🏀 Bubble Watch: Winners and losers among NCAA/SEC tournament fringe teams

[TheChief]

Bama played Kentucky twice in the regular season last year. This season, it's Missouri and Georgia from the other side, and it's still possible this squad finishes at .500 (They're so inconsistent - they could win out and they could lose out. I don't think anyone has any guess on how the season plays out.). Last year's team also had more top 25 wins, if memory serves and I'm much too lazy to look. I would say if last year's team had this year's schedule, they had a realistic shot at making the tourney. The Tide lost to Kentucky in the SEC Tournament as well.

Is it just me or does Alabama play better when certain upper classmen are injured?

I hope you're right: win out and get in. I'm not so confident. I don't see the team winning the SEC tournament. Funny things happen in that tourney though. At times, this team seems scrappy enough to pull it off. Of course, then they go 9-26 from the line. Who knows?

Did we lose a player for the rest of the season?

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

Did we lose a player for the rest of the season?

Hale

 

[TheChief]

See my bold Sgt?

Maybe I wasn't the only one to see the difference in the team at times...

 

[EasyTider]

Decent 2nd half but we just got beat by 1 player and we were trying to double team him. Bubble has burst.

 

[#80]

Decent 2nd half but we just got beat by 1 player and we were trying to double team him. Bubble has burst.

Yep you can't let one player beat you and that just happened.

 

[TheChief]

There is much we do not know about this team.

Players can shoot Saturday. Players cannot shoot Thursday.
Players play and do well Saturday. Players do not do well and hence do not play much Thursday.

I just don't get it.

 

[UAgrad93]

There is much we do not know about this team.

Players can shoot Saturday. Players cannot shoot Thursday.
Players play and do well Saturday. Players do not do well and hence do not play much Thursday.

I just don't get it.

Paging Dr. Elko! Paging Dr. Elko! Schizophrenic basketball team on line 2!!!

 

[#80]

Norris, Collins and Bola did not score.

 

[JoseyWalesTheOutlaw]

Avery has a roster of grad transfers and Grant players that should be playing at Livingston or Troy. The jury is still out on those he recruited. Year 3 will be show what he can or can't do as a HC.

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

Avery has a roster of grad transfers and Grant players that should be playing at Livingston or Troy. The jury is still out on those he recruited. Year 3 will be show what he can or can't do as a HC.

Here's the thing... last year, we saw potential in his half court offense.

This year, we see him building a foundation. In basketball, rebounding is foundational to the success of a program, just like defense is the foundation for success in football.

You can be a great defensive team holding teams to less than 30% shooting, and can have good offense. But, if you can't rebound, you're not going to beat quality teams.

We're leading the league in total rebounds this year, after being middle-to-bottom of the league the last couple years. And we're seeing much better energy, ball movement, and shot selection on half court O (even though the shots just don't fall sometimes).

He just needs a couple more consistent shooters. Riley can shoot the lights out against LSWho, then not score the next night. Consistent shooting is the problem.

We've got 2 really great freshmen shooters coming in the summer.

Despite the less-than-desirable W/L record this year, you can see vast improvement since last year, but ESPECIALLY the since the Grant years.

We'll be seeing 22-24 regular season wins next year, and top 2 or 3 in the league. Which will EASILY have us dancing in March. You can bookmark this for reference a year from now.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Here's the thing... last year, we saw potential in his half court offense.

This year, we see him building a foundation. In basketball, rebounding is foundational to the success of a program, just like defense is the foundation for success in football.

You can be a great defensive team holding teams to less than 30% shooting, and can have good offense. But, if you can't rebound, you're not going to beat quality teams.

We're leading the league in total rebounds this year, after being middle-to-bottom of the league the last couple years. And we're seeing much better energy, ball movement, and shot selection on half court O (even though the shots just don't fall sometimes).

He just needs a couple more consistent shooters. Riley can shoot the lights out against LSWho, then not score the next night. Consistent shooting is the problem.

We've got 2 really great freshmen shooters coming in the summer.

Despite the less-than-desirable W/L record this year, you can see vast improvement since last year, but ESPECIALLY the since the Grant years.

We'll be seeing 22-24 regular season wins next year, and top 2 or 3 in the league. Which will EASILY have us dancing in March. You can bookmark this for reference a year from now.

I've marveled at our football team's consistency, regardless of who we're playing, week after week. It's really been the most amazing part of this great run we've been on. Our basketball team makes me feel this is a much more complicated sport than it looks. I sure hope our new guys will bring some alpha male leadership along with the talent.

 

[Sgt. Lincoln Osiris]

I've marveled at our football team's consistency, regardless of who we're playing, week after week. It's really been the most amazing part of this great run we've been on. Our basketball team makes me feel this is a much more complicated sport than it looks. I sure hope our new guys will bring some alpha male leadership along with the talent.

Not really more complicated overall, except from a numbers perspective.

In football, we sign 23-26 4 and 5 stars every year. If 2-3 guys' skills don't translate to college very well and it turns out they peaked in HS, you've still got 20-22 guys that develop and contribute meaningfully. So that's AT LEAST an 80% recruiting success rate with each signing class.

In basketball, you sign 2- 3 guys on average a year, with an occasional 4th if you're lucky. If 1 or 2 of those guys don't develop much more after HS, then you have a crap shoot as far as meaningful contribution success rate. Which is why you want to see how these guys compete against other future college players in the AAU and camp circuits.

I guess it just comes down to more "disposable income" (relative to how many chances you can take with recruiting) in football. The potential risk/reward gap is much greater in basketball recruiting.

 

[Che Boludo]

Not really more complicated overall, except from a numbers perspective.

In football, we sign 23-26 4 and 5 stars every year. If 2-3 guys' skills don't translate to college very well and it turns out they peaked in HS, you've still got 20-22 guys that develop and contribute meaningfully. So that's AT LEAST an 80% recruiting success rate with each signing class.

In basketball, you sign 2- 3 guys on average a year, with an occasional 4th if you're lucky. If 1 or 2 of those guys don't develop much more after HS, then you have a crap shoot as far as meaningful contribution success rate. Which is why you want to see how these guys compete against other future college players in the AAU and camp circuits.

I guess it just comes down to more "disposable income" (relative to how many chances you can take with recruiting) in football. The potential risk/reward gap is much greater in basketball recruiting.

IMO...

Football is a team sport that requires both great coaching and top tier talent to be elite at D1.

BB is a sport with much greater parity among players at the college level. It is a "team" sport, but its a Coach Calipari vs. Coach K dynamic that doesn't exist in CFB.

A team can be "elite" through an assemblage of a super team full of top talent or a couple superstars even if they don't play particularly well as a team. This is less coaching and more differentiation of talent giving the edge, which requires outstanding recruiting skills (eye for talent and sales pitch) and less coaching = coach calipari. Also see any Florida Marlins World Series team.

The Coach K model requires recruiting the right players to play as a team, which places demand on a higher end Xs and Os coach. To sustain elite status, this team needs excellent talent management and HC leadership to inspire purpose, direction and motivation toward team vs. Individual goals.

Unfortunately, it is the Coach Cal players that usually go onto the NBA, which is why I hate the NBA. The Coach K players enjoy great team success, but often don't have the NBA talent or success.

That is what made Phil Jackson (the zin master), so special in the NBA. He managed elite talent that played like a team. But, it is also why Greg Poppovich is GOAT IMO and the unicorn of NBA coaches. He is essentially the Coach K of the NBA, which is near impossible given the egos of the players.

I'd much rather find a Coach K than a Coach Cal fwiw ... unfortunately, we don't have either at the moment and will be a good not good enough BB team.

 

[TUSKtimes]

Bama fans, raise your hands if you know we are the 1929-30 national basketball champion?

Premo-Porretta Power Poll