Make the case for A&M

[thebigabd]

They lost Josh Carter and Junior Elonu, their two best players. They were 9-7 in conference last year. With Carter and Elonue gone, their best player is Doland Sloan who averaged 11 points a game last year.

Their projected lineup is:

PG: Donald Sloan (11 points, 3 rebounds last year)
SG: Derrick Roland (6 points, 3 rebounds last year)
SF: Naji Hibbert (#59 player by ESPN)
PF: David Loubeau (4 points, 3 rebounds last year)
C: Bryan Davis (10 points, 6 rebounds last year)

Some people are predicting them 4th in the conference, (they were nearly .500 last year with Elonu and Carter) and most are predicting them in the top 5 or 6.

Make the case for them.

 

[sanguinetti]

losing Elonu to the draft hurt. i might could have got on board with a bubble type team with Elonu....but, i'd project them around .500 at best. they could surprise, there's talent on the roster....but i'll take a "show me" approach there.

 

[Sam]

Bryan Davis still looks like a duck so they have that going for them.

 

[DenverSooner]

They lost Josh Carter and Junior Elonu, their two best players. They were 9-7 in conference last year. With Carter and Elonue gone, their best player is Doland Sloan who averaged 11 points a game last year.

Their projected lineup is:

PG: Donald Sloan (11 points, 3 rebounds last year)
SG: Derrick Roland (6 points, 3 rebounds last year)
SF: Naji Hibbert (#59 player by ESPN)
PF: David Loubeau (4 points, 3 rebounds last year)
C: Bryan Davis (10 points, 6 rebounds last year)

Some people are predicting them 4th in the conference, (they were nearly .500 last year with Elonu and Carter) and most are predicting them in the top 5 or 6.

Make the case for them.

I think Sloan, Roland and Davis form a nice foundation for a respectable team. However, I do not think they will be better than last year. OU and Texas sweep A&M. OSU wins in Stoolwater and gives them all they want in College Station (either team could win). They lose at Baylor and at Tech. They lose to KU whereever it is played. If they go to ISU they lose and I could see ISU giving them a game in college station. The rest of the north will give them a game when A&M is on the road.

I would say A&M has a losing conference record. Maybe 10-6. (I did not look at their actual schedule, playing KU on the road would be good for them because they are losing to KU either way).

 

[thebigabd]

I think Sloan, Roland and Davis form a nice foundation for a respectable team. However, I do not think they will be better than last year. OU and Texas sweep A&M. OSU wins in Stoolwater and gives them all they want in College Station (either team could win). They lose at Baylor and at Tech. They lose to KU whereever it is played. If they go to ISU they lose and I could see ISU giving them a game in college station. The rest of the north will give them a game when A&M is on the road.

I would say A&M has a losing conference record. Maybe 10-6. (I did not look at their actual schedule, playing KU on the road would be good for them because they are losing to KU either way).

They have a tough north schedule

Kansas in College Station--- LOSS
Iowa State in Ames--- LOSS
Kansas State in Manhattan--- LOSS
Missouri in Columbia--- LOSS

Then they have to go to Norman, to Waco, to Lubbock, to Austin, and to Stillwater.

7-9 or 6-10 is what I have them at.

 

[UHsurfer12]

I think Sloan, Roland and Davis form a nice foundation for a respectable team. However, I do not think they will be better than last year. OU and Texas sweep A&M. OSU wins in Stoolwater and gives them all they want in College Station (either team could win). They lose at Baylor and at Tech. They lose to KU whereever it is played. If they go to ISU they lose and I could see ISU giving them a game in college station. The rest of the north will give them a game when A&M is on the road.

I would say A&M has a losing conference record. Maybe 10-6. (I did not look at their actual schedule, playing KU on the road would be good for them because they are losing to KU either way).

Man, I wouldn't mind having that type of losing record! haha

 

[DFWHoopster]

they have the potential to be very good defensively. Sloan, Roland and Davis are all scrappy, tough guys. Dash Harris is also a good defender. Loubeau is a key guy for them. He has a lot of talent. I just don't think they will be good enough offensively to make a push towards the upper half of the conference. BJ Holmes can shoot well from the outside. But they will miss Carter. Sloan, Roland and Harris can lay some bricks up and go cold for long stretches.

Bryan Davis is a good player but he is not a great athlete. He was the beneficiary of Joseph Jones and Elonu the last couple of years. You take that big post presence away and I see him having trouble scoring against the better big men in the league.

I would say 6-9 wins are probable for the Ags- probably closer to 6.

 

[DenverSooner]

They have a tough north schedule

Kansas in College Station--- LOSS
Iowa State in Ames--- LOSS
Kansas State in Manhattan--- LOSS
Missouri in Columbia--- LOSS

Then they have to go to Norman, to Waco, to Lubbock, to Austin, and to Stillwater.

7-9 or 6-10 is what I have them at.

With that information I go 5-11. I obviously wrote that wrong the first time. That lets them beat everyone at home but KU, OU and Texas. I really don't think they will do that but they might steal a game on the road or upset someone (KU, Texas or OU) in A&M. 7-9 is huge respect when you say they can't win any of those 4 games to the North.

What 7 do they win? CU and Nebraska and .500 ball in the Big XII south? I don't see them playing .500 ball in the Big XII south.

If Turgeon loses the team, they could do worse than 5-11. I don' t they will be favored for a single road game.

 

[thebigabd]

With that information I go 5-11. I obviously wrote that wrong the first time. That lets them beat everyone at home but KU, OU and Texas. I really don't think they will do that but they might steal a game on the road or upset someone (KU, Texas or OU) in A&M. 7-9 is huge respect when you say they can't win any of those 4 games to the North.

What 7 do they win? CU and Nebraska and .500 ball in the Big XII south? I don't see them playing .500 ball in the Big XII south.

If Turgeon loses the team, they could do worse than 5-11. I don' t they will be favored for a single road game.

I could definitely see them only winning 5 games. I gave them 6 assuming they would beat some south teams at home but if I see OU at A&M, Texas at A&M, Baylor at A&M.... I WOULDNT PICK A&M.

They could only win 4-5 games if they dont beat someone good at home.

 

[Krugerfan52]

I know some people claim that recruiting rankings don't mean anything, but what I believe is that FOR THE MOST PART 5-star MAA's are the types of players you have to have to win championships, 4-star players build solid teams and 3-stars are usually role players.

A&M doesn't have the 5-stars like KU, UT, and OU so they can't go 12-4.

A&M isn't made up of all 3-stars and juco's like Neb/CU/Tech so they won't go 4-12.

They are made up of mostly 4-star and top 150 rated recruits so I see them at 8-8.

Naji Hibbert - 4 star
Dash Harris - 4 star
David Loubeau - 4 star
Bryan Davis - 4 star
Donald Sloan - 4 star

 

[thebigabd]

Naji Hibbert - 4 star
Dash Harris - 4 star
David Loubeau - 4 star
Bryan Davis - 4 star
Donald Sloan - 4 star

We KNOW that Sloan is an average player....
We KNOW that Davis is an average player....
We KNOW that Dash is an average player....

We dont really know about Loubeau or Hibbert, but we know their main group is average. Their rankings dont matter when we know exactly what type of player they are.

For example, im not gonna go back and say "Tony Crocker is gonna be really good, he was a 4-star... And Cade Davis wasnt even ranked, so he probably will never get off the bench"...

Recruit rankings become totally meaningless after we have seen them play... You cant say "A&M is gonna be good because they have 4 stars, even though we know those guys are average at best"....

 

[playmakr]

I can't, thebigabd.

 

[campbest]

Sorry...had to laugh at the idea that you judge someone's talent based on what their recruiting ranking was in 2005. These guy's have been around for 3-4 years, we know what they can do, regardless of what they were ranked.

 

[Krugerfan52]

Those guys are are solid players. Thats why A&M keeps making the tourney. ABD, you can call them average players, but if thats true then CU, NEB and Tech are made up of below average players.

The only team that throws a wrench in the logic that teams with the better players/recruits win more often is Baylor, because their coach stinks. If they performed based on talent last year they would have made the tourney again. But A&M has a solid coach. Thats why they are always solid.

Don't get me wrong. I am not an A&M fan. I dont give a rats a-- about them. I just know they will be somewhere around 8-8 because thats who they are.

 

[MNsooner]

Those guys are are solid players. Thats why A&M keeps making the tourney. ABD, you can call them average players, but if thats true then CU, NEB and Tech are made up of below average players.

Well... to be far CU, NEB and Tech are made up of below average players. A&M is made up of a group of solid players, but they don't have a true play maker on that team IMO.

 

[DenverSooner]

Those guys are are solid players. Thats why A&M keeps making the tourney. ABD, you can call them average players, but if thats true then CU, NEB and Tech are made up of below average players.

The only team that throws a wrench in the logic that teams with the better players/recruits win more often is Baylor, because their coach stinks. If they performed based on talent last year they would have made the tourney again. But A&M has a solid coach. Thats why they are always solid.

Don't get me wrong. I am not an A&M fan. I dont give a rats a-- about them. I just know they will be somewhere around 8-8 because thats who they are.

They are solid players but who is going to score points when needed? Also how are they better players than the players at OU, Texas, KU, OSU, Baylor, ISU, KSU or Missouri? I could see arguments to make them better than some of those teams but as soon as you are arguing about it, it seems to me they have even talent at best. If the talent is even, I will take the home team every time.

 

[DFWHoopster]

Those guys are are solid players. Thats why A&M keeps making the tourney. ABD, you can call them average players, but if thats true then CU, NEB and Tech are made up of below average players.

The only team that throws a wrench in the logic that teams with the better players/recruits win more often is Baylor, because their coach stinks. If they performed based on talent last year they would have made the tourney again. But A&M has a solid coach. Thats why they are always solid.

Don't get me wrong. I am not an A&M fan. I dont give a rats a-- about them. I just know they will be somewhere around 8-8 because thats who they are.

the last five years, A&M's recruits were ranked equal by every possible measure to Baylor's recruits. Baylor's classes were unbalanced because they missed on big men. Meanwhile, A&M hit on some big guys (Jordan, Joseph Jones, Bryan Davis, Elonu). Baylor didn't get a 5-star recruit before Perry Jones. A&M had Deandre Jordan and Antoine Wright. But don't let facts get in the way of your theory. Baylor has been upgrading their talent each year and I suspect you will see that play out on the court. I detailed the evidence in this thread:

http://ouhoops.com/forum/showthread.php?t=8180

 

[sys]

i'll make the case, even though i don't really believe it...

sloan, roland and davis are average (roland well below average) offensive players, but above average defenders. they lost their two best offensive players, but it's easier for a freshman to come in and provide some offense than to come in and be an above average defender. if they can get holmes to keep shooting 40%+ from 3 when the defenses are keyed on him rather than carter, and if loubeau or one of the freshmen can step up to provide an consistent 2nd/3rd scorer, they can be a pretty decent team. if one of the freshman (or holmes) can largely replace roland's minutes without sacrificing much defensively, they could be better than decent.

defense and offensive rebounding will keep them in a lot of games. sloan and holmes both take great care of the ball too, so they aren't likely to rack up a bunch of turnovers either, even with all the new faces.

 

[Sam]

If they run some Kelvin Samspon style slow it down game I think they could be in a lot of games and maybe steal one or two they shouldn't on the road (OSU, one of the north teams) or at home (OU, Texas etc).

 

[earlpearl]

There really is no case to be made for them. I think they will wind up in the bottom tier.