Some stats to keep this season in perspective

[slufanskip]

1. We are 11-8

2. We have outscored our opponents 1126-1107

3. We have outrebounded our opponents 621-574

4. We have more assists than our opponents 212-166

5. We have what has been reported as the 4th youngest out of 300+ D1 teams

6. Freshmen have played 53% of our minutes ytd

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 3 are freshmen

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. All of our freshmen our true freshmen

Maybe, just maybe, we are actually doing well for our circumstances

[moytoy12]

1. We are 11-8

2. We have outscored our opponents 1126-1107

3. We have outrebounded our opponents 621-574

4. We have more assists than our opponents 212-166

5. We have what has been reported as the 4th youngest out of 300+ D1 teams

6. Freshmen have played 53% of our minutes ytd

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 3 are freshmen

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. All of our freshmen our true freshmen

Maybe, just maybe, we are actually doing well for our circumstances

10. No werewolves

[3Jack]

Of course the flip side to this, in fairness, is that 2 best plaers on this team are very experienced seniors and 3 of the top 6 players on seniors. And that true freshman regualarly play and produce in college basketball.

[TheChosenOne]

Of course the flip side to this, in fairness, is that 2 best plaers on this team are very experienced seniors and 3 of the top 6 players on seniors. And that true freshman regualarly play and produce in college basketball.

And all of these stats are against the 210th ranked strength of schedule.

[slufanskip]

1. We are 11-8

2. We have outscored our opponents 1126-1107

3. We have outrebounded our opponents 621-574

4. We have more assists than our opponents 212-166

5. We have what has been reported as the 4th youngest out of 300+ D1 teams

6. Freshmen have played 53% of our minutes ytd

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 3 are freshmen

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. All of our freshmen our true freshmen

Maybe, just maybe, we are actually doing well for our circumstances

Some more stats

Recent freshmen bigs

1. Baniak 8.6 - 5.3

2. Conklin 7.6 - 4.8

3. Reed 6.8 - 4.0

4. Heinrich 4.3 - 3.0

5. Braun 3.1 - 2.9

6. Thompson 2.0 - 2.7

7. Ian 2.2 - 1.7

8. Sloan 1.3 - 1.4

Recent PG stats

1. Mitchell 8ppg, 2.9rpg, 72-42 ass/to

2. Fisher 5ppg, 1.8rpg, 89-53 ass/to

3. Perry 6ppg, 1.1rpg, 51-66 ass/to

In one freshman class alone we have the most productive pg we've had in the last 10 years (probably alot longer) and 2 out of the top 3 most productive bigs in the last 10 years.

[slufanskip]

Of course the flip side to this, in fairness, is that 2 best plaers on this team are very experienced seniors and 3 of the top 6 players on seniors. And that true freshman regualarly play and produce in college basketball.

Is that the flip side? 3 of the top 6 players are true freshman?

[slufanskip]

And all of these stats are against the 210th ranked strength of schedule.

We are the 340th oldest team and we are 11-8 against the 210th ranked schedule. I see how poor that seems.

[SLUDrew]

Is that the flip side? 3 of the top 6 players are true freshman?

For those of you that say true freshmen are regularly called on to contribute in college basketball, I understand where you are coming from. However, those that have a truly huge impact are blue chip players that are few and far between. Look at Scott Suggs. He was considered an elite recruit, and will probably still wind up being a stud, but as of right now he is averaging 1.2 points per game.

My oint being that I think we see and here about a few stud freshmen each year (Durant, Oden, Beasley, Mayo) or any of the McDonald's All-Mericans that litter the rosters of the Dukes and UNCs of the world, and assume that it is the rule that freshmen make big contributions everywhere instead of the exception.

As far as our freshmen go, I am more excited about Kwamain Mitchell than I have been with any freshmen we have had since Larry Hughes

[kwyjibo]

We are the 340th oldest team and we are 11-8 against the 210th ranked schedule. I see how poor that seems.

SLU is the 278th oldest team.

[TheChosenOne]

We are the 340th oldest team and we are 11-8 against the 210th ranked schedule. I see how poor that seems.

You are putting lipstick on the pig.

I guess a lot of it depends on what kind of expectations you place on the program and its million dollar coach.

[3Jack]

For those of you that say true freshmen are regularly called on to contribute in college basketball, I understand where you are coming from. However, those that have a truly huge impact are blue chip players that are few and far between. Look at Scott Suggs. He was considered an elite recruit, and will probably still wind up being a stud, but as of right now he is averaging 1.2 points per game.

My oint being that I think we see and here about a few stud freshmen each year (Durant, Oden, Beasley, Mayo) or any of the McDonald's All-Mericans that litter the rosters of the Dukes and UNCs of the world, and assume that it is the rule that freshmen make big contributions everywhere instead of the exception.

As far as our freshmen go, I am more excited about Kwamain Mitchell than I have been with any freshmen we have had since Larry Hughes

It is not just blue chip freshman that are expected to contribute right away in college basketball. To say that freshman making contributions is an exception in college basketball and only happens at the McDonald All-American level is absolutely incorrect. If you want examples at the A-10 level I would be glad to give you some.

[slufanskip]

SLU is the 278th oldest team.

where do you get that info? It has been said they were 4th youngest. Not doubting you, just going by what I'd heard.

[slufanskip]

It is not just blue chip freshman that are expected to contribute right away in college basketball. To say that freshman making contributions is an exception in college basketball and only happens at the McDonald All-American level is absolutely incorrect. If you want examples at the A-10 level I would be glad to give you some.

did you read his post? We don't just have a freshman or 2, they have played 53% of our minutes.

[3Jack]

And all of these stats are against the 210th ranked strength of schedule.

Good point.

[slufanskip]

You are putting lipstick on the pig.

I guess a lot of it depends on what kind of expectations you place on the program and its million dollar coach.

No, what I'm saying is if you read this board regularly you'd guess we absolutely suck.

My expectatons of a team that hasn't been very good over a long period of time which has true freshmen playing over half of the minutes played .... is that what your asking? I'd say a .500 record would be acceptable and I'd be pleased with a few games over.

My expectations of a million dollar coach would be to get players here that he can win with. I'm good with where we are in this aspect also.

Do I think everything has been perfect ... no. But I hate the tone of this board lately.

[3Jack]

where do you get that info? It has been said they were 4th youngest. Not doubting you, just going by what I'd heard.

You have a link to this being the 4th youngest team? When 3 of your top 6 players are seniors I have a very hard time believing this team is ranked that young in college basketball.

[kwyjibo]

where do you get that info? It has been said they were 4th youngest. Not doubting you, just going by what I'd heard.

SLU could very well be the 4th youngest by age. I was posting mostly in jest although there is a real madman behind it (as usual Ken Pomeroy). SLU is 278th in "experience" which is tenure in NCAA Division I (better stat than age in my opinion and in the opinion of Abdur Raheem al-Mateen).

I love looking at his "Height and other stuff" ranking page--lots of interesting stuff:

http://kenpom.com/height.php?y=2009&s=ExpRank

Here is his thoughts on the Experience stat (there is little correlation between team experience and success but I suppose part of that is early exits of good players to the pros):

"I would take talent over experience any day. Obviously the two aren't independent of each other, though. A freshman this season is usually going to be a better player in three years as a senior. I haven't studied it rigorously, but I am tracking experience over at kenpom.com, and there doesn't seem to be much relationship between success and experience. The most experienced teams in the Sun Belt last season were New Orleans and Troy and you saw where that got them."

The most experience team this year is Houston Baptist and has not helped them although it has probably helped Marquette.

[SLUDrew]

It is not just blue chip freshman that are expected to contribute right away in college basketball. To say that freshman making contributions is an exception in college basketball and only happens at the McDonald All-American level is absolutely incorrect. If you want examples at the A-10 level I would be glad to give you some.

You missed my point, or maybe I wasn't clear. Clearly freshmen contribute. Conklin, Reed, and KM have made invaluable contributions to this team. It seems to me that the "freshmen contribute everywhere why not here" crowd is a little misguided.

[3Jack]

I would submit that SLU is not even the youngest team in the A-10. Duquense is. And they are 13-6 and 4-2 in the conference. Three freshman and 2 sophmores in their top 7 players.

[saluki762]

1. We are 11-8

2. We have outscored our opponents 1126-1107

3. We have outrebounded our opponents 621-574

4. We have more assists than our opponents 212-166

5. We have what has been reported as the 4th youngest out of 300+ D1 teams

6. Freshmen have played 53% of our minutes ytd

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 3 are freshmen

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. All of our freshmen our true freshmen

Maybe, just maybe, we are actually doing well for our circumstances

This is my issue with other SLU fans. That seems rather mediocre to me, with a 1 million dollar coach, I expected more. I know that others here hate the Saluki's but check out these stats.

1. We are 9-11

2. We have been outscored 1278 - 1291.

3. Getting outrebounded 634 - 657

4. We have more assists than our opponents 269 - 218

5. No idea where we rank here but we are really young.

6. Freshman have played 45.6% of our minutes YTD.

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 2 are freshmen, one is a sophmore.

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. 3 of SIU's are true freshman.

This is all done against the 43rd - 49th toughest schedule depanding on what site you look at and many SIU fans are very unhappy with these results. I am not saying the SLU is having a bad season by any stretch but compared to SIU (who is a very similar team to the Bills), we are not doing that great.

SIU does not return 2 all MVC players like SLU has in Lidell and Lisch, we only have one in Bryan Mullins.

SIU does not have a HOF coach either, in fact many SIU fans believe Lowery needs to improve quite a bit.

SLU is going to be much better in 2-3 years but looking through my slightly maroon colored glasses, I think SIU gets the edge. There should be some really good battles between the 2 teams starting next year in STL.

[slufanskip]

You have a link to this being the 4th youngest team? When 3 of your top 6 players are seniors I have a very hard time believing this team is ranked that young in college basketball.

do you read or just randomly post? Did I not answer your question in the post you responded to?

[slufanskip]

I would submit that SLU is not even the youngest team in the A-10. Duquense is. And they are 13-6 and 4-2 in the conference. Three freshman and 2 sophmores in their top 7 players.

We have 5 freshman in the top 8 by minutes played.

I guarantee you that all 5 of our freshmen will be better as sophs.

[slufanskip]

This is my issue with other SLU fans. That seems rather mediocre to me, with a 1 million dollar coach, I expected more. I know that others here hate the Saluki's but check out these stats.

1. We are 9-11

2. We have been outscored 1278 - 1291.

3. Getting outrebounded 634 - 657

4. We have more assists than our opponents 269 - 218

5. No idea where we rank here but we are really young.

6. Freshman have played 45.6% of our minutes YTD.

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 2 are freshmen, one is a sophmore.

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. 3 of SIU's are true freshman.

This is all done against the 43rd - 49th toughest schedule depanding on what site you look at and many SIU fans are very unhappy with these results. I am not saying the SLU is having a bad season by any stretch but compared to SIU (who is a very similar team to the Bills), we are not doing that great.

SIU does not return 2 all MVC players like SLU has in Lidell and Lisch, we only have one in Bryan Mullins.

SIU does not have a HOF coach either, in fact many SIU fans believe Lowery needs to improve quite a bit.

SLU is going to be much better in 2-3 years but looking through my slightly maroon colored glasses, I think SIU gets the edge. There should be some really good battles between the 2 teams starting next year in STL.

well isn't that nice.

[SShoe]

This is my issue with other SLU fans. That seems rather mediocre to me, with a 1 million dollar coach, I expected more. I know that others here hate the Saluki's but check out these stats.

1. We are 9-11

2. We have been outscored 1278 - 1291.

3. Getting outrebounded 634 - 657

4. We have more assists than our opponents 269 - 218

5. No idea where we rank here but we are really young.

6. Freshman have played 45.6% of our minutes YTD.

7. Of the 5 players with the most minutes 2 are freshmen, one is a sophmore.

8. Of the 8 players with the most minutes 5 are freshmen

9. 3 of SIU's are true freshman.

This is all done against the 43rd - 49th toughest schedule depanding on what site you look at and many SIU fans are very unhappy with these results. I am not saying the SLU is having a bad season by any stretch but compared to SIU (who is a very similar team to the Bills), we are not doing that great.

SIU does not return 2 all MVC players like SLU has in Lidell and Lisch, we only have one in Bryan Mullins.

SIU does not have a HOF coach either, in fact many SIU fans believe Lowery needs to improve quite a bit.

SLU is going to be much better in 2-3 years but looking through my slightly maroon colored glasses, I think SIU gets the edge. There should be some really good battles between the 2 teams starting next year in STL.

Just curious, but how are the Salukis doing on the recruiting front this year? Have they signed anybody worth getting excited about?

[saluki762]

well isn't that nice.

I said nothing with ill intent, I was just pointing out how the 2 programs were really similar this year and how many SIU fans are unhappy with their results as well.