|
Fairfield
Feb 21, 2015 23:23:38 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by loyal on Feb 21, 2015 23:23:38 GMT -5
Anyway....Comparisons on how disappointing we are is me separating the pepper from the fly poop.
I am bummed. Never imagined this team would have this kind of season in a piss-poor MAAC.
|
|
|
Post by cindycrawford on Feb 21, 2015 23:31:38 GMT -5
We knew Leckie's first two teams would suck. The cupboard was bare. This years team was our once every four year up cycle. Much more disappointing, relative to my expectations. My greatest disappointment was that he wasn't able to surround KeeKee with enough of a supporting cast to win a title. With NBA scouts at Yanitelli almost every night,that should have been a recruiting tool with which to build a stronger roster.
|
|
|
Fairfield
Feb 21, 2015 23:42:50 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by loyal on Feb 21, 2015 23:42:50 GMT -5
Yes, the year we had Sowers and Yates with KC, we ran into Flores Jasper club. We were pretty good that season.....Sowers, Yates, Watkins and Clark. Agree we did not leverage Clark well in his career here.
|
|
|
Post by cindycrawford on Feb 21, 2015 23:43:21 GMT -5
Only partially recovered from this afternoon's fiasco but since I'm away for a week I took a look at the box score. Turns out that we took 14 more shots than Fairfield!! Cindy seemed to explain part of it but then I went back over the entire Seasons box scores. With very few exceptions we took more attempts ( or equal ) from the field than our opponents in most of games we have played. Does someone want to take a shot at explaining their take on this? Several explanations possible but I'd like to see the diversity of opinions on this. I didn't have time or the energy at this time to check on the season but with regard to tonight, we had 6 more offensive rebounds due to our larger number of missed shots and we interrupted their offense,at least in the eyes of the refs, by sending them to the line for 15 more shots than we.
|
|
|
Post by oldtimer1 on Feb 22, 2015 8:13:56 GMT -5
Cindy, on my way...but the point to be made is that while we generally take the same, or more shots, than our opponents we have trouble putting the ball in the basket, both as a team and individually. This conclusion doesn't take a genius to figure it out. Additionally, combined with our year long poor shooting percentages, it can suggest many things.
Certainly those that put the burden on the Coach can claim poor offensive schemes. However, to be balanced, one has to admidt that we don't have players who can shoot or score consistently. Can't come to any other conclusion. And it's not just blaming it on a perimeter offense because as Cindy pointed out we were miserable inside against Fairfield.
No axe to grind here as there can be plenty of criticism to go around but one conclusion that has to be drawn is that the team both individually and collectively does not have the "talent" many thought they had. Their stats and record tell you that. Not trying to pick on Loyal but perhaps what he thought we had ( and I agreed with him to a lesser extent ), we do not have. Hence his huge disappointment. We have an OK team that has underperformed but not that team of superior talent that keeps having bad games. Sort of tired of hearing that.
Just a few games left and I'm looking forward to payback when Iona comes to town. At this point, I'll continue to root just as hard and still believe that we have a "punchers chance" in the MAAC Tournament as spcfan pointed out several threads ago.
|
|
|
Post by loyal on Feb 22, 2015 9:10:08 GMT -5
Superior talent? I agree, we do not have superior talent, even compared with the other clubs in a down MAAC year.
Is SPU talent a little better than Canisius, Quinny, Monmouth? Personally, I think it is. Is SPU talent every bit as good as Rider and the Jaspers (give or take a bucket)? I think so.
A 2-8 record against the aforementioned clubs?
Major disappointment.
Add that the next two years are shaping up worse. 36% over nine years.
Just can't fathom a rationale to maintain status quo. Nothing personal, or mean, or vindictive, or crazed....status quo just does not compute, for me.
That said, I will root like heck for us to stay ahead of Siena, draw Monmouth in he Quarters and have a "Miracle II" up in Albany in two weeks.
|
|
|
Post by oldtimer1 on Feb 22, 2015 9:48:41 GMT -5
Loyal...don't know any other way to say this. Cannot agrue on your 36% win take but you talent evsaluation leaves much to be desired. You are stubborn. Perhaps a 2-8 record against the teams you mentioned should tell you something! If not how about our shooting/lack of scoring game after game. Fair to put some of it on the Coach but he's not shooting the basketball or taking foul shots. Admire the fact that you are disappointed...we all are. You're a great fan but your talent evaluation leaves a lot to be desired.
I understand that this should have been our year to make some noise, no question. But the Coach's voted us 4th, some 5th. So yes we have disappointed. You have now qualified your original evaluations about some of our opponents. A far cry from your original comments. Similar for Manhattan and Rider. Are we so much better than Niagara, for example? The league, except for 2/3 teams is pretty evenly balanced. There are "upsets" almost every night.
You are perhaps right that the league may be "piss poor" but we are part of that league. Can we beat Iona, Manhattan, Rider etc.? Certainly, it's called college basketball. We are not so inferior that we can't beat any team on any given night. But just because we have a Senior laden team doesn't automatically mean we will win the league.
To repeat, we have decent talent and can "upset" anyone, including Iona but let's be realistic in our commentary. If it's the Coach, fine but I can't understand you touting our talent to the extent you do.
Sorry for being so blunt. I know that you are a great fan. Please re-read my post on the status of Athletics at St. Peter's. Not my opinion but fact. The issue is much larger than Men's Basketball. The changes you, and we all want, to bring our BB Program back to prominance have much more to do than our Coach. To me, unless things change, and I'm not hopeful, it will be more of the same. And I'm basically an optimist!
|
|
|
Post by loyal on Feb 22, 2015 10:18:26 GMT -5
Our players are now deemed to be average to below-average MAAC players? A roster containing two all-MAAC preseason selections? A roster with a functional PG, which most MAAC teams do not have this season?
If our guys are not better BB players than the Canisius, Monmouth and Quinny rosters, I'll eat my hat.
I feel the responsibility accrues elsewhere, as the body of overall work strongly suggests.
However, no use beating a dead horse. We both want SPU success and can agree to disagree. Enjoy the cruise and bring back a few wins.
|
|
|
Post by Peacock on Feb 22, 2015 10:23:20 GMT -5
One common thread to those who can't fault Dunne, is they just don't think its possible for him to be a poor coach. They never consider that HS players don't want to play for him and not the school. Anybody know what network he has. Never mention the minimal motion on the perimeter. His offense is, was and will always be moribund. He recruits JUCOs that should be impactful and the majority never see the light of day. Great talent evaluator??. He always defers to a common group as if he is scared to let others into the game. And while SPU athletics sucks, the basketball gets the bulk of the budget which makes the case worse for Dunne. He has lost over the years to many of the worst teams in the nation at that time. Binghamton, FDU and others. He even started with better talent than he has recruited. The greatest lie even manufactured by some on this board is that he inherited garbage. He could coach at any other school and make them as bad as we look now. This political correctness of not criticizing the coach is laughable.
Note to Cindy. Leckie was a HS school coach who came in out of his league. He was hired because Loughran would not fund the money to hire a coach and a bulk of his salary was made up by an alumnus. He did learn but also was more of a part time coach, having a outside business to manage and subsequently a wife having cancer. He didn't care about all aspects of coaching and in particular recruiting and yet managed a better percentage than Dunne despite those first two years. Sure you will counter with Clark, who most likely would have reduced minutes under Dunne, but more likely never would have come to SPC.
|
|
|
Post by willdurant on Feb 22, 2015 10:50:08 GMT -5
Statistics lie. But it's said that one should never let the truth get in the way of a good story. (Unless you're Brian Williams, or Bill O'Reilly)
Offered without judgment, some comparisons between the Championship team of 2011 and the 2015 version. (34 games for 2011, 29 for the present team)
The 2011 team shot 40% from the field for the year, 713-1782. This year's team is shooting 40.6% , 590-1452
2011 shot .344 from three on 573 shots. This years team is shooting .340 on the 491 threes they have taken.
Free throws: The Championship team shot .644 for the season; this year's team is at .655. 2011 made 446 free throws, this team has made 420 in five less games .(Of course, we might not have another five games to play.)
Mix all these statistical components together and you get this interesting stat: The Championship team averaged 60.9 points per game. This year's team is averaging 60.9 points per game.
|
|
|
Fairfield
Feb 22, 2015 11:52:02 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by newfan on Feb 22, 2015 11:52:02 GMT -5
There are many valid points here and I post my thoughts and try to offend no one. One thing about this board, compared to other boards, it is not vicious,crude, and just plain nasty, great to read. I too will keep rooting, question at this point do we know who our PIG opponent might be, just asking. Now I feel this team has way underacheived, yes. But it seems some posters are thinking without saying that maybe a new sheriff is needed. No one is saying JD is a bad coach, person, etc but he is not getting the response from the players. And at this point, let's think, some of our players would thrive in other systems, therefore saying they are non performers would be rendered moot. I'm sure if some could rethink their SPU choice, they would have chosen elsewhere. Evidently they chose SPU because of something they were told, they visited and saw themselves here and they came. They chose to wear the SPU uniform and I'm sure as they want to perform for the school, the school should perform for them. Are these dedicated players not worthy of something to give. Take away the players and there is no SPU bball. And look at our lone recruit, need more be said. Some thoughts to my post, put MD in another offense/system with consistant scorers, he goes big time because he is not the focus all the time. TW, we have seen he is not a great scorer but he can hit a shot here and there and can get to rim, passing and his vision on court finding the open man is solid, put him in a offense/system where shooters actually shoot when open, post players finish and transition game, he is possibly one of the best PG in conference. Q has his moments and he has shown better games, he has nagging injury, take that away and who knows what level he would be at. DW has made appearances, no consistentcy, he is supposed to be a scorer, he tends to not be ready to shoot (and the guards do get him open looks), will put ball back on floor and he can be TO prone, and at times will just be selfish or throw up anything. But would he be more in another system, who knows because think he would be sat down for some things more so than now. Just opinions. Is I'll end with again if SPU basketball is to survive, something has to give. AGAIN not saying again JD is not good, but if a teachers classes constantly fail at some point you have to look at the way the class is being taught. Can't forever keep saying the students are not smart or they are underacheivers. No solid recruit is going to want to come anymore and we have to look at the fact it may not be SPU, it may well be they don't want to play for him or his style after watching a game or two. So said, I'll be a fan always but these are just my thoughts.
|
|
|
Post by cindycrawford on Feb 22, 2015 12:23:45 GMT -5
Statistics lie. But it's said that one should never let the truth get in the way of a good story. (Unless you're Brian Williams, or Bill O'Reilly) Offered without judgment, some comparisons between the Championship team of 2011 and the 2015 version. (34 games for 2011, 29 for the present team) The 2011 team shot 40% from the field for the year, 713-1782. This year's team is shooting 40.6% , 590-1452 2011 shot .344 from three on 573 shots. This years team is shooting .340 on the 491 threes they have taken. Free throws: The Championship team shot .644 for the season; this year's team is at .655. 2011 made 446 free throws, this team has made 420 in five less games .(Of course, we might not have another five games to play.) Mix all these statistical components together and you get this interesting stat: The Championship team averaged 60.9 points per game. This year's team is averaging 60.9 points per game. I am curious Will. Are you letting a good story get in the way of the truth ? Do you have SP defensive stats and opponents offensive ones for these two seasons ?
|
|
|
Fairfield
Feb 22, 2015 14:11:17 GMT -5
via mobile
Post by loyal on Feb 22, 2015 14:11:17 GMT -5
'11 team had much better interior (Bacon) and perimeter (Yvonne, Samuels) defense. Playing deliberate offense made sense.... more or less.
This year, it was apparent early on we were average defensively. Multiple posters pointed this out, as did JC Hoops.
We could not afford to play so deliberately....opponents would eventually exploit us. Plus, this talent evaluator would contend, on a MAAC level, we had some ammunition to work with on the offensive end.
Kept the identical offensive style. Didn't work.
|
|
|
Post by willdurant on Feb 22, 2015 14:50:01 GMT -5
Cindy, I'm not sure what your point is, but broadly speaking (and these numbers can be found on the SPC web page--2011 under archives) in 2011 we scored it at 60.9 a game, out scoring our opponents for the year 2069 to 2042. We outscored them 992 to 932 in the first half; but only scored 1067 points to our opponents 1099 in the second half. Overtime we were down one, 11-10. I don't have the breakdowns by halves but this year's team is scoring 60.9 and allowing 60.8 points a game.
Now if you're raising a much more nuanced argument that a team's offensive, and defensive, efficiency can best be measured by comparison to the opponent's norm; that is a scoring 61 points a game against a team that usually allows only 55 is qualitatively a better number than scoring the same against a team which usually allows 70, no argument here. And the same goes for defensive performances: to hold a team that scores 70 to 60 is a much better performance that holding a team that scores 60 to 60. Maybe the MAAC page has archives that would allow such research. By comparing what each team scored against St, Peter's to what they scored against every other team might yield a more revealing + - equation, but two thing prevent me for pursuing that line of reasoning: I don't have the time, and I don't have the interest.
But quickly, you can to it with Fairfield and Iona in the Championship year. In three games Fairfield scored 70, 70, and 48. Iona 70, 73, and 57. Obviously, from a statistical perspective those last two games were great defensive performances. And although I'll never ever understand how Fairfield could come out so, so flat at home during a tourney, St. Peter's held a team used to scoring 70 against them to 48. Iona is a little bit different in that losing Kyle Smith did not help them any. In the previous two games he had scored 21 points but in the Championship didn't even take a shot in very limited minutes. Again, that's statistically unaccountable for, but the record says they held a team used to scored 71.5 against them to 57. The record book says they won a Championship.
Rah, rah, rah, yeah team. But the same record book doesn't show them to be a more accomplished offensive team than this year's unit. In fact it says, they're about even. The difference, and no small difference this, is that the 2011 team had four double digit scorers: they had more balanced scoring, more confidence in each other. But that's a discussion for another day.
|
|
|
Post by cindycrawford on Feb 22, 2015 19:14:56 GMT -5
Cindy, I'm not sure what your point is, but broadly speaking (and these numbers can be found on the SPC web page--2011 under archives) in 2011 we scored it at 60.9 a game, out scoring our opponents for the year 2069 to 2042. We outscored them 992 to 932 in the first half; but only scored 1067 points to our opponents 1099 in the second half. Overtime we were down one, 11-10. I don't have the breakdowns by halves but this year's team is scoring 60.9 and allowing 60.8 points a game. Now if you're raising a much more nuanced argument that a team's offensive, and defensive, efficiency can best be measured by comparison to the opponent's norm; that is a scoring 61 points a game against a team that usually allows only 55 is qualitatively a better number than scoring the same against a team which usually allows 70, no argument here. And the same goes for defensive performances: to hold a team that scores 70 to 60 is a much better performance that holding a team that scores 60 to 60. Maybe the MAAC page has archives that would allow such research. By comparing what each team scored against St, Peter's to what they scored against every other team might yield a more revealing + - equation, but two thing prevent me for pursuing that line of reasoning: I don't have the time, and I don't have the interest. But quickly, you can to it with Fairfield and Iona in the Championship year. In three games Fairfield scored 70, 70, and 48. Iona 70, 73, and 57. Obviously, from a statistical perspective those last two games were great defensive performances. And although I'll never ever understand how Fairfield could come out so, so flat at home during a tourney, St. Peter's held a team used to scoring 70 against them to 48. Iona is a little bit different in that losing Kyle Smith did not help them any. In the previous two games he had scored 21 points but in the Championship didn't even take a shot in very limited minutes. Again, that's statistically unaccountable for, but the record says they held a team used to scored 71.5 against them to 57. The record book says they won a Championship. Rah, rah, rah, yeah team. But the same record book doesn't show them to be a more accomplished offensive team than this year's unit. In fact it says, they're about even. The difference, and no small difference this, is that the 2011 team had four double digit scorers: they had more balanced scoring, more confidence in each other. But that's a discussion for another day. My point was simply that scoring statistics are only significant relative to those of your opponent. Clearly , I think all can agree that the 2011 team was stronger defensively. So to score at the same rate would clearly put the '15 team at a disadvantage.
|
|