MVC Hoops: 2017-18

[underdawg]

Our 6-8 second team MVC PF Thik Bol isn't fairing well and will be re-evaluated in two weeks--a shame but thems the breaks. At least we got our 6-5 PG back --first game he played in 1.8 years he had 12 points and two assists but our 6-10 center Pippen fouled out with 3:35 to go and we were a mess underneath after that being out scored 12-6 for the 6 point loss to SLU

[FieldGoodie05]

I think about this sometimes, are we ratcheting up the expectations a few degrees simply because of the move to The Valley? 

What was the general expectation with Alec's freshmen class?  I suppose some of this is the absurd records we've put up the last 3 years consecutively.

Peters last 3-years (82-22)
Broekhoff last 3-years (71-32)

What year begins the next 3-years of dominance class? 

I'd argue Dan Oppland (last year 2005/06) was the one before Broekhoff.  That was a big gap of mediocrity 2006/07-2010/11.  Had only one season in the 20 win range during that time.

Is it Bakari, starting this year?
Is it Javon Freeman starting next year?

The real test for us will be overlapping studs.  Avoiding down years in between.

[VUGrad1314]

I think about this sometimes, are we ratcheting up the expectations a few degrees simply because of the move to The Valley? What was the general expectation with Alec's freshmen class?  I suppose some of this is the absurd records we've put up the last 3 years consecutively. Peters last 3-years (82-22) Broekhoff last 3-years (71-32) What year begins the next 3-years of dominance class? I'd argue Dan Oppland (last year 2005/06) was the one before Broekhoff.  That was a big gap of mediocrity 2006/07-2010/11.  Had only one season in the 20 win range during that time. Is it Bakari, starting this year? Is it Javon Freeman starting next year? The real test for us will be overlapping studs.  Avoiding down years in between.

Your point on the need for overlapping studs to avoid down years is well-taken and I think we're starting to see that emerge. Peters had plenty of help, Tevonn has support, Freeman-Liberty will have a solid group around him, etc.To answer your first question, yes. The conference move plus the strong performance of the Broekhoff-Peters years are the main reasons why my expectations are so high, and they should be. That's a sustained period of excellence that we as a fanbase should make clear that we expect to continue. We're not in the mid-con anymore; we're in a conference that expects its teams to perform and excel on big stages. Yet some act like this is still a mid-con team that should be happy to be there whenever they make the tournament. That's not an MVC mentality, and that's not the mentality a program that is as successful as ours has been should have.

[agibson]

Loyola getting some love on WBEZ, Chicago Public Radio, this morning. Even a brief quote from Moser. Based on their 9-1 record, and somehow on game day of their game against 0-8 Norfolk State.

We've talked about not wanting RPI 313 teams like Norfolk State on our schedule. But, maybe it's OK to have some in the conference? The win may hurt Loyola's RPI (which isn't great for us, as it makes a win or a loss against Loyola look worse). But, it'll help the rest of the conference's RPI by virtue of boosting Loyola's W-L...

[valpotx]

I get what your general statement is around the Mid-Con expectations, but I do want to point out that several of those Valpo teams from my time in school would take this team to the woodshed.  Yes, the conference was crap, but we still had similar caliber teams back then.

[VU2014]

https://twitter.com/CBB_Central/status/939993585688203270

[valpotx]

I now don't feel so bad about our 30 point loss to Purdue, or our last second loss at Ball State.  I can at least rationalize those outcomes, but Missouri State losing to an Oral Roberts team that is terrible nowadays?  Yikes!  This isn't the Oral Roberts of old, but some version that is 1/4 the talent specific to the days of Caleb Green and Ken Tutt.

[VULB#62]

From the MVCFANS board first posted December 7th:  Looks like Wardle's past is reemerging (at least from the perspective of one player's family).

The story began with the dismissal of JoJo McGalston from the Bradley squad.  But apparently there was some smoke beforehand -- this started brewing back in early November.

http://www.mvcfans.com/viewtopic.php?f=2&t=4844


[tweet]938583463745044480[/tweet]

[tweet]938830668183650304[/tweet]

But apparently there was some smoke beforehand -- this started brewing back in early November.

[tweet]931652791751213056[/tweet]

[tweet]927017132591685634[/tweet]

There are always two sides to every story, but this one seems eerily similar to the events that transpired in GB not so long ago.

[VU2014]

I've talked to a few Bradley fans about this and they were totally fine with letting him go because the kid had a history. We don't know what happened. This a non-story, imo. If you can't follow team rules then the coach has every right to cut a kid. He should be grateful that the University is still allowing him to have his scholarship.

[VU2014]

This kid is going to be a handful for years to come. Krutwig is incredibly polished for a freshman. He sort of has the same frame as Marten Linssen but I'd say Krutwig is a little lighter on his feet and more nimble but doesn't have Marty's mid-range potential. Those 2 are going to be fun to watch the next 4 years. I'd like to see Marty put on lean muscle during the offseason to help his lateral movement and maybe it will help with his "explosiveness" when grabbing those 50-50 rebounds. It will be interesting to see how Krutwig matches up with Valpo and our height from inside. He may be smaller but he move better then our 7 footers.
https://twitter.com/ValleyHoops/status/940310218994569216

[wh]

[tweet]938830668183650304[/tweet]

Someone who finds it worth the trouble might want to inform the Bradley player's mom that the bullying allegation at GB involved a white player, and was attested to by another white player.  The entire roster of black players fully supported Wardle.   

[VU2014]

Someone who finds it worth the trouble might want to inform the Bradley player's mom that the bullying allegation at GB involved a white player, and was attested to by another white player.  The entire roster of black players fully supported Wardle.   

Yeah bringing race into it was pretty uncalled for. Also comparing "verbal abuse" from a coach to sexual assault is quite a stretch. "Verbal abuse" is a very subjective thing. I'm not willing to criticize Coach Wardle especially when we have no clue what was said and when the player that got kicked off the team has a track record of breaking team rules. 

[VULB#62]

As mentioned there are always two sides to every story.  Here is the link to the Bradley Fan Forum that discusses this item in even greater depth.  https://bradleyfans.com  if anyone is interested.  Lots of interesting comments on the kid's previous history at Utah State and the changes Wardle has brought to Braves basketball.

[VU2014]

https://twitter.com/MVCsports/status/940628060499533825

[bigmosmithfan1]

I get what your general statement is around the Mid-Con expectations, but I do want to point out that several of those Valpo teams from my time in school would take this team to the woodshed.  Yes, the conference was crap, but we still had similar caliber teams back then.

We actually didn't. I'm not saying the Sweet 16 team wasn't capable of beating our current squad (because obviously, they could beat a number of P5 squads on a given night), but they'd be overmatched by our current squad most games. I think you're severely underselling how much a terrible Mid-Con allowed those 90's teams a huge margin for error and also how much more talented our recent squads have been compared to that era.

The 1998 team, as much as I love them, were blown out in their two non-conference games against HL opponents (Green Bay and UIC - back when the league was still called the Midwest Collegiate Conf.) They lost to Bethel. YSU beat them in early February. They came together at the right time and we will always love them for that, but don't sell short that we are at a significantly different level now, in recruiting and otherwise.

We're 8-2, with one bad loss to a ranked Big Ten team at their place and a one-point loss on the road to the likely MAC Champ minus our best player. It's gonna be okay.

[craftyrighthander]

I have positive expectations about this team, but I don't think you have to downgrade the '98 team to make the point about this year's team.  Comparing eras is difficult in sports, because athletes are getting better, faster, stronger, etc.

If you look at context (where the '98 team was relative to DI basketball in '98), can we really say that this team is better? The '98 team had a recruit who chose Valpo over Syracuse. The '98 team had a someone who played 5-6 years in the NBA. I'm not criticizing the current team when I say that they don't have anyone in Bryce's league. The '98 team went toe-to-toe with Stanford (which won the St. Louis region and went to the Final Four). While the '98 team did lose a number of games, it's probably a stretch to say that they'd be overmatched by the current team.

I agree, 8-2 is better than I expected at this stage.  I am just going to enjoy the ride.

[valpotx]

I get what your general statement is around the Mid-Con expectations, but I do want to point out that several of those Valpo teams from my time in school would take this team to the woodshed.  Yes, the conference was crap, but we still had similar caliber teams back then.

We actually didn't. I'm not saying the Sweet 16 team wasn't capable of beating our current squad (because obviously, they could beat a number of P5 squads on a given night), but they'd be overmatched by our current squad most games. I think you're severely underselling how much a terrible Mid-Con allowed those 90's teams a huge margin for error and also how much more talented our recent squads have been compared to that era.

The 1998 team, as much as I love them, were blown out in their two non-conference games against HL opponents (Green Bay and UIC - back when the league was still called the Midwest Collegiate Conf.) They lost to Bethel. YSU beat them in early February. They came together at the right time and we will always love them for that, but don't sell short that we are at a significantly different level now, in recruiting and otherwise.

We're 8-2, with one bad loss to a ranked Big Ten team at their place and a one-point loss on the road to the likely MAC Champ minus our best player. It's gonna be okay.

Sorry man, this is complete crap.  I am not down on this team, but we need to be realistic here.  I am not even referencing the 1998 team, but the teams during my tenure from the 1999-2000 season to 2003-2004.  Several of those teams would SMOKE this team.  We had our 2001-2002 team lose by less than 5 at both #14 Arizona and #2 Kansas, by 1 or 2 against #6 Notre Dame on a neutral court in 2002-2003, etc.  You are severely overvaluing the conference change, and not looking at the talent we had.  Having witnessed each home game during my days at Valpo, and watching all games online since we started Streaming, you can't say that there is a large difference in overall talent.  I would take that 2001-2002 team any day over this year's team.  Again, I think that we are good, but let's not pretend that just because it was 15 years ago, that those teams would not beat any of our recent teams, just because of their conference affiliation.

[FieldGoodie05]

I get what your general statement is around the Mid-Con expectations, but I do want to point out that several of those Valpo teams from my time in school would take this team to the woodshed.  Yes, the conference was crap, but we still had similar caliber teams back then.

We actually didn't. I'm not saying the Sweet 16 team wasn't capable of beating our current squad (because obviously, they could beat a number of P5 squads on a given night), but they'd be overmatched by our current squad most games. I think you're severely underselling how much a terrible Mid-Con allowed those 90's teams a huge margin for error and also how much more talented our recent squads have been compared to that era.

The 1998 team, as much as I love them, were blown out in their two non-conference games against HL opponents (Green Bay and UIC - back when the league was still called the Midwest Collegiate Conf.) They lost to Bethel. YSU beat them in early February. They came together at the right time and we will always love them for that, but don't sell short that we are at a significantly different level now, in recruiting and otherwise.

We're 8-2, with one bad loss to a ranked Big Ten team at their place and a one-point loss on the road to the likely MAC Champ minus our best player. It's gonna be okay.

Sorry man, this is complete crap.  I am not down on this team, but we need to be realistic here.  I am not even referencing the 1998 team, but the teams during my tenure from the 1999-2000 season to 2003-2004.  Several of those teams would SMOKE this team.  We had our 2001-2002 team lose by less than 5 at both #14 Arizona and #2 Kansas, by 1 or 2 against #6 Notre Dame on a neutral court in 2002-2003, etc.  You are severely overvaluing the conference change, and not looking at the talent we had.  Having witnessed each home game during my days at Valpo, and watching all games online since we started Streaming, you can't say that there is a large difference in overall talent.  I would take that 2001-2002 team any day over this year's team.  Again, I think that we are good, but let's not pretend that just because it was 15 years ago, that those teams would not beat any of our recent teams, just because of their conference affiliation.

I'd take Raits and Anti (developed) over DEREK and Sorolla personally.  This is only their sophomore years, but if we are talking comparative...

Lubos was a better shooter and skilled player than any of our shooters right now.

I'm not sure we even need to go beyond those (3) players to make our point.  I agree with Tex.

[IrishDawg]

Sorry man, this is complete crap.  I am not down on this team, but we need to be realistic here.  I am not even referencing the 1998 team, but the teams during my tenure from the 1999-2000 season to 2003-2004.  Several of those teams would SMOKE this team.  We had our 2001-2002 team lose by less than 5 at both #14 Arizona and #2 Kansas, by 1 or 2 against #6 Notre Dame on a neutral court in 2002-2003, etc.  You are severely overvaluing the conference change, and not looking at the talent we had.  Having witnessed each home game during my days at Valpo, and watching all games online since we started Streaming, you can't say that there is a large difference in overall talent.  I would take that 2001-2002 team any day over this year's team.  Again, I think that we are good, but let's not pretend that just because it was 15 years ago, that those teams would not beat any of our recent teams, just because of their conference affiliation.

Not that this should be the end-all, be all of arguments, but Pomeroy's rankings had the 2001-02 team ranked at #47 in the country that year.  Valpo this year is currently at #86, which supports your argument for that team.  Your argument weakens the more you go toward 2003-04 as they were ranked #152 that year.  The year before (02-03) they were ranked #93, so at least a close comparison to this year's group.  As a hypothetical exercise, if this year's team were to play the #47 team at the ARC, Valpo would likely be a 1-2 point underdog with about a 45% chance of victory.

All rankings from the Ken Pomeroy era (01-02 through this year) for Valpo teams:
01-02: #47
02-03: #93
03-04: #152
04-05: #196
05-06: #175
06-07: #148
07-08: #119
08-09: #226
09-10: #183
10-11: #95
11-12: #138
12-13: #65
13-14: #163
14-15: #64
15-16: #42
16-17: #104
17-18: #86 (thus far)

[vu72]

The biggest difference between earlier teams and today's team is athleticism.  Today's team is far more athletic and fast.  They are also as big as any team we have ever had and will be even more so next year when we graduate two guys who are 6' and add a 6'4" and a 6'8" to the available roster.  How that translates to wins remains to be seen but clearly Matt is going for athleticism first.

[historyman]

this could be a case of addition by subtraction.

Have you ever noticed that no one ever says when a new player is acquired that it could be a case of subtraction by addition?



It's not till that player leaves the program that the quote is used.

[valpotx]

I will agree that this year's team is by far the most athletic I have ever seen at Valpo, but that doesn't translate to overall success and competitiveness.  I do have to contradict the assertion that our recruits are of a higher caliber than what we had in the Mid-Con days.  How quickly some will forget that when Scott Drew was our main recruiter, we had a few top 25 recruiting classes, 'back in my day' .

[elephtheria47]

It's all subjective. In the mid con days,  valpo would get hype for those games because it was their only/few chance to prove they were good/belonged.  Did Kansas or notre dame put extra emphasis on playing a mid-con team?

Now that valpo is in the MVC (perceived better talented league), and recent history of success, these teams know they just can't show up and win the game.

I don't think the team this year is one of the better ones in valpo history...but i think the standard norm of expectations have increased since the mid con days. Wish there was a way to let the 2 battle it out on the hardwood.

[vu72]

It's all subjective. In the mid con days,  valpo would get hype for those games because it was their only/few chance to prove they were good/belonged.  Did Kansas or notre dame put extra emphasis on playing a mid-con team?

Now that valpo is in the MVC (perceived better talented league), and recent history of success, these teams know they just can't show up and win the game.

I don't think the team this year is one of the better ones in valpo history...but i think the standard norm of expectations have increased since the mid con days. Wish there was a way to let the 2 battle it out on the hardwood.

I think everyone (at least most) is saying that this team has THE POTENTIAL to be one of the best in Valpo history, but at the moment they are one of THE YOUNGEST teams in Valpo history.  If there is a silver lining to having Tevonn go down it is that the remainder of the team will be essentially what the team will look like next year.

Ten freshman and sophomores is a lot of youth and clearly that inexperience is showing particularly in turnovers.  But, when you have a team like Ball State beat (ex last second heroics)--on the road and against a team that beat a top 10 team, at this stage, I think this looks very promising !(is that a run on sentence or what!)

[VULB#62]

UWM 73 - Loyola 56 yesterday. Tryin to get the MVC's attention?