Untitled Document
Brown Columbia Cornell Dartmouth Harvard Penn Princeton Yale



 Page 4 of 6 « First<3456
Username Post: What do we know after 7 games        (Topic#20726)
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
11-27-17 09:06 AM - Post#238019    
    In response to Chip Bayers

And if Williams can put up a game line like Woods did for the entire game, we'll be in good shape.

I don't know where the hate for Antonio comes from here, but his line was excellent...any guard who in 50 minutes of play has 3 turnovers is doing pretty well, not to mention 23 points, 10-14 from the line, 5 rebounds. I know you can point to a bad span for any player, but AJ was 1-5 and 4 points/4 turnovers in 19 minutes before he fouled out, Max was 2-8, 7-12 from the line before he fouled out, Foreman was 1-9 and 2 turnovers before he fouled out in 23 minutes.

We've seen this kind of criticism before...when someone has to make things happen, shots go up which wouldn't be taken if others were in the game, playing well. For the game, he played well and if you take away the 2nd and 3rd games of the back to back to back, he has been playing very well.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
11-27-17 09:51 AM - Post#238024    
    In response to palestra38

you don't even listen to yourself anymore do you. If you take away all the bad games, then antonio woods is the best player in college basketball.

You can't take away all the bad games. Guess what, the Ivy tourney is back to back. Will he not be ready for that? Friday/Saturday back to backs, he gonna suck for all Saturdays? The players he played, they all were back to backs.

He played terribly in the 2nd half. Everyone agrees with that. He got better in OT, which is cool, but would completely torpedo your argument that he doesn't play well when tired. You just make sh t up to fit your theories. You're Colin.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 09:56 AM - Post#238026    
    In response to Jeff2sf

You are nothing more than a simple attack dog. You can't have any sort of debate without making it personal.

No, it is not the same to play back to back as playing 50 minutes in a single game. When was the last time you exercised---in 5th grade? Your muscles stiffen and you get sore. You don't get sore while playing .

And do you listen to YOURSELF? You try and isolate a 10 minute section of the game from a very solid game line and claim that is more symptomatic of his game than the other 40 minutes.

You are the worst statistician on earth--you care nothing about sample size or variables that change from year to year and simply believe in a number as a magical objective "truth" about a player. Again, the coach knows whether Antonio helps this team or not. You don't.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
11-27-17 10:01 AM - Post#238028    
    In response to palestra38

You're an ignorant luddite. The ten minutes count. It all counts. Ryan Betley did not have a disastrous 10 minutes. That's why his rating is better than Antonio's. Antonio's 20 good minutes (cus let's face it, his first 30 were terrible) ALSO count. That's why he wasn't nearly as bad as Foreman/Brodeur.

You don't get to pick and choose which stats you want to use. You take the body of evidence.

And if you acknowledge only one thing, which I'm not sure you're capable of doing because you've been so challenged with facts so far, please acknowledge that I can fully believe that Steve Donahue believes that Woods helps the most out of his available options. This is NOT the same thing as being an above average player. This is 100% true. It's not debatable. It's as simple as sun rises in East.

What's up for debate is whether Steve thinks he's an above average player.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
11-27-17 10:04 AM - Post#238031    
    In response to Jeff2sf

If you bother reading Steve's quotes about Antonio, many of which have been posted here by others, you would acknowledge that he believes Antonio is a special player.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
11-27-17 10:07 AM - Post#238034    
    In response to palestra38

I believe he says those quotes, but much like you acknowledge that Woods said he had no warning he was going to be suspended but you don't believe him, I think similarly.

Because if he truly believed that, he'd be a worse coach than Jerome in terms of understanding of the game. Fortunately there's a long established history of coach speak.

 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 10:18 AM - Post#238035    
    In response to palestra38

Having endured the Battle of Monmouth, it's a stretch to say Woods had a good game. He was not good during regulation, just probably the most effective out of a weak effort by the guards overall.

Woods does a number of good things but isn't great at anything - kind of like a variation of Foreman. One thing he doesn't do well is shoot. He went 6-14, and was something like 2-8 during regulation.

I was most impressed at Woods' endurance - his best minutes were during the last 2 overtime periods. He adapted well to the way the refs were calling the game and avoided fouling out.

Special player? No. Let's save that for Betley and Brodeur. Those are the only two above average players on the team.



Edited by TheLine on 11-27-17 10:30 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 10:25 AM - Post#238038    
    In response to TheLine

I'll bail out Woods a bit for his regulation shooting performance - there were a few times where the shot clock was close to expiring, the ball happened to be in Woods hands, and he had to put up the shot, which he inevitably missed. That's a team failing, not a Woods decision making problem. Woods had no choice but to shoot in those situations. It's not like he was like Donahue, who made a number of dumb decisions beyond the hissy fit that got him T'd up and that awful foul to start the 4th OT.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 10:34 AM - Post#238039    
    In response to TheLine

We may have a kid out there who went 8-8 who can be pretty special.



 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 10:46 AM - Post#238042    
    In response to palestra38

In the future, yes. Still has more growing to do.

That was a huge game out of Scott and we don't win it without him, but we don't win it without Woods, Betley and Rothschild either.

Woods had to man the point and cover Monmouth's best player most of the game. Betley had to run through countless screens to get open, I don't think he ever stopped moving. Rothschild had to go up against Monmouth's hulks and not foul out - this after taking a nasty fall that I wasn't sure he was getting up from. Scott had secondary responsibilities and got to freelance. He did performed his role really well and should have earned himself more minutes moving forward.



Edited by TheLine on 11-27-17 10:48 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
penn nation 
Professor
Posts: 21081

Reg: 12-02-04
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 10:48 AM - Post#238043    
    In response to palestra38

Besides not being good shooters, Foreman and Woods are also not good finishers.

Man, can Scott finish.

 
TheLine 
Professor
Posts: 5597

Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
11-27-17 10:58 AM - Post#238045    
    In response to penn nation

The put-back slam to get us to the 4th OT was something. The one earlier in the game was amazing as well.

He and Simmons put on a show during the layup drills. Simmons is effortless in how he gets up - you think he's going for a soft layup and then he keeps going. Scott has explosive hops.

I was impressed with Scott's composure. He looked very comfortable on the court.


 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
11-27-17 12:12 PM - Post#238064    
    In response to TheLine

If, aside from the W, the only thing that comes from the Monmouth game is the emergence of Eddie Scott as one of Those Guys, that will be a major development indeed. Let's wait and see. Right now Penn really only has two of Those Guys, and we won't be able to compete credibly for a title unless we can find one or two more.

On a related note, here's what I'll say about A. Woods: he's not as good as some rather argumentative posters say he is, and neither is he as bad as other equally argumentative posters say he is. He's also clearly not one of Those Guys, he's just the best option we've currently got at his position. Should E. Scott turn out to be one of Those Guys, A. Woods' PT is likely to suffer more than anybody else's.

And as for J. Simmons, I consider it a very good sign that he's playing. At least we know he's not another C. McManus. The fact that he's getting PT tells us that the coaches like his attitude and ability, and believe that eventually he'll start to make a real contribution.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 12:27 PM - Post#238067    
    In response to Silver Maple

Ugh, SM. Exactly how good do you think Antonio is. Because I bet I think he's close to that. I don't think he's terrible. He's just not as amazing, "special" as someone here thinks. I've supported my argument with facts. P38 has supported his by destroying evidence that doesn't support his case.

Edited by Jeff2sf on 11-27-17 12:30 PM. Reason for edit: No reason given.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
11-27-17 12:33 PM - Post#238070    
    In response to Jeff2sf

You support your attacks on Antonio with tautology and nothing more.

But I never said he was a great shooter. However, he plays defense better than any guard we have, can get to the hoop and score better than any guard we have (E Scott may have something to say about that going forward) and given some time, will make us a much better team than last year, because he is replacing guys like Donahue and Silpe, who simply do not play at his level. He's better than Foreman, too. He gives us a chance to compete with Ivy teams that have been beating us in the backcourt in recent years. So yes, he's a major step up for us. But for Jeff, all that matters is a number based on insufficient data and W/L is utterly irrelevant.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 12:42 PM - Post#238071    
    In response to palestra38

  • palestra38 Said:
However, he plays defense better than any guard we have


Maybe. Will grant you this for sake of argument.
  • palestra38 Said:
can get to the hoop and score better than any guard we have


Half right. Can't score when he gets to the hoop. document evidence of such over 50 games.

  • palestra38 Said:
and given some time, will make us a much better team than last year, because he is replacing guys like Donahue and Silpe, who simply do not play at his level.


yeah no. First, Donahue, who I'm no fan of, has 2 full seasons better of efficient offense than Woods has given us. Silpe hardly played last year. Sure Woods is better but it seems a non sequitur. We also know Matt Howard is definitely better than Woods on offense and defense. We're sure of that. So even if he's better than Donahue, which we're not sure, we also have to make up for the loss of Howard.

  • palestra38 Said:
He's better than Foreman, too.



again, going to have to go with definitely not. I mean this is easy. The stats show he's better on offense and then if you consider Foreman plays more than Woods which, according to the P38 Must Defer to Steve Donahue rule, means Foreman is better than Woods.

Now I took you down point by point. It doesn't seem worth it. Much easier to just defer to you being an ignorant luddite.


 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
Re: What do we know after 7 games
11-27-17 12:47 PM - Post#238073    
    In response to Jeff2sf

Your proof consists of numbers that don't match the games Woods has played with those of Foreman. I guarantee you Smith does not outscore Woods 20-1. Again, there is a reason Foreman played behind Woods when recruited...he's not as good.

Your offensive efficiency ratings do not measure player vs player in different seasons objectively as you believe. But to you, they are Jesus Christ. And Woods doesn't have to replace Howard---Betley is much better than Howard and we get far more defense and rebounding from the twin centers. We are better this year, not worse, and your belief we could not replace Howard and would be worse this year is also wrong.

 
Jeff2sf 
Postdoc
Posts: 4466

Reg: 11-22-04
11-27-17 12:50 PM - Post#238074    
    In response to palestra38

if you could just show any sort of study that would back up your claims beyond what you wish them to be, I might listen. But it doesn't work that way. You only have what your eyes tell you, no factual basis to rest this on. You're a sad old man.

 
palestra38 
Professor
Posts: 32680

Reg: 11-21-04
11-27-17 12:51 PM - Post#238076    
    In response to Jeff2sf

And you're a stupid middle age man who never educated himself beyond a keyboard.

 
Silver Maple 
Postdoc
Posts: 3765

Loc: Westfield, New Jersey
Reg: 11-23-04
11-27-17 12:53 PM - Post#238077    
    In response to palestra38

This is the kind of nonsense that ruins online communities.

Just saying.

 
 Page 4 of 6 « First<3456
Icon Legend Permissions Topic Options
Report Post

Quote Post

Quick Reply

Print Topic

Email Topic

5857 Views





Copyright © 2004-2012 Basketball U. Terms of Use for our Site and Privacy Policy are applicable to you. All rights reserved.
Basketball U. and its subsidiaries are not affiliated in any way with any NCAA athletic conference or member institution.
FusionBB™ Version 2.1 | ©2003-2007 InteractivePHP, Inc.
Execution time: 0.425 seconds.   Total Queries: 16   Zlib Compression is on.
All times are (GMT -0500) Eastern. Current time is 06:05 AM
Top