What do folks see in Mizzou next year?

[BigTime]

I saw in another thread that Vegas has the Tigers with some really solid odds to win the national championship, and have seen the Tigers in the 25-35 range in some of the national polls. I don't get it. I think they will finish 6th in the Big 12 at BEST! I really think that there is a decent chance that they finish 8th or 9th behind BU, ISU, and A&M.

What do folks see in Mizzou next year? I will go out on a limb and say that they won't make the dance.

 

[Seymore Cox]

no scorers.

 

[sys]

no scorers.

english.

 

[BigTime]

english.

What is your take on them, sys? Am I crazy for thinking they won't make the dance or finish in the top 6?

 

[Cheno]

ABD has them winning it all.

 

[thebigabd]

I saw in another thread that Vegas has the Tigers with some really solid odds to win the national championship, and have seen the Tigers in the 25-35 range in some of the national polls. I don't get it. I think they will finish 6th in the Big 12 at BEST! I really think that there is a decent chance that they finish 8th or 9th behind BU, ISU, and A&M.

What do folks see in Mizzou next year? I will go out on a limb and say that they won't make the dance.

They have a chance to surprise and be really good if Safford, Bowers, Dewitt, Ramsey, and Moore can produce in the paint. They return the same exact group of guards except English should be much improved. He is going to be a REALLY good player at MU.

Safford, Bowers, Dewitt, and Ramsey should be a solid group and I can see a top 5 finish for the Tigers.

 

[campbest]

I'm the one who saw the odds in Vegas and was shocked they were going at 15:1! Don't think they'll be THAT good, but they should finish in the middle of the pack of the Big XII. They are the one team where a small drop off in overall talent can be overcome with the style they play. I can see this team winning a few games it shouldn't, as well as losing a few to teams they should beat. English is going to be a stud, IMO.

Personally, I like to see them getting national attention (whether it is deserved or not) because it is good for the Big XII as a whole.

 

[Cheno]

I'm the one who saw the odds in Vegas and was shocked they were going at 15:1!

I would definitely lay down $15,000 to win $1,000 that Mizzou does not win the national championship. They have absolutely zero chance.

 

[Krugerfan52]

Losing Demare Carroll, Leo Lyones and Matt Lawrence is huge. They were the top 3 scorers. They don't have any big time players coming in, so I expect them to not only drop off more than anybody in the Big 12, but possibly more than anybody in the nation. Teams like UNC and OU lose a bunch of good players, but bring in MAA's to replace them.

I don't think they'll be an NIT team and probably finish 3rd in the Big 12 North behind Kansas and K. State, unless Brackins can carry ISU past them.

 

[sys]

What is your take on them, sys? Am I crazy for thinking they won't make the dance or finish in the top 6?

i don't think they'll be particularly good. tough at home.


i've been pretty wrong on mu in the past though. thought they'd be pretty good 2 years ago, and thought they'd be nowhere near as good as they were last year.

 

[Sawyer]

How many of you thought MU would be any good last year? I'm guessing not a whole lot of you anticipated a 31 win season in Columbia.

Losing Carroll is huge. Lyons and Lawrence are both replaceable. Lyons was talented and Lawrence was a valuable shooter, but Lyons couldn't be counted on night in, night out to give a consistent effort, and if Lawrence's shot wasn't falling he often would disappear. Between Safford, Bowers and Ramsey, Lyons' production will be replaced. Lawrence's production will also be balanced out by increases from Denmon and English (and then some).

I'm not sure where MU can turn to replace Carroll, though. There probably isn't a replacement, which means we won't likely win 31 games again. I can live with not winning 31 every single year.

Regarding the lack of impact recruits... Dixon is going to play a ton and will be among the best freshmen point guards in the Big 12. He was "only" ranked 136th by rivals, but he's tailor made for what Anderson wants to do and will make big contributions as a freshman. Keith Dewitt will also play a lot as a freshman... if he's eligible. That's still up in the air, and most fans assume at this point that he won't be here. If he makes it, though, he could be the best post guy on the roster from day one.

 

[thebigabd]

How many of you thought MU would be any good last year? I'm guessing not a whole lot of you anticipated a 31 win season in Columbia.

Losing Carroll is huge. Lyons and Lawrence are both replaceable. Lyons was talented and Lawrence was a valuable shooter, but Lyons couldn't be counted on night in, night out to give a consistent effort, and if Lawrence's shot wasn't falling he often would disappear. Between Safford, Bowers and Ramsey, Lyons' production will be replaced. Lawrence's production will also be balanced out by increases from Denmon and English (and then some).

I'm not sure where MU can turn to replace Carroll, though. There probably isn't a replacement, which means we won't likely win 31 games again. I can live with not winning 31 every single year.

Regarding the lack of impact recruits... Dixon is going to play a ton and will be among the best freshmen point guards in the Big 12. He was "only" ranked 136th by rivals, but he's tailor made for what Anderson wants to do and will make big contributions as a freshman. Keith Dewitt will also play a lot as a freshman... if he's eligible. That's still up in the air, and most fans assume at this point that he won't be here. If he makes it, though, he could be the best post guy on the roster from day one.

I think Ramsey is an underrated player, and my guess is that he will start next to Bowers or Safford next year in the paint. He did exactly what you would want any backup post player to do last year. He played great defense, rebounded, blocked shots, and had some nice scoring games. He can shoot jumpers (even out to the 3pt line), and is an impressive athlete at 6'9''...

I see Ramsey having a big year next season.

 

[Seymore Cox]

no scorers.

 

[sys]

no scorers.

english

 

[Sawyer]

no scorers.

Kim English (see: Marquette game)
Marcus Denmon (played hurt much of last year and wasn't much more than a spot up shooter.... that will change)

JT Tiller (at times)
Zaire Taylor (when he needs to be)

Laurence Bowers (when he had the opportunity, he was incredibly productive... he'll have ample opportunities this season)

MU was among the best in the nation last season in scoring and assists. They're not going to become an inept team offensively because they lost three guys.

 

[Seymore Cox]

Kim English (see: Marquette game)
Marcus Denmon (played hurt much of last year and wasn't much more than a spot up shooter.... that will change)

JT Tiller (at times)
Zaire Taylor (when he needs to be)

Laurence Bowers (when he had the opportunity, he was incredibly productive... he'll have ample opportunities this season)

MU was among the best in the nation last season in scoring and assists. They're not going to become an inept team offensively because they lost three guys.

You have to provide stipulations to defend their scoring ability. Mizzou will lose alot with Lyons and Carroll. Those were long, tall, guys with small forward skill and matchup headaches for everyone. They're replacing them with guys who aren't ready.

 

[Krugerfan52]

They don't have one proven scorer. That is not good news no matter who you are.

 

[Sawyer]

I don't have to defend anything. I have to explain it to the uninformed.

And for what it's worth, MU with "no scorers" returns more points per game than Oklahoma next year.

Anderson's teams have averaged 77.6, 77.1 and 81.5 points per game in his three seasons. He's done that with teams largely devoid of "scorers" (or talent in general if you're talking about his first year). There may not be an All Conference go-to type guy this year, but MU will still be at or near the top of the conference in scoring.

 

[Seymore Cox]

I don't have to defend anything. I have to explain it to the uninformed.

And for what it's worth, MU with "no scorers" returns more points per game than Oklahoma next year.

Anderson's teams have averaged 77.6, 77.1 and 81.5 points per game in his three seasons. He's done that with teams largely devoid of "scorers" (or talent in general if you're talking about his first year). There may not be an All Conference go-to type guy this year, but MU will still be at or near the top of the conference in scoring.

No scorers.

OU has scorers coming in.

 

[mizzOUstu702]

And for what it's worth, MU with "no scorers" returns more points per game than Oklahoma next year.

And I'm sure Kentucky returns less points per game this year than they had last year, but do you really think they'll be worse? (I'm not trying to be a douche, just an honest question)

DeMarre Carroll was a huge part of Mizzou's offense--a big man that can run the floor, defend, and pound it inside. I really don't see them replacing the production that Carroll and, in a lesser sense, Lyons brought to the team.

They'll end up in 4th or 5th in the Big 12. It's hard to replace your top 3 scorers.

Kim English? He may have turned it on late, but for the season he averaged 6.5 ppg. Sure, in Anderson's system, there are a lot of players sharing minutes, but 6.5 ppg is about as comparable as Juan Patillo.