KenPom Rankings Out

[Chief Wiggum]

Are Big East fans always this ignorant? It appears quite a bit of people in Milwaukee, Chicago, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York, and Providence will be dumbfounded this year.

This coming from the guy who stated Zach Hanson "took it too" a few Big East Teams last year. The most the guy scored was 8 points and he was lucky to play most games. Nobody will be dumbfounded...Creighton will get some wins but they will be mediocre overall just like most everyone expects outside of a few delusional Creighton fans.

[Bill Marsh]

It's hard to separate the System from the presence of Doug since we've never seen one with out the other at Creighton. The team was very efficient the last 3 years: 6th, 8th, and 3rd in Ortg. But his first year they were only 61st. It's possible (and I think most of us would argue is likely) that the offense will be much closer to that number than the 17th that Pomery currently predicts.

Adding more support to the theory the offense will have a marked fall off in efficiency is the fact that none of McDermott's teams at Iowa St or Northern Iowa were particularly efficient. Now I don't know if he was running the same system the whole time, but I'd be surprised if he invited a whole new system 4 years ago after coaching for 9 years prior to that.

Right on the money.

Creighton lost 4 starters, including their top 2 scorers and rebounders. They have no big time recruits coming in nor any previous waiting in the wings. Chatman is a nice piece, but he's not the kind of guy you build a team around. I have no idea how they can possibly be ranked top 50 in the country and top 4 in a tough conference.

McDermott may be an excellent coach with a great system, but he still has to have the players to execute it. He doesn't have the same level of talent right now as most of the other teams in the Big East unless he's been able to scoff up a whole lot of great kids who were flying under the radar, which is highly unlikely.

Ken Pom is doing something purely statistical. When you do that, sometimes it spits out crazy stuff like this. Garbage in. Garbage out.

We get it, Bill. You think Creighton is going to be awful, and that they have no talent on the roster. But I'll respond anyway.

You're completely undervaluing Chatman. This is his third year as the QB of the team. He's ultra quick, takes care of the ball, and has excellent vision. That last part is a big reason our offense was so lethal the previous two seasons. Zach Hanson had offers from Gonzaga, Arizona State, Missouri, and Marquette, and a host of other major schools, but wasn't "ranked" by recruiting services because he's from the middle of nowhere in South Dakota. He was able to break into the rotation last season as a true freshman on a loaded team. He's going to surprise more than a few people. Devin Brooks, according to Jeff Goodman, was the best player on the floor in Creighton's game with Iowa yesterday. Again, an under the radar JUCO guy. RS freshman Toby Hegner had offers from Marquette, Iowa State, and Boston College. 5-star guy? No. But he's a good player. You also stated that we have no big recruits coming in. Freshman Ronnie Harrell was a top 75 guy, and Leon Gilmore a top 150. Again, not 5-star guys, but after the first 20 players or so, the rankings are essentially throwing darts blindly anyhow. There is a whole lot more talent and shooting ability on this roster than you think, which is fine. I'd prefer to fly under the radar to start the season.

BTW, how many big time recruits did Wichita State have last season? The answer is zero. They were pretty good. McDermott was a 2/3 star. He was decent. The recruiting services are HEAVILY biased towards the coasts, which makes sense as that's where a majority of the talent is. However, there are plenty of excellent players in the Midwest who fly under the radar. Creighton has lived off guys like that for the past 20 years. With that said, I don't think any sensible fan thinks Creighton is going to win the league. But it's certainly not out of the realm of possibility that this team finishes middle of the pack in the league with an RPI around 50-60.

I have no argument with anything you say. I'm not into predictions, so I'm not saying they're going to be awful. I really have no idea. Chatman's really the only Creighton player I saw much of last year.

I don't consider recruits in the 75-150 range to be "big time". All that I mean by that is that they're not expected to step in and have an impact in their first year. Obviously there are plenty of good players who are ranked at that level. They're far better than most incoming players. But Creighton needs players who can step right in and compete on a high level to fill those 4 vacant starting spots, one of which was manned by an all time great, a super star who carried the team. I'm not rooting against Creighton. I'm just pointing to the obvious fact that there are big shoes to fill.

Obviously there are always surprises in recruiting. Yes, Doug flew under the radar and Creighton caught lightning in a bottle. Do you really think that's going to happen again?

As thorough as your review of Creighton's current status is - and I thank you for that - you really offer no reason for why these players are going to be better than anyone else's. Everyone has players who are heavily recruited by big time programs. The fact that Creighton has a few of those doesn't make them better than anyone else.

It isn't that Creighton can't finish in the top 50-60. Anything's possible. The question is, why would we expect them to do that any more than anyone else?

This forum get into these same kind of discussions about Marquette last year. When I pointed out that they had a lot to replace and not a lot of talent to do it with, people claimed that I had a low opinion of the Marquette program and was ignoring the fact that Buzz found a way every year with unheralded recruits. Well, it didn't happen for Marquette last year. They came nowhere close to living up to their advance billing.

Creighton has the same problem. Fans are used to a winning program. Even without McDermott, you all are expecting the winning to continue. You guys had a veteran team last year, loaded with seniors and one very special player. You're losing all that, which means it's time to go into rebuilding mode.

Not trying to be harsh, just realistic.

[Bill Marsh]

Are Jays fans always this sensitive? It appears quite a bit of people in Omaha will be disappointed this year.

People will be disappointed if we finish 9th, but that's not gonna happen. People will not be disappointed if we finish middle of the pack. Expectations are completely reasonable going into the season.

One thing I'd like to add is that program "culture" is huge. Creighton has 20+ wins in 15 of the last 16 seasons. This isn't a situation like DePaul, where the fans and those associated with the program are used to losing. There's something to be said for that, especially when you have a roster with several new contributors.

How did program culture work for Butler last year? For Marquette? For Gergetown?

[R to the OB]

Are Big East fans always this ignorant? It appears quite a bit of people in Milwaukee, Chicago, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York, and Providence will be dumbfounded this year.

This coming from the guy who stated Zach Hanson "took it too" a few Big East Teams last year. The most the guy scored was 8 points and he was lucky to play most games. Nobody will be dumbfounded...Creighton will get some wins but they will be mediocre overall just like most everyone expects outside of a few delusional Creighton fans.

Have you ever heard of a guy named Doug McDermott, because Zach was behind him on the depth chart. Apparently you didn't watch that Butler game where he scored those 8 points or the Villanova game where he scored 6 in very limited minutes. He was very physical inside and very efficient in those games.

[Chief Wiggum]

Are Big East fans always this ignorant? It appears quite a bit of people in Milwaukee, Chicago, Indianapolis, Cincinnati, Washington, D.C., Philadelphia, New York, and Providence will be dumbfounded this year.

This coming from the guy who stated Zach Hanson "took it too" a few Big East Teams last year. The most the guy scored was 8 points and he was lucky to play most games. Nobody will be dumbfounded...Creighton will get some wins but they will be mediocre overall just like most everyone expects outside of a few delusional Creighton fans.

Have you ever heard of a guy named Doug McDermott, because Zach was behind him on the depth chart. Apparently you didn't watch that Butler game where he scored those 8 points or the Villanova game where he scored 6 in very limited minutes. He was very physical inside and very efficient in those games.

I know very little about Hanson outside of the box scores which I'm still trying to find where he "took it too" a few Big East schools. Hey...if scoring 6 points by hitting 4 free throws in garbage time vs Villanova leads you to believe he's the next super star then more power to you! But reality is going to hit you square in the head fairly soon.

[FlyJays]

Marquette took 6th, and Georgetown 7th. That's about where I've been saying Creighton will finish this season. So, in that context, I'd say it worked out fairly well for both of those schools. I'd like to note that Marquette took 6th place with a horrendous offensive team. Georgetown doesn't exactly have a stellar culture at the moment. The program has an unbelievable history, but they've failed to reach 20 wins 7 times since 2000, and earned 7 NIT bids. Take out their Final Four year in 2006, and they've had a pretty mediocre previous 15 seasons. It would be nice to have a Final Four banner, though.

Butler had a really, really bad roster last season, which was compounded by the loss of Roosevelt Jones. I'd take Creighton's current roster over last year's Butler team hands down.

I'm not sure what's so delusional about not expecting your team to totally stink? Again, I haven't come across a single Creighton fan who expects us to finish top 3 in the league. Most are predicting a 5th-7th finish. If expecting moderate success with a moderately talented roster is delusional, then I suppose we are all delusional.

Regarding Hanson, I'm not sure who said he "took it to" a few Big East schools last season, but he didn't have the chance. He was a rotation player behind McDermott, Wragge, and Artino. In the few minutes he did get, he was pretty productive, though. And all indications are that he's playing/practicing at a very high level right now.

[Bill Marsh]

Marquette took 6th, and GTown 7th. That's about where I've been saying Creighton will finish this season. So, in that context, I'd say it worked out fairly well for both of those schools. I'd like to note that Marquette took 6th place with a horrendous offensive team.

Butler had a really, really bad roster last season, which was compounded by the loss of Roosevelt Jones. I'd take Creighton's current roster over last year's Butler team hands down.

I'm not sure what's so delusional about not expecting your team to totally stink? Again, I haven't come across a single Creighton fan who expects us to finish top 3 in the league. Most are predicting a 5th-7th finish. If expecting moderate success with a moderately talented roster is delusional, then I suppose we are all delusional.

Regarding Hanson, I'm not sure who said he "took it to" a few Big East schools last season, but he didn't have the chance. He was a rotation player behind McDermott, Wragge, and Artino. In the few minutes he did get, he was pretty productive, though. And all indications are that he's playing/practicing at a very high level right now.

My point about Georgetown and Marquette was that neither of them came anywhere close to living up to expectations last year either in the regular season or in the BE tournament. Those two were expected to battle for the conference title. Marquette was the favorite. Having a culture of winning did nothing to enable them to overcome AD seasons. Both lost more games than they won in BE competition despite their culture of winning. Seton Hall won as many BE games as Georgetown did.

It's not a matter of not expecting your team to stink. You're saying that they'll be one of the top 50-60 teams in the country! Do you realize how good a team has to be to do that?

You resent having anyone point out the obvious shortcomings of this hear's Creighton roster, but you have no problems disparaging Butler's from last year? What is there at Creighton that will make your guys better than Seron Hall, or Marquette, or Providence, or whomever you think you're going to beat out to get to the middle of the pack in the BE as you projected earlier?

Butler did not have a really bad roster last year despite the loss of Jones. They were bringing back Dunham, a 4-star recruit 2 years earlier, and Marshall, both starters on a 27 win NCAA tournament team the year before. Both had averaged 10 ppg. Marshall had been the team's #2 rebounder (7) and Dunham had been it's 2nd best 3-point shooter (35%). Creighton is simply not bringing back an inside-outside combination comparable to those two. They were also bring back the top 3 reserves off the bench, all of whom had averaged double figures minutes. That's 5 of their top 8 players from a team that wasn't so heavily dependent on one or two players the way that Creighton was last year.

In contrast, among the 4 starters they are losing, Creighton is losing both of their top 2 starters and both of their top 2 rebounders. They don't bring back a single player who scored in double figures last year. Players will have to learn completely new roles because last year's strategy was to get the ball to Doug so he could get to work. As a team Creighton shot over 40% from 3, which is incredible. They hit such a high % that they didn't have to worry about hitting the offensive boards (295th in the country in offensive rebounds). However, McDermott, Wragge, Gibbs, and Manigat all hit over 40% from 3. They were the reason why Creighton was so good and they're all gone. Chatman can hit the 3, but who else? The offense has been gutted. With 3's not falling this year the way they did last, the team is going to have to learn a new skill - rebounding. And they're not going to be able to simply outscore teams. They're going to have to hold scores down.

Anyone who doesn't see that there are big challenges lying ahead is simply living in denial.

[FlyJays]

You resent having anyone point out the obvious shortcomings of this hear's Creighton roster, but you have no problems disparaging Butler's from last year?

Butler did not have a really bad roster last year despite the loss of Jones. They were bringing back Dunham, a 4-star recruit 2 years earlier, and Marshall, both starters on a 27 win NCAA tournament team the year before. Both had averaged 10 ppg. Marshall had been the team's #2 rebounder (7) and Dunham had been it's 2nd best 3-point shooter (35%). Creighton is simply not bringing back an inside-outside combination comparable to those two. They were also bring back the top 3 reserves off the bench, all of whom had averaged double figures minutes. That's 5 of their top 8 players from a team that wasn't so heavily dependent on one or two players the way that Creighton was last year.

In contrast, among the 4 starters they are losing, Creighton is losing both of their top 2 starters and both of their top 2 rebounders. They don't bring back a single player who scored in double figures last year. Players will have to learn completely new roles because last year's strategy was to get the ball to Doug so he could get to work. As a team Creighton shot over 40% from 3, which is incredible. They hit such a high % that they didn't have to worry about hitting the offensive boards (295th in the country in offensive rebounds). However, McDermott, Wragge, Gibbs, and Manigat all hit over 40% from 3. They were the reason why Creighton was so good and they're all gone. Chatman can hit the 3, but who else? The offense has been gutted. With 3's not falling this year the way they did last, the team is going to have to learn a new skill - rebounding. And they're not going to be able to simply outscore teams. They're going to have to hold scores down.

I don't resent anything. I'm simply disagreeing with the notion that Creighton is talent-less, and pointing out some areas where you're missing some points.

We have game tape to view which illustrates Butler's obvious shortcomings last season. You're basing much of your analysis on Creighton on what we lost (everyone is aware they lost a ton), not what remains on the roster. That's where we differ. There are plenty of pieces on the roster. And if you think the strategy was "get the ball to Doug so he could get to work", then I'm not sure what you watched. He scored a ton of points, while also being extremely efficient, specifically because we didn't just give him the ball and watch him work. His points were within the flow of the offense, and he connected on the shots he took. Will the new players be able to connect on theirs? Who knows, but there are plenty of shooters remaining.

Chatman can hit the three. Zierden can hit the three (was one of the top shooters in the nation coming out of HS), Hegner is 6'10" and can hit the three. Brooks has apparently been lights out in practice from distance. Milliken was one of the top JUCO 3pt shooters in the country. Avery Dingman is a career 37% shooter from 3, and shot 42% as a freshman. There are plenty of shooters left on the roster.

[Westbrook#36]

Marquette took 6th, and GTown 7th. That's about where I've been saying Creighton will finish this season. So, in that context, I'd say it worked out fairly well for both of those schools. I'd like to note that Marquette took 6th place with a horrendous offensive team.

Butler had a really, really bad roster last season, which was compounded by the loss of Roosevelt Jones. I'd take Creighton's current roster over last year's Butler team hands down.

I'm not sure what's so delusional about not expecting your team to totally stink? Again, I haven't come across a single Creighton fan who expects us to finish top 3 in the league. Most are predicting a 5th-7th finish. If expecting moderate success with a moderately talented roster is delusional, then I suppose we are all delusional.

Regarding Hanson, I'm not sure who said he "took it to" a few Big East schools last season, but he didn't have the chance. He was a rotation player behind McDermott, Wragge, and Artino. In the few minutes he did get, he was pretty productive, though. And all indications are that he's playing/practicing at a very high level right now.

My point about Georgetown and Marquette was that neither of them came anywhere close to living up to expectations last year either in the regular season or in the BE tournament. Those two were expected to battle for the conference title. Marquette was the favorite. Having a culture of winning did nothing to enable them to overcome AD seasons. Both lost more games than they won in BE competition despite their culture of winning. Seton Hall won as many BE games as Georgetown did.

It's not a matter of not expecting your team to stink. You're saying that they'll be one of the top 50-60 teams in the country! Do you realize how good a team has to be to do that?

You resent having anyone point out the obvious shortcomings of this hear's Creighton roster, but you have no problems disparaging Butler's from last year? What is there at Creighton that will make your guys better than Seron Hall, or Marquette, or Providence, or whomever you think you're going to beat out to get to the middle of the pack in the BE as you projected earlier?

Butler did not have a really bad roster last year despite the loss of Jones. They were bringing back Dunham, a 4-star recruit 2 years earlier, and Marshall, both starters on a 27 win NCAA tournament team the year before. Both had averaged 10 ppg. Marshall had been the team's #2 rebounder (7) and Dunham had been it's 2nd best 3-point shooter (35%). Creighton is simply not bringing back an inside-outside combination comparable to those two. They were also bring back the top 3 reserves off the bench, all of whom had averaged double figures minutes. That's 5 of their top 8 players from a team that wasn't so heavily dependent on one or two players the way that Creighton was last year.

In contrast, among the 4 starters they are losing, Creighton is losing both of their top 2 starters and both of their top 2 rebounders. They don't bring back a single player who scored in double figures last year. Players will have to learn completely new roles because last year's strategy was to get the ball to Doug so he could get to work. As a team Creighton shot over 40% from 3, which is incredible. They hit such a high % that they didn't have to worry about hitting the offensive boards (295th in the country in offensive rebounds). However, McDermott, Wragge, Gibbs, and Manigat all hit over 40% from 3. They were the reason why Creighton was so good and they're all gone. Chatman can hit the 3, but who else? The offense has been gutted. With 3's not falling this year the way they did last, the team is going to have to learn a new skill - rebounding. And they're not going to be able to simply outscore teams. They're going to have to hold scores down.

Anyone who doesn't see that there are big challenges lying ahead is simply living in denial.

QFT

Well Bill beat me to it. Was ready to type up a response then saw Bill's post. Denial and delusion are being thrown around a bunch here, I don't think it's delusional to predict Creighton to finish 5th-7th. It's also not delusional to predict them to go through a year very similar to what Butler went through last year and finish 8th-9th.

[stever20]

Marquette took 6th, and GTown 7th. That's about where I've been saying Creighton will finish this season. So, in that context, I'd say it worked out fairly well for both of those schools. I'd like to note that Marquette took 6th place with a horrendous offensive team.

Butler had a really, really bad roster last season, which was compounded by the loss of Roosevelt Jones. I'd take Creighton's current roster over last year's Butler team hands down.

I'm not sure what's so delusional about not expecting your team to totally stink? Again, I haven't come across a single Creighton fan who expects us to finish top 3 in the league. Most are predicting a 5th-7th finish. If expecting moderate success with a moderately talented roster is delusional, then I suppose we are all delusional.

Regarding Hanson, I'm not sure who said he "took it to" a few Big East schools last season, but he didn't have the chance. He was a rotation player behind McDermott, Wragge, and Artino. In the few minutes he did get, he was pretty productive, though. And all indications are that he's playing/practicing at a very high level right now.

My point about Georgetown and Marquette was that neither of them came anywhere close to living up to expectations last year either in the regular season or in the BE tournament. Those two were expected to battle for the conference title. Marquette was the favorite. Having a culture of winning did nothing to enable them to overcome AD seasons. Both lost more games than they won in BE competition despite their culture of winning. Seton Hall won as many BE games as Georgetown did.

It's not a matter of not expecting your team to stink. You're saying that they'll be one of the top 50-60 teams in the country! Do you realize how good a team has to be to do that?

You resent having anyone point out the obvious shortcomings of this hear's Creighton roster, but you have no problems disparaging Butler's from last year? What is there at Creighton that will make your guys better than Seron Hall, or Marquette, or Providence, or whomever you think you're going to beat out to get to the middle of the pack in the BE as you projected earlier?

Butler did not have a really bad roster last year despite the loss of Jones. They were bringing back Dunham, a 4-star recruit 2 years earlier, and Marshall, both starters on a 27 win NCAA tournament team the year before. Both had averaged 10 ppg. Marshall had been the team's #2 rebounder (7) and Dunham had been it's 2nd best 3-point shooter (35%). Creighton is simply not bringing back an inside-outside combination comparable to those two. They were also bring back the top 3 reserves off the bench, all of whom had averaged double figures minutes. That's 5 of their top 8 players from a team that wasn't so heavily dependent on one or two players the way that Creighton was last year.

In contrast, among the 4 starters they are losing, Creighton is losing both of their top 2 starters and both of their top 2 rebounders. They don't bring back a single player who scored in double figures last year. Players will have to learn completely new roles because last year's strategy was to get the ball to Doug so he could get to work. As a team Creighton shot over 40% from 3, which is incredible. They hit such a high % that they didn't have to worry about hitting the offensive boards (295th in the country in offensive rebounds). However, McDermott, Wragge, Gibbs, and Manigat all hit over 40% from 3. They were the reason why Creighton was so good and they're all gone. Chatman can hit the 3, but who else? The offense has been gutted. With 3's not falling this year the way they did last, the team is going to have to learn a new skill - rebounding. And they're not going to be able to simply outscore teams. They're going to have to hold scores down.

Anyone who doesn't see that there are big challenges lying ahead is simply living in denial.

QFT

Well Bill beat me to it. Was ready to type up a response then saw Bill's post. Denial and delusion are being thrown around a bunch here, I don't think it's delusional to predict Creighton to finish 5th-7th. It's also not delusional to predict them to go through a year very similar to what Butler went through last year and finish 8th-9th.

Well truthfully- they're picked in a tie for 4th, and 1 game ahead of 4 teams in a tie for 6th. 9-9 and 18-12 seems pretty reasonable(1 more game in the in season tourney and BET added).