These are the facts and they are indisputable

[Taj79]

Just like taking Ian out of the equation now and inserting Bryce and callling it even ---- you cant' do that. You can't argue that with Ian out of the game, Tommie adn Kevin did better just because he's on the bench. What did his contribution on thefloor mean at that time? For example, if Ian had 20 minutes in DC last week (20 point output) don't you think that his presence would ahve meant something in terms of deteriorating play on the part of Rob Diggs, Damien Hollis and the African-named kid? They would ahve exerted a lot of energy covering him, including numerous fouls that their intensity to defend Tommie adn Kevin as they did that night would have been different. Even so slighly? You can't operate in a vacuum. There are causes adn effects that have a play in an overall game that you can't just ignore.

What about when Ian sat down? Did Ford pull Lasme? Did Hobbs pull Mensah-Bonsu? Did Fordham pull Dunston? I dont' recall but if Ian is resting, the counter moves on the other side also mean something --- with Dunston gone, is Liddell more apt to drive and do so against lesser competition? Does Hobbs pull Elliott, forcing a lesser defender on Tommie because Rice shifts over to Lisch? You can argue all the stats you want but you can't argue momentum or karma or consequences from moves and counter moves; actions and counter actions.

Some have already said that the A10 was a lesser conference last year. So now add in what those counter moves mean in terms of what caliber of player the rpelacement is. Is he Maurice Rice as a sixth man or is he Danny Brown? And on end? Doesn't five minutes of Bryce make him abetter plaeyr as oppposed to ten or twelve? I saw him against UMass in the AC last year and have not really seen THAT Bryce Husak since. But the combo that we went against ina physicla UMass made that play out.

Rick is not blameless for sure but he is playing the hand that he was dealt. That is all a mater-of--fact "thank you FRUBS." I thought a 16 win season was possible this year --- almost everyone else was unabashedly out of control with 20 and in some cases 30 win season. I know the 30 win guy was probably joking but go back and look at the prediciton thread. Very few are in the mid-teen area. My 16 included home wins against Sam Houston and Dayton so we are drooping there as well.

Intangibles are huge. When Ian didn't liek the way it was going with Soderberg it took a visit from his father to say "stop blowing the million dollar Greek contract" to get his sizable arse in gear again. Now Tommie adn Kevin don't like Rick's style. The Eagles got rid of TO despite the fact of not having a decent wide receiver on the roster. Teams still jam their wideouts and don't respect them in that regard. But put To out there and guys have career years. You think Patrick Crayton has the year he had (not taht great really) without TO on the other side? You decide to take a play off and you got Dwight Freeney over your head and your QB gets killed. Cause and effect. Nothing stands alone.

If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullsh*t. If all else fails, use statistics.

[JMM28]

The "This team was better with Ian on the bench" argument may be one of the more asanine things I have read on this board. Looking at the boxsocre will do you absolutely nothing besides tell you the final score of the game.

There is a reason why coaches watch game tape. If they could see every thing a player does on a boxscore, then why would they bother wasting time with tape?

This team wasn't going anywhere with Soderberg, Majerus, or Jesus as coach. Who cares about the NIT? Who was the NIT champ last year? 3 years ago? Exactly.

[3Jack]

The "This team was better with Ian on the bench" argument may be one of the more asanine things I have read on this board. Looking at the boxsocre will do you absolutely nothing besides tell you the final score of the game.

There is a reason why coaches watch game tape. If they could see every thing a player does on a boxscore, then why would they bother wasting time with tape?

This team wasn't going anywhere with Soderberg, Majerus, or Jesus as coach. Who cares about the NIT? Who was the NIT champ last year? 3 years ago? Exactly.

I never said that "this team was better with Ian on the bench". And if you think coaches don't look at box scores your crazy.

[3Jack]

Just like taking Ian out of the equation now and inserting Bryce and callling it even ---- you cant' do that. You can't argue that with Ian out of the game, Tommie adn Kevin did better just because he's on the bench. What did his contribution on thefloor mean at that time? For example, if Ian had 20 minutes in DC last week (20 point output) don't you think that his presence would ahve meant something in terms of deteriorating play on the part of Rob Diggs, Damien Hollis and the African-named kid? They would ahve exerted a lot of energy covering him, including numerous fouls that their intensity to defend Tommie adn Kevin as they did that night would have been different. Even so slighly? You can't operate in a vacuum. There are causes adn effects that have a play in an overall game that you can't just ignore.

What about when Ian sat down? Did Ford pull Lasme? Did Hobbs pull Mensah-Bonsu? Did Fordham pull Dunston? I dont' recall but if Ian is resting, the counter moves on the other side also mean something --- with Dunston gone, is Liddell more apt to drive and do so against lesser competition? Does Hobbs pull Elliott, forcing a lesser defender on Tommie because Rice shifts over to Lisch? You can argue all the stats you want but you can't argue momentum or karma or consequences from moves and counter moves; actions and counter actions.

Some have already said that the A10 was a lesser conference last year. So now add in what those counter moves mean in terms of what caliber of player the rpelacement is. Is he Maurice Rice as a sixth man or is he Danny Brown? And on end? Doesn't five minutes of Bryce make him abetter plaeyr as oppposed to ten or twelve? I saw him against UMass in the AC last year and have not really seen THAT Bryce Husak since. But the combo that we went against ina physicla UMass made that play out.

Rick is not blameless for sure but he is playing the hand that he was dealt. That is all a mater-of--fact "thank you FRUBS." I thought a 16 win season was possible this year --- almost everyone else was unabashedly out of control with 20 and in some cases 30 win season. I know the 30 win guy was probably joking but go back and look at the prediciton thread. Very few are in the mid-teen area. My 16 included home wins against Sam Houston and Dayton so we are drooping there as well.

Intangibles are huge. When Ian didn't liek the way it was going with Soderberg it took a visit from his father to say "stop blowing the million dollar Greek contract" to get his sizable arse in gear again. Now Tommie adn Kevin don't like Rick's style. The Eagles got rid of TO despite the fact of not having a decent wide receiver on the roster. Teams still jam their wideouts and don't respect them in that regard. But put To out there and guys have career years. You think Patrick Crayton has the year he had (not taht great really) without TO on the other side? You decide to take a play off and you got Dwight Freeney over your head and your QB gets killed. Cause and effect. Nothing stands alone.

If you can't dazzle 'em with brilliance, baffle 'em with bullsh*t. If all else fails, use statistics.

Taj can I have the cliff notes next time? Apparantly if you can't dazzle them with brillance, baffle 'em with bullsh*t or use statistics you ramble on until they aren't paying attention anymore. But I really didn't need to reed this entire post because the first things your write basically attribute assertions to me that I didn't make. Never did I say that Husak replaces IV and it's even. Never did I say that taking Ian out and putting him on the bench makes it even. I merely pointed out that this team performed under those conditions last year. And backed it up with facts.

[moytoy12]

I never said that "this team was better with Ian on the bench". And if you think coaches don't look at box scores your crazy.

It's interesting, you don't have any original arguments nor are you able to defend the ones you steal. Coaches don't build game plans off of box scores.

My apologies, earlier I attributed "major chunks" to you, but it was actually "big chunks."

[Majerus Magic]

I'm to lazy but I really wish we had the points scored for Tommie and Kevin while Ian was on the bench and the points scored while Ian was in the game. I think this would really settle the argument.

[slufanskip]

I'm to lazy but I really wish we had the points scored for Tommie and Kevin while Ian was on the bench and the points scored while Ian was in the game. I think this would really settle the argument.

not really because when Ian sits so does the opposition's best big man. There is absolutey no way to verify what players were on the floor and the argument is silly that the Bills were a better team when Ian wasn't on the floor.

[Majerus Magic]

not really because when Ian sits so does the opposition's best big man. There is absolutey no way to verify what players were on the floor and the argument is silly that the Bills were a better team when Ian wasn't on the floor.

I was banking on the stats to prove that playing Ian was better for the team. This is a ludicrous argument

[JMM28]

I never said that "this team was better with Ian on the bench". And if you think coaches don't look at box scores your crazy.

Well then why are you bothering to quote his minutes from last year? Drop that argument, it is weak.

Coaches who look at boxscores might look at...4 columns? Any coach who makes any sort of game plan off of a boxscores should be sitting behind Soderberg in the unemployed coaches lounge.

A boxscore tells you 4 things...

the final score

what your team shot from the field/3point/ft

assist/steal/turnover ratios

how many fouls everyone had

If you are basing anything off a boxscore, you are 110% dicked.

[slu72]

I'm not defending Coach Soderberg's recruiting and I have never defended his recruiting on this board. But Soderberg was able to win last year and get more out of the players on this team than Majerus is. That is what I am criticizing Majerus for.

Soderberg was in his 5th year with his system, his players, which by the way included two first team conference all frosh and a first team all conf center, who had earned an invite to the NBA tryouts. Yes, he led us to 20 w's, really 19. But also managed to lose to St. B's and Duquense, which all but killed any shot we had at post season. This after he stated anything less than an NCAA bid would be a failure. He failed. He got fired. Even though he gave himself an A- for the season. Good luck and good riddance. We were never going to be anything more than middle of the pack under UB. Why he still gets defended on here as doing a "good job" is truly a mystery to me.

[brianstl]

I never said that "this team was better with Ian on the bench". And if you think coaches don't look at box scores your crazy.

I can tell you that coaches pay very little to no attention to box scores. Everything a coach needs to know is on a game tape. Thats why they spend hours watching them and disecting them. You never hear a coach say "I was up all night going over the Rhode Island vs. Dayton box score." Box scores lie. Game tapes don't. Coaches don't give a crap about box scores. They give us something to talk about and provide little else.

[3Jack]

It's amazing how this board hates opposing viewpoints and facts and figures that back them up. And anyone who thinks that coaches don't use boxscores and statistics in addition to game film isn't worth arguing with.

[brianstl]

It's amazing how this board hates opposing viewpoints and facts and figures that back them up. And anyone who thinks that coaches don't use boxscores and statistics in addition to game film isn't worth arguing with.

They do pay attention to stats and in fact somebody on the most staffs will keep there own box score. They will then watch the game tapes and add to or correct those numbers. The box scores that college coaches use are much different and keep track of much more than the box scores we see in the paper. They are totally different and you can't compare the two.

[Sheltiedave]

JMM, I will stay out of the stupid argument, but the information gleaned from proper box scores generate the stats that Ken Pomeroy uses to create his version of Sabermatics. The information that can be gleaned from box scores is quite significant. It is the Cliff notes of the game.

Film is great for predictive behavior, learning players' strengths and weaknesses, telltale mannerisms, how to design defenses and offensive schemes, how to attack.

The properly annotated season of box scores will tell a coach what the other team will do, and film will tell him how and where it will be done.

[3Jack]

JMM, I will stay out of the stupid argument, but the information gleaned from proper box scores generate the stats that Ken Pomeroy uses to create his version of Sabermatics. The information that can be gleaned from box scores is quite significant. It is the Cliff notes of the game.

Of course this is true. And the fact that several posters came in to argue that coaches don't use box scores and stats will tell you the knowledge level of some of the posters on this board.

[brianstl]

JMM, I will stay out of the stupid argument, but the information gleaned from proper box scores generate the stats that Ken Pomeroy uses to create his version of Sabermatics. The information that can be gleaned from box scores is quite significant. It is the Cliff notes of the game.

Film is great for predictive behavior, learning players' strengths and weaknesses, telltale mannerisms, how to design defenses and offensive schemes, how to attack.

The properly annotated season of box scores will tell a coach what the other team will do, and film will tell him how and where it will be done.

Sheltie Pomeroy's stats are the best you can do when you are tying to get a feel for 330 plus teams. Pomeroys stats are used to judge teams and not indvidual players. From a basic box score (what 3jack and jalejarr are using in their argument) you can not tell what is happening when an individual player is on or off the court. It does not tell you if the Billikens out scored an oppenent when Ian was on the court compared to being off the court. I am not a huge fan of +/- numbers (Timmerman post these now and then) , but those numbers would give you a much better feel for the impact Ian had in every game last year.

[brianstl]

Of course this is true. And the fact that several posters came in to argue that coaches don't use box scores and stats will tell you the knowledge level of some of the posters on this board.

Pomeroy uses the basic box score to judge teams and not players.

[3Jack]

Pomeroy uses the basic box score to judge teams and not players.

Which does not change the fact that coaches use box scores and stats and anyone who says otherwise does not know what they are talking about.

[brianstl]

Which does not change the fact that coaches use box scores and stats and anyone who says otherwise does not know what they are talking about.

They don't use the same basic box score you are using to try to make your argument. If you think they are using the same box score you look at in the paper you are kidding yourself. The stats that a coach uses are much more detailed and broken down for many different situations than anything you read in the paper. Trying to make a case on a player’s impact on a team based on the basic numbers you are using is foolish.

[Taj79]

3Jack ---- there I wrote your name. For the first time. Don't take my use of the word "you" in such a personal sense.

3Jack --- what is your argument on the boxscore use? Is it summed up as in "coaches only use the boxscore in analyzing teams" or is it "the boxscore is one of the many tools coaches use to analyze teams"?

Trust me: you can prove anything you want by using statistics. Case in point: Dwayne Polk's line from last year's Xavier game. Or even Dwayne's overall 5 ppg from last year. What was our record --- 20 and 14? Thirty three games at 5 pr game is 165 total points. Against Xavier he averaged 12 (or did we play them twice). It doesn't matter. A painting isn't judged on one color alone, and not sometime even on the use of color.

[3Jack]

3Jack ---- there I wrote your name. For the first time. Don't take my use of the word "you" in such a personal sense.

3Jack --- what is your argument on the boxscore use? Is it summed up as in "coaches only use the boxscore in analyzing teams" or is it "the boxscore is one of the many tools coaches use to analyze teams"?

Trust me: you can prove anything you want by using statistics. Case in point: Dwayne Polk's line from last year's Xavier game. Or even Dwayne's overall 5 ppg from last year. What was our record --- 20 and 14? Thirty three games at 5 pr game is 165 total points. Against Xavier he averaged 12 (or did we play them twice). It doesn't matter. A painting isn't judged on one color alone, and not sometime even on the use of color.

Taj my argument on box score use is of course it is one of many tools used by coaches in analyzing teams. But there are several posters in this thread that have argued that coaches don't use them at all. Which is a ridiculous claim.

[brianstl]

Taj my argument on box score use is of course it is one of many tools used by coaches in analyzing teams. But there are several posters in this thread that have argued that coaches don't use them at all. Which is a ridiculous claim.

Here is a stat for you 3Jack:

We are 4-1 in games that Tommie Liddell III plays less than 30 minutes this year. We are 5-6 in games he plays more than 30 minutes.

[3Jack]

They don't use the same basic box score you are using to try to make your argument. If you think they are using the same box score you look at in the paper you are kidding yourself. The stats that a coach uses are much more detailed and broken down for many different situations than anything you read in the paper. Trying to make a case on a player’s impact on a team based on the basic numbers you are using is foolish.

Nor do I use the box score in the paper. I don't even get a paper.

[3Jack]

Here is a stat for you 3Jack:

We are 4-1 in games that Tommie Liddell III plays less than 30 minutes this year. We are 5-6 in games he plays more than 30 minutes.

LOL. Your not very good at this Brian. Let the record show that those 4 wins were against these 4 powerhouses:

North Carolina A&T - 2-9 record RPI 172

Houston Baptist Not a Division 1 team

Detroit - 3-12 record 270 RPI

Furman - 2-14 record 327 RPI

I highly doubt this team will have any quality wins without Tommy and Kevin playing at least 30 minutes. In fact I challange you to find a quality win in the last two years in which those two did not play at least that many minutes.

[BIG BILL FAN]

LOL. Your not very good at this Brian. Let the record show that those 4 wins were against these 4 powerhouses:

North Carolina A&T - 2-9 record RPI 172

Houston Baptist Not a Division 1 team

Detroit - 3-12 record 270 RPI

Furman - 2-14 record 327 RPI

I highly doubt this team will have any quality wins without Tommy and Kevin playing at least 30 minutes. In fact I challange you to find a quality win in the last two years in which those two did not play at least that many minutes.

Brian, you are wasting your time with Jack, the guy is an obsessed RM hater, who can't handle that the recruiting legend BS is not the Bills coach any more.