Navigation: Jump to content areas:


Pro Quality. Fan Perspective.
Login-facebook
Around SBN: This Week In GIFs

Cougar Basketball: They Are Who They Are

A part of me believes there is a contigent of Cougar fans that would've rather seen WSU lose Sunday night.

Why?

Last night's win confirmed something they've believed - that this team isn't what their record says they are. That instead, they are a tournament team. They are one of the better teams in the Pac-10. They shouldn't be a .500 team in conference. They should be a Top 50 team in college basketball. Perhaps even a Top 25 team when they're at their best.

Even though I read kenpom.com religiously, and am viewing our Cougs through permanently crimson-colored glasses, I am a believer in one key tenant of sports: you are who your record says you are. Nothing more. Nothing less.

Now that's not to say that's who you will be at the end of the season. Or in the playoffs. Or in the next week. Or the next game. That's where advanced stats, film study and scouting your opponents have value: predicting the future. They aren't always right, but that's simply because accurately predicting the future is impossible. Right now all you can do is use the best tools available and make a prediction with the knowledge you have.

The past? That's already dead and buried. The Washington State Cougars are 18-10. 8-8 in conference. That's who they are. That's how good they've been in 2011.

Still, the question everyone seems to be asking is this: should they have performed better than that?

Star-divide

 

Let me start by giving you a lineup:

PG - Reggie Moore
SG - Faisal Aden
G/F - Marcus Capers
F - Abe Lodwick
F/C - DeAngelo Casto

You know what this is, right? This would be our starting lineup if Klay Thompson wasn't a Cougar. How many conference wins would you expect a team like this to win? Personally, I'd say 8 or 9 on the high end and 4 or 5 on the low end. 6 or 7 wins would be a realistic expectation, and even that might be pushing it. You have a very good Pac-10 big man, a streaky shooter, a good young point guard and two role players. That's it.

Now, I know what you're thinking. We have Klay Thompson. And Klay Thompson is the best player in a weak conference. Except there's two things wrong with that statement: Klay Thompson isn't the best player in the conference - Derrick Williams is. And the Pac-10 isn't weak. It's the fifth best conference by Kenpom's rankings, ahead of the SEC and the surprising Mountain West. And even if you don't believe kenpom, just look at the conference standings. You have eight teams with 7 or more conference wins, with two games left to play for most squads. What that says to me is the Pac-10 has parity: A couple frontrunners (Arizona, UCLA), and then a six car pileup in the middle. All of the teams in the middle of the conference have significant talent and all six can win on any given night.

The point is, even when you add Klay Thompson and the fact the Pac-10 is weak, does this team really strike fear in the hearts of the competition? We've been over how great Klay is time and time again... but he isn't the guy people seem to want him to be: Adam Morrison. In other words, a transcendent scorer. People want Klay to see 4:00 on the clock in the second half and then start scoring at will. Admittedly, I've wanted to see him do it too. But that isn't who he is. Lorenzo Romar on his radio show tonight called Klay an "opportunistic scorer". Klay isn't a dominant scorer in isolation, or against a set defense... but when the defense breaks down; in transition, after an offensive rebound, or after a switch of defenders, he's flat out deadly. But he's not Adam Morrison. He just doesn't score at will.

Oh, and let's not forget a grand total of four players on this WSU team had two years of NCAA basketball experience coming into this season.

To me, our roster looks like an average Pac-10 lineup. Let me give you another lineup as a comparison:

G - Taylor Rochestie
G - Marcus Capers
G/F - Klay Thompson
F - DeAngelo Casto
C - Aron Baynes

I don't know about you, but I would kill to have this lineup right now. The weakest player in that group just happens to also be your best on-ball defender. Two absolute lights-out shooters in Rochestie and Thompson, and you can forget about out-rebounding or posting up on the Cougs in that frontcourt. It just wouldn't happen.

Now... how about I sweeten the deal by throwing in Nikola Koprivica, Daven Harmeling and Caleb Forrest as your bench contributors?

You get the 2008-09 Washington State Cougars. An 8-10 Pac-10 ball club that lost in the second round of the Pac-10 tournament and the first round of the NIT.

Now I know that isn't entirely fair. That team played in a tougher Pac-10 (#1 by kenpom).. and Thompson, Casto and Capers were all true freshmen.

Still - this team had that talent, and couldn't even sniff the NCAA tournament. And the Grand Emperor of Cougar basketball - Tony Bennett - was at the helm.

This year's team just isn't that talented. 02Coug already laid this out beautifully in a fanpost, which is required reading if you haven't already browsed it. I'll add a wrinkle to it, which is this: we constantly overvalue players who perform well or earn significant playing time as freshmen. You remember Will Derting and Michael Bumpus, right? Based on their freshmen years alone at WSU we all would have had them projected as ten-year NFL starters by the time their football careers were finished. But despite having solid (and not dominating) careers at WSU, Derting never played a down at the next level and Brandon Gibson already has ten times as many NFL receptions (53) as Michael Bumpus had (5) in his entire career.

But back to basketball. Klay Thompson, Marcus Capers, DeAngelo Casto and Reggie Moore are all victims of the freshman projection problem. We expected them to grow exponentially from year to year. But that's just crazy to expect from 18 to 22 year olds. Some players will improve, some won't. Some will improve a lot - like Thompson - some will stay essentially the same. Some even regress. Our current guys have all improved, but not necessarily by leaps and bounds. Sometimes a good player's development gets slowed down by injury, like Reggie Moore has this season. Not all freshman that play their first year are future All-Americans. Some play out of necessity. Thompson, Capers and Casto were certainly in that category.

What ultimately offends me is that people profess that this team is "underachieving", and therefore the blame for that underachievement lies solely with Ken Bone. They point to last night as an example of how good this team can be, and the Arizona State loss as an example of the coaching staff botching the entire season.

So then, let's talk about that Arizona State loss. I have two words for that: San Diego.

The University of San Diego, to put it bluntly, sucks at basketball. They are 6-23 overall, 2-12 in the West Coast and are ranked 303rd by kenpom.com. They recently lost to Gonzaga 68-31. They are horrible.

And yet, on February 16th, they beat WCC co-champion Saint Mary's. By eight points.

This is because of one time-honored basketball principle: crazy stuff happens in conference play.

There is so much familiarity in conference - especially when you play a true home-and-home round robin - that teams know all of your tendencies. Your strengths, your weaknesses... they are all laid out twice a year every year for all your conference opposition to see. And with the tournament approaching the stakes are even higher. Matchups matter more. An off night doing anything - shooting, rebounding, passing - could spell disaster because the margin for error is so small.

That's why it disappoints me so much to hear Coug fans cite the Arizona State loss as completely inexcusable, while turning around and saying the Washington wins were examples of what this team can be. They aren't. The Cougs pose numerous matchup problems for the Huskies, especially the one named DeAngelo Casto. Matthew Bryan-Amaning and Aziz N'Diaye were complete non-factors in both games this season. Casto and the zone were two huge reasons why the Cougs took home two wins against a Husky team that was, frankly, overrated at the start of the year. Meanwhile, the Arizona State game was a close loss, in conference, on the road. Hardly inexcusable at any level of basketball. In between, WSU had their ups and their downs, because they are just simply an average team that is inconsistent and still has a few things to learn.

This team was who they were. Nothing more, nothing less.

And, by the end of this week, we'll find out who they really are.

Comment 60 comments  |  0 recs  | 

Do you like this story?

Comments

Display:

Sorry, but I couldn't resist after seeing the title:

“THEY ARE…WHO WE THOUGHT THEY WERE. AND WE LETEMOFFTHEHOOK”.

One thing I found very interesting after reading this article. I’ve kind of been under the opinion this year that this team has a sort of “inability” to win on the road (with the obvious exception of last night). Or maybe it would be phrased better as “why are we so good at home and so not good on the road?” So I was going to ask for you take on this, and I went to ESPN to find our road record. What I found surprised me: ONE Pac 10 team has a winning record on the road this year (Arizona). You read that right. One. By the same token, one team in the Pac 10 doesn’t have a winning record at home (ASU, they’re 1 game below .500). I don’t know if this ties into your post at all, but it was just something that I found interesting.

I don’t think that the San Diego thing is such a great example. I’d file that more under fluke than I would the ASU game. If you told me that San Diego would beat SMC, I’d say no way. If you told me ASU would beat WSU, I’d say ya that sounds about right. And the thing is, (talented or not and I’ve said this before) this is still a good team, and they just don’t play like it sometimes. It was not that long ago that we absolutely pummeled GU. We beat UW twice, once on the road. Took UA down to the final seconds. So basically what I’m saying is that the inconsistency is most frustrating. I remember last night thinking “OK I will watch the Cougs until that goes south, and then switch it to the Blazers on ESPN (turns out my assessment was wrong).” I don’t like having to assume you’re going to lose and then being moderately surprised when you don’t (see: WSU football). SO are they better than their record? No. But do they have the ability to be better than their record, and maybe should they have a better record? Yes. The ability is there and hopefully they can harness it and put it all together. This is why I really hope Klay stays another year: they kinda of started to put it together this year, but just aren’t there yet. But take this late season Reggie, cover Casto’s hands in glue, keep Klay around, and add Fire Marshal Brock into the starting lineup with a little more size and we could have a very good team. Maybe add in an improved Aden off the bench, Ladd (I have no idea who this is but everyone seems to think he’ll be good), and have Capers doing his usual thing against big name guys.

And finally a thought on Faisal Aden. A lot of what he does reminds me of last year’s Klay. Last year, Klay would go cold, and just try to shoot his way out of it. This year Aden will just keep tossing it up until it goes in or Bone benches him. so maybe a reason to hope for some good things from him? Just a thought.

Sorry this is so long. Maybe should have used a Fanpost now that I look at it.

Attractive, Intelligent, Short Attention Span Reader

by Coug999 on Feb 28, 2011 11:37 PM PST reply actions   1 recs

So much for short comments huh?

You are not a Short Attention Span writer.

"Yaka Fest from outside for Klay Thompson" – Marques Johnson

by SoCalCoug on Mar 1, 2011 7:32 AM PST up reply actions  

Yaaaaaaa oops.

It didn’t seem that long when I was writing it.

Attractive, Intelligent, Short Attention Span Reader

by Coug999 on Mar 1, 2011 8:28 AM PST up reply actions  

No worries.

Just messing with ya. Zing!

"Yaka Fest from outside for Klay Thompson" – Marques Johnson

by SoCalCoug on Mar 1, 2011 8:33 AM PST up reply actions  

When Faisal gets benched, he rarely gets benched for missing shots

He gets benched for the other dumb stuff that he does — like, for example, picking up Venoy Overton at 60 feet and watching him race by.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 1, 2011 11:11 AM PST up reply actions  

I was talking to you about this yesterday

If there is one play that sums up his defensive prowess, it was that. In a “show-me” press, Aden picks up Overton and watches him completely blow by before they even reached the halfcourt line. Yeah….

by Brian Floyd on Mar 1, 2011 11:19 AM PST up reply actions  

Well whether or not he gets benched for missing shots,

he keeps throwing them up until he is benched, whatever the reason.

Attractive, Intelligent, Short Attention Span Reader

by Coug999 on Mar 1, 2011 1:14 PM PST up reply actions  

They are who they are right now. That doesn't mean they can't be something more.

Certainly this team isn’t as good as we thought they were/could be after the non conference schedule. However, to say things couldn’t have and maybe should have played out better than they did just isn’t right. We throttled Oregon an Oregon team with this lineup: Catron, Singler, Nared, Sim, Loyd. Is that lineup better than the one we possess? Catron for Lodwick is the only exchange I would make. We beat Stanford in Maples. Then lost by 13 at home to this lineup: Owens,Powell, Brown, Mann and Green. Is that lineup better than ours? We destroyed ASU at home and lost to this lineup in the desert: Cain, Creekmur, McMillan, Lockett, Hawkins. Again we have a better lineup. Is this team as good as we thought it was, hoped it was? No. Should we have won all three of those games? Probably not. But is 2 wins in that stretch, heck one unreasonable? This team has underperformed. No doubt about it. It happens sometimes, it doesn’t make us less talented. If we played any of those teams tomorrow on a neutral floor would you expect us to lose? I wouldn’t we’re better than that.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 1, 2011 1:08 AM PST reply actions  

I am sorry, you have last yr's frosh all Pac-10, this year's Pac-10 leading scorer

and USA team member and one of the top 5 big man in the Pac and you are 8-8.
I agree they are what they are, a schizophrenic team that cannot play ball on a more consistent basis, and those are my words but your high prince, Grippi.

How about I use Grippi since you guys bow down to him so much. The guy has come out said that in all years and he has never seen a team that confuses him more and leaves him absolutely guessing what he will see on any given night. That my friend is troubling and is the same reason we are underperforming. If we were consistently bad, see ASU, or consistently avg see CAL, then ok. But the extremes of our performances is absolutely absurd.

By the way, no way does this team win 8 games with Aden instead of KT. We would be Oregon St with 5 wins, and that’s high. Of course we get to find this out next year.

Give me 3 solid guys to build a bball team around and I will take it every night of the week and twice on Sunday. If Bone finishes higher next yr without KT, you can repost about how right you are, but if you would like to place any bets on that occurring I am willing to take it. Nevertheless, your position will be that the Pac-10 will be tougher next year as more teams mature and there is no way we can expect to finish higher. What would be your projection be if KT came back? My expectation would be more of the same, schizophrenic performances with a LoRo clone as coach and that’s okay because at least we aren’t last like in a terrible Pac-10 in 09-10.

Truly what I find troubling you guys are act like Red Sox mgmt and look at the numbers rather than the performers on the floor. Abe and Capers are solid role players. You don’t need superstars to win 11-12 games in this Pac. You did back in the TR days, but not in this one.

by ptowncoug3012 on Mar 1, 2011 7:27 AM PST reply actions  

Sorry if this seems like nitpicking

but I don’t agree with Bone being a LoRo clone. I didn’t take it in a negative way, because you explained that it is okay and we aren’t terrible. I just wouldn’t say he is a clone. Bone has been coaching since 1982 and out of those years he spent 4 with LoRo. LoRo’s first coaching job wasn’t until 1992. I am not saying he didn’t take anything away from LoRo, but I think LoRo also learned from Bone. It was give an take. Bone is always picking coaches minds. Check out this quote from the Seattle Times.

He sought Marv Harshman’s counsel. He went to dozens of Sonics practices and had lunches with former coach George Karl and assistant Tim Grgurich.
This might help give a little more insight into Bone’s coaching experiences.

"Yaka Fest from outside for Klay Thompson" – Marques Johnson

by SoCalCoug on Mar 1, 2011 8:02 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Most likely Bone is playing younger Bone.

The older Bone found out discipline and the younger Bone has not achieved that goal.

by well you win some and lose others on Mar 1, 2011 9:04 AM PST up reply actions  

Can you clarify your argument?

I’m confused as to what you are arguing for or against, but are you saying just that this team should be at the top of the conference but has underachieved and just because they don’t have superstars, they have several very good players which should be enough?

by Kenneth Arthur on Mar 1, 2011 9:42 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

Trios that are as good or better than our trio

In my perceived order of strength

- Tyler Honeycutt, Reeves Nelson, Joshua Smith (feel free to replace Smith with Malcolm Lee, if you like, or even Lazeric Jones)
- Jorge Gutierrez, Harper Kamp, Allen Crabbe
- Isaiah Thomas, Matthew Bryan-Amaning, Justin Holiday (also feel free to replace Holiday with Suggs, Wilcox or Ross)
- Derrick Williams, Jamelle Horne, Lamont Jones
- Nikola Vucevic, Donte Smith, Alex Stepheson

That’s about as far as I’m willing to go, and that’s 55 percent of the other teams in the conference. However, you could also make reasonable arguments for …
- Joevan Catron, Jay-R Strowbridge, E.J. Singler
- Jeremy Green, Josh Owens, Dwight Powell

In addition, I’d like to point out that basketball is sport that uses more than 3 guys on the floor at once, and that may also have something to do with Grady’s post.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 1, 2011 11:29 AM PST up reply actions  

Harmeling Disagrees With Most of You

Here is a quote from Harmeling on Brand X: He sees a lot of practices and obviously knows Pac 10 basketball.

I understand the temptation to withdraw our emotional investment from the team this year. Without question, we have lost to teams when we are working with the superior talent. I have heard, "Well, maybe we’re just not as talented as we thought". I do not believe that.
http://washingtonstate.scout.com/2/1051100.html

There are very few complete teams in college basketball these days and especially in this weak Pac 10. We definitely have holes but to say were not more talented than Oregon, Stanford, Oregon State, USC and Arizona State is wrong. We may be a touch behind UCLA and Arizona in talent but at least equal to Cal. We have underachieved, a coach has to make the sum better then the parts. Bennett did that here, so for Bone has not. We are coming off a great win where Bone was really good. Maybe we can keep it going, it hasn’t played out that way this year but I’m hoping for a strong finish.

by hbelvoir on Mar 1, 2011 9:29 AM PST reply actions  

I read that a couple weeks ago.

And I still don’t think we have the overall talent to perform consistently better than UA, UCLA and UW. That combined with injuries to Aden and Moore lead to what we’ve seen this season.

Also, not to nitpick, but Harmeling doesn’t sit in on practices. He’s coaching and teaching in the Vancouver area.

Kenpom has two of our starters as “limited role” or “nearly invisible.” No other team in the conference has a starter who’s “nearly invisible,” and Lodwick plays more than half the minutes available at his position.

Marcus Simmons (USC), Garrett Sim (Oregon) and Jamelle McMillan (UA) are the only other players with significant minutes that are in the “limited role” category in the conference, and Capers plays more minutes than any of them.

Aden is considered one of our “go-to guys,” and between his decision making and the injury which seems to have affected him before it was made public, he’s plummeted as an option.

Reggie has gone from a “significant contributor” last year, to a “role-player” this year based on % of possessions. His free throw rate has dropped from 76.4 to 57.7. His overall offensive rating has dropped from 106.7 to 100.5. Again, I think his injury has affected his play quite a bit.

Dearth of talent + injuries = “underachieved”.

by TiltingRight on Mar 1, 2011 10:29 AM PST up reply actions  

I think the answer is

a lot.

I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh

by HitKing69 on Mar 1, 2011 11:14 AM PST up reply actions  

Probably even more personal in college sports where you perceive the players to also be your peers.

You remember having class with them (or if you are the age I wish I was, you currently do have class with them) and so you take it upon yourself to see them as more than just athletes.

by Kenneth Arthur on Mar 1, 2011 11:32 AM PST up reply actions  

On the other hand

This has also made me dislike some of our players more because I did get to know them personally … a punter and QB come to mind.

I feel like Charlie Brown trying to kick the football. Ugh

by HitKing69 on Mar 1, 2011 8:24 PM PST up reply actions  

Need evidence?

Look no further than the football team…..

by B-Lot tailgater on Mar 1, 2011 1:06 PM PST up reply actions  

Harmeling isn't exactly an objective source, given that he played with a bunch of these guys

Which doesn’t mean he’s wrong, just that one would be wise to employ the ol’ grain of salt in this case.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Mar 1, 2011 10:46 AM PST up reply actions   1 recs

totally agree

While I don’t think we are as good as many of us thought originally, we are better than our record. How can we be better than our record? We are better than ASU, Oregon, and Stanford, all teams we lost to. I’m all for a reality check on our talent level, but I think some of y’all are setting the bar way too low for this team. Based upon your argument, it would appear that we over achieved in beating UW and Baylor and keeping it close w/ Arizona and KSU.

by SigmaNu83 on Mar 1, 2011 11:49 AM PST up reply actions  

No. Consistency is another area. Look at UW I think a lot of people would agree that

they are very talented and have underperformed their ability. A better example might be Kentucky. Kentucky is a team is with at least two lottery picks Brandon Knight and Terrance Jones. Every other guy seeing significant minutes is either a 4 or 5 star recruit. They have plenty of talent. They are ranked 9th by Kenpom. Yet they are currently 8-6 in the SEC, the 7th best conference in America according to Kenpom. Exceptionally talented yet inconsistent.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 1, 2011 12:20 PM PST up reply actions  

Those are teams that have been very unlucky in terms of points scored/allowed relative to their conference records

WSU hasn’t.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Mar 1, 2011 3:53 PM PST up reply actions  

Are they unlucky?

Assuming you are referring to Pomeroy, The same argument to call them unlucky is being used to call WSU not that talented. Both teams are inconsistent but have vastly different levels of talent. My point is consistency and talent aren’t very closely tied.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 1, 2011 6:45 PM PST up reply actions  

His "unlucky" comment comes from the fact that they're 8-6 in conference

Despite a plus-.12 efficiency margin in conference. That would generally be predictive of a much better conference record. They’ve lost five of their six conference games by a total of 11 points, all on the road.

It’s one thing to be “inconsistent” in barely losing games, quite another to be “inconsistent” getting run off the floor.

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 1, 2011 7:46 PM PST up reply actions  

So there are levels of inconsistency as well.

How much of our losses to USC, Cal, and ASU on the road and Arizona at home were bad luck were beating Cal and Oregon State at home good luck? We’ve been run off the floor at Oregon and that is about it we’ve been able to be competitive in every other game in conference. It’s not like we’ve been clearly significantly worse than any team in the conference.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 1, 2011 8:05 PM PST up reply actions  

That's his (and my) point.

When Kentucky has won, they’ve won big. When they’ve lost, they’ve lost small.

We’ve been all over the board — close wins, close losses, a couple of big wins, a couple of big losses …

by Jeff Nusser on Mar 2, 2011 9:24 AM PST up reply actions  

There numbers are inflated by 3 games though.

Home vs. LSU, Auburn and South Carolina they won by a combined 93 points. Those teams are 10-32 in conference play. They have only one win by double digits in conference outside of those games (12 vs. Tennessee). Certainly they have lost close games but they only win close games against good/decent teams too. 2 pt. win last night and 6 pt wins over Miss St. and UGA 8 vs. UF.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 2, 2011 11:56 AM PST up reply actions  

maybe

But I don’t see how that changes anything. The argument that y’all are positing, that we really don’t have much talent and we have the record to prove it, does not leave room for this team to underachieve. I believe the talent on our team is sufficient to have won more games. I believe the talent on our team is not as good as I had originally thought. I think we are similar to Michigan State…we aren’t who we thought we were, but we have more talent than our record would indicate. I still think the ASU game was inexcusable.

by SigmaNu83 on Mar 1, 2011 12:23 PM PST up reply actions  

I'm not sure I understand because if we underachieved a few times and overachieved a few times, doesn't that equal out our record to say we are still about as good as we are?

We aren’t as good as Arizona or KSU. Keeping it close is nice, but those would have been wins that masked the fact that we aren’t as good as those teams. And then we would definitely be overachievers.

by Kenneth Arthur on Mar 1, 2011 11:55 AM PST up reply actions  

no

Our performance against teams that are considered to be “good,” (i.e. Arizona, KSU, Baylor, Gonzaga, UW) demonstrates that we have enough talent that we shouldn’t have lost to teams such as Arizona State.

by SigmaNu83 on Mar 1, 2011 12:27 PM PST up reply actions  

I think we can all agree that we shouldn't have lost to ASU. But Grady's point is that these things happen in basketball, especially in conference play.

It can be argued that we shouldn’t be 2-0 against UW. I haven’t seen any evidence this year that the Cougs should be significantly better than 18-10 (8-8) even if a win over a team like K-State could be the bubble difference right now.

by Kenneth Arthur on Mar 1, 2011 12:32 PM PST up reply actions  

You are exactly right. We shouldnt be significantly better.

However if we were just a couple of games better our chances of making the tournament would be a lot greater. That’s where the frustration is.

"If you want your dreams to come true, don't sleep in."

by kelly20210 on Mar 1, 2011 12:39 PM PST up reply actions  

Points per possession in conference: 1.00

Opponents’ points per possession in conference: 1.00

Kinda says it all, doesn’t it?

Now, if you want to know why I think they’ve slid to #5 or #6 instead of #3 as I predicted at the start of the season, I’d chalk it up to a combination of getting relatively poor production out of newcomers (with Aden obviously being a primo culprit there) and the injury-plagued shambles that is Reggie Moore’s season. I don’t know whether you want to call that a defect in “talent” because I don’t know what the word “talent” means (seriously, I have no idea— does it mean athleticism? upside? tools? skills? just being good at basketball?) but it’s enough to say that, over the course of a 30-game season, things change.

"We don't want our people to be preoccupied with seminude, crazy men jumping up and down who are chasing an inflated object," said Sheik Mohamed Osman Arus, head of operations for the Hizbul Islam insurgent group.

by PaulThomas on Mar 1, 2011 11:00 AM PST reply actions  

Good point on "talent"

Talent, skill, upside, athleticism and production are sometimes used interchangeably, but clearly don’t mean the same thing.

by TiltingRight on Mar 1, 2011 11:12 AM PST up reply actions  

We started to have this discussion yesterday.

Everyone has a different opinion of what “talent” means, leading to plenty of confusion.

by Brian Floyd on Mar 1, 2011 11:17 AM PST up reply actions  

I almost don't know what to think anymore.

I have read so many different comments throughout this season I don’t know what gauge to go by. Are we talking about talent, potential, skill, poise or what? Should I gauge this year off of last years performance, where the team was picked to finish this year by the writers, Pomeroy ratings, Daven Harmeling, Grippi, Ian Furness?
This is what Jon Wilner said before the season. By the way he picked us 5th.

5. Washington State. The Cougars are set for a solid season with the returning trio of Reggie Moore, Klay Thompson and DeAngelo Casto – plus a full year in Ken Bone’s system. Then again, it’s possible that Bone is not the right man for the job, and if that’s the case the Cougars won’t be in fifth place next March.
I think Bone is the right man for the job and so far Wilner is right about our season. Wilner considers 5th place solid. I don’t think many around here do. Did anyone think we would sweep the Dawgs this year? I don’t think anyone did, including myself. Did I have a feeling it would go this way? Yes. Look at last years schedule here on Pomery.
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Washington%20St.&y=2010
Now open this link in a separate window and size them up look at them next to each other. (reduce your window sizes)
http://kenpom.com/team.php?team=Washington%20St.
Look at the colors on the schedule. We only lost 3 games in a row once this year. Last year we did that three times. Besides the Arizona back to back loses this year that is our only 2 game losing streak. No matter how you look at it we have improved, maybe not the way most people expected (in their own head) but we have gotten better. Looking at this year and last year in Pomeroy we have statistically improved in almost every category and our schedule is twice as harder as it was last year according to Pomeroy. Everyone has this set of ideals (talent, skill, potential, coaching, etc.) in there head of what this team should (or should have) achieved. Are their times I have been disappointed with this team? Yes. But at the same time I have enjoyed the season and I think they have improved. Does this mean I am satisfied with their performance? No. No one should ever be happy where they are at, you should always shoot to constantly improved. Rob Neyer has a excellent qoute that kind of touches on this.
The moment you can’t accept corrections or criticism or disdain you’ve give up on getting better, or smarter.
I haven’t accepted anything, but I will acknowledge that we have improved. I don’t know how much we should expect players to improve. I do think Reg does things better this year than last, but does that mean he is improved in everyone eyes? No. I don’t think the Cougs or Bone has given up and I think they have made an exciting season. If we win the ASU, Oregon and Arizona home game we are still the same team with all of us talking about the NCAA tournament. We probably wouldn’t even be talking about talent, potential, etc. Everyone would be talking about what regional we will be bracketed in. I think this season has some of the best highlights that I can remember (especailly against the Dawgs). If Klay stays next year I expect to again see improvement. If there is one word that I could use to gauge this team performance this year as a collective unit, it would be CONSISTENCY. That is consistency night in and night out. That would be the area I am most disappointed in, is staying consistent. Actually, more fitting…FOCUSTESITY.

"Yaka Fest from outside for Klay Thompson" – Marques Johnson

by SoCalCoug on Mar 1, 2011 2:07 PM PST reply actions  

Comments For This Post Are Closed


User Tools

Welcome to CougCenter, a website dedicated to WSU football, basketball and other athletics.

Community Guidelines

FanPosts

Community blog posts and discussion.

Recommended FanPosts

Brianheadshot_small
Where Did You Come From And How Did You Get Here?

Recent FanPosts

Rainbow-caught-on-moffitt-wooly-bugger1_small
Its Memorial Day weekend and I’ve already skipped ahead to Labor Day.
Brianheadshot_small
OT: Teaching Football Signals
Small
Per Cougfan.. Walden is out
Worldtraveler_small
OTFP: Greatest Player You've Ever Seen?
Cougar_01t_small
Bone-in or Bone-out?
Small
Vote for ESPN College Game Day to come to Pullman!
Jeff_mug_h2_small
Live In Spokane? Possess A DVD Recorder? Or Even A VCR? I Need Your Help
Small
OTFP: Best/Worst Trophy
Small
Just noticed this about The Crimson and Grey Game

+ New FanPost All FanPosts >

FanShots

Quick hits of video, photos, quotes, chats, links and lists that you find around the web.

Recommended FanShots

A UW "Swagga Suit" - yes, it's a real thing.

Recent FanShots

1931 Rose Bowl Highlight Reel
1916 Rose Bowl Highlight "reel"
Pac-12 Blog talks to DC Mike Breske
Bill Moos interview - pirates of the palouse.
Interview with Drew Bledsoe
Klay Thompson 6th In ROY voting
Tell us: Between Mike Leach and Craig James, who gets your vote?
Wulff lands job with 49ers
New 'Friday Night Lights' Movie: Leaked* Script Reveals Mike Leach Storyline

+ New FanShot All FanShots >

Go Cougs


Attractive, intelligent managing editors

Jeff_mug_h2_small Jeff Nusser

62817_716885768283_27206155_40333453_7664553_n_small Grady Clapp

Arizona_small Craig Powers

Brianheadshot_small Brian Floyd

Header_small Mark Sandritter

Attractive, intelligent editors

Worldtraveler_small Kyle Rancourt