CHN top 144

[Clickclack]

Just noticed that CHN has kicked off it's annual top 144. They are up to 138 with no sign of UA or any other AE team.

 

- Do you guys think we make this list? Last year were came in at 90

- And if Yes, where abouts do you guys see us.

 

I'm unsure because we are loosing allot from last year and many of us who follow the team are somewhat unsure what type of team we'll have this year. But it might be interesting to kick around in the dead of summer.

[McFan]

My guess is that we are not there this year. The UConn game in the tourney the prior year gave UA a ton of respect (in the press) as well as for Jamar in particular.

 

What the media knows this year is that Jamar is gone and we didn't play as well in the tourney.

 

Flip side is that we have two straight AE Championships and maybe that alone gets us there.

 

Good news is if we start out not listed and low on other rankings, plenty of upward movement is available.

[Dane96]

We are 123.

[UA_MA_2000]

"#123: Albany Great Danes

Despite losing Jamar Wilson (19 ppg), Albany has enough talent to win the America East."

 

 

Albany Great Danes

Overall Rank: #123

Conference Rank: #1 America East

2006-07: 23-10, 13-3, 2nd

2006-07 postseason: NCAA

 

Albany has a surprising amount of depth up front for an America East team. And despite the loss of all-everything Jamar Wilson, the size of the Great Danes will keep them towards the top of the conference. The other Wilson, Brian, is the new leader. The 6-8 senior averaged 11.0 points and 5.0 rebounds last year and will likely lead the team in both categories as a senior. Brian Connelly, Jimmie Covington and Brett Gifford are not prolific scorers, but all have starting experience and plenty of room to improve. With that depth and talent on hand, it is possible that Coach Will Brown will run a big lineup at times.

 

Who’s Out:

 

The obvious loss is Jamar Wilson, who averaged a team high 18.8 points, 6.2 rebounds and 4.8 assists. But there are some other losses that are a cause for concern. Wing Jason Siggers added 13.8 points and guard Carl Ross had the potential to play a bigger role in the backcourt before leaving the program. Michael Knight, David Bauman and Mike Yocum are also leaving earlier than their scheduled departure time.

 

Who’s In:

 

There should be some future stars in the class, but the most important right now are point guards Anthony Raffa and Robert Moores. Raffa is a great scorer and it would be great for the team if he could run the show by the time the conference schedule rolls around. However, Moores and his one year of experience may have the upper hand. The sophomore spent one year at Pratt Community College in Kansas and, like Raffa, will do some scoring along with his point guard duties. The team is attempting to replace Jamar Wilson with another shooting threat, but neither of these guys are going to be Wilson right away. Speaking of scorers, Tim Ambrose could be a very good one by the time his days at Albany are over. The 5-11 shooting guard is not afraid to mix it up with the big guys in the paint and he can keep the defenses honest with his outside shot as well. The tough Josh Martin is in the same boat and 6-6 wing Billy Allen has enough versatility to play on the wing or at either forward spot. Forward Jerel Hastings is the usual athletic undersized forward. He will help out on the glass right away and can be a great player once the jump shot develops a little more consistency. Big man Albert Turley will make the frontcourt even deeper. The 6-7 center is a decent offensive player for his age, but will find it difficult to steal away too many minutes from the returning group.

 

Who to Watch:

 

There is a surprising amount of experienced depth considering that Albany has seven newcomers. With the four big guys up front and Brian Lillis, Jon Iati and Reid Anderson on the perimeter, the Danes can go seven deep without even dipping into the newcomer pool. It is hoped that Lillis will take over much of the scoring on the wing. The 6-5 senior averaged 6.9 points per game but was the third scoring option on the perimeter behind Jamar Wilson and Siggers. Lillis could run the point, but that job will likely fall to Jon Iati until the newcomers are ready. Iati’s minutes have been diminished after a shoulder injury in 2005, but the 5-9 senior is still a smart player who should be able to run the show when necessary. Once Raffa or Moores cracks the starting lineup, Iati will likely do what he did last year and come off the bench. Reid Anderson saw very few minutes during his freshman campaign, but that will change this year and if he can improve as much as Albany fans hope, the 6-5 wing will provide a spark off the bench.

 

Final Projection:

 

On paper this is not your dominating Albany team that got slaughtered by…well lets go back two years to the team that hung tough with Connecticut in the NCAA Tournament. Once the initial shock about losing Jamar Wilson subsides, it becomes clear that the Danes have some legitimate players waiting to take over. While nobody will come close to the versatility of Wilson, there is enough talent ready to help make up for some of his production.

 

Projected Post-season Tournament: NCAA

 

Projected Starting Five:

 

Jon Iati, Senior, Guard, 5.9 points per game

Brian Lillis, Senior, Guard, 6.9 points per game

Brent Wilson, Senior, Forward, 11.0 points per game

Brian Connelly, Junior, Forward, 5.5 points per game

Brett Gifford, Sophomore, Center, 1.5 points per game

 

http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/new/story/2...ll_preview40983

[UA_MA_2000]

The above-quoted review works for me! I'm happy with that preseason ranking. Is it our highest preseason ranking ever?

 

I've always liked our returning (and deep) frontcourt for this coming season. To have 7 solid returning players who can play right away is a plus as well. We may not have a guy who will drop 20 points on most nights, but then again, JW (like every great player) had his off nights too (i.e., at Hartford last year), and we still found ways to win. Good teams can have multiple people step up on a given night and find a way to win, using tough defense, solid perimeter shooting, and good ball distribution (and keep moving on offense!).

 

I can think of at least a couple games last year that were low scoring, defensive battles. At Hartford and at Boston University are the first ones that come to mind. But we still found ways to win both of those. The BPG against Bingo was also a tough game as far as points went for most of the game. Prolific scorers are great, but defense, rebounding, and team-oriented offenses win conference titles. (IMHO)

[MTS]

The above-quoted review works for me! I'm happy with that preseason ranking. Is it our highest preseason ranking ever?

 

I've always liked our returning (and deep) frontcourt for this coming season. To have 7 solid returning players who can play right away is a plus as well. We may not have a guy who will drop 20 points on most nights, but then again, JW (like every great player) had his off nights too (i.e., at Hartford last year), and we still found ways to win. Good teams can have multiple people step up on a given night and find a way to win, using tough defense, solid perimeter shooting, and good ball distribution (and keep moving on offense!).

 

I can think of at least a couple games last year that were low scoring, defensive battles. At Hartford and at Boston University are the first ones that come to mind. But we still found ways to win both of those. The BPG against Bingo was also a tough game as far as points went for most of the game. Prolific scorers are great, but defense, rebounding, and team-oriented offenses win conference titles. (IMHO)

 

Good for UAlbany..I have to admit I didn't think they'd make CHN's top 144 especially after they got by 130 but this shows how much respect they've earned from the last two years. Albany has some solid role players but what will keep them from "three-peating" is the lack of a go to player. Losing Wilson, Siggers, and Ross will hurt (Ross was the key to that win against Vermont IMO) I think Vermont will win the league but Albany won't be too far behind...and should finish probably 2nd..let's face it the league isn't very strong.

 

As far as Siena goes..I think they'll be between 85 to 95 in the CHN ranking. Marist was 135 and ranked third in the MAAC, Siena and Loyola are likely to be the two higher ranked MAAC teams. Anything can happen on December 1st and in rivalry game who knows..Albany was supposed to beat us badly two years again and it didn't happen...I do like Siena chances if we play the way we envision the team to play. Should be a fun game again...the last two years were two of the best college basketball games I've seen in a long team (I'll admit it helps when your team pulls it out though) Plenty of time to talk and now to Saturday night Dec. 1st. (I've heard the game will be at 7:30pm second part of a men's-women's DH but it is not confirmed or official)

 

Anyway enjoy the summer, less than two weeks to Saratoga!

[UA_MA_2000]

I find it hard to believe that two MAAC teams will be in the top 100. Out of fairness, I would also be suprised if two America East teams were (hypothetically speaking) in the top 100. But who knows ... .

[Clickclack]

UA_MA

 

We came in at #90 last year! This dip seems justified, I was thinking there was a solid chance we wouldn't be on the list especially as the first 10 or so picks went by. Nice to see us there!

 

MTS,

 

The league might not be very "strong" but it was stronger then the MAAC two of the last three years, thats a fact that even a blind Siena fan can't dispute. Vermont will be once again an excellent team as will UMBC and Boston. Don't kid yourself, this league will probably be as strong if not stronger overall. UA will dip and should be back the year following this one, although I think it will be a minor dip not as some 'aints fans suggested that we'll fall of the map. This league has been recovering from the CAA defections and will only get stronger from here on out, while the MAAC continues to teeter totter between 16-18 and 20-22. It's no longer able to sustain the success it used to.

 

Siena will have a good if not great season as you are my pick to make it out of the MAAC (comment not TIC). But your league as a whole occupies the same neighborhood in the D1 world as the AE, for now.

[olddog71]

There was no team in the America East last season who was vying for the longest losing streak in the country's history. And that team had a close league contender for one of the country's other worst teams. If anyone can say that the MAAC was a stronger league last year than the AE, he has to be very blind.

[UA_MA_2000]

Boisy: If it's true that we came in at 90 last year (and I have no reason to doubt that statistic, of course), then I would expect there to be some differences between the RPI rankings and this top 144 poll (which I know little about). Have you, or has anyone else, observed a substantial difference between the poll discussed in this thread and the typical RPI rankings (preseason or otherwise)?

 

As far as the MAAC and AE comparisons go, I think that I have, along with others here, debated this one ad nauseum, and the AE prevails. No question for the state-educated. I expect the difference between the conferences as a whole to only widen with time.

 

 

And because UAMA2000 loves to talk academics, here we go: If it's MAAC vs. AE, AE all the way (right?). In another thread this spring, I outlined the US World News and World Report rankings, such as they are (and as flawed as they may be), for the CAA and AE conferences in an attempt to demonstrate how the AE as a conference is as good, if not better, academically as compared to the CAA (I recall concluding that our top 5 was slightly better than their top 5 and probably better top to bottom, but William and Mary takes the prize, edging BU, as the top school between the two conferences; the bottom line is both conferences are very good academically). But if the academic comparison is between the MAAC and AE, I'm not even going to waste the reader's time with this one ... .

[Dane Pound]

As I think it was Olddog metnioned on the AE Board, I'm surprised they picked us #1 in the conference. Vermont was the regular season champions last year and will probably have the preseason player of the pick in Tromboli. I've been expecting to see UVM picked in the preseason poll but who knows.

 

For the incoming players I'd be curious to know if they talked to the coaching staff about them or went by scouting reports from recruiting sites. From the other schools that were recruiting them I thought Josh Martin and Ambrose were pretty highly regarded and would possibly be vying for a starting spot especially if Raffa isn't in the picture this year. I'm pretty sure Martin had scholarship offers from CAA and A10 schools, not that it's a guarantee he'll be a great player but it's been uncommon for our past recruits to be mentioned in that company.

 

Not to totally pick apart the article (OK, I am) but the starting five seems a little off as well. Granted it would be a really big lineup but I don't see either Brent (or is it Brian?) Wilson or Connelly guarding the small forward spot. I've never seen him play but I imagined Ambrose as possibly playing shooting guard with Lillis as small forward.

[bob87]

Boisy: If it's true that we came in at 90 last year (and I have no reason to doubt that statistic, of course), then I would expect there to be some differences between the RPI rankings and this top 144 poll (which I know little about). Have you, or has anyone else, observed a substantial difference between the poll discussed in this thread and the typical RPI rankings (preseason or otherwise)?

 

 

This is the link from last years CHN preseason rankings.

http://www.collegehoopsnet.com/preview/2006/81to90.htm

 

There are no preseason RPI rankings. The RPI is a far from perfect formula based on your winning percentage, your opponents winning percentage and your opponents winning percentage.

[bob87]

There was no team in the America East last season who was vying for the longest losing streak in the country's history. And that team had a close league contender for one of the country's other worst teams. If anyone can say that the MAAC was a stronger league last year than the AE, he has to be very blind.

 

Yep the maac finished with 2 of the bottom 11 teams. Also the maac favorite OOC opponent NJIT finished even lower than the 2 maac schools despite getting 2 of their 5 wins against maac schools

 

http://web1.ncaa.org/app_data/weeklyrpi/2007MBBrpi1.html

[quackman]

Before this turns into a huge pissing match, here's one Siena fan's thoughts on this ranking. I really like Lillis and expect him to have a huge senior year. With Wilson and Siggers gone, I expect that he will improve his scoring dramatically this year. I do think the CHN ranking is a bit high when you consider what the Dane's lost from last year but a huge year from Lillis will go a long ways towards them having a successful year.

 

For what it's worth, I also think Siena is a bit overrated, especially by other Saints fans. Haddix and Ryan are going to be missed but it sure looks like their guard play is going to be pretty good.

 

It's nice recognition to be on this list, obviously giving the Dane's past success it's proper due.

 

Good luck on the season.

 

Q

[Clickclack]

quackman,

 

When I initially made this thread, I wasn't even sure we'd be in the top 144, so I am a little surprised as are many here. I think it's not out of the realm of possibility for us to wind up anywhere in the 1-4 range. If someone had a gun to my head right now I'd say 3 or 4 is most likely. I don't think anyone here is under any illusion that this isn't somewhat of a reloading year. At least thats the way I view it.

 

Excellent, civil post, with some objectivity included. You are to be commanded.

 

Personally my pick in the MAAC is the Saints at worst a 2. I haven't been shy about that point.