I realize it is meaningless ranking at this point, but if that were to hold true can't imagine how frustrated the Kentucky cesspool would be. Seems they are starting to fall a bit.

The Kentucky situation is going to be really fascinating this season. They're going to be pretty good, but not as good as their fans want them to be. What does that look like with the kind of cash they're throwing around.

I really don't think people will be surprised. The vibe from the national types on this team has been "This is a really intriguing roster and if they can stay healthy this might be a very good team."

But we just have quite a few "If...."s with this group. Like we're counting on Mgbako to be a star player for this team but from the outside looking in he's a career 12 and 5 guy who's injured the same foot twice in the last two years and didn't exactly have a stellar rep as a player coming from Indiana.

Not all that surprised . It feels like we are going to be quite deep which seems like a formula for success with this system.

I am surprised to see Houston at 3. They lost some serious firepower as in about 70% of their scoring from last season. Seems like quite a bit of uncertainty to be ranked that high.

KenPom's preseason ratings give a lot of weight to recent history, and Houston's recent history is absolutely rock solid. They haven't finished outside the top five in his ratings in six years, they've been, going backwards, 4, 2, 2, 2, 2, 5.

No doubt Sampson has shown an ability to replace lost production and maintain a very high level of success but this feels different to me . I get that the ranking is all about what metrics the system uses . Also get that the Kenpom probably needs half a season to start getting dialed in.

Michigan ranked quite low considering last year as well. Coaching change and personnel turnover no doubt a major contributor but why did they get dinged so severely and Houston didn't? They actually have a higher % of offensive production returning than Houston albeit still not a lot as a %.

Clearly there's some significant component of projecting the impact of incoming talent as well or we wouldn't be 19. I'll admit I haven't looked at that angle for UH.

It's funny, I was just thinking the other day that we're kind of a bizarro Kentucky right now.

Stein and Bucky are both pretty innovative and aggressive coaches.

I don't know exactly how all of the hamsters run on those wheels but he just added the coaching component to his rankings two years ago and that's definitely not helping them, but Michigan has also just generally been a more volatile team than Houston. Finished #1 last year but #21 the year before and #128 before that.

taylorswift13_ said:

---

https://kenpom.com/

Doesn't mean much, but it's data and this time of year it's all we got! Surprised we're that high at 19, but interesting to see!

---

Hell, we are picked 10th in-conference. 19 overall makes sense.

That just warms the cockles, dont it?

Torvik updated his projections also and we went from mid 40s to 33 I think

It buzzes mine