Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your
contribution is not tax-deductible.)
PayPal Acct: 
Feedback: 
Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):
| [ Login ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4], 5 ] |
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
NU GRAD -- Dane96, 18:05:23 04/21/03 Mon
>
>
>>>
>Dane96 was overdue for an eruption.
LOL...touche NUGRAD!
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: The definitive question -- BUfan2, 16:56:48 04/21/03 Mon
>Are the players on the 3rd Team All-MAAC that
>much better than, say, the players on the 2nd Team
>All-AE? Jamar Wilson, Billy Collins, Nick Billings,
>Justin Rowe, and D.J. Munir...how would these guys
>stack up against the 3rd Team All-MAAC?
You bring up a good point -- when comparing *individual* players on all star teams from different mid-major conferences (such as the MAAC and AE), the difference may be that the MAAC has more talent -- but not necessarily better individual top players -- just more of them -- per *team* than the AE. Therefore, it doesn't necessarily correlate that a first team all-MAAC player is better than a first team all-AE player, although that may be true in some instances. It may also be true that the POY in a lower mid-major conference is a better talent than the POY in a higher conference. No matter how high the MAAC's RPI is compared to the AE's, they are still a mid-major conference.
What I mean is, you can't assume that the top 5 or 10 individual players in the higher ranked conference are always going to be universally better than the top 5 or 10 players in all lower ranked conferences. I think you *can* assume, though, that the majority of the rest of players (who aren't on an all conference team) are better than the majority of the rest of the players in the lower ranked league. That's what makes the difference in winning percentage -- and therefore RPI -- for the conference, as well as tougher schedules (I think someone already made the point that several mid-major conferences prevent ther schools from playing teams with low RPIs).
So my point is, I don't think you can assume someone who made the 3rd team from a higher ranked mid-major conference would necessarily be a 1st team selection in the AE.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: The definitive question-I Agree -- Patch, 17:12:13 04/21/03 Mon
I agree with your post the only place I disagree and it's trivial is a Conference with and RPI of 25 should not be called a mid major - it's a low major. There are 32 conferences rated if your conference is near the bottom it's a low major.
I think until the AE RPI is in the very Low 20's it's a low major.
>>Are the players on the 3rd Team All-MAAC that
>>much better than, say, the players on the 2nd Team
>>All-AE? Jamar Wilson, Billy Collins, Nick Billings,
>>Justin Rowe, and D.J. Munir...how would these guys
>>stack up against the 3rd Team All-MAAC?
>
>You bring up a good point -- when comparing
>*individual* players on all star teams from different
>mid-major conferences (such as the MAAC and AE), the
>difference may be that the MAAC has more talent -- but
>not necessarily better individual top players -- just
>more of them -- per *team* than the AE. Therefore, it
>doesn't necessarily correlate that a first team
>all-MAAC player is better than a first team all-AE
>player, although that may be true in some instances.
>It may also be true that the POY in a lower mid-major
>conference is a better talent than the POY in a higher
>conference. No matter how high the MAAC's RPI is
>compared to the AE's, they are still a mid-major
>conference.
>
>What I mean is, you can't assume that the top 5 or 10
>individual players in the higher ranked conference are
>always going to be universally better than the top 5
>or 10 players in all lower ranked conferences. I think
>you *can* assume, though, that the majority of the
>rest of players (who aren't on an all conference team)
>are better than the majority of the rest of the
>players in the lower ranked league. That's what makes
>the difference in winning percentage -- and therefore
>RPI -- for the conference, as well as tougher
>schedules (I think someone already made the point that
>several mid-major conferences prevent ther schools
>from playing teams with low RPIs).
>
>So my point is, I don't think you can assume someone
>who made the 3rd team from a higher ranked mid-major
>conference would necessarily be a 1st team selection
>in the AE.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: low major to mid major -- Josh, 20:19:42 04/21/03 Mon
One factor that will help the conference improve its RPI is to "play up", wherever and whenever possible. Granted, many schools are faced with conference rules about opponents RPI, which (allegedly) prohibits them from playing aspiring schools from weaker conferences. However, playing a bunch of Division III games in order to pad some coaches overall wins vs losses doesn't offer much in terms of credibility. Although games against non-division I opponents aren't considered in the RPI calculations, replacing those cream-puff games with some schools in the top 125 might help.
>I agree with your post the only place I disagree and
>it's trivial is a Conference with and RPI of 25 should
>not be called a mid major - it's a low major. There
>are 32 conferences rated if your conference is near
>the bottom it's a low major.
>I think until the AE RPI is in the very Low 20's it's
>a low major.
That's what makes
>>the difference in winning percentage -- and therefore
>>RPI -- for the conference, as well as tougher
>>schedules (I think someone already made the point that
>>several mid-major conferences prevent ther schools
>>from playing teams with low RPIs).
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: The definitive question -- Dane96, 18:13:27 04/21/03 Mon
>Ok, nobody's debating that the MAAC is a stronger
>league than the AE. Well, Greg is, but he doesn't
>count.
>
>But here's the definitive question: Are the players on
>the 3rd Team All-MAAC that much better than, say, the
>players on the 2nd Team All-AE? Jamar Wilson, Billy
>Collins, Nick Billings, Justin Rowe, and D.J.
>Munir...how would these guys stack up against the 3rd
>Team All-MAAC? I gotta believe that those listed
>players could be 3rd Team All-MAAC. I know for sure
>that the 3rd Team All-MAAC isn't equivalent to the 1st
>Team All-AE.
>
>The MAAC is stronger, but it's not an overwhelming
>gap. If I remember correctly, if you subtract the AE
>RPI from the MAAC RPI, you get a figure similar to if
>you subtracted the Big East RPI from the SEC RPI.
>
>Also, look at the RPIs of the individual teams.
>Manhattan, Fairfield, and Siena all have RPIs much
>higher than anyone in the AE. But teams 4-10 are all
>interspersed among the AE teams. Good yes, amazing no.
>
>But really, I think we're getting away from the actual
>point of all this: Lucious Jordan is good, and he'll
>be a benefit for Albany. My only concern, if I'm
>Albany, is who's going to get all the shots? Between
>Wilson, Levine, Jordan, Iati, God knows who
>else...they can't all be 20ppg scorers. It's gonna
>require a lot of offensive balance.
Everyone has made excellant points here. Much more logic than when Ramfan butts heads (pun intended). I think though we are missing two points...one of them Patch made, and one that Go Cats Go alluded to. First, we are a low major conference right now...and everyone in the league has to be able to admit that. I mean Siena was ranked the 25th mid-major college (in the mid-major poll. No one, not even UVM or BU would be w/in the top 30....sorry gang.
Second, transfers like Jordan and Parker only make our league better, from top to bottom. The same goes for the JUCOS that Hartford, Binghamton and now UA are going after. These additions make our league a much more attractive place to go for a player. W/ the additions of these student-atheletes and the "super arenas" at Binghamton, BU, SBU, UA and even Hartford (I would even throw Alfond in there if you could pack it), this conference has solid players, coaches and facilities that will bring that RPI up very quickly.
We are having a pissing contest about a player who will only help, not hurt the stature of the league. And its safe to say that even if Lucious makes "only" the second team AE (which would be my presumption), he is a much better pickup than you guys are giving UA credit for. I guaruntee you that every team in this conference would love to have him start or play significant minutes at the two for them.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: The definitive question -- Czar, 19:29:10 04/21/03 Mon
>>This is it from me! If you know anything about basketball and you follow it then you know that Jordan is a great pick-up for Albany and he is a player who will start for 2 years and average double figures for 2 years. You can argue what league is better or that guy's in the AE can play in the MAAC. Whatever! Whether you hate Albany or love Albany you can't deny it is a great get! You are getting an established All Conference player from a better overall league! End of discussion!
Ok, nobody's debating that the MAAC is a stronger
>>league than the AE. Well, Greg is, but he doesn't
>>count.
>>
>>But here's the definitive question: Are the players on
>>the 3rd Team All-MAAC that much better than, say, the
>>players on the 2nd Team All-AE? Jamar Wilson, Billy
>>Collins, Nick Billings, Justin Rowe, and D.J.
>>Munir...how would these guys stack up against the 3rd
>>Team All-MAAC? I gotta believe that those listed
>>players could be 3rd Team All-MAAC. I know for sure
>>that the 3rd Team All-MAAC isn't equivalent to the 1st
>>Team All-AE.
>>
>>The MAAC is stronger, but it's not an overwhelming
>>gap. If I remember correctly, if you subtract the AE
>>RPI from the MAAC RPI, you get a figure similar to if
>>you subtracted the Big East RPI from the SEC RPI.
>>
>>Also, look at the RPIs of the individual teams.
>>Manhattan, Fairfield, and Siena all have RPIs much
>>higher than anyone in the AE. But teams 4-10 are all
>>interspersed among the AE teams. Good yes, amazing
>no.
>>
>>But really, I think we're getting away from the actual
>>point of all this: Lucious Jordan is good, and he'll
>>be a benefit for Albany. My only concern, if I'm
>>Albany, is who's going to get all the shots? Between
>>Wilson, Levine, Jordan, Iati, God knows who
>>else...they can't all be 20ppg scorers. It's gonna
>>require a lot of offensive balance.
>
>Everyone has made excellant points here. Much more
>logic than when Ramfan butts heads (pun intended). I
>think though we are missing two points...one of them
>Patch made, and one that Go Cats Go alluded to.
>First, we are a low major conference right now...and
>everyone in the league has to be able to admit that. I
>mean Siena was ranked the 25th mid-major college (in
>the mid-major poll. No one, not even UVM or BU would
>be w/in the top 30....sorry gang.
>
>Second, transfers like Jordan and Parker only make our
>league better, from top to bottom. The same goes for
>the JUCOS that Hartford, Binghamton and now UA are
>going after. These additions make our league a much
>more attractive place to go for a player. W/ the
>additions of these student-atheletes and the "super
>arenas" at Binghamton, BU, SBU, UA and even Hartford
>(I would even throw Alfond in there if you could pack
>it), this conference has solid players, coaches and
>facilities that will bring that RPI up very quickly.
>
>We are having a pissing contest about a player who
>will only help, not hurt the stature of the league.
>And its safe to say that even if Lucious makes "only"
>the second team AE (which would be my presumption), he
>is a much better pickup than you guys are giving UA
>credit for. I guaruntee you that every team in this
>conference would love to have him start or play
>significant minutes at the two for them.
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]
[> [> [> [>
Re: AE vs. MAAC: The definitive question -- Dane96, 21:33:03 04/21/03 Mon
>>>This is it from me! If you know anything about
>basketball and you follow it then you know that Jordan
>is a great pick-up for Albany and he is a player who
>will start for 2 years and average double figures for
>2 years. You can argue what league is better or that
>guy's in the AE can play in the MAAC. Whatever!
>Whether you hate Albany or love Albany you can't deny
>it is a great get! You are getting an established All
>Conference player from a better overall league! End
>of discussion!
>
AMEN BROTHER!
[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]