brianstl Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 actually, i am not buying that excuse. no offense to eckerle, but he didnt match up with the boston college guards either (look at timmermann's plus/minus chart for proof) yet was out there enough. if matchups was a concern, then i would have played cotto more minutes and sat eckerle as well. Roy the Eckerle +/- numbers were greatly skewed by the substitution pattern at the end of the game. Eckerle getting the call on defense while Cotto was in there when the Billikens were on offense and getting points at the line. Tom even points that out clearly in the post. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 Roy the Eckerle +/- numbers were greatly skewed by the substitution pattern at the end of the game. Eckerle getting the call on defense while Cotto was in there when the Billikens were on offense and getting points at the line. Tom even points that out clearly in the post. brian, he was -14. there were not 14 defensive possessions in the last 5 minutes. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
brianstl Posted November 25, 2008 Share Posted November 25, 2008 brian, he was -14. there were not 14 defensive possessions in the last 5 minutes.You are tight Roy. there were 9 of them. BC scored 13 points on those processions. There is no way that -13 might have played a part in Eckerle's -14. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.