PDA

View Full Version : Rivals #32 - Gonzaga



Butler Guy
09-10-2007, 04:49 AM
Link (http://collegebasketball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1146&CID=711559)

Rubbadub
09-10-2007, 05:05 AM
They don't even mention Gray or Davis.

ZagMania
09-10-2007, 06:34 AM
Bad writeup and ranking IMO, it means nothing anyway.

roxdoc
09-10-2007, 06:36 AM
Although I admit I don't follow these things too closely, I have not heard of this guy. Maybe there is a reason! Boy is he in for a suprise. Good incentive for the guys though.

Rubbadub
09-10-2007, 06:53 AM
He also forgot to put a ! after Ira. Inexcusable, imo.

lawzag
09-10-2007, 07:08 AM
Bad writeup and ranking IMO, it means nothing anyway.

:agreed:

Psychozag
09-10-2007, 07:15 AM
I also don't think he is right about us being an at-large bid...I seem to remember winning the conference tournament.

CDC84
09-10-2007, 08:19 AM
If Heytvelt plays, the Bulldogs will be far less guard-oriented.

Can't say I agree. The key phrase here is "far less." The strength and focus of Gonzaga will continue to be its perimeter players (guards and wings), and to a certain extent, that includes Heytvelt with his face up game and long distance shooting ability. Last time I checked, JP Batista and Turiaf aren't on this team. The bottom line is that even when Josh was playing last year, Gonzaga was still a guard oriented team. This year's team is probably going to push the ball more than ever due to the athleticism and depth up and down the roster.


Boy is he in for a surprise

I don't think a lot of national pundits are just aware of how good Ira Brown, Austin Daye, Steven Gray, Jeremy Pargo, and Theo Davis are (and some of the other guys). Hence, I am expecting preseason polls to reflect this. They just look at the roster and think, well, they don't have 18 PPG star player. Again, not that talent alone automatically makes you a great team..........

MBZags
09-10-2007, 10:54 AM
What I don't understand is how the hell he got that starting 5. There's absolutely no way anyone in his right mind would put that 5 out there as the starters.

Zags-Bsee
09-10-2007, 03:46 PM
Thanks Butler Guy for the link, I found it a very interesting article with lots to think about.

Under OUTLOOK in the link he wrote
Gonzaga again will be one of the top teams not in a major conference, though the rest of the West Coast Conference is catching up.

Personally I don't think that is true. I think Gonzaga will dominate the WCC this year, probably going undefeated. I think we will be even better the next year. I think we have better talent and coaching and the gap overall isn't closing, but instead widening just a little bit.

Relative to last years WCC season, this Gonzaga team is way better. If this team comes together and plays like the Zags of old we will be equal with the elite teams in the nation. The WCC isn't improving that much in my opinion.

No disrespect to our WCC foes, but having Josh back, combined with the talent we added vs. what we lost and it is obvious the WCC is NOT catching up. If our team develops a aggressive defensive game, it won't even be a close contest.

Lot of ifs, and assuming no problems like last year. As it stands now, the WCC is playing for 2nd place. Last season I think some teams were playing for 1st.

Angelo Roncalli
09-10-2007, 03:54 PM
I completely agree with Bsee. The WCC isn't catching up. If anything, it's regressing, except for SMC, which has experience, coaching and talent.

Butler Guy
09-10-2007, 03:54 PM
and I have a question concerning the user point thing that this site seems to use. I was changing my signature and I saw that someone graded me negatively for linking an article, what is the grading standard? Also, what is the benefit of the points, does something happen when you get a lot of them?

PS. My Paypal account has yet to be funded with the 7000 dollars for giving up Gonzaga viewing for the season. I need the money soon, I just got an email and evidently there is a person in Zaire that needs my help bringing a couple million into the US and all the need is a few thousand to grease the wheels. :D

primal23
09-10-2007, 08:55 PM
Should be an intersting and fun season!

CDC84
09-11-2007, 10:15 AM
http://collegebasketball.rivals.com/content.asp?SID=1146&CID=712658

I'm sorry, but GU is just plain better this season.

SteelCityZag
09-11-2007, 10:53 AM
I completely agree with Bsee. The WCC isn't catching up. If anything, it's regressing, except for SMC, which has experience, coaching and talent.


Here's a thought: What if the WCC isn't catching up, as the Zags should be fielding one the toughest lineups top to bottom in their history, but rather the league overall is improving?

I don't know if this is happening, but it seems as if both things (the gap between the Zags and the other teams widening AND the overall improvement of the conference) are not mutually exclusive and could be happening at the same time.

It seems as if several teams are improving and recruiting quite well (Pepp, SMU, Santa Clara, San Diego)

Thoughts of those in the know?

Nevtelen
09-11-2007, 10:58 AM
I was just going to post that... beat me to the punch, CDC!

Honestly - Team A, NCAA team, clearly had some issues last year, but managed to go 23-11 with some great wins (and a few painfull losses). Top 15 recruiting class in the country, plus only one impact player lost. Proven quality at every position. Quality depth, even (though some of it is unproven).

Team B - didn't make the NIT, missed the 20-win mark (in a season where more teams than ever before hit 20 wins), lost a 1-and-done quality big man and has only one proven quality big and a PG that seriously struggled last year.

How exactly does team B get rated higher preseason? Stick to the recruiting coverage, Rivals.

zagster318
09-11-2007, 11:01 AM
I was just going to post that... beat me to the punch, CDC!

Honestly - Team A, NCAA team, clearly had some issues last year, but managed to go 23-11 with some great wins (and a few painfull losses). Top 15 recruiting class in the country, plus only one impact player lost. Proven quality at every position. Quality depth, even (though some of it is unproven).

Team B - didn't make the NIT, missed the 20-win mark (in a season where more teams than ever before hit 20 wins), lost a 1-and-done quality big man and has only one proven quality big and a PG that seriously struggled last year.

How exactly does team B get rated higher preseason? Stick to the recruiting coverage, Rivals.

You're making too much sense.

Nevtelen
09-11-2007, 11:07 AM
yeah, I have that problem sometimes. :)

CDC84
09-11-2007, 11:14 AM
Honestly - Team A, NCAA team, clearly had some issues last year, but managed to go 23-11 with some great wins (and a few painfull losses). Top 15 recruiting class in the country, plus only one impact player lost. Proven quality at every position. Quality depth, even (though some of it is unproven).

Team B - didn't make the NIT, missed the 20-win mark (in a season where more teams than ever before hit 20 wins), lost a 1-and-done quality big man and has only one proven quality big and a PG that seriously struggled last year.

To be honest, all you need to do is look at the 2 rosters and compare.

http://gozags.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/gonz-m-baskbl-mtt.html

http://gohuskies.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/wash-m-baskbl-mtt.html

It should also be noted that a redshirt freshman on Gonzaga, who isn't a part of the incoming class, is the highest rated big man in the program's history coming out of high school (see 36):

http://home.nc.rr.com/rsci/RSCI_100_Final_2005.htm

Rubbadub
09-11-2007, 11:17 AM
To be honest, all you need to do is look at the 2 rosters and compare.

http://gozags.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/gonz-m-baskbl-mtt.html

http://gohuskies.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/mtt/wash-m-baskbl-mtt.html

I'm thinking 9 would be zags of the 13 if you had to make a team. (before you edited your post)