(01-13-2016 03:35 PM)geewizNU Wrote:  Making a tourney run also depends on match-ups and who's left standing after the night is done.

And key injuries sustained between now and then

(01-13-2016 03:46 PM)dan10 Wrote:  Btw, you could just have easily used the 10 point scale in those categories ranked each team 1-10 in each and seen what it gave you, since the conference does have 10 teams after all.

I considered that. But the reason why I rejected it was this: Take Towson. They have, by a fairly significant margin, the best post play in my mind. They should be rewarded for that not by being just 1 spot ahead of the next best team. Thus, they got a 9, and no one else was higher than 7.

Meanwhile, Coen and Shaver are the best coaches in the league, and the gap is large between those 2 and the next best guy. Therefore, they're both 10's. No one else was higher than a 6, because every other coach in the league either has something to prove or isn't very good.

The edge in those departments are what, in part, give Towson a shot (by dominating in the post), and also make Northeastern and W&M pretty big-time favorites (by having the ability to out-coach anyone but perhaps each other).

Things this week proved correct about my analysis:

* Hofstra continues to have no depth, and it's killing them.
* UNCW would look a lot better than they did against Towson.
* Towson might be legit.

Things I might be wrong about:

* Matt Brady could be a better coach than I gave him credit for.
* Elon does more than just shoot 3's

Towson is the hardest to read. Their only close game was a win against a bad Delaware team. The others have either been mostly double digit wins, or double digit losses.

UNCW has the style of play, but our post play is going to be our Achilles heel. Playing Flemmings at the 4 will only work against a few teams. I'd like to see Cacok at the 4 paired with Gettys a few times. He's a really good offensive rebounder and can get us some points from that position with size.

Right now, i'd have to give the edge to the Tribe. They have good post play, can shoot the 3, and can defend and rebound. Their bench doesn't seem to cause any drop off in play. JMU also seems like they have the depth and overall play to take the tourney.

Agreed on all counts, 82. Though I imagine Northeastern will get their problems ironed out in plenty of time for Baltimore as well.

I'll stick with the same 4 top contenders as last week, just in a different order. W&M, JMU, NU, UNCW. With Towson a dark horse.

I want to see how Towson handles the top four the second time around before I buy in. They've played well so far though. Teams thought the same of us last year.

This was an interesting read. After how they dominated us in Williamsburg, I cannot say Towson is weak. As for Hofstra, they absolutely are a contender right at the top. Perhaps you have forgotten the two games they played against us last year at Hofstra and in the tournament. Those games were the closest to the game yesterday that the Tribe has played. Hofstra has great talent, enough to win it all. BTW, if either W&M or UNCW had a game to play today, they would be significant underdogs. Northeastern was the best team last year, but I still think Hofstra pushing us to double overtime in the semis really hurt our chances in the final.

Will check this thread again in another 6 games. At 2/3 of the regular season, we should have a better idea(maybe?).

(01-17-2016 04:13 PM)TribePride91 Wrote:  As for Hofstra, they absolutely are a contender right at the top. Perhaps you have forgotten the two games they played against us last year at Hofstra and in the tournament.

I have not forgotten that. But the 2015-16 version has no depth and can't hit free throws with consistency, and when those 2 things are true, you're not winning 3 games in 3 days. It's simply not happening. They will have to find ways to improve drastically in these 2 areas to make me a believer. As it stands, they're my "upset special" pick in the Quarterfinals when the tournament rolls around. They're going to be completely worn down by the end of the season if nothing changes.

(01-17-2016 04:13 PM)TribePride91 Wrote:  Will check this thread again in another 6 games. At 2/3 of the regular season, we should have a better idea(maybe?).

I'm planning to update my "ratings" at around the 2/3 point, which will be heavily based on CAA-only stats. The first version relied on overall stats because of a small sample size of CAA games at the time.