Welcome to The Holy Land of Hoops

Seth Davis posted an article on SI.com where he rated teams with either a "buy", "hold" or "sell". He rated Butler a "buy", Creighton and Villanova were "holds" and Xavier and St. John's were "sells".

On the one hand, I should be annoyed he rated SJU a "sell" but then again, the article begins by him saying he would be assessing many of the top 60 programs, so the fact he considers us in that group should be a positive?!?!


http://www.si.com/college-basketball/20 ... ville-ucla

I don't know why you would sell Xavier stock now. Two to four weeks ago? Yeah, sure. There were a great opportunity to sell top 10 stock because they were looking more like an 11-25 team. Now, though, I would just hold and see what happens. They just eviscerated in okay Providence team and then went on the road to beat a solid Georgetown team. They really seem to be playing to their ranking lately.

It seems like Seth has an axe to grind with SJU. I understand the "Sell" logic...yes we had a great mini stretch, but this might be our ceiling. Hopefully not, but you can't realistically expect this team to keep beating ranked teams. We may steal 1 or 2 more games we are not expected to win, but this team is a roller coaster and we may have peaked. So the "sell" makes sense. Where Seth lost me was where he said "the guards are small and won't hold up in the Big East". Really? Yes our guards are small, but they excelled against Minnesota, Michigan State, Syracuse, #13 Butler, etc...we are way beyond the question of whether or not our guards can do this consistently against top notch opponents. They passed the test already easily. To say not even that they "may not" but rather "WILL not" hold up in the Big East is not backed by any evidence and the opposite is actually true thus far. Our guards have been a revelation...I don't ever remember a SJ team with such dangerous guards. Small, yes but who cares? The only game where their size really seemed to be a real issue was against Penn State. We have had plenty of bigger guards like Jordan (6'4 I think) and they were not even close to as good as our freshmen guards now. A few inches of difference in height for guards is overrated in actual play. The only thing it really affects is your draft stock or being drafted at all. If Ponds were 6'3 or 6'4 he'd be a 1st round pick easily. But other than draft stock and NBA potential, their size is not an issue.

XUFan09 wrote:I don't know why you would sell Xavier stock now. Two to four weeks ago? Yeah, sure. There were a great opportunity to sell top 10 stock because they were looking more like an 11-25 team. Now, though, I would just hold and see what happens. They just eviscerated in okay Providence team and then went on the road to beat a solid Georgetown team. They really seem to be playing to their ranking lately.

He's just being cute by comparing teams with stocks, using the old axiom, "Buy low, sell high." The "sell" tag is actually a compliment to how they've played so far. He's saying that they've played really well this far, have compiled a really good record, and are ranked, but the schedule gets so much tougher from here that he can't guarantee that they'll be able to sustain the same kind of record going forward. It's pretty much the same thing that most of us said on the Villanova thread, that they would probably lose in one of their back-to-back road games vs Creighton and Butler. As he says in the article, Seth anticipated a Nova loss at Creighton and thought he'd be recommending "sell" for them too. But they surprised him with the win, so he changed them to a "hold" since the win raises the possibility that they're better than he thought.

Bill Marsh wrote:

XUFan09 wrote:I don't know why you would sell Xavier stock now. Two to four weeks ago? Yeah, sure. There were a great opportunity to sell top 10 stock because they were looking more like an 11-25 team. Now, though, I would just hold and see what happens. They just eviscerated in okay Providence team and then went on the road to beat a solid Georgetown team. They really seem to be playing to their ranking lately.

He's just being cute by comparing teams with stocks, using the old axiom, "Buy low, sell high." The "sell" tag is actually a compliment to how they've played so far. He's saying that they've played really well this far, have compiled a really good record, and are ranked, but the schedule gets so much tougher from here that he can't guarantee that they'll be able to sustain the same kind of record going forward. It's pretty much the same thing that most of us said on the Villanova thread, that they would probably lose in one of their back-to-back road games vs Creighton and Butler. As he says in the article, Seth anticipated a Nova loss at Creighton and thought he'd be recommending "sell" for them too. But they surprised him with the win, so he changed them to a "hold" since the win raises the possibility that they're better than he thought.

I thought the concept was: "Sell because there's a good chance they won't perform as well as they have so far"? Xavier is probably going to lose more than two games in the second half of the season, but they still might perform better in the second half or perform at the same level.

I hate Seth Davis but I think most his write ups made sense.