting lineup you posted legitimately has maybe 2 borderline NBA draftees on it and if I consult the best in the business that lineup has zero NBA draftees http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2016/" target="_blank. That doesn't exactly qualify as talent with experience.

Christ...well I might as well cancel the pac 12 network and sandbag this season.

We don't have talent to win it all...Shake my head...

If you think we can win it all this season more power to you my man.

rgdeuce wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:

ChooChooCat wrote:

Merkin wrote:I never expect the basketball team to lose.

Starting lineup of Allen, York, Tollefson, Anderson and Tarczewski are all in their early 20s. What other team will have that much maturity?

Probably roughly 50% of the mid majors out there. I'd take talent over experience any day.

Hey if we had both I'd be all for it. That starting lineup you posted legitimately has maybe 2 borderline NBA draftees on it and if I consult the best in the business that lineup has zero NBA draftees http://www.draftexpress.com/nba-mock-draft/2016/" target="_blank. That doesn't exactly qualify as talent with experience.

I can think of three teams that werent absolutely loaded with NBA talent, or had some guys who became great players but were only freshmen at the time. Maybe our freshmen arent on the same level as a guy like Simon or Salim, but:

Derrick Williams and who else? Solo was an NBA guy but wasnt an impact player at the time. First in conference and an Elite 8

After wright, RJ, Gil and Woods left; Gardner (great college player, not NBA player) Walton was solid but not a beast, and Anderson (good college player only) and freshmen Salim and frye: 2nd in Pac and sweet 16

Jason Terrys senior year after Bibby Simon Dickerson left. Had Bramlett who was quality, and RJs class who were all freshmen: 2nd in Pac, first rd loss (but how many great teams of ours had that happened to before)

If you think this years team is vastly inferior to those teams you are crazy. Two of those years were supposed to be rebuilding years after losing the house on two teams that played in an NCAA title game the year before. The other was a year after Miller took over a trainwreck.

Derrick Williams was arguably the best player in all of college basketball that season. If you have that on your team you're going to be really good, just ask Wisconsin.

I never said this team couldn't accomplish what those other teams you listed did and I have no idea why you're insinuating as much. A Sweet 16 is more than within reach for this team, especially with a great draw.

Wisconsin also had Dekker, Hayes, Jackson, Brust, and a few other solid shooters. You got Williams-level or near him like Bobby Portis (2nd but in a very weak SEC) and TJ Warren playing on far less productive teams, or guys like Otto Porter and countless others who get bounced in the first or 2nd round. Teams with that one star and not much help are prone to get knocked out early, especially if the star has an off night or a team comes up with a nice scheme that forces the teammates to beat you. Besides, those top level players are typically going to be playing at top schools with some nice pieces around them

And we look back on that team and Williams favorably because history has already been written. That team was a Horne miss or officials not effing Williams and keeping him out of the game away from being a final four team. Anderson wont be D-Will good, but he still looks to be close to that tier of player thus far, maybe in the tier just below. And Anderson looks like he has the better supporting cast along with a cast that has a higher ceiling. D Will had to put that team on his back countless games with an occasional player stepping up to do it (Momo in the Cal game). The team generally played solid ball come march. No reason to believe that wont happen here.

I think we all just got spoiled with two straight title contenders. Im not sure anyone here will put money on this team being a title team, or a final four team, but in a year where you lose four star players what more do you want? This team has sweet 16 talent. Get to the sweet 16 by beating the teams u are supposed to and anything can happen. Favorable matchups due to high seeds getting bounced early, running into a top team on an off night, or us just playing at the highest level we can and beating them. This is good timing too, because there is not a team in the country right now who looks like a sure thing final four team. Kentucky isnt the team they have been, UNC returns practically everyone but we have seen them underperform in the past and be a mess at times. Duke has a lot of questions. You really gonna trust a Kansas team? There isnt a last years Wisconsin, Kentucky or Duke that I can see thus far. Everyone has questions just like we do

rgdeuce wrote:Wisconsin also had Dekker, Hayes, Jackson, Brust, and a few other solid shooters.

Yes, hence why they made it to the National Championship game in a year with some of the best teams in a good while, while we only made it to the Elite 8 in a weak year. We had one dominant player carry us that season and they had one dominant player and a much more talented supporting cast than what Arizona had that year. This isn't that hard to figure out.

TJ Warren, Bobby Portis, and Otto Porter (odd cast of characters to point out) were not the dominant force Derrick Williams was, regardless that they were all very good players and obviously eventual professionals. When Arizona got the ball to Derrick Williams in the right position, which it became very proficient at by season's end, they were pretty much guaranteed to put points on the board. None of those 3 guys you mentioned could do that.

You're the one who brought up Kaminsky's star power and disregarded what he had around him. Now you acknowledge his supporting cast but are now pulling out the differences in strength of competition over two different seasons? I know the end result is all that matters, but who was our Kaminsky last year and the year before when some divine intervention decided that everything Dekker threw up was going in and Nick Johnson was whistled for that offensive foul in a game deciding possession?

TJ Warren was arguably the most dominant offensive player in the nation playing in a conference that was superior to what D Will played against. I think D Will was better regardless, but I said on his level or close, which he clearly was. Otto Porter was one of the best players in the nation, the best player on one of the best teams. He was a beast, again, not at minimum near D Will's level? You dont think you move Porter to the Cats in place of D Will and he does not dominate the league? Portis another dominating player that was close to D Will's level. Just threw out three quick and recent names. You get the ball in the right position for just about any college star you are going to get success. I take D Will over any of those dudes, but lets not act like I threw out three chumps who werent doninant players and among the 5-7 best in the nation.

You looked better yesterday than Kentucky did against Albany. FWIW.

Regardless, KU will be cutting down the nets this year.

enfuego wrote:KU will be cutting down the nets this year.

You ever get that feeling that you've heard the exact same thing for 9 years straight?

Chicat wrote:

enfuego wrote:KU will be cutting down the nets this year.

You ever get that feeling that you've heard the exact same thing for 9 years straight?

Impossible. KU won in 2008, so that would be 8 years straight. If we get Diallo eligible, name a more complete team?

Arizona is not great at any one position, but you're good at each and bring equally good players off the bench.

I think Unc ,with a healthy Paige , is the most complete team in the country. Probably Maryland after that.

It's still pretty early to make judgements just yet. This year is def gonna be more competitive than last year where there were 4 teams (uk, wisk, Duke, Zona) then everybody else

The potential NBA draftee thing is overplayed. Draft is often based on potential rather than college production. Let's say we had Rabb instead of Anderson. Rabb could produce less as a college one and done but still get drafted higher.

Richard Jefferson was a better NBA prospect but Michael Wright was a better college player. Salim was better than many two guards who made the league. Same with Miles Simon.

enfuego wrote:Arizona is not great at any one position

Ryan says hi