UTDD

Texas needed an almost historic performance to hang with UNC and didn't get that when they lost to MSU. I think the team is what it is -- talented enough to hang with some Top 10 teams with amazing play but not talented enough to hang with these teams being just ok. I think that's realistic and you hope just the players develop well over the year to have more consistently good to great performances versus average to bad ones.

You have to pressure Tua to have a chance. Yes, it could destroy you worse if it fails badly but you weren't going to win anyway otherwise.

I personally like Lake trash talking from a competitive standpoint, but if I am an AD looking for a new coach to lead a program/national brand, I might pause if that is a consistent style towards opponents.

Wow, I can see how some UNC boards might attribute it to some kind of jinx, hard to explain that stat so easily.

Yeah, I am kind of in your camp. My children have only been spanked collectively three times ever, and it was always my wife just to be sure given her much calmer demeanor and size (she's only about 100-105 maybe soaking wet and long and skinny) , as we decided that long ago as a last resort or specific situation that might necessitate that kind of discipline. I can imagine there may be specific situations with specific children that might make me believe spanking can work, but at least for our family, it definitely isn't very needed or helpful in my opinion. I also believe that if AP's initial situation was on video somehow, his entire career would have been likely over.

I agree with this entirely if Sam is very healthy and coaching staff feels confident about this issue. The scenario I posted above was much more about a best case scenario within the context of protecting Sam from a higher chance of injury in game if it's a real concern. If the team is confident about Sam, go ahead and go all out.

That's why it's called a best case scenario, it is on the outlier of variables involved in predictive reasoning and is a perfectly plausible scenario when you quantify all possibilities in a reasonable manner. Plus it's Kansas. The worst case scenario is actually losing the game, which I also think is quite plausible if they turn the ball over.

Yeah I can see some of that potential, throw in a little Charles Barkley offensively too and you got yourself a player there.

Best case scenario is that Texas cam ram the ball down Kansas' throat with Ingram/Watson and avoid too many QB runs/throws and he barely plays the second half with Shane getting a lot of the 3Q and part of the 4Q, and maybe even Rising gets 1-2 series of garbage time.

I think he could be a superstar personally, but some question his outside shot , true position (is he skilled enough to guard wings/long enough to guard bigs?) and durability long-term. I think he's the best athlete I have seen coming towards the NBA since LeBron arrived many years ago.

I get that Zion might be undersized and not a perfect fit for the NBA on paper/position but when I watch him for a few minutes and then Barrett, I am feeling Zion more for # 1 for sure.

I wouldn't agree that any undefeated team automatically should deserve a shot but I would agree that UCF does.

It almost depresses me to think of what could have been for Young and even a guy like McNair if not for Fisher. Seriously. Ugh.

I personally believe UCF on a given night can absolutely beat a highly ranked team because that is true of some teams in the Top 20 as it is -- but I think it is equally true that it would be very hard for UCF to run say an SEC gauntlet and lose zero or 1 game either.

I think this is all basically what I agree with but I would add that sometimes what a coach can say in a public setting can greatly differ in clarity and tone than what a coach may be saying even in front of his teammates/coaches only and then only in front of that player himself. A really great coach might give vague praise to the press and ensure his player is not criticized in public very much but then add a little more detail to the team about a player's performance/game, and then individually might do quite a bit more in challenging that player in a solo setting. I don't know how Shaka challenges and develops his players in private so I can't fairly comment on that at all other than to look at the current player development trajectories as some sort of metric of success on some level.

Serious congrats as she is embarking on a great life experience there!

Yeah, I am kind of with you on this, maybe a slight overachieving considering where the OL was last year. I hoped we would go about 8-4 or 9-3 with 4ish swing games that could go either way from a 7-5 to 10-2 type season. I kind of think this is what has happened. If we beat WVU/OU in the title game, I would consider that an impressive achievement because I believe pound for pound right now OU/WVU have better talent to win right now although with ceilings and our freshman group in particular, that could change later.

Herman has made it clear recently more than once now that he considers the team to be overachieving a bit. I am curious if people generally agree with this statement and/or why he would be saying it.

Absolutely, and I believe three/four classes in a row like this one or close to it and you realistically can compete for the whole thing.

I think one big difference if I am recalling this correctly is that Foster, Sterns, and Cook all enrolled early and got a lot more prep time versus Green who did not go that route.

Utah (also Boston to an extent) I believe have been the most negatively impacted by the new offensive movement rules this year being emphasized.

Agreed about the bench a lot, they are not the same team they were in 2016 which was much healthier and better top to bottom taking out Durant. I also think Durant is a better overall player than Curry in more variables (different rosters, coaches, etc) and the reason I also have LeBron at such a gap over any other player in this era is for the same reason (I don't think for example that any other player in NBA history except Jordan could have won the 2016 Finals with that Cavs roster) I totally disagree however about Curry in 2016, that was one of the greatest seasons in NBA history from a number of metrics and analytics and the team record reflected that as well. To be fair, they did lose the Finals though. Many people value different stats, but a few that many agree on some level reflect something but not everything are things like PER, BPM, W/S per 48, and VORP. All reflect some level of value and impact but all are flawed as well because they are only specifically measuring what they measure and nothing else. Having said that, 2016 was very magical for Curry in that he led the league in basically every meaningful category in those arenas. His PER that year is 8th all-time in NBA history, only four other players have ever cracked the Top 12: Wilt (1,2,6), Jordan (3,5,7,11), LBJ (4,7,11), and Anthony Davis (12th). His OBPM is first-all time in NBA history. His overall BPM was 5th all-time in NBA history, only three other players are in the Top 12 club there -- Westbrook (1), LBJ (2,4,6,7,8), and Jordan (3,6). W/S per 48 8th all-time. Only other players Top 12 ever: Kareem (1,2,4), Wilt (3), LBJ (5,7,11,12) Jordan (6,9,10), and Curry at 8. VORP he was 12th, that club all-time is Westbrook (1), Jordan (2,3,8), LBJ (4,5,9), David Robinson (6), Kareem (7), and Chris Paul (10). I think a lot of these stats are flawed in terms of how they favor certain things over others (especially looking at Westbrook, his analytics I believe overvalue his true impact) but by that same token, Curry's season that year was simply incredible. It is fair to say it was an offensive GOAT level season that will likely not be seen again for a long time. The Warriors are a true GOAT level team to me because they have recognized how to utilize Curry in a way that impact all the other nine players in a way that has not been seen in a long time. That doesn't mean he is just a better player than Player A or B etc but it does mean that if you have him on your team, you can build the right roster/system to dominate the winning column in ways that are unique to him even over some better players.

In a nutshell, this is basically their dominance and are there are very advanced analytics that specifically track the quality of shots (based on hot zone location, space from defender, pass accuracy to shooter, etc) of every single player on the floor based on the actions of Curry and the attention generated from it. In simpler terms, one might call it the gravity or gravitational impact of one player on the four other offensive players and five defensive players on the floor. As good as LeBron and Durant are, they do not quite impact the other nine players in the same fashion, the last player like that was maybe Shaq.

Curry has more impact and importance for the Warriors system and roster because of what they run consistently. He is a unique player that has changed the NBA as a whole more than any current player since maybe Shaq in terms of how the game is now changing, has already changed (roster construction, defensive/offensive game plans, analytics, etc) so he's a great, great player. His gravity and impact on other teams is very unique and I believe in a way not seen since Shaq. Durant could probably thrive fine in almost any system where Curry due to the nature of his game maybe functions better in certain systems. I personally think Durant is an overall better talent (specifically in that I think he could thrive more consistently in more varied roster situations and coaches, teams, etc) but I don't think Durant has ever peaked in a season as well as Curry did in his NBA2k video game session in 2016 which was in a sense a perfect storm of everything breaking just right where I think he was even better than LeBron that year.

Golden State is definitely crippled a lot without Curry and Green, but I still think their play is disappointing. Durant just isn't in his groove right now, and I think Thompson really suffers not having Curry to create some gravity on the floor for spacing. Spurs are just not good enough to really win a title, but also not bad enough to start some kind of Dying for Zion train derailment either. With the way the West might tweak this year, at least 10-11+ teams realistically can make the playoffs and maybe quite a bit of this same group can even fight for a home first round.