The premise of predictions

We enjoy WAC predictions, actually more the thought process that goes into justifying what is believed will happen.

It's fun to issue a prognostication and often educational to read about them.

But the truth is none of us has a clue.

Even the WAC coaches.

That's because nobody has seen all, let alone most, of the new arrivals nor has a clue on how much any returnees have improved.

Yes, PTW precicted that Brockeith Pane would earn Newcomer of the Year honors but ... we've never seen him play. So that's an so-called 'educated' guess, at best.

We also don't know who is teetering on the edge of academic problems or having behavioral issues that may endanger eligibility.

Plus, if you can forsee injuries then please make yourself known.

Another curious item is how the coaches and media define a most valuable player? To be a contrarian, why can't a most valuable player emerge from a second division finishing team? Is it to be someone whose team would drop the most if he wasn't on the court? Just what are the metrics for this honor? Just asking.

More specifically, it's interesting that the WAC coaches have Nevada ending up in third place yet no Wolf Packer was predicted to be honored on the first or second team.

This is not picking on a certain pl;ayer but the selection by the coaches of Tyler Newbold as a second-teamer is curious. Yes, we enjoy watching him play but a few of his numbers are questionable for that high of a ranking. This is his production in 16 games last season:

- 8.2 ppg.
- 45% overall shooting, 46% from three-point range (4th in the WAC), 90% on free throws but just 21 attempts
- 4.1 rpg.
- 48 assists to 16 turnovers, a stellar 3:1 ratio and tops in the WAC, assists were 15th in the WAC
- 9 steals

Again, just asking. The totality of his numbers are solid, no doubt, but being a second-teamer is worthy of debate. And that brings us back to the main point: nobody is right or wrong, at least right now.

More ruminations later.