Hogville

RB Sports Discussion => Jump Ball => Topic started by: Mr. Porkleone on September 22, 2017, 01:17:25 pm

Title: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Mr. Porkleone on September 22, 2017, 01:17:25 pm
Seen 3 today. Linsey's, Athlon, Sporting news.

Not expecting much.  We will see. I may be wrong. But how our year ended I thought we'd be predicted a little higher. 
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ErieHog on September 22, 2017, 01:23:56 pm
We're not going to be picked in the top 4 of the league; that was entirely expected.

This will be a much better team to end the year, than the beginning, as well.   There's going to be a step back in record,  which may not reflect a decline in the overall level of play.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: navyhog24 on September 22, 2017, 02:58:50 pm
We're not going to be picked in the top 4 of the league; that was entirely expected.

This will be a much better team to end the year, than the beginning, as well.   There's going to be a step back in record,  which may not reflect a decline in the overall level of play.


Agreed. This team has a lot of potential, but with the bump up in schedule and waiting for the freshmen to acclimate, there will be early growing pains.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Marshfieldhog on September 22, 2017, 03:26:56 pm
Kingsley drove me nuts, I think we can cover that loss and then some. I'm surprised we are not ranked higher since Macon and Barford came back.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: batmanfan on September 22, 2017, 03:44:06 pm
Seen 3 today. Linsey's, Athlon, Sporting news.

Not expecting much.  We will see. I may be wrong. But how our year ended I thought we'd be predicted a little higher. 

Well...where did they pick us?
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on September 22, 2017, 04:09:07 pm
I think thereís some hidden improvement some arenít factoring in with potential of defense on the ball from Hannahís minutes and scoring from Mannyís minutes. Trey and Gafford need to produce to somewhat offset losing MK. But the potential for some gains is there in a few areas. Need CJ to become a consistent threat outside and I think he will. Need an uptick out of the PFís and including Bailey and I also think thatís gonna happen. Bailey showed late what he could bring. Strictly looking at his PPG wonít impress magazine writers but we saw something late that should excite us.

I agree that we will likely win fewer games but may actually end up stronger.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Dominicanhog on September 23, 2017, 08:15:43 am
These magazines are like sheep.. they follow... if you weren't in the previous T25, your probably not going to make the preseason T25.. they put the usual suspects in because it's safe and easy... in addition, they don't have to do much research.....

My thoughts are a little different than some others ..we will be  T25 most of the year,  a better team than last year and we'll win at least 25... I think this is the year where everybody knows the Hogs are back.... these next few years are going to be the golden years of the Anderson era..
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: rzrbkman on September 23, 2017, 08:36:32 am
If this was any other team, besides Arkansas, and I was looking at the roster/bio/returning players and incoming players, I would not be confident on the potential inside game, at this point.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Dominicanhog on September 23, 2017, 08:44:21 am
If this was any other team, besides Arkansas, and I was looking at the roster/bio/returning players and incoming players, I would not be confident on the potential inside game, at this point.
I understand this... but when looking at other teams, they lost as much or more than we did,  you can say something about them not being as good in the back court or defensively or up front... each team has questions... we have a lot returning from a pretty good team that was getting better as the year went on... imo, we pick up where we left off...  We get a chance to proof it early with our schedule.. I think we surprise.....
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: LR_Matt on September 23, 2017, 10:30:33 pm
Well...where did they pick us?

I've seen anywhere from 4th to 6th in the conference. UK picked to repeat as SEC champs again.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Dominicanhog on September 24, 2017, 04:30:51 am
I've seen anywhere from 4th to 6th in the conference. UK picked to repeat as SEC champs again.

sounds about right for UK .. until someone can prove otherwise.. 4th is where I would pick us as well... think we'll end up top 3 when it's all said and done.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: husker71 on September 24, 2017, 05:21:37 am
order Blue Ribbon
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Ironhawg on September 24, 2017, 07:40:12 am
I'm afraid the first couple of months may be a little bit of a roller coaster ride until the team can gel.  I'm a little worried about the inside game, but I'm still excited for the season to get here!
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: The_Iceman on September 24, 2017, 08:26:22 am
It's hard to project Mike Anderson teams in the preseason because these magazines are all about the star players. While I believe Macon and Barford will be studs and average 15+ ppg each, the strength of this team will be the waves of length, talent, and athleticism we can throw at a team throughout the course of a game.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Dwight_K_Shrute on September 24, 2017, 03:48:54 pm
order Blue Ribbon

No doubt.  I don't read preseason BBall mags but if I did this would be the only one.  It's considered the hands down Bible.  They did a FB version for a few years that was great as well just too much competition.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Brake on September 25, 2017, 03:55:46 am
I understand this... but when looking at other teams, they lost as much or more than we did,  you can say something about them not being as good in the back court or defensively or up front... each team has questions... we have a lot returning from a pretty good team that was getting better as the year went on... imo, we pick up where we left off...  We get a chance to proof it early with our schedule.. I think we surprise.....

This is my thinking as well man. I see a lot of people say we need time to gel. I don't understand why. We only lost 3 players from last year and I think we got better players in their place and the rest of the team has had a year to gel. No one is saying UK needs time to gel and they're getting a completely new team. I think we start strong and stay strong the whole year. A lot of people will be surprised.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on September 25, 2017, 09:56:04 am
I thought about this last night too.

Youíve got some key guards coming back. Youíve got experienced bigs also returning.

I could see use mixing two waves of players to spread out the new guys and experience and finish games early in the season with more of our seasoned guys and gradually work your others into that fold. If they adjust quickly, then even better.

We may not struggle to gel like some think.

I could see us using Barford, Macon, Garland, Thomas, Thompson starting and then Beard, Jones, Bailey, Miles and Gafford off the bench. Not sure whatíll happen with Cook or our late signee. Each rotation would blend experience with youth

Late in close games you want Barford and Macon for sure out there and then various combos based on hot hands and match ups.

I venture to say not many teams have the ability to run 3 senior guards out there like we do. Thatís a very good thing. If our bigs develop, look out.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: batmanfan on September 25, 2017, 10:19:59 am
If I remember right, last year South Carolina was being picked 6-8th in the league in the preseason. Very underrated, and like us has some stud guards coming back.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: The_Iceman on September 25, 2017, 10:32:33 am
This is the first time we have real NCAA tournament experience returning under Mike Anderson. As in guys who seriously contributed. That will make a difference in how quickly this team gels early in the year.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Fan701 on September 25, 2017, 12:33:00 pm
If I remember right, last year South Carolina was being picked 6-8th in the league in the preseason. Very underrated, and like us has some stud guards coming back.

Bleacher Report had South Carolina picked for 11th last year.  Athlon had them 9th.  USA Today had them 10th.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ErieHog on September 25, 2017, 01:16:35 pm
This is my thinking as well man. I see a lot of people say we need time to gel. I don't understand why. We only lost 3 players from last year and I think we got better players in their place and the rest of the team has had a year to gel. No one is saying UK needs time to gel and they're getting a completely new team. I think we start strong and stay strong the whole year. A lot of people will be surprised.

Arkansas loses a SEC POTY candidate and the anchor of their defense.  Players who have had trouble staying on the floor for long stretches are going to be vital to our success.    Talented recruits come in, to be sure, but it is widely considered either the 5th or 6th best class in the league-- and lacks the top end talent of every class ranked ahead of it.

There really isn't any mystery as to why we aren't a popular pick, even if we have the potential to outperform a few other teams that get early hype.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Big Nasty 34 on September 25, 2017, 02:11:58 pm
I thought about this last night too.

Youíve got some key guards coming back. Youíve got experienced bigs also returning.

I could see use mixing two waves of players to spread out the new guys and experience and finish games early in the season with more of our seasoned guys and gradually work your others into that fold. If they adjust quickly, then even better.

We may not struggle to gel like some think.

I could see us using Barford, Macon, Garland, Thomas, Thompson starting and then Beard, Jones, Bailey, Miles and Gafford off the bench. Not sure whatíll happen with Cook or our late signee. Each rotation would blend experience with youth

Late in close games you want Barford and Macon for sure out there and then various combos based on hot hands and match ups.

I venture to say not many teams have the ability to run 3 senior guards out there like we do. Thatís a very good thing. If our bigs develop, look out.

See, I think Hall will be the surprise between he and Garland and can see him getting the start at the 3 spot. Seems to be a great candidate to replace Manny. Does all the little things to help his team win, and isn't looking to "get his" on the offensive end.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Brake on September 25, 2017, 04:26:47 pm
Arkansas loses a SEC POTY candidate and the anchor of their defense.  Players who have had trouble staying on the floor for long stretches are going to be vital to our success.    Talented recruits come in, to be sure, but it is widely considered either the 5th or 6th best class in the league-- and lacks the top end talent of every class ranked ahead of it.

There really isn't any mystery as to why we aren't a popular pick, even if we have the potential to outperform a few other teams that get early hype.

Kingsley was a sec poty candidate because his Jr year, he was the best player on a bad team. On a good team (last year) his numbers dropped quite a bit and was never really looked at as the best player in the sec. And I'm not saying this team should be hyped up, I'm just pointing out that we are in a lot better shape to win early on than a lot of other teams.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Letsroll1200 on September 29, 2017, 09:52:48 am
The SEC is deep and talented this season. I have the hogs fifth going into the season.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ShadowHawg on September 29, 2017, 11:32:15 am
The SEC is deep and talented this season. I have the hogs fifth going into the season.


I think this is a fair starting point for sure.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Fan701 on September 29, 2017, 11:37:42 am
The SEC is deep and talented this season. I have the hogs fifth going into the season.
But do the four teams you pick ahead of us have players that will turn out to have been paid?  That might change things considerably.  Auburn will almost certainly have at least one and probably more key players ruled ineligible, as well as lose their coach, so if you picked them ahead of us, which wouldn't have seemed unreasonable a week ago, you might want to think again.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: hoglady on September 29, 2017, 04:25:35 pm
Those preseason magazines are going to have to have a reset before this season starts.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Letsroll1200 on September 29, 2017, 04:52:45 pm
But do the four teams you pick ahead of us have players that will turn out to have been paid?  That might change things considerably.  Auburn will almost certainly have at least one and probably more key players ruled ineligible, as well as lose their coach, so if you picked them ahead of us, which wouldn't have seemed unreasonable a week ago, you might want to think again.

Kentucky, Florida, A&M and Miss. State ahead of the Razorbacks. Things could change.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: FineAsSwine on September 29, 2017, 05:14:56 pm
Kentucky, Florida, A&M and Miss. State ahead of the Razorbacks. Things could change.

Whole KY class ruled ineligible would be my dream come true.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ErieHog on September 29, 2017, 06:52:58 pm
Those preseason magazines are going to have to have a reset before this season starts.

It may be a case of no one actually being ruled ineligible before the season is played.    It is, to paraphrase the saying, better to have played it and lost it in later review, than never to have played it at all, as far as the NCAA goes
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: bkjbearcat on September 29, 2017, 07:56:39 pm
It's hard to project Mike Anderson teams in the preseason because these magazines are all about the star players. While I believe Macon and Barford will be studs and average 15+ ppg each, the strength of this team will be the waves of length, talent, and athleticism we can throw at a team throughout the course of a game.

I looked at one today. Had Missouri third. I guess a good recruiting class can do that.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Corkscrew Johnson on October 02, 2017, 11:20:51 am
If I remember right, last year South Carolina was being picked 6-8th in the league in the preseason. Very underrated, and like us has some stud guards coming back.

Experienced guards are critical to success in college basketball.  If you look at Anderson's roster since he arrived at Arkansas, it has been noticeably devoid of dangerous senior guards.  Some of that is due to recruiting, some of that is due to players leaving (pros or transfers), but regardless it is what it is.  You can argue that his most successful season happened to coincide with the year that Madden as a senior started playing like a point guard instead of small forward.  I think Macon and Barford give us something that we haven't experienced in a long time, and I'm optimistic that will translate to success. 
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: KlubhouseKonnected on October 02, 2017, 02:25:59 pm
I won't be surprised if we have some growing pains early. Hope the chicken littles and dedicated haters of MA amongst us can keep their panties dry while this team figures itself out.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ErieHog on October 02, 2017, 06:56:22 pm
I won't be surprised if we have some growing pains early. Hope the chicken littles and dedicated haters of MA amongst us can keep their panties dry while this team figures itself out.

If we don't start out 13-1, they'll be ready to burn the program to the ground.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: KlubhouseKonnected on October 03, 2017, 02:58:15 pm
If we don't start out 13-1, they'll be ready to burn the program to the ground.

Many of them will be ready to burn it down whether the first loss comes on the 14th game, the 4th game or the 24th.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: hogsanity on October 03, 2017, 04:46:03 pm
If we don't start out 13-1, they'll be ready to burn the program to the ground.

If they get through the ooc with 9 or 10 wins that will be pretty good. That is a solid ooc schedule and we don't know how tough the 2nd and 3rd games will be in the p80, could be 2 more hard games.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: ErieHog on October 03, 2017, 04:59:58 pm
If they get through the ooc with 9 or 10 wins that will be pretty good. That is a solid ooc schedule and we don't know how tough the 2nd and 3rd games will be in the p80, could be 2 more hard games.

Oh, without a doubt.  But you mention that, and you are an Anderson Apologist.  We've seen that for years now--  talking about the relative merits of the teams played has little bearing on what such people demand.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Dominicanhog on October 03, 2017, 05:17:29 pm
If they get through the ooc with 9 or 10 wins that will be pretty good. That is a solid ooc schedule and we don't know how tough the 2nd and 3rd games will be in the p80, could be 2 more hard games.

sounds about right...
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: FATHAWG08 on October 03, 2017, 06:42:25 pm
If our guards play up to what is expected this team will suprise a lot of people.Great guard play has been the difference for the Top Teams in the tournament. I expect a very good year for the Hogs. I also expect a good start to the season.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on October 03, 2017, 07:32:44 pm
Oh, without a doubt.  But you mention that, and you are an Anderson Apologist.  We've seen that for years now--  talking about the relative merits of the teams played has little bearing on what such people demand.
those people donít deserve the attention they seek by making such stupid comments. People who know their stuff understand this schedule will be tough.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Smithian on October 15, 2017, 09:29:57 am
Picked up Athlon and they have Hogs picked #7 in conference.

I understand we lost Kingsley but I don't get the lack of expectations for the Hogs. We return a pair of guards who came on strong late and we have some experienced depth. I don't expect Gafford to replicate Kingsley, but if he puts together even a respectable freshman year and gives us even respectable rim protection then the Hogs will be a tough out.

I really expect Macon and Barford to take a second year jump. I could especially see Barford going off.

I think the magazines are weighted heavily toward big time freshman classes and the Hogs class doesn't jump off the page.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: hogfan14 on October 15, 2017, 09:43:53 am
Picked up Athlon and they have Hogs picked #7 in conference.

I understand we lost Kingsley but I don't get the lack of expectations for the Hogs. We return a pair of guards who came on strong late and we have some experienced depth. I don't expect Gafford to replicate Kingsley, but if he puts together even a respectable freshman year and gives us even respectable rim protection then the Hogs will be a tough out.

I really expect Macon and Barford to take a second year jump. I could especially see Barford going off.

I think the magazines are weighted heavily toward big time freshman classes and the Hogs class doesn't jump off the page.

I think most don't look at anything other than Barford and Macon
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: nwahogfan1 on October 15, 2017, 03:07:40 pm
If this was any other team, besides Arkansas, and I was looking at the roster/bio/returning players and incoming players, I would not be confident on the potential inside game, at this point.

You are right on inside scoring unless one of our senior bigs really worked hard on their scoring we will get little out them.  Gafford will help with put backs and transition baskets.  I am hoping for 10- 12 ppg/rpg from those 4 bigs.  I can see several 3s playing minutes at the 4 to help with scoring and pressure D..
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on October 15, 2017, 04:45:23 pm
Assuming Cook plays - we have 3 of our 4 bigs back and are bringing in Gafford.

If I were scouting our competition, Iíd note the above and think theyíd have a good chance to be pretty solid inside.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: GuvHog on October 15, 2017, 05:02:44 pm
You are right on inside scoring unless one of our senior bigs really worked hard on their scoring we will get little out them.  Gafford will help with put backs and transition baskets.  I am hoping for 10- 12 ppg/rpg from those 4 bigs.  I can see several 3s playing minutes at the 4 to help with scoring and pressure D..

The inside game is really a mystery. Mike is not one to start both Thompson and Gafford so Thompson will likely start making him the tallest player on the court at 6'9". Gafford will come off of the bench to relieve Thompson but he's not ready to assume a main roll just yet. That's why the Hogs are not ranked very high in the SEC.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: mhuff on October 15, 2017, 05:54:07 pm
If Thompson and Gafford don't play together, CMA will miss the boat again. I do look for them to be on the floor together. Thompson passes the ball too well and shoots well in the paint. Wait and see.

Hogs not ranked very high because there's too many new faces. Takes time to develop chemistry.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: mhuff on October 15, 2017, 05:59:26 pm
I won't be surprised if we have some growing pains early. Hope the chicken littles and dedicated haters of MA amongst us can keep their panties dry while this team figures itself out.

Defense and scoring in the paint gonna tell the tale.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: mhuff on October 15, 2017, 06:10:44 pm
I think thereís some hidden improvement some arenít factoring in with potential of defense on the ball from Hannahís minutes and scoring from Mannyís minutes. Trey and Gafford need to produce to somewhat offset losing MK. But the potential for some gains is there in a few areas. Need CJ to become a consistent threat outside and I think he will. Need an uptick out of the PFís and including Bailey and I also think thatís gonna happen. Bailey showed late what he could bring. Strictly looking at his PPG wonít impress magazine writers but we saw something late that should excite us.

I agree that we will likely win fewer games but may actually end up stronger.

Agree with what you've said and would add with change of personnel an expectation of more points on turnovers. Also, I believe I read recently that MA said Thompson was one of the best 3p shooters on the team.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on October 15, 2017, 06:59:31 pm
Agree with what you've said and would add with change of personnel an expectation of more points on turnovers. Also, I believe I read recently that MA said Thompson was one of the best 3p shooters on the team.
I heard him say it.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Letsroll1200 on October 16, 2017, 09:49:54 pm
Agree with what you've said and would add with change of personnel an expectation of more points on turnovers. Also, I believe I read recently that MA said Thompson was one of the best 3p shooters on the team.

Thomas
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: mhuff on October 17, 2017, 11:13:48 am
Thomas

Nope never has been nor will be
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Medic821 on October 18, 2017, 11:37:30 pm
It's not where u start it's where end.  Screw the experts in print, radio, tv,and most of the dumb asses posting on this site.  I would not want to play this Tammie around SEC tourney time.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: Porkchop#1 on October 19, 2017, 06:37:30 am


I could see us using Barford, Macon, Garland, Thomas, Thompson starting and then Beard, Jones, Bailey, Miles and Gafford off the bench. Not sure whatíll happen with Cook or our late signee. Each rotation would blend experience with youth

Is Keaton still around?  What is he, like a 7th-8th year senior by now?

I'll tell you a player no one should sleep on is Arlando Cook, that guy is a fighter.
Title: Re: Preseason Magazines not kind to Razorbacks
Post by: HoopS on October 19, 2017, 07:23:20 am
Is Keaton still around?  What is he, like a 7th-8th year senior by now?

I'll tell you a player no one should sleep on is Arlando Cook, that guy is a fighter.
lol.  That was supposed to be Hall. Not sure how Keaton snuck in there  maybe I should have Arlando have a talk with him for me.