SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-01-17 03:43 PM - Post#224148
In response to HARVARDDADGRAD
I don't do sports talk radio, but on ESPN and CBSSN the only time Wichita State appeared is on the crawl and early in the season when Marshall walked his team off the floor.
|
AsiaSunset
Postdoc
Posts: 4360
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-01-17 04:11 PM - Post#224150
In response to SRP
The survival rate of those who choose to separate from the herd is pretty dismal, in both the wild and in business.
The end result for the Ivy league would probably be somewhat better - simply sustained mediocrity and irrelevance.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
03-01-17 05:05 PM - Post#224159
In response to AsiaSunset
We're all talking about whether we should have a tournament, right? Or did I miss something?
If y'all wanna argue that having a tournament isn't fair because the best team might be upset then that's an OK thing to argue. That's really the one reason to not have a tournament.
The best reason to have a tournament is what Jeff said.
The rest of the rationale is dodgy at best, nonsense at worst.
|
section110
Masters Student
Posts: 847
Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
|
03-01-17 06:17 PM - Post#224178
In response to mrjames
If ifs & buts were candy & nuts, what a wonderful time we would have. SRP is right on this one. We're a mid-major league & we'll be treated as badly as the other mid majors are by the committee. We might get two bids with two 25-2 or 24-3 teams each with an impressive OOC win or two, with or without the tournament which could only serve to keep one of those teams out of the NCAA.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Two bids or why a tourney?
03-01-17 07:03 PM - Post#224189
In response to section110
We just set a record for the most productive frosh and soph classes as far back as I have win share records. We're going to put a little distance between us and that mark too. That just eclipsed the 12-13 frosh/soph class, which that year and over the next three proceeded to go: W, W, L at buzzer, W in the NCAA tournament R64. I'm sure if I had said a decade ago, "Hey, there will come a time when we win 3 R64 games in four years," I'd have been met with the same derision as I'm getting here (probably with reference to winning 3 of 5 in the 90s and those Penn and Princeton teams never being matched again).
My point is that we are, once again, in uncharted territory. We have three more years of the most productive freshman class this league has seen and two more years of the most productive combined frosh/soph classes.
The only evidence I've heard to refute this is "selection committee bias." Fine. But it's not like zero mids have gotten in. Some, indeed, have. And we have had many recent reps who have generated profiles close to those mids that have gotten in. To say that the odds are 0% is just flat wrong. We can debate whether they are 5, 10, 20 or more percent to happen in a certain window, but zero is the wrong answer. It just ignores the evidence.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-01-17 07:09 PM - Post#224190
In response to section110
AsiaSunset, just about every long-term successful company separates from the herd in some way (or else is a member of a protected oligopoly or monopoly). That doesn't mean stepping away by itself is the key--the step has to be one that creates some advantage--but mediocre herd companies generally have crappy rates of return, even the Japanese giants during their heyday in the 1980s. But that's a long story for another forum.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-01-17 07:18 PM - Post#224191
In response to SRP
I always believed that Ivy teams could win at the NCAA tournament WITHOUT grabbing four-star recruits. But they had to be well-coached teams with distinctive skills, as with Cornell's deadly catch-and-shoot capability.
As for the committee, the trends for mid-majors are bad and getting worse. Nobody is saying zero chance--they're saying you need a set of very unusual circumstances like two 23-win teams with big OOC upsets or a team with a high-profile individual player who's been followed all season long by the media. Did you see the Pete Thamel article linked up in the Ivy section of the board?
Finally, please--enough with the overselling of the wonders of the freshman class and how productive it's been. They look very good and, who knows, may grow into players that help win some OOC or NCAA tournament games. But they've mostly been beating up on each other, not catching up to older good players in the league. The one team playing with the least freshman input has the best record.
|
Chip Bayers
Professor
Posts: 7001
Loc: New York
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-01-17 07:31 PM - Post#224193
In response to SRP
Herd security isn't even a universal norm in nature. Plenty of species have evolved survival strategies based on individuals going it alone.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-01-17 07:52 PM - Post#224199
In response to SRP
How is stating a fact overselling the freshmen? Also, Princeton is a different team than the one that unexpectedly struggled in the non-conf due to a sophomore getting turned loose after seeing his minutes restricted sitting behind a senior. Stephens and Cannady are two big contributors to that whole "best frosh/soph output ever," and Princeton wouldn't be first without them.
Why is everyone so afraid to admit that this frosh/soph class combo is the best we've seen?
|
section110
Masters Student
Posts: 847
Loc: south jersey
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Two bids or why a tourney?
03-01-17 09:05 PM - Post#224207
In response to mrjames
And the points are that the league tournament has nothing to do with that, and the selection committee bias against mid-majors is growing, not shrinking. And the power conferences are not going to let us in to their little club.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
|
03-01-17 09:13 PM - Post#224208
In response to mrjames
Interesting that you have concluded that the Tigers would not be in 1st place if they also had Brase and Caruso getting minutes in addition to Cannady and Stephens and everyone else. How do you know? Please educate some of us who just do not understand.
"Afraid to admit", "fear mongering" if one expresses a different opinion than yours?? Everyone has the right to agree or disagree with the opinions expressed by you, me or anyone else -- part of the learning process.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-01-17 09:26 PM - Post#224209
In response to bradley
Cannady and Stephens are terrific. But I'm not at all convinced that these two classes are clearly better than all previous classes. Even at Harvard.
|
mrjames
Professor
Posts: 6062
Loc: Montclair, NJ
Reg: 11-21-04
|
03-01-17 09:42 PM - Post#224210
In response to bradley
I am not expressing an opinion. I am expressing a fact. This is the most productive frosh and frosh + soph class as far back as I have win shares. I am expressing a fact that other high win share classes have continued to produce going forward.
Others are expressing opinions. I am providing facts. There's a difference.
It is also a fact that Princeton has performed much better with Stephens as a starter than in more limited minutes off the bench, as is shown by the Pythag rating under each situation.
Facts are different than opinions.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
|
03-01-17 10:00 PM - Post#224211
In response to mrjames
Your "facts" do not contemplate Hans Brase shooting 3 point shots at his historical rate vs. Will Gladson or others this year. You fail to mention Henry Caruso's performance numbers last year. Plus, the additional depth on the Tiger squad with all of these guys available.
When you say that Princeton would not be in 1st place if they had Brase and Caruso that is clearly an opinion. I would suggest that you would be in the minority as to your opinion with experts in the field.
If you get frustrated with some of us that is your issue.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4911
Reg: 02-04-06
|
03-01-17 10:46 PM - Post#224217
In response to bradley
Perhaps I misunderstand, but don't win shares simply assign credit for team wins to different players based on their estimated marginal contribution, and since the number of wins in the conference is fixed, a drop in production from upperclassmen would automatically raise the win shares of the underclassmen?
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6412
Reg: 11-22-04
|
03-01-17 10:54 PM - Post#224218
In response to mrjames
Perhaps the even more relevant fact is that Brase and Caruso got hurt and couldn't play. So it really doesn't matter, for this discussion, what would have happened if they were around. A better question might be where Princeton would have been without Cannady and Stephens around to pick up the slack. Guys have been getting hurt for decades, yet no set of consecutive incoming classes have produced so much. We know there is a pretty direct correlation between win shares as freshmen and sophs and win shares later on. We can disagree as to whether the fact they have played a lot is indicative of the quality of the class, but the facts are pretty clear that it bodes well for the future of these last two classes.
While that is the more relevant reality, nonetheless, I will point out that I called that Princeton would be better without Brase right when he got hurt. Obviously, that has nothing to do with his quality as a player. It's just that the mix wasn't working with him on the floor. He just didn't seem to be enough of a defensive presence, and the rest of the core is good enough offensively that he almost seemed redundant. They might have figured it out with more time, but they have played better without him. Caruso surprised me, although he had a sub 100 ORAT, while using up a lot of possessions, so having higher ORAT guys replace all his possessions is a statistical improvement. Not sure his ORAT would've stayed down there, though.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
|
03-01-17 11:35 PM - Post#224225
In response to SomeGuy
I respect your opinion and may or may not agree with your conclusions relative to Brase and Caruso, especially Brase. My concern remains when someone represents educated opinions as absolute facts -- there is a pattern.
Maybe, Mitch can replay the games with a surgically repaired Brase and Caruso and decide who gets the minutes during the course of the season or simulated games get played with certain assumptions to decide the Tigers' IL record.
|
SomeGuy
Professor
Posts: 6412
Reg: 11-22-04
|
03-02-17 04:08 AM - Post#224233
In response to bradley
I guess I don't see precisely what you think is an opinion being presented as a fact. It seems to me that you are objecting to Mike's conclusions (which are opinions, and expressed as such), and then when he presents his evidence (which are facts), you are saying that the evidence isn't valid because you don't agree with the conclusion.
I'll also go out on a limb with another opinion. This whole conversation is going to look silly in a year or two, because Harvard is going to be ridiculously good, and soon. What they've done starting 3-4 freshmen per game is very, very impressive. I assume Cornell's 2007 freshman class is the last time a group of freshmen came close to this group's impact, and they won the league the next three years.
|
bradley
PhD Student
Posts: 1842
Age: 74
Reg: 01-15-16
|
03-02-17 08:52 AM - Post#224236
In response to SomeGuy
Based on my emails, I rendered no statement about the IL freshmen/sophomore class. My comments related to Mike's statement that Princeton would not be in 1st place if they had not given Stephens more minutes due to Caruso/Brase injury. A lot of conjuncture in that statement.
As to the Harvard freshmen class, they are obviously very good and will get better with additional experience. This year's record might be very different if Chambers had not returned from injury for his senior year. As many of the IL coaches have stated over time, it has been a senior driven league as to which teams wins the IL Crown, i.e. Sears, Saunders etc. Before anyone gets crowned for future years, let's see how it plays out over time.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
03-02-17 08:53 AM - Post#224237
In response to SomeGuy
This talk is making me nostalgic for the days when overeager Penn posters would dominate discussion on some other team's site.
When can we talk about Penn basketball again?
|
