Jump to content
Buffalo Bulls - UB Fan Forum

'22-'23 MBB Schedule


Recommended Posts

  • 3 months later...
2 hours ago, DocCas86 said:

According to Barttorvik.com rankings, Drake will be a very tough opponent, as they rank them at 58.  BT has Wyoming as the best team at 44.  

Wow, I haven't looked at those rankings in a long time but it's so sad to see where we are right now. 

Wyoming (#44)

Drake (#58)

Boston College (#78)

George Mason (#110)

Belmont (#178)

Tarleton State (#188)

Buffalo (#246)

Howard (#266)

If this holds true this will be one of the most depressing seasons of Buffalo basketball I've ever witnessed.

Edited by clodney
Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clodney said:

Wow, I haven't looked at those rankings in a long time but it's so sad to see where we are right now. 

Wyoming (#44)

Drake (#58)

Boston College (#78)

George Mason (#110)

Belmont (#178)

Tarleton State (#188)

Buffalo (#246)

Howard (#266)

If this holds true this will be one of the most depressing seasons of Buffalo basketball I've ever witnessed.

Does anyone really know how good we, or anyone, will be? They're basically all new teams top to bottom. Your statement is accurate though, if that ranking holds true. It's truly a crapshoot to try to predict anyone beyond the top dogs at this point, at least in my eyes. We shall see what happens.  Gotta just hope it comes together as there's talent in the fold. It has to come together with buy in from each player, both ends of the floor and their role(s).

  • Like 4
Link to comment
Share on other sites

2 hours ago, clodney said:

Wow, I haven't looked at those rankings in a long time but it's so sad to see where we are right now. 

Wyoming (#44)

Drake (#58)

Boston College (#78)

George Mason (#110)

Belmont (#178)

Tarleton State (#188)

Buffalo (#246)

Howard (#266)

If this holds true this will be one of the most depressing seasons of Buffalo basketball I've ever witnessed.

Bartovik leans very heavy on returning numbers, so it isn't a surprise to see ub rated so low. Its tough to project what a how a new player will play wither from juco or high school or a player that sat the bench the previous season

The better projections will come from the Mac when they do their preseason stuff

Link to comment
Share on other sites

38 minutes ago, Tee4three said:

Bartovik leans very heavy on returning numbers, so it isn't a surprise to see ub rated so low. Its tough to project what a how a new player will play wither from juco or high school or a player that sat the bench the previous season

The better projections will come from the Mac when they do their preseason stuff

Then, Bartovik should have our Women rated somewhere around the sump hole with3 returners.  I think we're all relatively confident that's not where they'll end up.  I wouldn't even call it an educated guess at this point.  More like throwing it up and seeing where they land.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

22 hours ago, clodney said:

Wow, I haven't looked at those rankings in a long time but it's so sad to see where we are right now. 

Wyoming (#44)

Drake (#58)

Boston College (#78)

George Mason (#110)

Belmont (#178)

Tarleton State (#188)

Buffalo (#246)

Howard (#266)

If this holds true this will be one of the most depressing seasons of Buffalo basketball I've ever witnessed.

I agree with what others say - that BT or other sites will have a hard time predicting how a team that had to replace 90% of their minutes will perform.  That said - I think we probably should expect this to be a down year.  When I look at the assumptions underlying #246, specifically the Adj. Offensive Efficiency (99.4 vs 105.7 last year) and Adj. Defensive Efficiency (105.0 vs 103.7), I feel that barttorvik is being a bit pessimistic relative to our prospects.  I can see our offense being down from last year, but below the MAC average?? I don't think so.  I am hopeful the drop off will be smaller than they predict, in the  range of 102-103.  I also am optimistic our defense is better than last year - in fact I would hope it improves to at least our average level of past few years of 101-102.   Our Adj Def Efficiency will be key to me as to how this team does (I know I am a broken record on this point! )

All that said, my expectation is the middle of the MAC with rankings somewhere between 140 - 185, a down year for sure.  However, this is in part due to players needing time to get comfortable playing with one another.   If things go well they could be a team that presents a challenge to say a Toledo or Akron in Cleveland.

Edited by DocCas86
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

He’s pretty open about the fact that it’s kinda a crapshoot when there’s a lot of roster movement. You can play with adding transfers and removing players and the page calls it “The Sausagemaker” lol

https://barttorvik.com/rostercast.php
 

I can see a wide range of outcomes for the team with a lot of “lottery tickets” coming in. I think a median outcome is probably a middle tier MAC team below teams with more continuity like Toledo, Kent, and maybe Akron.

I see a scenario where Adams regains his freshman form, Foster makes a smooth transition, and others play well and we contend for the MAC. And I see a scenario where the pieces don’t fit and the wheels fall off. I wouldn’t bet on either end

Link to comment
Share on other sites

31 minutes ago, clodney said:

I'm gonna call it now. We end up #150-200 and a whole bunch of people claim it was a successful season.

I would not characterize a ranking in that range as a successful year.  However, if I see evidence of effort throughout the season, improved play over the course of the season such that an upset or two in Cleveland would not be a surprise, and there is reason for optimism heading into the following season, then  I would accept that result given that we had to replace 90% of the minutes.  This scenario in my mind buys Whitesell a bit more time, especially given this is a young team that if signs point in direction that UB can potentially win the MAC in next few seasons after this one.  If the wheels come off - (i.e. ranking ~250) not my decision to make, but that would warrant a change, in my opinion.

To set some perspective, I had previously identified 'elite' MAC coaches over the past 10 years - Elite Coaches Groce (Akron), Dambrot (Akron), Boals (Ohio), Kowalczyk (Toledo), Hurley (Buffalo), Oats (Buffalo).  If you compile their Kenpom rankings over that time - here is the distribution of rankings:

image.png.de61f378bb0660cb11709878454e7868.png

You can see about one in seven years, this group's team had a ranking below 150.  You may recall that I used this criteria previously to say that Whitesell fell short of the elite group based on his team's performance so far.  If this year is sub 150, but the following two are 75-150, then Whitesell would be in the one in seven range. 

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, clodney said:

I'm gonna call it now. We end up #150-200 and a whole bunch of people claim it was a successful season.

I'm not even sure how to quantify success at this point. In the past, one could look at a roster and say "they were young, but wow they'll be good next year or the year after". Now, it's all 1 year positions when it comes to the eye test, because for all we know everyone will leave after this year. They could be good and "go bigger" or not play as much as desired and just go elsewhere. It's totally just wait and see. My goal would be 20+ wins and top 4 in MAC (and a win+ in Cleveland). Is that doable? I honestly wouldn't have the first guess.

Unlike many here, I do believe in this staff and believe that they are good teachers. So all I'll do is hope that I get proven correct for many reasons, one being I don't want to have to read a constant barrage of "JW sucks" or "XYZ player sucks". If I'm incorrect,  well it will just be one really un-enjoyable winter of games. I'm hoping for the former, as I would hope all others on here are too.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

4 hours ago, skrabukes said:

Does anyone really know how good we, or anyone, will be? They're basically all new teams top to bottom. Your statement is accurate though, if that ranking holds true. It's truly a crapshoot to try to predict anyone beyond the top dogs at this point, at least in my eyes. We shall see what happens.  Gotta just hope it comes together as there's talent in the fold. It has to come together with buy in from each player, both ends of the floor and their role(s).

I hate to keep bringing up the 2015-2016 season, but, you just never know what a team can accomplish until they put it all together. Rankings right now don’t mean anything.

 

Our team is in pretty unknown dark waters right now. As in, we have zero clue on who is going to be starting or in the rotation, but from what I have been seeing from highlights from the players we have brought in, there’s definitely excitement. But, that’s if the coaching staff can figure it all out leading up to the season.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, skrabukes said:

I'm not even sure how to quantify success at this point. In the past, one could look at a roster and say "they were young, but wow they'll be good next year or the year after". Now, it's all 1 year positions when it comes to the eye test, because for all we know everyone will leave after this year. They could be good and "go bigger" or not play as much as desired and just go elsewhere. It's totally just wait and see. My goal would be 20+ wins and top 4 in MAC (and a win+ in Cleveland). Is that doable? I honestly wouldn't have the first guess.

Unlike many here, I do believe in this staff and believe that they are good teachers. So all I'll do is hope that I get proven correct for many reasons, one being I don't want to have to read a constant barrage of "JW sucks" or "XYZ player sucks". If I'm incorrect,  well it will just be one really un-enjoyable winter of games. I'm hoping for the former, as I would hope all others on here are too.

Maybe I am in denial, but I am hoping that replacing majority of the roster does not become a yearly event.  My hope that is if  there is positive outlook for 2023-24, that we keep the core of young players.  If you are right....it certainly will take a large amount of the enjoyment out of rooting for UB.  As Seinfeld joked years ago you are rooting for the uniform.

 

Edited by DocCas86
Link to comment
Share on other sites

13 hours ago, DocCas86 said:

Latest per D1 docket, 7 out of likely 13 non conference games.  The Bonnies at Alumni on 12/3.  Also Howard or Wyoming after game with Drake.  Canisius on the calendar again.1402111447_Screenshot_20220621-2220412.thumb.png.437c6733e91c37bbc5cfa2f6390b2b77.png

Add in the 3 non D1 teams we will face and we are almost there. I’m joking but sorta could be the sad truth again.

  • Sad 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

3 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

Add in the 3 non D1 teams we will face and we are almost there. I’m joking but sorta could be the sad truth again.

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry to that comment.  Hopefully the non d1 is only one or two ( at most) 

There are 8 non 7 D1 currently, one TBD in paradise jam not included above.  So hopefully of five six remaining, we limit non d1.

Edited by DocCas86
  • Like 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites

5 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

I didn't know whether to laugh or cry to that comment.  Hopefully the non d1 is only one or two ( at most) 

There are 8 non D1 currently, one TBD in paradise jam not included above.  So hopefully of five remaining, limit non d1.

All the Paradise Jam games are listed.  The date of the second second game depends on what happens in the first game.  everyone plays three games in four days.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

1 hour ago, BrooklynBull said:

All the Paradise Jam games are listed.  The date of the second second game depends on what happens in the first game.  everyone plays three games in four days.

You are correct, and obviously more observant than I am. 🙂  We do have 7 D1 opponents at this time.  Here is the list so I do not cause any more confusion.

  1. Drake
  2. Howard / Wyoming
  3. TBD Paradise Jam
  4. St. Bonaventure
  5. WVU
  6. North Texas
  7. Canisius

Am I correct that we will likely have 13 non-conference games and 18 conference games?  I seem to recall that MAC switching back to 18 games this year.

Corrected my prior post (guess my coffee hadn't kicked in!) - well at least give me credit for spelling Bonaventure correct 🙂

Edited by DocCas86
Link to comment
Share on other sites

41 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

You are correct, and obviously more observant than I am. 🙂  We do have 7 D1 opponents at this time.  Here is the list so I do not cause any more confusion.

  1. Drake
  2. Howard / Wyoming
  3. TBD Paradise Jam
  4. St. Bonaventure
  5. WVU
  6. North Texas
  7. Canisius

Am I correct that we will likely have 13 non-conference games and 18 conference games?  I seem to recall that MAC switching back to 18 games this year.

Corrected my prior post (guess my coffee hadn't kicked in!) - well at least give me credit for spelling Bonaventure correct 🙂

Your logic seems sound. I think we can figure 2 Non D1 from past relationships. If we can fine 11 nice games, I will be happy.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

  • 3 weeks later...

Join the conversation

You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.

Guest
Reply to this topic...

×   Pasted as rich text.   Paste as plain text instead

  Only 75 emoji are allowed.

×   Your link has been automatically embedded.   Display as a link instead

×   Your previous content has been restored.   Clear editor

×   You cannot paste images directly. Upload or insert images from URL.

×
×
  • Create New...