I don't doubt there may be some struggles in conference play. But I can promise you it won't be because they are fazed by the environment. Wichita State has one of if not the best road winning percentage for at least the last 5-6 years.

Wichita State fans know what they are in for. The AAC is no murderer's row, but it is a step up and Wichita is unlikely to escape unscathed. I am sure their fans are picking Wichita State to win the league, just like Cincinnati and SMU fans are picking their schools. All 3 have a very good shot and it is going to be an exciting season. I don't think we will see anyone go 17-1 this year, as the league should be much stronger. 15-3 will probably win it.

And I don't expect Wichita to be shell-shocked at all. They will be challenged, but they are too good of a team and Marshall is too good of a coach to be unprepared for a tougher league schedule. They will go 14-4 at worst barring injuries.

(04-13-2017 07:43 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:48 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:45 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I think the difference is that even the crappy teams in this league have some good players that can give you problems on any given night. Guys that were sought after coming out of HS. That doesn't really happen with the crappy teams in the valley.

RPI 317 is RPI 317. You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake. If you did, they would give more teams problems, and not end up with an RPI of 317. I hate the MVC, but that logic is just misguided holier-than-thou crap not founded in reality.

you stated 2 things i was to rebutt,

first) 1 is "RPI 317 is RPI 317"

that is a weak argument....if we made a conference follow of this year years bottom 15 rpi team, the winner of that conference would be top 150 that following year, if you made a conference just full of top 15 rpi and recruiting teams the bottom last team will be follow 150 rpi the following year

the flaw in your argument in using rpi to judge player talent is that someone has to win and some has to lose regardless, and computers reward winners regardless of talent of opponents


second) "ECU, USF and Tulane, as they are currently constructed, would fit right in, in the MVC"....."You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake"

you took quite a few shots at usf, but this sorta references my first point but usf had numerous 4/5 star players on their roster, if they had played in the mvc with that roster they could have arguably ran through that league, all because they couldnt figure it out vs better aac teams doesnt mean they couldnt have ran through subpar mvc teams

the last 2 years usf had:
4star Chris Perry
5star transfer roddy petters
4star louis santos
4star Tulio Da Silva
4star transfer malik price-martin
top 150 recruit troy holston
louisville transfer ANGEL NUNEZ
Michael Bibby jr (arizona player of the year, offers from everyome)

let me be clear, im not saying WSU will lose to our bottom, im just rebutting that usf and tulane and ecu are mvc quality teams with no talent

every team in the AAC not tulsa or ecu had atleast 1 4star on the roster (and ecu fans will tell you they recruited a guy as a 4star but was downgraded after he committed to them)

If you don't like RPI, KenPom adjusts for play against the average team. Take a look at KP for bottom 3 MVC and bottom 3 American teams. MVC was better last year.

Absolutely true that the MVC talent level is lower, however the teams are loaded with upperclassmen. Now the REAL difference between the two is the middle of the conference. The American has more resources, fans, potential and success. How will WSU perform playing 10-15 top 100 teams? That will be interesting!

(04-14-2017 07:14 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 07:43 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:48 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:45 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I think the difference is that even the crappy teams in this league have some good players that can give you problems on any given night. Guys that were sought after coming out of HS. That doesn't really happen with the crappy teams in the valley.

RPI 317 is RPI 317. You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake. If you did, they would give more teams problems, and not end up with an RPI of 317. I hate the MVC, but that logic is just misguided holier-than-thou crap not founded in reality.

you stated 2 things i was to rebutt,

first) 1 is "RPI 317 is RPI 317"

that is a weak argument....if we made a conference follow of this year years bottom 15 rpi team, the winner of that conference would be top 150 that following year, if you made a conference just full of top 15 rpi and recruiting teams the bottom last team will be follow 150 rpi the following year

the flaw in your argument in using rpi to judge player talent is that someone has to win and some has to lose regardless, and computers reward winners regardless of talent of opponents


second) "ECU, USF and Tulane, as they are currently constructed, would fit right in, in the MVC"....."You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake"

you took quite a few shots at usf, but this sorta references my first point but usf had numerous 4/5 star players on their roster, if they had played in the mvc with that roster they could have arguably ran through that league, all because they couldnt figure it out vs better aac teams doesnt mean they couldnt have ran through subpar mvc teams

the last 2 years usf had:
4star Chris Perry
5star transfer roddy petters
4star louis santos
4star Tulio Da Silva
4star transfer malik price-martin
top 150 recruit troy holston
louisville transfer ANGEL NUNEZ
Michael Bibby jr (arizona player of the year, offers from everyome)

let me be clear, im not saying WSU will lose to our bottom, im just rebutting that usf and tulane and ecu are mvc quality teams with no talent

every team in the AAC not tulsa or ecu had atleast 1 4star on the roster (and ecu fans will tell you they recruited a guy as a 4star but was downgraded after he committed to them)

If you don't like RPI, KenPom adjusts for play against the average team. Take a look at KP for bottom 3 MVC and bottom 3 American teams. MVC was better last year.

Absolutely true that the MVC talent level is lower, however the teams are loaded with upperclassmen. Now the REAL difference between the two is the middle of the conference. The American has more resources, fans, potential and success. How will WSU perform playing 10-15 top 100 teams? That will be interesting!

first off kenpom is worse, im saying this as a houston fan who regularly had bad ooc schedules and would then rank top 35 in kenpom for blowing out the bad teams...but be 60-70 in the rpi

and ALL computers are the same, they adjust to SOS but winners always trump loser regardless of schedule

if the top 10 teams (quality wise) only played each other, the 10th team if they lost every game, would have lower rpi/kenpom than an undefeated champion of a horrible league (who's not even top 70 quality wise)

that is how computers rankings work

(04-14-2017 07:56 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 07:14 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 07:43 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:48 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:45 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I think the difference is that even the crappy teams in this league have some good players that can give you problems on any given night. Guys that were sought after coming out of HS. That doesn't really happen with the crappy teams in the valley.

RPI 317 is RPI 317. You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake. If you did, they would give more teams problems, and not end up with an RPI of 317. I hate the MVC, but that logic is just misguided holier-than-thou crap not founded in reality.

you stated 2 things i was to rebutt,

first) 1 is "RPI 317 is RPI 317"

that is a weak argument....if we made a conference follow of this year years bottom 15 rpi team, the winner of that conference would be top 150 that following year, if you made a conference just full of top 15 rpi and recruiting teams the bottom last team will be follow 150 rpi the following year

the flaw in your argument in using rpi to judge player talent is that someone has to win and some has to lose regardless, and computers reward winners regardless of talent of opponents


second) "ECU, USF and Tulane, as they are currently constructed, would fit right in, in the MVC"....."You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake"

you took quite a few shots at usf, but this sorta references my first point but usf had numerous 4/5 star players on their roster, if they had played in the mvc with that roster they could have arguably ran through that league, all because they couldnt figure it out vs better aac teams doesnt mean they couldnt have ran through subpar mvc teams

the last 2 years usf had:
4star Chris Perry
5star transfer roddy petters
4star louis santos
4star Tulio Da Silva
4star transfer malik price-martin
top 150 recruit troy holston
louisville transfer ANGEL NUNEZ
Michael Bibby jr (arizona player of the year, offers from everyome)

let me be clear, im not saying WSU will lose to our bottom, im just rebutting that usf and tulane and ecu are mvc quality teams with no talent

every team in the AAC not tulsa or ecu had atleast 1 4star on the roster (and ecu fans will tell you they recruited a guy as a 4star but was downgraded after he committed to them)

If you don't like RPI, KenPom adjusts for play against the average team. Take a look at KP for bottom 3 MVC and bottom 3 American teams. MVC was better last year.

Absolutely true that the MVC talent level is lower, however the teams are loaded with upperclassmen. Now the REAL difference between the two is the middle of the conference. The American has more resources, fans, potential and success. How will WSU perform playing 10-15 top 100 teams? That will be interesting!

first off kenpom is worse, im saying this as a houston fan who regularly had bad ooc schedules and would then rank top 35 in kenpom for blowing out the bad teams...but be 60-70 in the rpi

and ALL computers are the same, they adjust to SOS but winners always trump loser regardless of schedule

if the top 10 teams (quality wise) only played each other, the 10th team if they lost every game, would have lower rpi/kenpom than an undefeated champion of a horrible league (who's not even top 70 quality wise)

that is how computers rankings work

But that's not how they work. The top 10 teams play other teams and their opponents play other teams. That allows the computer models to work. It gives a pool of comparison. Perhaps jersey color is a better metric?

(04-14-2017 02:48 AM)robertfoshizzle Wrote:  Wichita State fans know what they are in for. The AAC is no murderer's row, but it is a step up and Wichita is unlikely to escape unscathed. I am sure their fans are picking Wichita State to win the league, just like Cincinnati and SMU fans are picking their schools. All 3 have a very good shot and it is going to be an exciting season. I don't think we will see anyone go 17-1 this year, as the league should be much stronger. 15-3 will probably win it.

all you need to know right here

(04-14-2017 07:56 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 07:14 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 07:43 PM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:48 PM)Wudizzle Wrote:  

(04-13-2017 04:45 PM)invisiblehand Wrote:  I think the difference is that even the crappy teams in this league have some good players that can give you problems on any given night. Guys that were sought after coming out of HS. That doesn't really happen with the crappy teams in the valley.

RPI 317 is RPI 317. You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake. If you did, they would give more teams problems, and not end up with an RPI of 317. I hate the MVC, but that logic is just misguided holier-than-thou crap not founded in reality.

you stated 2 things i was to rebutt,

first) 1 is "RPI 317 is RPI 317"

that is a weak argument....if we made a conference follow of this year years bottom 15 rpi team, the winner of that conference would be top 150 that following year, if you made a conference just full of top 15 rpi and recruiting teams the bottom last team will be follow 150 rpi the following year

the flaw in your argument in using rpi to judge player talent is that someone has to win and some has to lose regardless, and computers reward winners regardless of talent of opponents


second) "ECU, USF and Tulane, as they are currently constructed, would fit right in, in the MVC"....."You don't have really good players and end up with an RPI one spot below Drake"

you took quite a few shots at usf, but this sorta references my first point but usf had numerous 4/5 star players on their roster, if they had played in the mvc with that roster they could have arguably ran through that league, all because they couldnt figure it out vs better aac teams doesnt mean they couldnt have ran through subpar mvc teams

the last 2 years usf had:
4star Chris Perry
5star transfer roddy petters
4star louis santos
4star Tulio Da Silva
4star transfer malik price-martin
top 150 recruit troy holston
louisville transfer ANGEL NUNEZ
Michael Bibby jr (arizona player of the year, offers from everyome)

let me be clear, im not saying WSU will lose to our bottom, im just rebutting that usf and tulane and ecu are mvc quality teams with no talent

every team in the AAC not tulsa or ecu had atleast 1 4star on the roster (and ecu fans will tell you they recruited a guy as a 4star but was downgraded after he committed to them)

If you don't like RPI, KenPom adjusts for play against the average team. Take a look at KP for bottom 3 MVC and bottom 3 American teams. MVC was better last year.

Absolutely true that the MVC talent level is lower, however the teams are loaded with upperclassmen. Now the REAL difference between the two is the middle of the conference. The American has more resources, fans, potential and success. How will WSU perform playing 10-15 top 100 teams? That will be interesting!

first off kenpom is worse, im saying this as a houston fan who regularly had bad ooc schedules and would then rank top 35 in kenpom for blowing out the bad teams...but be 60-70 in the rpi

and ALL computers are the same, they adjust to SOS but winners always trump loser regardless of schedule

if the top 10 teams (quality wise) only played each other, the 10th team if they lost every game, would have lower rpi/kenpom than an undefeated champion of a horrible league (who's not even top 70 quality wise)

that is how computers rankings work

Also, I'm going to call BS...Houston has never had a top 35 KPI.

(04-14-2017 08:01 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  But that's not how they work. The top 10 teams play other teams and their opponents play other teams. That allows the computer models to work. It gives a pool of comparison. Perhaps jersey color is a better metric?

is is exactly how they work..ive said they partially adjusted to schedule but they reward winner

anyone with basketball iq will have taken lsu and boston college over sienna, Wright St., Evansville or the majority of the 30-40 15win mid major teams ahead of them

the jersey color comment is just stupid...and i never said it was a bad metric, at the end of the day, winning should be counted into the equation because you can only play who you play, if we could all put our bball in the ACC we would, but we dont have that choice..i was just rebutting that those rankings arent a true evaluatin of player talent on those teams and their true quality

85% of the mvc would have traded usf for its roster in a heartbeat

(04-14-2017 08:11 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  Also, I'm going to call BS...Houston has never had a top 35 KPI.

we 100% were at different points in the season, this is from 5 seconds of googling, you can google something before trying to call them out...heres a smu pregame preview to our second before playing us, note them talking about our extremely high kenpom rankings

at this time we werent even top 60 in rpi
http://www.scout.com/college/southern-me...at-houston

To all Wichita St. fans:

Welcome to the AAC but be careful as to how you react during the season. As a lifelong fan of UC who went through the step up to the BE, remember that it is going to be a bit different than what you were used to, let the whole season play out. You will lose more games than you are accustomed to losing and in the end that sometimes is not a bad thing. It is very hard not to go off the deep end when you lose a game to a bottom feeder or lose two league games in a row but just let the whole season play out, you will be better off for it. Again, welcome to the AAC and good luck this year.

(04-14-2017 08:45 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 08:11 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  Also, I'm going to call BS...Houston has never had a top 35 KPI.

we 100% were at different points in the season, this is from 5 seconds of googling, you can google something before trying to call them out...heres a smu pregame preview to our second before playing us, note them talking about our extremely high kenpom rankings

at this time we werent even top 60 in rpi
http://www.scout.com/college/southern-me...at-houston

I only looked at end of season KPI. I remember a few years back when WSU was #3 in the RPI after 4 games. I didn't figure that counted.

(04-14-2017 08:37 AM)pesik Wrote:  

(04-14-2017 08:01 AM)wufan1 Wrote:  But that's not how they work. The top 10 teams play other teams and their opponents play other teams. That allows the computer models to work. It gives a pool of comparison. Perhaps jersey color is a better metric?

is is exactly how they work..ive said they partially adjusted to schedule but they reward winner

anyone with basketball iq will have taken lsu and boston college over sienna, Wright St., Evansville or the majority of the 30-40 15win mid major teams ahead of them

the jersey color comment is just stupid...and i never said it was a bad metric, at the end of the day, winning should be counted into the equation because you can only play who you play, if we could all put our bball in the ACC we would, but we dont have that choice..i was just rebutting that those rankings arent a true evaluatin of player talent on those teams and their true quality

85% of the mvc would have traded usf for its roster in a heartbeat

So wins count. I believe WSU is top 5 in wins in the country over the past 5 years. WSU beat LSU by 35 last year. Only beat Evansville by 26 and 17.

Yeah, losses can happen anytime to anyone. We have been a little spoiled to say the least. Heck, the team that went to the Final Four lost to Evansville twice (home and away), at home to Indiana St, at UNI, at SIU...Etc. Yes, I realize we had some very key injuries. But that is part of the game. There have been other WTF conference losses as well. Just haven't been any in the last two or three years. Eventually, there will be another one. Could happen this next season.

While I won't predict us to lose to any of the bottom teams, it won't be totally shocking or as devistating as it would be in the Valley should it happen. This grind is going to be like one that none of the current players for WSU has seen. Who knows how they will respond. I THINK they will respond just fine and contend for the title. But this is uncharted territory. I am just excited to watch it unfold.