Grade the non-con

[treeman]

What grade are you giving our non-con?

For me I’d put it in the C-C+ range. We really didn’t do anything spectacular one way or the other but the Alcorn State loss made it impossible to elevate in the “B” status.

Excellent: None

Good: Ball State - always nice to beat the birds and we looked really good the second half.
Southern Indiana - dominate win over a fellow in-state mid-major. That’s always a good thing.
Milwaukee - tough griddy road win when we were short handed.
SIUE - winning on the road is never easy and always a good day
Louisiana Tech - never going to complain about a win vs a competent D1 team

Meh:
Duke - Duke was Duke. No way we were winning and they look like the best team in the country in a lot of their games. I thought we actually didn’t play bad there but just completely overmatched - as we should be.
Louisiana Tech - that loss hurt, but at the end of the day it was a 2 point loss on road, it happens.
Eureka - non-D1
Illinois Tech - non-D1

Bad:
Charlotte - don’t necessarily believe the Charlotte loss was bad but just getting boatraced by a 4-7 team isn’t a good look. I’m also surprised that Charlotte is 4-7 because we made them look damn good and I thought they had a pretty well funded NIL roster. Very similar to FAU last year; I thought they’d be a top mid-major after we played them and they turned into a very average squad….

The ugly:
Alcorn State - this was just bad and should never happen.

Overall a pretty average non-con result. Pretty close to being 9-2 but also close to being 6-5 or 5-6. Getting our ass spanked by Charlotte (which is forgivable given the circumstance) and the Alcorn Loss prevented this from being what you would considered a success. Bringing a 187 NET to the valley is probably where majority of people would have guessed it to be at the beginning of the year. Also worth noting Charlotte is 194

 

[TreeTop]

I'm probably not as hard on our players as other members of this board. After all, we have a winning record of 7-4, we're undefeated at home, and only the Alcorn loss is flabbergasting.

Scott: A (happy he's a Sycamore!)
Young: C- (his shooting form is yikes and he doesn't finish as well as advertised, shouldn't be starting)
Vorst: B (please stay healthy and please get more minutes than Harding and St. Bernard)
Hall: B+ (happy he's a Sycamore!)
Harding: C- (he is who I thought he was)
Wagner: B (confident his shooting is coming around)
Jo: B- (still a smaller sample size to get in rhythm with the team)
St. Bernard: B- (I like his play but he can't finish unless it's a dunk and his free throw shooting is worse than yikes)
Walker: C (prob deserves a few more minutes, but then I look at his stats)
Bruno: C+ (can be cringe when on the floor, but then he hits a couple of threes)

 

[Dymotic]

If you would have told me we'd be 8-3 in the noncon before the season, I would have been happy. That Alcorn loss is going to sting all year.

At 7-4? I'd probably give it a C+. Need to see more out of some *specific* players going into conference play.

 

[sycamore_21]

B given Alcorn disaster. If we had won that game, I’d say B+/A- all things considered.

We aren’t wowing fans but we are winning games. We are missing our coach too.

 

[sycamore_21]

We were flat out going to be 0-2 against Charlotte and Duke. Split with a team we played twice in a week and had a major dud. Honestly pretty much what I expected.

 

[RunSyc]

Alcorn & early shooting struggles were my only significant gripes. Glad shooting is gradually improving.

Would've given a B, but Alcorn makes it a C.

Glad that there has been team & player improvement since the Alcorn game.

Following Alcorn, to my eye, 3pt. Shooters seem to square up to the basket much better.

Hoping for a fun conference season, & an eventual return of a healthy HCMG.