fordhamfans.com
December 18, 2017, 01:39:46 pm
Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.

Login with username, password and session length
News:
 
  Home Help Search Gallery Login Register  

Fordham vs. Tulane (Montego Bay) - 11/19/17


Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6   Go Down
  Print  
Author Topic: Fordham vs. Tulane (Montego Bay) - 11/19/17  (Read 2494 times)
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #120 on: November 20, 2017, 05:38:10 pm »

Great insights here, especially the first one. We are playing to a script / formula and offensively I feel we are giving up too much as a result.
85 mentioned flow of the game and alluded to basketball instinct. I think we are restricting ourselves and limiting ourselves on offense (e.g. making baskets early in the shot clock). Some players are second guessing a game approach they have been playing all their lives.

NextGen stats and value of possession may say otherwise but a make is a make in my book - even more so when you are a team that can't make any.
Passing up a shot by a 6'10" guy from 4 feet for a three is bad basketball no matter the decade you are playing in - metrics be damned.

We won more A-10 games the last two years implementing this system than we did the previous 7 seasons combined.  This is still a work in progress as we get current players and new players to understand and implement it but we have won more as we implemented the system.   you are essentially arguing that bunting a guy over to second with no one out is a good play when it is mathematically  proven inaccurate.  It is a numbers game that over the long run gives us a better chance to win.  Get used to it because it is not going anywhere. 
« Last Edit: November 20, 2017, 05:54:19 pm by Rich93 » Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
shortshot
Senior
****
Online Online

Posts: 3822


View Profile
« Reply #121 on: November 20, 2017, 06:14:57 pm »

We won more A-10 games the last two years implementing this system than we did the previous 7 seasons combined.  This is still a work in progress as we get current players and new players to understand and implement it but we have won more as we implemented the system.   you are essentially arguing that bunting a guy over to second with no one out is a good play when it is mathematically  proven inaccurate.  It is a numbers game that over the long run gives us a better chance to win.  Get used to it because it is not going anywhere. 
Excellent observation. Last year we had more starters familiar with JNís system but they still didnít click until Hawkins became comfortable with it. We have more new key players this season who have to get comfortable with it. Hopefully it wonít take that long.
Report Spam   Logged
SkipPass71
Freshman
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 195


View Profile
« Reply #122 on: November 20, 2017, 06:33:58 pm »

Scoring two tix to see the incomparable Kelli O'Hara in Brigadoon kept me from the live coverage of the game.  The show and Kelli: sublime, the replay of the game not so much.  Neither team looked good-we were worse.  The zone flummoxed the Green Wave as it did many of our opponents last year.  But once they heeded the astute advice of the color man and made sure the ball entered the post, better things (just enough) happened for them offensively.  The ever smooth Will Taveras does us proud, agree that JC will return to form and do what he does best and I believe that Raut, Hicks, Havsa and yes, even Pec will be deep threats.  Slanina's low post and outside games should only get better.  JN played Pat Riley to JC's John Starks and let him bomb away.  If some of those shots went to Hicks, Raut, Will T....who knows!

Expect big A-10 production from Will T.  85, in citing our good D, wonders if our low offensive output will be enough to win games.  Well, if indeed the A-10 is down this year as many here have stated, even a modest improvement on offense should lead to a nice number of Ws.

 
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #123 on: November 21, 2017, 07:26:00 am »

We won more A-10 games the last two years implementing this system than we did the previous 7 seasons combined.  This is still a work in progress as we get current players and new players to understand and implement it but we have won more as we implemented the system.   you are essentially arguing that bunting a guy over to second with no one out is a good play when it is mathematically  proven inaccurate.  It is a numbers game that over the long run gives us a better chance to win.  Get used to it because it is not going anywhere. 

The first year we won a lot of games because Rhoomes dominated down low on offense. The mismatches were there and we exploited them. Slnina passing up gimme put backs to toss it back out to 3 is ridiculous. You reach up and dunk it. Tenuous argument on the conference. We also won more the first year with Rhoomes and Pecoras guys than year 2. If it decreases again this year, that argument starts to weaken.
 
Pekarek is a dud in this system, its been long enough to figure that out. Havsa was here all last year and has been atrocious so far this year. Chartouny is in year 3 and has been utterly dreadful in the system after this year. Bunting is a non factor. Ohams has come out of the gate very slowly in year 2.  We have Zarko taking up a ship, why?

I agree the newbies need some time to gel but until that happens the veterans cant stink up the joint, they have been here and know the system.  The inability to shoot the 3 is something that defies logic....and maybe needs an excorcism.
« Last Edit: November 21, 2017, 07:53:57 am by 85 » Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #124 on: November 21, 2017, 08:06:14 am »

We won 1 less conference game last year with this system that is not statistically significant.   Rhoomes isnít here and is not coming back.  Zarko is in his 4th year on scholarship who had major surgery last year.  Not sure what else you need there.  We have 10 guys playing now donít waste our time with your obsession with one guy not playing or start a thread entitled Zarko hurt Fordham honors scholarship.   I was told he wants to play this year again not sure he will be able to but it is not relevant to this year.  Havsa played a few games last year he is not paying well but it is 4 games.  Chartouny is horrible now and should implement the second part of the system which is layups.  You ignore our most important new comer Evans.  Give him some time. Yes they should take the ball to the basket more and I think you will see that.   It is a process and does not happen over night.  We went through this last year and there is no way to fully get rid of the three.  No team can do that us even less. 
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
ace93
Arbitrary and Capricious Administrator
Raging Lunatic
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21136



View Profile
« Reply #125 on: November 21, 2017, 08:30:10 am »

We definitely need to take the ball to the hole more often. I am fairly sure it is not be design that Tavares is the only one that does it.
Report Spam   Logged

Nothing replaces success in the revenue sports.  Nothing.  That's not to take away from the success in the Olympic sports - they do matter.  It isn't a replacement for success in the flagship sports. - Debbie Yow, AD - NC State
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #126 on: November 21, 2017, 08:40:43 am »

I had to laugh watching this game. All these guys with nice form on the jumpers and nobody could hit a 3. Perris Hicks hoists one from mid chest, with the ugliest form I have seen, and of course, swish. 

I dont know if Ohams has any low post ability but Slanina at least has the hands to handle and kick it out to open it up a bit. Hicks is pretty fast, not sure if he is a slasher to hoop but the kid has some wheels. 
Report Spam   Logged
KPW
Junior
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1491


View Profile
« Reply #127 on: November 21, 2017, 10:11:06 am »

We definitely need to take the ball to the hole more often. I am fairly sure it is not be design that Tavares is the only one that does it.
...indeed he was the only one driving in the last five minutes of the Tulane game. I think it was the only thing we tried to do inside the arc - Tavares iso drive 1:4.

Call it a system, if you like. Whatever he was doing offensively at EKU isn't translating. We can't score points. It can't be all late shot clock threes.
 
It isn't a laboratory. Guys are hesitant to make sensible basketball plays when the opportunity is there in order to comply. That's why guys choose to move on.
Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #128 on: November 21, 2017, 10:29:58 am »

You canít make stupid like this up. 
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
NYRam07
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4517


View Profile
« Reply #129 on: November 21, 2017, 10:31:30 am »

...indeed he was the only one driving in the last five minutes of the Tulane game. I think it was the only thing we tried to do inside the arc - Tavares iso drive 1:4.

Call it a system, if you like. Whatever he was doing offensively at EKU isn't translating. We can't score points. It can't be all late shot clock threes.
 
It isn't a laboratory. Guys are hesitant to make sensible basketball plays when the opportunity is there in order to comply. That's why guys choose to move on.

Its translated to our most successful A-10 seasons since DW 10 years ago. As far as your last sentence, I'm not sure you can really back that up at all. Seems like an outlandish and ridiculous statement.
Report Spam   Logged
KPW
Junior
***
Offline Offline

Posts: 1491


View Profile
« Reply #130 on: November 21, 2017, 10:52:05 am »

Wow. I am stupid, outlandish and ridiculous all in one swoop. Thanks for attacking. I'll just go grab the kool-aid instead.
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #131 on: November 21, 2017, 11:01:55 am »

Here is the perfect Fordham Kool Aid response we keep hearing......eventually the 3's will have to start dropping. Eventually, why?  Via magic?

I can easily buy into the guys needing to gel, but right now the guy playing the worst is Chartouny and he has been here 3 years and should be the leader.   
Report Spam   Logged
ace93
Arbitrary and Capricious Administrator
Raging Lunatic
*****
Offline Offline

Posts: 21136



View Profile
« Reply #132 on: November 21, 2017, 11:03:16 am »

Wow. I am stupid, outlandish and ridiculous all in one swoop. Thanks for attacking. I'll just go grab the kool-aid instead.

Seemingly for the outlandish and ridiculous. Wink

I refrained from replying to your message. It definitely seemed a bit of a stretch to me to say that people are transferring b/c of it.
Report Spam   Logged

Nothing replaces success in the revenue sports.  Nothing.  That's not to take away from the success in the Olympic sports - they do matter.  It isn't a replacement for success in the flagship sports. - Debbie Yow, AD - NC State
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #133 on: November 21, 2017, 11:04:57 am »

Wow. I am stupid, outlandish and ridiculous all in one swoop. Thanks for attacking. I'll just go grab the kool-aid instead.

Try thinking no need for Koop aid.  Anderson went from a bench player on a 20 loss team to a starter on a respectable A-10 team under the system you say caused him to leave.  Try remembering last year when we were up in arms but the team figured it out.  I agree it should not take that long this year to improve but your comments about why guys left were stupid outlandish and letís add in moronic.  

Here is the perfect Fordham Kool Aid response we keep hearing......eventually the 3's will have to start dropping. Eventually, why?  Via magic?

Everyone agrees that there needs to be more of an emphasis on the second part of our offense which is layups ie drive to the basket more and finish.  That tends to help the three point shooting.
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #134 on: November 21, 2017, 11:05:39 am »

I disagreed with the reason for the transfers out. But otherwise, agreed. Guys seem afraid to make basketball moves and instead are tossing the ball around the arc like a hot potato. Systems are fine and things start there but sometimes you need to take what htey are giving you. This team seems very hesitant to do that.  
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #135 on: November 21, 2017, 11:06:33 am »

Try thinking no need for Koop aid.  Anderson went from a bench player on a 20 loss team to a starter on a respectable A-10 team under the system you say caused him to leave.  Try remembering last year when we were up in arms but the team figured it out.  I agree it should not take that long this year to improve but your comments about why guys left were stupid outlandish and letís add in moronic.  

Everyone agrees that there needs to be more of an emphasis on the second part of our offense which is layups ie drive to the basket more and finish.  That tends to help the three point shooting.

Again, it has to start with Chartouny. He needs to get going right now.  I agree it takes time for the new guys to gel but when your senior leader and former rookie of year is tanking it early, that makes it all the more difficult for things to gel.
Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #136 on: November 21, 2017, 11:07:30 am »

I disagreed with the reason for the transfers out. But otherwise, agreed. Guys seem afraid to make basketball moves and instead are tossing the ball around the arc like a hot potato. Systems are fine and things start there but sometimes you need to take what htey are giving you. This team seems very hesitant to do that.  

It takes time to learn an offense.  2 of our 5 starters are new.  Letís see what we do against Manhattan.

Again, it has to start with Chartouny. He needs to get going right now.  I agree it takes time for the new guys to gel but when your senior leader and former rookie of year is tanking it early, that makes it all the more difficult for things to gel.

Agreed.  Add in Evans I donít like that there is no improvement from him on offense game to game.  He is stuck in neutral.  We had some great ball movement against Tulane but missed wide open shots. Any DI team needs to make those. 
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
VTRAM
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2588


View Profile
« Reply #137 on: November 21, 2017, 11:16:05 am »

Its translated to our most successful A-10 seasons since DW 10 years ago.

Don't you know that doesn't matter because we lost 3 games. Fire the staff! Start over! Rebuild! Get a Hot Young Assistant!  Roll Eyes
Report Spam   Logged
VTRAM
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2588


View Profile
« Reply #138 on: November 21, 2017, 11:18:05 am »

Here is the perfect Fordham Kool Aid response we keep hearing......eventually the 3's will have to start dropping. Eventually, why?  Via magic?

I can easily buy into the guys needing to gel, but right now the guy playing the worst is Chartouny and he has been here 3 years and should be the leader.   

Honest question. Do you think JC will play like this all season? What in his past indicates that he won't shoot better?

4 games is a small sample size. It just looks worse because it is at the beginning of the season.
Report Spam   Logged
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


View Profile
« Reply #139 on: November 21, 2017, 11:19:48 am »

   It's not a bad system, especially if you don't think we can attract star players.  It does require more thought on the floor, which can disorient some players.

   Several of the players are just not talented enough, regardless of the system.  Ohams seems out of place in this system.  
Report Spam   Logged
VTRAM
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 2588


View Profile
« Reply #140 on: November 21, 2017, 11:21:49 am »

Again, it has to start with Chartouny. He needs to get going right now.  I agree it takes time for the new guys to gel but when your senior leader and former rookie of year is tanking it early, that makes it all the more difficult for things to gel.

Agreed 100% here. We need the seniors to step up as the young guys gel. This is on JC and to a lesser extent Havsa, Chuba (he has been injured). We need those guys to carry us as the new guys got comfortable.
Report Spam   Logged
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


View Profile
« Reply #141 on: November 21, 2017, 11:23:37 am »

I disagreed with the reason for the transfers out. But otherwise, agreed. Guys seem afraid to make basketball moves and instead are tossing the ball around the arc like a hot potato. Systems are fine and things start there but sometimes you need to take what htey are giving you. This team seems very hesitant to do that.  

   Exactly. 

   Part of it may be experience or personality.  I don't think we have anyone (yet) who has the confidence to break off and make a play.
Report Spam   Logged
85
Raging Lunatic
***
Online Online

Posts: 12733


View Profile
« Reply #142 on: November 21, 2017, 11:24:47 am »

My favorite line, dont think, just play!  Its like watching a rangers power play where nobody wants to shoot.
Report Spam   Logged
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


View Profile
« Reply #143 on: November 21, 2017, 11:28:29 am »

Here is the perfect Fordham Kool Aid response we keep hearing......eventually the 3's will have to start dropping. Eventually, why?  Via magic?

   +1.  

   I've argued that a good 3-point shooter is identified early and easily.  The good ones don't miss as many as we do, or as badly.  I think it's wrong to expect a meaningful jump in makes from 3 by this stage.  Who wants Pekarek to keep shooting?
Report Spam   Logged
71
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4607



View Profile
« Reply #144 on: November 21, 2017, 11:52:49 am »

  +1.  

   I've argued that a good 3-point shooter is identified early and easily.  The good ones don't miss as many as we do, or as badly.  I think it's wrong to expect a meaningful jump in makes from 3 by this stage.  Who wants Pekarek to keep shooting?

I think there will be a jump. There has to be.  The current percentage from 3 is mind-numbingly bad. I don't expect it to get to great, but it will increase. Whether that translates into wins is another matter.
Report Spam   Logged
NYRam07
Senior
****
Offline Offline

Posts: 4517


View Profile
« Reply #145 on: November 21, 2017, 11:54:19 am »

Wow. I am stupid, outlandish and ridiculous all in one swoop. Thanks for attacking. I'll just go grab the kool-aid instead.

Not you, but definitely the suggestion that players left specifically because of a system/coach that discourages making basketball plays.
Report Spam   Logged
drunkle
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 761


View Profile
« Reply #146 on: November 21, 2017, 12:10:57 pm »

  +1.  

   I've argued that a good 3-point shooter is identified early and easily.  The good ones don't miss as many as we do, or as badly.  I think it's wrong to expect a meaningful jump in makes from 3 by this stage.  Who wants Pekarek to keep shooting?

It's wrong not to expect a meaningful jump in 3 point shooting.  Whether it's to "good enough" levels is the question.

I already posted these numbers.  But you can reasonably expect Chartouny to do better than .118 (2-17).  Why?  Because he has a much larger history to go on.  Now, he may regress.  Sengfelder did last year (and JC, AA and Hawk all vastly improved over their prior career rates).  But even including this year's rate his career numbers are .337.  Much larger sample. Tavares made .333 last year and over 40% in a larger sample in junior college.  This year he's around 18%, 3-17.

Evans nailed over 40% in junior college.  Havsa .333 last year.  Even Pekarek, who has career numbers below 30%, is better than 0%.  Those 3 are a combined 0-21.

I'm not sure if they are good enough to hit 37-40%.  Raut seems like a good addition.  But why do I expect a meaningful jump?  Because our players' historical averages say so.  And no team has shot 22.8% from 3 this decade.  In fact only 1 team finished below 25%.

A jump above 30% alone would be meaningful from this putrid level.

My confidence in their abilities is fairly low right now, but I'd bet you $100 bucks we shoot at least 33% from 3 rest of season. We shot 33.4% from 3 last year (and 34.6% in 2016).  Which is still pretty bad.  I'd bet we do better than 35% actually.  But I'd need odds.  Evil    
Report Spam   Logged
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


View Profile
« Reply #147 on: November 21, 2017, 12:21:28 pm »

I think there will be a jump. There has to be.  The current percentage from 3 is mind-numbingly bad. I don't expect it to get to great, but it will increase. Whether that translates into wins is another matter.

   I'm certain we'll improve from here, but not enough.  We shot 33% from 3 last season, and I think we had better shooters then.

   My point was relative to individual players, not the team-wide stat.

   We are tantalizing to watch because in any given game we may nail a bunch of 3s and defeat anyone or, more likely, have our defense keep us in the game where that late 3 from a kid having gone 0-6 is the game-winner.
Report Spam   Logged
Rich93
Class of 93
Raging Lunatic
*
Offline Offline

Posts: 12471


View Profile
« Reply #148 on: November 21, 2017, 12:23:39 pm »

  +1.  

   I've argued that a good 3-point shooter is identified early and easily.  The good ones don't miss as many as we do, or as badly.  I think it's wrong to expect a meaningful jump in makes from 3 by this stage.  Who wants Pekarek to keep shooting?

You pick the one guy who has played sparingly this year.   Raut is shooting 43% from 3 do you want him to stop shooting 3s?   The statistics disprove your theory of guys not improving their shooting from year to year.  You say it every year and every year we point to guys who improved.  Some will improve others may regress but the numbers show more improved their shooting than regressed under Neubauer.  
Report Spam   Logged

WINNING MATTERS
Vinseiro2
Sophomore
**
Offline Offline

Posts: 509


View Profile
« Reply #149 on: November 21, 2017, 12:39:47 pm »

You pick the one guy who has played sparingly this year.   Raut is shooting 43% from 3 do you want him to stop shooting 3s?   The statistics disprove your theory of guys not improving their shooting from year to year.  You say it every year and every year we point to guys who improved.  Some will improve others may regress but the numbers show more improved their shooting than regressed under Neubauer.  

   You keep missing my point that it's not a meaningful improvement. 
   
   We purposely have limited possessions, but have guys who are shooting (historically) in the 20s% and low 30s% taking shots.  And it's not like most of these shots are contested; many of them are open shots that we still miss (last season and this season).  Do we have a 40% 3-point shooter on this squad?

   
Report Spam   Logged

Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6   Go Up
  Print  
 
Jump to:  

Powered by EzPortal
Bookmark this site! | Upgrade This Forum
SMF For Free - Create your own Forum

Buy traffic for your forum/website
traffic-masters
Powered by SMF | SMF © 2016, Simple Machines
Page created in 0.218 seconds with 11 queries.