VoyForums

Natural Pain Relief

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, [4] ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 08:37:29 01/08/09 Thu
Author: LU MAN
Subject: MBB- Are we a fraud?

Non-conference play is over and we have our best non-league record in a long time at 10-4. But after last night's disappointing loss at a very much down Princeton team (who Lafayette just beat last week), I have to wonder if this team has really proven anything?

We are currently 8-0 against teams ranked 285 or above in Pomeroy's rankings. There are a total of 344 teams in D1, so we have essentially amassed wins against the worst 60 teams in the country. Overall, our non-conference strength of schedule is rated 340 (5th easiest in the country).

We are in luck that several of the Patriot League opponents currently fall into this category (#291 Bucknell, #292 Army, #304 Lafayette, #319 Colgate). But with the talent that our team returned, they should contend for a league title. To me, they look like nothing more than an underachieving middle of the pack team... again. Is there any reason to think that we can beat American or Navy or even a healthy Holy Cross?

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- LU 65 (We're for real - but so are others), 18:29:43 01/08/09 Thu

Yes, we can contend for the PL title - both regular season and league championship. But, so can four other teams. I write-off only Colgate, Army and Lafayette. The Leopards will, however, pull off a few surprises when their threes start falling.

So, where do we stand on the eve of PL play? Everyone has their favorite rankings site, be it Pomeroy, Real Time RPI, or Sagarin. Some actually believe the preseason rankings will hold true to form saying the AD's and Coaches know best. These folks, perhaps wisely, infer little can be drawn from OOC results and point to the widely diversified level of play in OOC contests. Who is to say that BU (3-8) couldn't have been 8-3 playing LU's (10-4) slate of opponents that rank 345th in SOS (we are reminded that there are only 347 DI teams this year). Maybe there's something to be said for scheduling opponents you have a chance of beating in the "preseason." Lehigh had no way of knowing the teams they would go up against this year would have a composite SOS ranking of 345 at this point in the season. Actually, LU ended the 08-09 campaign ranked 241. As you would have it - believe it or not (see previous post)- the average composite OOC ranking of all teams Lehigh was to face in the '09 OOC campaign would equal 241. Now that's playing your peers! As it turned out, the 14 teams LU faced in OOC play this year didn't do as well as might have been expected. And before you're quick to criticize us for putitng together what appeared to have been the softest of schedules, consider the 49th ranked razorbacks of Arkansas(12-1), their SOS is 248. How about the Demon Decons of Wake Forest (13-0), their SOS is 218. Actually, I kind of enjoyed OOC play this year. I think many other backers of LU sports did the same. LU was in practically every game they played, falling apart in only the second half of the Stoney Brook game (some might add Wednesday night's effort at Princeton to that list). In each of those contests, we couldn't buy a basket while our opponents (some unlikely contributors, I might add) couldn't miss, e.g., last night we shot .315 overall and .200 from deep while the Tigers of Princeton hit .478 from the field and .409 from beyond the arc. Toss in a couple of 4-6 minute scoring droughts - most notably in the SB game, and you have the makings of two disappointing losses. Our other losses to Rider and St. Joe's were well fought games with us coming up a bit short in each. Overall, you got the sense that the Mountain Hawks believe in themselves this year and played thinking they could win every time out. What more can you ask for? We'll see if that winning attitude - something that I truly believe is a by-product of playing your peers - holds true as PL play begins on Saturday. Maybe it'll have no bearing on PL play; maybe it'll key our success.

A look at the rankings..........


RESEASON RANKINGS

Team / Present Record / Real Time (Jan 8th) RPI

1. AU / 8-6 / 89
2. LU / 10-4 / 219
3. HC / 5-10 / 272
4. CU / 4-9 / 273
5. BU / 3-11 / 259
6. Navy / 11-4 / 125
7. Army / 4-10 / 331
8. LC / 4-10 / 302


SAGARIN RANKINGS

Team / Rank (347 teams) / SOS

1. AU / 127st / 111
2. Navy / 137th / 316
3. LU / 192nd / 345
4. HC / 241st / 219
5. BU / 293rd / 102
6. LC / 306th / 286
7. Army / 313th / 340
8. CU / 323rd / 296


A firm believer in the Sagarin ratings, I offer the "line" for Saturday's opening round games.

2pm
LU + 7 @ AU

3:30pm
LC + 9 @ HC

4pm
CU + 5 @ Army

5pm
BU + 13 @ Navy


More stats and "reasons to believe" we can compete for the title in follow-up postings.

[ Edit | View ]
[> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- Observer, 18:30:01 01/08/09 Thu

Not a fraud but also not that good because the post position is terrible. Anderson is having an excellent year but he is a shooting forward and not a center. Gourlay is terrible - a big 7 footer who never developed and the younger guy is a walk on. This is the Achilles heal of the team.
The coaching is very good and most of the buys are doing well. Hall is a very good player but can have terrible shooting nights and this was one of them.
Combine poor shooting from outside with the horror show at center and you lose to a weak team like PU.

[ Edit | View ]
[> Pre-season Rankings -- Correction, 19:09:41 01/08/09 Thu

I believe the pre-season rankings are determined by the coaches and SIDs not the ADs. Not saying the SIDs are any smarter because they aren't.

[ Edit | View ]
[> [> Re: Pre-season Rankings -- Ted, 06:08:06 01/09/09 Fri

That's a great point, '65. Our attendance has been lacking this year, despite a pretty good home schedule so far (especially compared to recent years). I hope fans will come out and support this team in league play, although I fear an 0-2 start - which is very possible - will scare some people off.

See you at the women's game tomorrow night!

[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- LU 65 (While not the best....certainly not a fraud), 05:44:34 01/09/09 Fri

LU never met a team they couldn't beat this year in OOC play and ended up beating a couple of opponents few gave us a chance to win, e.g., Rutgers and Albany. This, while others - most notably BU and AU - tangled frequently with the giants of college basketball, e.g., Maryland, Wake Forest, Georgetown, and Oklahoma. That said, even the most casual fan has to be impressed with LU's comparative league stats entering PL play (see below). Couple these numbers with what I like to think is the habit of winning a 10-4 team brings to the table, and I think the Mountain Hawks have a real chance to make some noise in the PL this year. Will we win it all? Perhaps not, but a good showing can be expected.

LU is.....

2nd in Scoring Offense @ 69.1 ppg
3rd in Scoring Defense @ 63.3 ppg
1st in Scoring Margin @ +5.8 ppg
1st in FG Defense @ .381
2nd in 3FG Defense @ .305
1st in 3FG Offense @ .359
2nd in Rebounding Margin @ +5.7 rpg
1st in A/TO Ratio @ .99

Here's another stat that must be mentioned: 1,065

That's our average home attendance figure for the '08-'09 program. It ranks 6th in the PL. You'd think at least 2,000 people (aided by 400 + students) in the Lehigh Valley would show up on any given night to enjoy DI college basketball - not to mention, as is the case this year, winning basketball! Let's hope that regardless of how we do tomorrow down in D.C. against the PL's top rated (RPI) team, AU, that a good crowd in on hand for our home opener against Navy on Wednesday.

[ Edit | View ]
[> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- EngineHawk, 08:45:06 01/10/09 Sat

The average basketball game crowd is about 1/2 that of the wrestling crowds and that is traditional. Lehigh has never been a basketball school but has always been a wrestling powerhouse with a strong alumni and local following.

People like coming out to see high school state champions in the Brown and White singlets taking on the likes of Big Ten opponents like Michigan and Penn State toe to toe.

I don't see too many All State basketball players on the floor of Stabler for either the men or women and the Patriot League isn't exactly a hotbed of basketball. Basketball would be more exciting if played in Grace Hall.

[ Edit | View ]
[> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- Realist, 23:41:37 01/10/09 Sat

There are actually a few all-state performers on both the men's and women's teams.

Secondly, if Stabler Arena was where Grace Hall is located, I guarantee you men's basketball would draw more student fans then wrestling. Shoot, soccer might as well. Wrestling does have a niche in the local market here, but everyone knows basketball is a much bigger draw on every campus in the country and would be at Lehigh with a better set up as well.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- Ted, 06:35:54 01/11/09 Sun

Realist makes a great point. Lehigh wrestling is very exciting and the fans are as loyal as any, but look at the numbers. Even the wrestling match in Stabler didn't draw 3,000 people. Basketball vs. Lafayette and maybe even Bucknell will reach near or surpass that number.

Basketball would definitely out-draw wrestling if played on-campus. But it's not, and that's not changing. The challenge for the marketing people is to figure out how to get more students over the mountain for more than just one or two games.

For the community at large, getting to Stabler is easier than Grace.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- ngineer, 19:08:06 01/11/09 Sun

If the product is entertaining enough the people will show up. They did in the 1980's when Queenan and Polaha were leading the program out of the Dark Ages. Same venue.
When Lehigh played basketball at Grace Hall, the biggest crowd was for Lafayette, and even then Grace wasn't near filled. Maybe,now, with women on campus that demographic changes things, but there will be no changing venues. The student body isn't into rah-rah as much as in the past it seems. The Administration has instituted harrassing policies toward the students aimed at curbing drinking so students don't show up at University events and are either studying, playing on all their X-Boxes and what-not, or binge drinking off campus.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> Queenan/Polaha Attendance -- bison137, 05:24:02 01/12/09 Mon

>>>If the product is entertaining enough the people will show up. They did in the 1980's when Queenan and Polaha were leading the program out of the Dark Ages. Same venue.
<<<



As I've pointed out before, Lehigh did not draw well during most of the Queenan/Polaha years - as talented as those two players were.

For the five year when one or both were on Lehigh, the published average attendance was 1285. The average attendance for the three years when both played together was 1592. Their final season - when LU won 21 games and went to the NCAA - attendance "skyrocketed" to just over 2300. If anything, I'd imagine some of the attendance figures were overstated.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Queenan/Polaha Attendance -- Neighbor, 10:45:48 01/12/09 Mon

Maybe there's another approach.

Because, right now, LU students don't make much effort to attend games at Stabler, perhaps Lehigh should make a greater effort to attract fans on the "other side of the mountain."

Youth league games at half-time featuring only Saucon Valley teams, special discount coupons in local establishments, etc.

Of course, even more important to the Lehigh basketball marketing effort (if there IS one) is to push for the return of mens/womens doubleheaders, continuously running student shuttle buses, and an inexpensive re-design to the arena that would remove the current crib-like atmosphere and bring fans right down to the floor, at least on three sides.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Queenan/Polaha Attendance -- Rehm, 13:08:23 01/12/09 Mon

Its tough to get kids from youth leagues there on a Saturday - that's when they play most of their games. I don't think its a matter on money, residents of the Saucon Valley SD are well off.

I don't think there is much they can do about the side stands. They pulled them back 3 rows to make room for the media tables and the scorers table. Thats the least of the problems. If you have 5,000 students and only 80 show up, thats where your problem is.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Queenan/Polaha Attendance -- neer85, 13:21:34 01/12/09 Mon

this team is a complete fraud. the ooc schedule was an absolute joke. our saving grace will be that the league is down this year and its truly "up for grabs". we're one of the best three teams in a very down league.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Queenan/Polaha Attendance -- LU MAN, 07:01:49 01/15/09 Thu

0-2 league start
Maybe a more challenging non-league schedule could have helped prepare us for league play. You know, actually playing competitive games and working on executing down the stretch, which you don't get when you're always playing NJIT and Longwood. Instead, we are now in league play, trying to run late-game plays with six guys on the court.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Six men on the court -- bison137, 10:11:04 01/15/09 Thu

Could someone who was watching the game explain the 6-man technical at the end. Did six men go onto the court following the timeout or was there a botched-up late sub or what?

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Good Point LU man -- Rehm, 07:38:22 01/15/09 Thu

I think the soft pre-league schedule may be catching up to us. Its hard to work on closing out a game when you are up by 10-12 points against an inferior opponet.

[ Edit | View ]

[> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- norcalfan, 23:48:42 01/20/09 Tue

Maybe someone should pass the information about a soft schedule on to the coach. He seems to think LU has played some tough teams:)Maybe next year they will play tougher teams.

[ Edit | View ]
[> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- Ted, 05:36:24 01/21/09 Wed

I doubt that will happen. I heard they were so disappointed in the turnout for St. Joe's that they said they wouldn't play teams of that caliber at home anymore. Besides, every coach in every sport claims their schedule is "challenging" and "tough."

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- norcalfan, 21:30:38 01/21/09 Wed

Ted,

When you say they were disappointed, do you mean it was a money issue or they wanted more fans to hype up the school.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- Ted, 05:54:55 01/22/09 Thu

They were surprised by lack of student and community turnout for that "big name" opponent. I think in the future they'll be inclined to play teams like Monmouth - that they can beat - since the crowd wasn't great for the SJU game.

[ Edit | View ]

[> [> Re: MBB- Are we a fraud? -- state of the program, 07:44:29 01/22/09 Thu

how is it that lafayette sells out their (terrible) gym, albeit only 3,500 for temple and we can't get over 2,000 for st. joe's in 10x better venue?

[ Edit | View ]

[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-8
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2012 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.