PDA

View Full Version : WCC as a whole, looks extremely weak this year.



Tetonka Test
12-05-2017, 10:07 AM
WCC (Kenpom ranking)

12-Gonzaga

30-Saint Mary's

70-BYU

162-San Diego

164-San Francisco

202-Santa Clara

222-LMU

228-Pacific

299-Pepperdine

308-Portland


Way too many sub-100 schools. When will a school not named Gonzaga, Saint Marys, or BYU ever step up and make a respectable showing?

Tetonka Test
12-05-2017, 10:08 AM
For comparison, here is the MWC kenpom rankings

MWC

34-Nevada

59-SDSU

62-Boise

71-Fresno

88-UNLV

100-Wyoming

124-USU

161-Colorado St

172-New Mexico

229-AFA

302-San Jose St.

mgadfly
12-05-2017, 10:34 AM
WCC (Kenpom ranking)

12-Gonzaga

30-Saint Mary's

70-BYU

162-San Diego

164-San Francisco

202-Santa Clara

222-LMU

228-Pacific

299-Pepperdine

308-Portland


Way too many sub-100 schools. When will a school not named Gonzaga, Saint Marys, or BYU ever step up and make a respectable showing?

I agree but would point out that since 2002 (Ken Pom's first year available on his site) the WCC has had the following:

1 top 100 team: 1 time (2006)
2 top 100 teams: 8 times (most recently, 2011 - the year before BYU entered the league)
3 top 100 teams: 5 times
4 top 100 teams: 2 times (2013 and 2014 when Santa Clara and San Francisco finished in top 100)

So, while I think the conference looks weak this season, it is really in comparison to the post 2012 era and sub-100 teams isn't the issue (we pretty much have the same three usual suspects). The problem is that nobody in our Bottom Seven is even close to the top 100 barrier.

ZagsObserver
12-05-2017, 11:05 AM
I agree but would point out that since 2002 (Ken Pom's first year available on his site) the WCC has had the following:

1 top 100 team: 1 time (2006)
2 top 100 teams: 8 times (most recently, 2011 - the year before BYU entered the league)
3 top 100 teams: 5 times
4 top 100 teams: 2 times (2013 and 2014 when Santa Clara and San Francisco finished in top 100)

So, while I think the conference looks weak this season, it is really in comparison to the post 2012 era and sub-100 teams isn't the issue (we pretty much have the same three usual suspects). The problem is that nobody in our Bottom Seven is even close to the top 100 barrier.

The 200-300 plus is scary

jazzdelmar
12-05-2017, 11:37 AM
WCC (Kenpom ranking)

12-Gonzaga

30-Saint Mary's

70-BYU

162-San Diego

164-San Francisco

202-Santa Clara

222-LMU

228-Pacific

299-Pepperdine

308-Portland


Way too many sub-100 schools. When will a school not named Gonzaga, Saint Marys, or BYU ever step up and make a respectable showing?

Not in our lifetime.

realtydog
12-05-2017, 11:38 AM
Santa Clara and USF have been a real disappointment !!!!! I thought they were on a higher trajectory

Zags_Fanatic
12-05-2017, 11:39 AM
https://i.imgur.com/xlzD86m.png

Zagdawg
12-05-2017, 12:00 PM
Thank you for sharing this chart-- good layout.

sideshow06
12-05-2017, 01:22 PM
Cool chart.

Though it would never happen, I kind of wish that if a particular league average RPI (or BPI, KenPom, whatever) was below the median for the whole NCAA, that league would forfeit its right to an auto-bid. Or something like that. Why should a league where every team is sub-200 have a guaranteed spot in the NCAA tourney? Their auto-bid could be a guaranteed spot in the NIT or something. That would leave more room for deserving at-large teams.

sittingon50
12-05-2017, 01:25 PM
Great chart, Fanatic! Please feel free to post weekly when updated. Thanks.

DixieZag
12-05-2017, 01:26 PM
That chart wonderfully demonstrates the huge impact of having sub 200 teams.

It's not even the lack of top 100 teams that devastates us, it's the bottom 7 being SO bad, as in "can't make the top 150" - bad.

sideshow06
12-06-2017, 09:09 AM
Perhaps a naive thought, but it seems like it shouldn't be that hard for the WCC to get a profile similar to the Mountain West. Especially with GU and SMC raising the upper-end profile. But I guess if it were easy we'd already be there.

CDC84
12-06-2017, 09:23 AM
One basketball analyst I know feels that allowing BYU to join the league just killed the league. Before BYU, the WCC had King Gonzaga, and a decent challenger in St. Mary's. But there was still hope. There was always that third spot. With the 2nd and 3rd spots taken away, every other team besides GU, SMC and BYU threw in the towel when BYU joined the WCC. Coaches got fired to cut expenses. What's the point of even trying when there is that much power at the top (especially when you consider BYU's monetary clout)?? Also, the more teams you have, the less practice time you get as well. No byes during WCC play, etc. This one analyst didn't really agree with Few's bashing of the "cellar dwellers" in that one article. His view if that by bringing BYU into the league, it forced teams into being cellar dwellers. There's just no way LMU and Pacific can compete with all the power at the top. Once it gets beyond two teams, it gets to be too hard for schools like them to excel unless a Boone Pickens type guy comes into the picture and dumps a ton of money into the program.

Birddog
12-06-2017, 09:26 AM
One basketball analyst I know feels that allowing BYU to join the league just killed the league. Before BYU, the WCC had King Gonzaga, and a decent challenger in St. Mary's. But there was still hope. There was always that third spot. With the 2nd and 3rd spots taken away, every other team besides GU, SMC and BYU threw in the towel when BYU joined the WCC. Coaches got fired to cut expenses. What's the point of even trying when there is that much power at the top (especially when you consider BYU's monetary clout)?? Also, the more teams you have, the less practice time you get as well. No byes during WCC play, etc. This one analyst didn't really agree with Few's bashing of the "cellar dwellers" in that one article. His view if that by bringing BYU into the league, it forced teams into being cellar dwellers. There's just no way LMU and Pacific can compete with all the power at the top. Once it gets beyond two teams, it gets to be too hard for schools like them to excel unless a Boone Pickens type guy comes into the picture and dumps a ton of money into the program.

The bottom feeders need to listen to Valvano's talk.