Many posts have dealt with the lack of production from the big forward. It appears that neither Thomas or Cook are very explosive athletes. I know Henderson is said to be very athletic, but what is the story on Chaney?
It Chaney were on the team this season, my guess is he would be starting at the 4.
Rugged, aggressive and athletic with a high motor. Great offensive rebounder
Chaney is very mature physically and has the athleticism to play early. His game is mostly around the paint and the two times I saw him he looked more comfortable with his back to the basket.
With Chaney and Henderson the 4 spot will improve. That will also make Gafford more effective. Teams would be able to play off of our 4’s with his ability to score.
Maybe next year we will be a better rebounding team.
Phillips is the one to watch. Phillips is around Thomas size (6’7) and can play away from the lane. He can pull out other teams fours (in HS he has played every position for his team) and take them off the dribble. He can also set up others. He will allow Gafford one on one situations. Allowing Gafford easier moves to the basket. Chaney is, as Dudley described, more of a true four, I think he and Gafford will have a nose for the ball and actually will clog the lane more, but our rebounds will go way up.
This is something I’ve said several times, I think next years team is better than this years, but when I go through the newbies and how they’ll fit in, the one I keep missing is Ethan Henderson. He’s the highest rated, but he is the one I hear the least about. To me he maybe the glue guy, very good player that does his thing, but doesn’t stand out unless you’re looking for him.
I 'm not sure I would agree on next year’s team being better. I think there will be growing pains with the young guards and the chemistry. The new guys will be trying to figure out their roles and while learning the college game. I could see them being pretty good in Feb. or March, but I see struggles during the early part of the season.
I can see it playing out that way. Getting better as the season goes on, maybe I should rephrase, I think come March they will go deeper than this years team. I think this year’s team, could make the second weekend, next year’s team will be more complete, and come March has more of a chance of making the third weekend.
This is how I feel, as well. The issue is, to Richard’s point, with a slow start in non-conference play (if that’s how it truly plays out), will our record be good enough to get us in the dance - even though we may finish strong and be as good or better (at the END of the season) than this year’s team is?
I guess we’ll all just have to watch next season to find out.
And, by the way . . . we’re not in the tournament yet this season. We have to sweep our games at home, or win as many as we lose (at home) on the road. MUST have a .500 (9-9) conference record or it will be NIT time.
This team just don’t show the ability to build a lead and maintain it. No value of time and score! Too many stupid mistakes with the ball late. Empty possession aginst Moo U and not playing on both ends of the floor.
NIT or NCAA is a coin flip right now! That’s with 6 seniors! They need to beat Kentucky or Auburn at home 9-9 conference record may put the hogs in a bad spot. Of course they have shown enough yet to make it certain they will get to 9-9. The ability is there it’s that space between their ears!
I agree, Army Hog. It’s as if they smoke pot before they take the court for tipoff.
Army, I’ve said this for several years, when Nolan was here and we were just starting to get rolling (I believe it was the MayDay teams freshmen year) I remember Paul Eells asking a committee member what it took to make the tourney. This was 88/89 timeframe. At that time the committee member said, 1. Win 20 games (you saw my other post on that, only four times in AR history did we win 20 before Selection Sunday and not dance, 3 were in the 20’s and 30’s). 2. Have a winning record in conference. 3. Have a decent road/neutral court record.
I believe it’s adjusted some over the years, now they look at RPI, last 12, road/neutral site, but you don’t necessarily need .500 in conference, and SOS, conference SOS, and the stronger the conference the less wins. 18 seems to be the cutoff now.
Now looking at adjusted above. If we just win our remaining home games:
RPI - 37
Last 12 - 7-5
Road/neutral - 4-9 (4 wins isn’t a bad thing)
SOS - 33
Overall Record - 20-11
The conference is considered #2 this year, behind only ACC.
With those numbers, it’s hard to say they’ll miss the tourney. Even if they go 4-5 and end up 8-10 in conference. Anything worse than 4-5, then I think we can start sweating. Right now they’re good. If the can somehow win a road game, it’ll help immensely, no road game and holding home court (wins over 3 tourney teams, and a bubble team) would still be good enough. Now if we lose our next three, then it’s time to start sweating
I am concerned about a lot of youth. I do think they are talented, and I do think returners will be much better. But man that’s a lot to replace with solid freshmen across the board. So I’m am concerned we could drop a few games we maybe expect to win, then there is the whole Conference ref change of calling games when it starts and that terribleness. So I think SEC play could be real tough on them.
So to find something positive to cling to, it would be their talent and hoping they have a mental toughness in a sense that they not think they are better than they are(I have been watching that I think) but not knowing any better, and playing better than they should.
That may be true, in SOME instances, in the ACC or perhaps the Big 10. But show me any SEC team (relevent because we are, after all, in the SEC) that has made it to the big dance with a less than .500 record. Obviously, this excludes teams that may have won 4 games unexpectedly to win the automatic conference bid (and I’m not even sure any of those have sub-.500 records).
As I’ve posted, I think we get in (barring a historic rash of upsets in other conference tournaments that absorb a LOT of at-large bids) if we get to 9-9 in conference play. I’m positive we’re in at 10-8, but 80-90% sure at 9-9.
Show me where our conference has ever been this strong, where at least 9 teams are considered bubble teams and let me know, if any had losing records in conference. Oh that’s right it’s never happened because our conference has never been considered this strong. 6 is the most we’ve ever got in, and this year, even Palm had 8 on the bubble line. So, this year we are almost on par with the ACC and ahead of the B1G
Guys like Palm, et al, are simply projecting what the field might be like if the season stopped at whatever point they are making that projection. In that regard, it’s very similar to the rankings released by the CFP committee the last half of the season. What neither projection factors in, even though they know it will be significant, is HOW the season ends. And the reason is obvious - because they don’t and cannot know, with certainty.
In the case of the CFP, the critical factor is who wins (or doesn’t) their conference. You may have, for example, Ohio State and Michigan undefeated at 7-0, and headed toward their annual clash in late November. They may be ranked/seeded #2 and #3, respectively, at that point. So, in the weekly show, both would be included in the “Top Four”. But even as that is released, everyone - most of all, the CFP committee - knows that the game between the two will very likely determine which ONE of the two will make it through to the Playoffs (barring other upsets they suffer, of course).
Same thing is in play here. If you will look, when these weekly NCAA field projections are released, they pretty closely follow the then-current RPI rankings, with allowances made for winners of non-power conferences whose RPI appear to out of the top 50 or whatever. Lunardi, Palm, etc. all know that due to remaining conference play, some of the teams (in conferences that have several teams projected as “in”) will knock each other off and out of the tournament. In that regard, it is not a “PREDICTION” of who will make it at season’s end; just a snapshot reflective of how teams might be selected if they did not have to play the rest of the season.
So - as of now, if the season ended yesterday - the SEC MIGHT get 7 teams in (per Lunardi). Before today’s games, as i type this, only FIVE of them have winning records. You might say “Aha! That proves my point!” - but it does not. Six other SEC teams (including Arkansas) are at 4-5 . . . SIX! . . . and Lunardi rightfully expects that out of that group, 2 or 3 will end up with winning records (while 5-4 Alabama may, or may not, stay above .500). So, there are your POSSIBLE (not for sure) 7 teams.
Get back with me and let me know if any SEC teams with less than .500 conference records (unless, as noted earlier, they make a run to the Tournament Championship) get in. I say they won’t.
There is no conference record requirement to make the NCAA tournament. In this year’s SEC It’s very possible for a team to get in below .500. And the way it’s looking with all these teams so balanced it wouldn’t surprise me at all if an SEC team made it in the tournament with a sub .500 record. As Baked said the SEC is currently the second strongest conference. You can’t compare this year in the SEC this year to any other year, because historical it’s never been this good. Worst case scenario this year is 6 teams from the SEC go and it can get as many as 9 in.
And just glancing at Arkansas remaining schedule. There’s only 1 game left that would be considered a bad loss. And that’s at home to Vanderbilt. Say we don’t win another road game and win all our home games except Auburn. That would put our record at 19-12, 49 RPI, 33 SOS according to RPIforecast.
Looking at a team to compare last year Kansas State (8-10 conference record) finished regular season 19-12, 53 RPI, 34 SOS and made it in as an 11 seed. Of course they did win 1 game in their conference tournament. So it’s not like it’s unheard of for a sub .500 team to make the tournament especially if the conference is considered strong.
Bake this team lacks the urgency to play hard and put teams away. At this point they haven’t earned a spot in the Dance. Sorry attitudes and just not caring.
This late in the season they fail to know who needs to be taking shots. They don’t know thier roll.
I’ve been optimistic all year, but this is hard to watch. They better do something quick
The fact that there’s a discussion wether we should make the tournament with a losing conference record tells me we don’t deserve to be in the tournament. WPS