AlumniFan Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I totally get that, but we've done the same thing at the end of pretty much every close game this season. It's like everyone is waiting for someone else to do their part. There's absolutely an adjustment period. I'm just saying I'd rather have a Yarbrough forced shot or a Crawford forced drive than a turnover or a panic 3 at the shot clock. Agreed. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AlumniFan Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I don't think it's a stretch to say that the team has performed below every poster's expectations on this board. If you had us at 3-11 in conference, 11 wins on the season (fingers crossed), and losing to Fordham by eighteen.. Congrats. I thought .500 would be a realistic goal. Way too much AY hype. Agree that we have could have won another half-dozen games, which makes it extremely frustrating to lose every single one. I'd rather question the coaching than the freshmen, personally. Or we could just pin it on the sophomores/upperclassmen? They don't exactly look 'well-coached' and have all been around two seasons now. Also, I don't know why you'd bother to 'include the sopohmores'. MC, yes. TL, absolutely not, and RA gets between 6-8 minutes a game. It's hard to even discern that the freshmen are making substantial developments. MY was playing a helluva lot better a month ago. MB was out of control. DR has been steady, and forget the other 3. And I'm still very high on the class going forward. I think there were plenty of people who read this board who thought the team would be under .500 this year. However, after you see the reaction to the few people who suggested such, you become a little reluctant to post anything that isn't glowing in the preseason. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mrjoelabs Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Or any semi-capable bigs. Tanner doesn't play for a month and then takes Reggie's minutes. Makes sense. Thats because Jimmy Crews is literally just GUESSING out there. And also as stated back, RM was a well choreagraphed dance. This is worse than an 8th grade pickup game scrum. All you guys need to do is look at the man's record before he was handed a premade well trained group of upperclassmen that knew exactly what they wanted to do. And even then Jordair had to bail us out with his greatness as the season drug on. Crews at Army I will discount because you can't recruit there. But this man did nothing at Evansville except a few ok years, at a school that you at least can recruit some and compete in the valley. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLU_Nick Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I'm just saying - it would be nice to see noticeable improvements from game to game. That's not happening with any player, imho. +1 This is my biggest problem. I have not seen any of the freshmen "grow up" throughout the season. And I do not buy into the "we play competitively every game" cop out. Our young players are not the problem. It is seriously our coaching. And if we are going to just blow it up and play for the future...fine, sounds great...but then why do we play manning/lancona at all. These guys are not the future and are honestly terrible. When RM made decisions the board did not understand it was "in RM I trust"...with Crews...none of what he is doing makes sense. If I was player I would have lost confidence in my coach by now. We have regressed as a team and as players individually...maybe MC has gotten better. We are teetering here. A new Soderberg era starts in 2017 on our current trajectory. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
almaman Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Really? http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Evansville_Purple_Aces_men's_basketball One dance without JC 4 with in about same amount of seasons. I've pointed out here before; there is no there or even anyone asking where where is there. Most popular ? there is how do you get out of here. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Crews isn't a bad coach. He wasn't as good at Evansville as some people think he was, but he also wasn't as bad as some people think he was. Taking out his Army years he's made the NCAA about 1 of every 3 years in his career. I would like to make the NCAA more regularly than that. We were never going to be good this year. Next year will be a telling year. It is discouraging however that we haven't seen obvious signs of improvement from the team or more than a couple individuals this season. Nothing against The Wiz, but I'd like to see more than just the numbers show that we've improved. Roby has probably been our most consistent player over the last 2 months. That's a good sign for him, but probably not that great for everyone else. And he is definitely improved. Crawford has improved but as has been said many times, he isn't a star. 7-9 PPG from him with a handful of 15 point games and I'd be thrilled. Yacoubou has a ton of talent and athleticism but he's just out of control. I don't think it's unfair to say he's been disappointing. Yarbrough has become predictable. Not saying he isn't good, but it's not that hard to defend him given our current roster and his current set of skills. Bartley is not the PG that this board thinks he is, but all is not lost with him. He at the very least seems like a good shooter with some size. The inconsistency is maddening but to be expected. But I did expect to play a little better in A10 play than we have (even if it doesn't show up in wins and losses) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
majerus mojo Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 I think there were plenty of people who read this board who thought the team would be under .500 this year. However, after you see the reaction to the few people who suggested such, you become a little reluctant to post anything that isn't glowing in the preseason. I'm sure you're right. I could've seen us hovering around 13-14 wins, before all the pre-season Kool-Aid started flowing (I drank a big glass with each raving report about AY). But we had some horrific non-con showings, and are going to struggle to win 3 conference games. I would not have predicted futility on this scale. How's Indiana State doing this season.. I'm curious Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BigMouthBilliken Posted February 11, 2015 Author Share Posted February 11, 2015 I'm sure you're right. I could've seen us hovering around 13-14 wins, before all the pre-season Kool-Aid started flowing (I drank a big glass with each raving report about AY). But we had some horrific non-con showings, and are going to struggle to win 3 conference games. I would not have predicted futility on this scale. How's Indiana State doing this season.. I'm curiousAll I know is that I remeber ISU missing a ton of free throws and the win was pretty much a product of them screwing themselves. Was that the game we had a stretch of 7 min without a field goal? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
iamitalian85 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 All I know is that I remeber ISU missing a ton of free throws and the win was pretty much a product of them screwing themselves. Was that the game we had a stretch of 7 min without a field goal? Isn't that every game? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Agree with most of the comments. It is still frustrating we don't seem to have an inbounds play. Also, not ragging on Jolly but he really does seem like he's lost when he's on the floor. Like may have said just what do they work on in practice? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 The inconsistency is maddening but to be expected. But I did expect to play a little better in A10 play than we have (even if it doesn't show up in wins and losses) We have been in every conference game except for Davidson. Even on the road. That's another similarity this team has to the 2010 team. Other than the blowout at Duquesne and maybe one or two of the others, that team was in all of the games too, they just lost a bunch of them. And yes, I know that by saying that I risk everyone coming out of the woodwork to howl about how this team is so much worse, but that's not the point. If this team can improve next year in the final minutes, I really think they could be better than just decent. As bad as the offense has been all year, it gets reeeeeaaaally bad in the last few minutes, and last night it probably hit the nadir. Not just the turnovers by Ash, but absolutely nobody getting open. At all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufan13 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 We have been in every conference game except for Davidson. Even on the road. That's another similarity this team has to the 2010 team. Other than the blowout at Duquesne and maybe one or two of the others, that team was in all of the games too, they just lost a bunch of them. And yes, I know that by saying that I risk everyone coming out of the woodwork to howl about how this team is so much worse, but that's not the point. If this team can improve next year in the final minutes, I really think they could be better than just decent. As bad as the offense has been all year, it gets reeeeeaaaally bad in the last few minutes, and last night it probably hit the nadir. Not just the turnovers by Ash, but absolutely nobody getting open. At all. We've been in games, but we just don't look good. That's all I'm saying. And totally agree on improving at the end of games. And yeah our offense goes to a standstill (literally) at the end of games. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
wgstl Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 All Im saying is where would we be with FBJT, 4 losses? 5? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Deutschkind Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 A few different people have shown that winning close games is mostly random. If you were to lose a ton of close games, that would be incredibly unlucky, more so than a sign of a bad team. Links: http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-1 http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-ii I planned to post this and then say that SLU has at least been partially unlucky in losing this many close games. But then I looked on Kenpom and he considered SLU the 44th most lucky team in the country. So never mind. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Just an idle question but how can Kenpom or anyone else measure such a thing as luck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
White Pelican Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 Just an idle question but how can Kenpom or anyone else measure such a thing as luck? Wondered the same thing. Here is a quote from Kenpom: Luck - A measure of the deviation between a team’s actual winning percentage and what one would expect from its game-by-game efficiencies. It’s a Dean Oliver invention. Essentially, a team involved in a lot of close games should not win (or lose) all of them. Those that do will be viewed as lucky (or unlucky). Edit: It's hard to believe we are the 44th most "lucky" team in Div I. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted February 11, 2015 Share Posted February 11, 2015 A few different people have shown that winning close games is mostly random. If you were to lose a ton of close games, that would be incredibly unlucky, more so than a sign of a bad team. Links: http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-1 http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-ii I planned to post this and then say that SLU has at least been partially unlucky in losing this many close games. But then I looked on Kenpom and he considered SLU the 44th most lucky team in the country. So never mind. Yeah, that's been the case all year. I assume a lot of it is pulling out some close home wins against really bad non-conference opponents. ALL of our wins this year have been fairly close. I don't think that totally mitigates the fact that we have played all of our top conference opponents closely and managed to lose to all of them. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
The Wiz Posted February 12, 2015 Share Posted February 12, 2015 A few different people have shown that winning close games is mostly random. If you were to lose a ton of close games, that would be incredibly unlucky, more so than a sign of a bad team. Links: http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-1 http://blog.minitab.com/blog/the-statistics-game/analyzing-luck-in-college-basketball-part-ii I planned to post this and then say that SLU has at least been partially unlucky in losing this many close games. But then I looked on Kenpom and he considered SLU the 44th most lucky team in the country. So never mind. I use a luck factor in my system....The difference is mine is within 5 pts instead of 6. Using my system the Bills are 4-3 (counting the OT game) . Using the system in the article, the Bills are 6-4. Their system uses 2 possesions (6pts) A number of systems use 5. This is the first I see 6. Five came about after testing determined that was the best number to use to determine "luck". Luck=random. In these models when a game is within 5 points the model then determines that the outcome is less deternmined by skill or coaching and more determined by outside factors (a crazy bounce, someone slipping, a bad ref call , etc) Consequentially, these models give less weight to those wins and losses when figuring spreads or grades or team rankings. So 60% would be considered "lucky"...40% would be considered "unlucky"...40-60% neutral or random. Under my system the Bills are neutral. Under the system in the article the Bills would be lucky. So if anyone asks you how the Bills are doing...tell them The Wiz thinks they are random. 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.