internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-23-09 02:23 PM - Post#71333
It appears it will be on the Lion video service.
http://www.gocolumbialions.com/liveEvents/liveEven...
Q's site says it's to start at 7.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-23-09 03:06 PM - Post#71336
In response to internetter
The Q feed will start at 6:30, the game at 7:00.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
quinnipiac
12-23-09 08:31 PM - Post#71353
In response to internetter
Craig was playing:
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=2 935...
Barbour entered near the end of the half.
Half: Lions 31-27.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-23-09 09:56 PM - Post#71355
In response to internetter
lost 63-51s; erious second half collapse.
Q's D RBs, Lions' poor foul, FG shooting; 11 TOs in second; Col tried but 6 treys, making 3, Agho missed his only try, led scorers with 14.
http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=2 935...
|
The Lion King
Junior
Posts: 257
Reg: 11-10-06
|
12-23-09 10:34 PM - Post#71356
In response to internetter
Well, you don't win many games shooting 36 percent. On the other hand, you don't win many shooting 38 percent either, and that's what Quinnipiac did. And how on earth did Bulger and Foley get 4 fouls apiece while playing 12 and 17 minutes? But the FT stats may be the ugliest of all from the Lions' perspective: Columbia 14 for 28, Quinnipiac 13 for 16.
It looks like the Q-Tips decided to go all-out against the three-pointer and challenge Columbia to beat them inside. Obviously the Lions couldn't, though if Craig improves and is able to put in more than a cameo appearance in the future, this may change. Actually Cisco's line looks decent (8 pt, 8 reb in 18 minutes), and Agho had his usual solid game, leading in points (14) and assists (3; no one else had more than 1). Grimes continues his enigmatic course with 6 points on 2-for-10 shooting, also 5 TO's.
Columbia still has three players who, at their best, can take control of a game in very different ways: Agho, Foley, and Grimes. If Craig can be dominant underneath, they will have a very strong team that I can even imagine beating Cornell on a good night. That's the best-case scenario. The worst-case scenario is what happened tonight, and after several decades of watching Columbia basketball, I know which we will probably see more of when the Ivy season starts.
|
Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2181
Reg: 02-14-06
|
12-23-09 10:58 PM - Post#71359
In response to The Lion King
Embarrassing. Foley picked up two fouls in the first two minutes of the game and Coach J kept him on the bench for the rest of the first half. Then Foley picked up another quick foul at the start of the second half and Coach J pulled him again over Foley's plea. When Foley finally got back on the floor, he was so frightened of getting another foul that he was useless. Meanwhile, Grimes and Ampim were having a miserable time trying to play the pivot which is not their natural position. Cisco started the game and looked very good, but only played about 17 minutes and apparently was hit with a technical foul for something or another in the early part of the second half. Cisco is the only player on the team who is a natural center and a consistent scorer so it is inexplicable to me why the Lions are not using him more. Quinnipiac (probably misspelled) had some fast guards who gave Foley and Agho fits, but not having another scorer besides Agho spelled defeat for the Lions. Oh yeah, they stunk from the foul line.
|
Howard Gensler
Postdoc
Posts: 4141
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-23-09 11:17 PM - Post#71360
In response to The Lion King
Columbia still has three players who, at their best, can take control of a game in very different ways: Agho, Foley, and Grimes. If Craig can be dominant underneath, they will have a very strong team that I can even imagine beating Cornell on a good night.
Craig never was dominant in two seasons at Loyola Marymount and has now played three non-dominant minutes for the Lions. So that's a very big IF. And as I don't believe Foley or Grimes has ever taken control of a game, your belief in them is . . . refreshing and you have an excellent imagination.
|
AndreG
Sophomore
Posts: 174
Reg: 10-28-07
|
12-23-09 11:54 PM - Post#71361
In response to Howard Gensler
My theme has always been the passing game or lack thereof. The team had only 7 assists while shooting 36%. I have always thought the problem starts with the point guard. I have always felt and still feel that is Columbia's main problem. Foley may have played a foul prone 17 minutes, but quite honestly is not a pass 1st player. He basically just looks to get in the lane and get his shots up. At times he makes some nifty shots, but will very rarely find the open man. Same with Egee. Columbia's points guards in 40 minutes of combined time managed not a single assist! I will challenge anyone to find a single college game on the D1 level where after an entire game, point guards had not a single assist. If that game does exist - against astronomical odds - I would venture to guess that team lost as well. But it's the entire team as well. The big men for Columbia can not or will not find the open players. They also have very poor hands. Has anyone watched any of the Cornell games on TV? It's like night and day difference. I sorry to vent my frustrations so, it's not my style normally. Perhaps I found myself getting my hopes up again only to realize that it will lead to another letdown.I truly hope I am wrong on this one.
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
quinnipiac
12-24-09 12:39 AM - Post#71362
In response to AndreG
I see now why Columbia has so many "cupcakes" lined up.
Andre, you are not the only one feeling frustrated. Columbia has been a very frustrating team to watch throughout the years. At times they can show signs of real promise, then we have tonight's game. Unfortunately tonights game is far too common.
Your issues with the PGs may or may not be a big problem, I am more likely to conclude that the PG problem is more of a "symtom" than the disease.
The disease which has afflicted us in the 2nd half of games, not only tonight (14 points UGH!)or this season, but throughout the years under Coach Jones. More often than not opposing teams figure us out by halftime, adjust, then make their run. This game was no different. Simple predictable plays, strange substituions and usually a strain just to get good looks at the basket.
Jones may be a decent recruiter and a pretty good motivater,(at least the last 2 years) but I have yet to see any significant signs of being a good "game coach".
The offense is usually the best indicator of game coaching. Double that indication in the 2nd half of games. Before someone comes to point out some of the exceptions, let me remind those that they are far to few in between.
Problem is that Columbia has been so poor before Jones' arrival that the current win/loss standards are considered acceptable if not welcome.
After the latest collapse, it seems pretty clear that Columbia will have some good to very good moments through the Ivies, but they will be sandwiched around all too many "letdowns". Most in the 2nd half.
Bank on it!
|
The Lion King
Junior
Posts: 257
Reg: 11-10-06
|
12-24-09 01:10 AM - Post#71365
In response to skiba34
Not so sure I agree with that. Columbia's biggest problem tonight was free-throw shooting, and that's not a matter of game coaching. Also, having Foley out for so long with foul trouble, and then so tentative when he came back, was a big blow, and that's not something you can blame on the coach.
Moreover, defying your prohibition, I will point out that against DePaul, Lehigh, and Bucknell, all credible opponents, Columbia did better in the second half than in the first. So I really don't see any pattern here. Columbia has problems with its opponents going on runs, but it's not specifically a second-half problem.
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
quinnipiac
12-24-09 01:28 AM - Post#71366
In response to The Lion King
Moreover, defying your prohibition, I will point out that against DePaul, Lehigh, and Bucknell, all credible opponents, Columbia did better in the second half than in the first. So I really don't see any pattern here.
Columbia has played in 10 games, doing better vs 3 teams in the 2nd half, means doing worse vs the other 7. I don't call that a good average.
|
The Lion King
Junior
Posts: 257
Reg: 11-10-06
|
12-24-09 01:53 AM - Post#71367
In response to skiba34
That would be true if the three games I cited were the ONLY three where they did better in the second. But they weren't; I just picked out three games that I happened to remember. In fact, Columbia has done better in the second half (measured by scoring margin) in five of its games: DePaul, Bucknell, Sacred Heart, Lehigh, and Bryant.
That said, you and AndreG do have half a point, because in the five games I just listed, the improvement from the first half to the second was always in the 6 to 9 point range. Contrast that with Longwood, where they went from +19 to -8, and tonight, where they went from +4 to -16.
Of the other three, Syracuse was -9 to -16, but that game was so one-sided from the start that who cares; Wagner was the most dramatic at +25 to -14, but that was a deceptive late garbage-time surge when the game had long since been decided; and Stony Brook was +3 to -6, though we remember it as being worse because Columbia had a 12-point lead in the second half and it all seemed to dissolve into nothingness in about two minutes.
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
12-24-09 02:05 AM - Post#71368
In response to The Lion King
Well based on your detailed breakdown Lion King, I think it's fair to say it may be a bigger problem than some may realize.
More importantly Columbia can not afford to have those types of results once the league starts if competing for a high finish is the desired goal.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3400
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-24-09 03:07 AM - Post#71372
In response to skiba34
The BR's Foote's passes vs. St, John's amounted to a clinic. Ditto Dale's on drives.
Can that be taught? Encouraged? Or just envied?
While I was hoping for a better game, I'm not (totally) discouraged by the post-exams, road performance. Three of the next four pre-league games are at home vs. beatable teams.
|
Howard Gensler
Postdoc
Posts: 4141
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: quinnipiac
12-24-09 09:55 AM - Post#71375
In response to skiba34
I see now why Columbia has so many "cupcakes" lined up.
Depends how you define a cupcake. At least on the Pomeroy ratings, QPac was 29 spots ahead of Columbia. Pomeroy predicted the game as a 70-64 loss for the Lions.
As for Lion King's post regarding credible opponents DePaul, Lehigh and Bucknell, Depaul is behind Columbia and has losses to American AND Florida Gulf Coast (two very bad teams this season), Bucknell is 35 spots behind Columbia and Lehigh is 57 spots behind Columbia. They should have won those games. As of now Columbia hasn't beaten one team ranked higher than them and lost to two teams ranked lower. Their next opportunity to beat someone higher? Cornell.
Edited by Howard Gensler on 12-24-09 09:56 AM. Reason for edit: No reason given.
|
The Lion King
Junior
Posts: 257
Reg: 11-10-06
|
Re: quinnipiac
12-24-09 11:09 AM - Post#71384
In response to Howard Gensler
Thanks for contributing your valuable insights, Howie! I hope that you have a wonderful Christmas, and that next year will be a great one for you and your Quakers (except on February 13 and 26).
|
Howard Gensler
Postdoc
Posts: 4141
Reg: 11-21-04
|
12-24-09 11:24 AM - Post#71385
In response to The Lion King
You're very welcome LK, same to you. Not trying to rain on your parade, especially since mine has already been rained out, but a lot of optimism has never been hurt by a little reality.
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
Re: quinnipiac
12-24-09 03:02 PM - Post#71398
In response to Howard Gensler
I see now why Columbia has so many "cupcakes" lined up.
Depends how you define a cupcake. At least on the Pomeroy ratings, QPac was 29 spots ahead of Columbia. Pomeroy predicted the game as a 70-64 loss for the Lions.
As for Lion King's post regarding credible opponents DePaul, Lehigh and Bucknell, Depaul is behind Columbia and has losses to American AND Florida Gulf Coast (two very bad teams this season), Bucknell is 35 spots behind Columbia and Lehigh is 57 spots behind Columbia. They should have won those games. As of now Columbia hasn't beaten one team ranked higher than them and lost to two teams ranked lower. Their next opportunity to beat someone higher? Cornell.
Howard, I never called the Q a cupcake. But after reading your post and the evidence you presented it appears that Columbia may be the "cupcakes" to some of these teams.
Based on Howard's information, there may be a bigger problem with Columbia then originally thought.
|
The Lion King
Junior
Posts: 257
Reg: 11-10-06
|
quinnipiac
12-24-09 04:20 PM - Post#71401
In response to skiba34
(I'm spending my Christmas Eve beating a dead horse. How are you spending your Christmas Eve?)
FWIW, Sagarin ratings are DePaul 172, Columbia 210, Lehigh 241, Bucknell 253.
The entire Ivy League is Cornell 32, Harvard 51, Princeton 152, Columbia 210, Brown 256, Yale 265, Penn 334, Dartmouth 341.
So the three teams I mentioned are about on a level with Columbia's mid-Ivy opponents; in fact, the worst of the three is better than half the league. That's all I meant by "credible."
|
AndreG
Sophomore
Posts: 174
Reg: 10-28-07
|
12-25-09 07:50 PM - Post#71428
In response to internetter
The BR's Foote's passes vs. St, John's amounted to a clinic. Ditto Dale's on drives.
Can that be taught? Encouraged? Or just envied?
Teaching, encouraging, emphasizing and film studying can help. Perhaps not to the level of Cornell. Recruiting a point guard that can make passes, create for teammates and see the court better than what Columbia has had can only help. How can Columbia ever expect to compete for a title if the team gets 7 or 8 assists in what seems like half their games? Again I ask, has there ever been a game where the points guards gained not a single assist? I don't think there has been an Ivy league contender that didn't have a point guard make 1st, 2nd or at least 3rd team all Ivy in over 2 decades. It is not a conincidence.
|
CU.LIONS
Senior
Posts: 398
Reg: 03-03-07
|
quinnipiac
12-25-09 10:00 PM - Post#71430
In response to AndreG
There is no question the Lions will only go as far as the offense will take them. The Lions defense overall must still be the best in the league. I don't know if the problem is with the coaching or with the point guards. I have watched 8 games this year and as already noted by many posters on here, the guards are doubled teammed anytime they are involved in coming off a screen or a pick n roll with a forward or center.
If one watches closely, you can see how teams allow the Forward/Centers to roll open, when the guards get them the ball the defense rotates the big players either force up bad shots or turn the bll over. I believe the shooting pct and turnovers of the big players will back up this theory of late.
The Lions must find a way to make opponents pay for that type of defensive approach. One way I figure is the staff should run their plays in practice and have the guards double teammed every single time until the Lions find ways to maximize against that. When the Forwards/centers make teams pay for the double teams, the guards will have much better looks at the basket including the fore mentioned 3 point shots.
The starting 3 guards for Columbia are all shooting over 40% from 3 (Agho still leading the NCAA I believe) Not sure, but how many teams have all 3 guards shooting that well. Problem is Agho and Scott as well are getting less and less shots in the 2nd half due to the double teamming.
The Lions have a few games to figure this out before the 2nd season starts. I believe to some extent they will improve upon this problem.
I have not lost faith....GO LIONS!!!!
|
AndreG
Sophomore
Posts: 174
Reg: 10-28-07
|
12-25-09 11:00 PM - Post#71432
In response to CU.LIONS
While I have a slighty different view, that was an excellent post overall CU.LIONS. Let's hope they can figure it out in the next four games.
|
IvyBballFan
Masters Student
Posts: 479
Age: 77
Loc: Central Florida
Reg: 11-19-09
|
12-28-09 08:59 PM - Post#71534
In response to AndreG
Columbia’s 10g team cumulative numbers for the various statistics could help us to understand them better.
I do think Princeton has a legitimate claim to “best defense in the Ivy League.†They’ve played a tougher schedule than the Lions and have allowed their opposition 9 fewer pts/g. Of course, part of how they get it done is by slowing the pace of play way down (among slowest ten teams in D-1), but defensive results are what they are.
Columbia’s pace of play, measured by pts attempted, also puts them in the lowest 50 D-1 teams. Remember, in both games between the Lions and Tigers in 2008-09, their combined point total was below what Cornell scored this year by itself against Bucknell.
That being said, I have no problem with this disciplined approach when coupled with solid offensive execution. However, the Lions’ below average free shooting (67%) and above average turnover rate (14.5/g) are signs, IMO, that all is neither well nor sensible in the den. As noted by MRJ, the Lions are also one of a handful of D-1 teams with a better shooting percentage from 3pt than from 2pt range. What maddens one further is that Columbia continues to shoot 2’s (albeit poorly [43.8%- lowest 10% of D-1!]) and eschew the 3, the one offensive category where they seem to have an efficiency advantage. A paltry 22% of their FG attempts are 3ptrs, clearly in the bottom 15 D-1 teams.
Their rebounding, with average efficiency performances on both ends is acceptable. Ampim, Cisco, Daniels, and Grimes are indeed doing a good job. I might almost expect them to improve a bit on the boards as the frosh gain more experience, and Craig gets more minutes. I cannot kick about their 8.1 stl/g, either. Columbia’s opponents do get ~9 pts more worth of scoring opportunities per game than do the Lions, mostly attributable to their shooting a usual portion of 3ptrs vs. Columbia's ignoring the three. Even though the opponents do not shoot as well as the Lions, they make it up simply by attempting to score more points.
If the opponents are packing into the paint (See CU.Lion) to cause the low 2pt percentage, the first-line answer should be (similar to what CU.Lion has concluded) making an effort (perhaps by the return pass!) to put up more 3ptrs to loosen things up. If Columbia had no long-range guys, it would be one thing. Given their early-season 3pt percentages, Agho and Scott [and possibly Foley and Egee!] appear to have earned a chance to produce.
I have not lost faith either. Let’s see what happens. Go Blue!
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
12-29-09 12:32 AM - Post#71555
In response to IvyBballFan
Excellent statistical references IVYBballfan. However all your fine points and that of CU.LIONS and AndreG really just help my theory, and that is Coach Jones is NOT a good game coach. I can really get going on this subject, but I will refrain from going into it more due to the Holidays.
But the evidence will continue to pile up as this season goes on.
|
IvyBballFan
Masters Student
Posts: 479
Age: 77
Loc: Central Florida
Reg: 11-19-09
|
12-29-09 08:15 PM - Post#71614
In response to skiba34
All your fine points and those of CU.LIONS/AndreG really just help my theory, that Coach Jones is NOT a good game coach...
I'll preface this by saying that I love the way the guys play hard and disciplined for Coach. I admire this trait (it is at the basis of good coaching), and believe that the Lions will keep following him.
The numbers can get a little gruesome, but, in one sense, they reveal in black and white, a strategic error in the way that Coach Jones is approaching Columbia's offense.
He is apparently having them shoot the "2" to the exclusion of using the "3." OTOH, they have shown that as a team they shoot the "2" poorly and shoot the "3" well, when given the opportunity. Like you say, that the imbalance toward taking 2ptrs has been allowed to occur to this extent is annoying (or worse). With three or four decent 3pt guys available, one of them ought to be hot on any given night.
Perhaps Coach can figure this out from a gut feeling, but looking at the numbers makes it easy. If this were a matter of a "lack of skills" on the Lion team members' part, I would be more pessimistic. This is just getting skilled guys to do their thing.
It will be intriguing to see if a new strategy is forthcoming over the next few games.
|
skiba34
Masters Student
Posts: 952
Reg: 03-11-06
|
12-30-09 12:07 AM - Post#71624
In response to IvyBballFan
The numbers can get a little gruesome, but, in one sense, they reveal in black and white, a strategic error in the way that Coach Jones is approaching Columbia's offense.
"A strategic error" is a nice or politically correct way to say, Coach Jones is not a good game coach.
Keeping in mind that the players "may be willing to follow" Jones may be a bigger indication of the type of character the players have than the type of "motivating skills" Jones has. It was only a few years ago the players present did not always "play hard" or appear motivated to giving their all.
Whether it is a credit to an improved coaching mind set from Jones or a credit to the players is not really the issue. The real issue is, will Coach Jones get the maximum "production" from the talent he has, or will they under achieve their potential.
Standing in the "bottom 10% of 347 D1 teams in FG% is DEFINITELY a sign of poor game coaching. Columbia may not have all world talent, but should be far superior to the bottom 10%. Factor in that Columbia actually played the bottom 2 D1 teams (Wagner, Bryant)their offensive numbers are probably more inflated than they should be.
I do appreciate all your posts IVYBballfan. You use an intelligent approach to your theories. Most however will avoid being too negative or softer in their approach. Perhaps I have too much of a "Penn board attitude".
But until the "Columbia Nation" desires and expects more than middle of the pack finishes, expect not much to change. Kind of like Columbia's offense.
|
CU.LIONS
Senior
Posts: 398
Reg: 03-03-07
|
quinnipiac
12-30-09 03:49 PM - Post#71638
In response to skiba34
A paltry 22% of their FG attempts are 3ptrs, clearly in the bottom 15 D-1 teams.
If Columbia had no long-range guys, it would be one thing. Given their early-season 3pt percentages, Agho and Scott [and possibly Foley and Egee!] appear to have earned a chance to produce.
Interesting reading all the statistics and evaluations concerning the Lions. One can not really argue the numbers. The facts are the facts. But I must admit being quite shocked that Columbia was as low as they are concerning their 3 point attempts (22% of their FG att)or bottom 15 teams in D1.
Using this theme I looked back to last year and found some eye popping statistics supporting IvyBballfan's claims as well. One was Niko Scott, despite being 3rd on the team in minutes played was 5th in FG attempts per game and an even more amazing 7th on the team shots per minute. What makes this ever the more baffling is that Scott finished near the top in the Ivies in 3point% while shooting just as well from regular FG range.
This season that trend continues as Scott averages only 5 attempts per game despite shooting into the 40s again this year. Very strange considering the teams lack of success on offense at times.
But again as I have noted in my earlier post is that there is a heavy dose of attention given by opponents in preventing the "shooters" from getting good looks.
Somehow Columbia must find a way to get the shots that they need rather than the shots the opponent wants.
|
