It's odd that, with this huge freshman class, nobody appears to be redshirting - each of the freshmen have seen minutes in games. Someone mentioned earlier that Brady has traditionally "lost" players before they graduate; and I imagine that is the plan here.

(11-20-2013 12:43 PM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:18 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote:  I know its been that way forever... But at some point we have to admit that we havent sold the tickets which require both lower levels to be sectioned off for season ticket holders. Maude can move to the other side or GTFO

It's a shame your AD didn't want to play VCU, GMU or ODU. Having a Top-10 VCU playing at the Convo would certainly spur interest. Then you add the casual fans of Virginia basketball and the VCU fans, you could sell out like JPJ at UVa. Never understood not playing in-state schools.

UVA will be in the convo next season. I'm certain it will be the highest attended game in years here.

(11-20-2013 02:00 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:43 PM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:18 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote:  I know its been that way forever... But at some point we have to admit that we havent sold the tickets which require both lower levels to be sectioned off for season ticket holders. Maude can move to the other side or GTFO

It's a shame your AD didn't want to play VCU, GMU or ODU. Having a Top-10 VCU playing at the Convo would certainly spur interest. Then you add the casual fans of Virginia basketball and the VCU fans, you could sell out like JPJ at UVa. Never understood not playing in-state schools.

UVA will be in the convo next season. I'm certain it will be the highest attended game in years here.

We should have a better team next year than this year.... Also, I agree about the not playing Va schools. So many good teams in the state that would spark interest at home. Ashamed that Bourne and Co feel this way.

(11-20-2013 02:37 PM)HolyCityDuke Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 02:00 PM)All Dukes_All Day Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:43 PM)DaBigBlue Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 11:18 AM)Centdukesfan Wrote:  I know its been that way forever... But at some point we have to admit that we havent sold the tickets which require both lower levels to be sectioned off for season ticket holders. Maude can move to the other side or GTFO

It's a shame your AD didn't want to play VCU, GMU or ODU. Having a Top-10 VCU playing at the Convo would certainly spur interest. Then you add the casual fans of Virginia basketball and the VCU fans, you could sell out like JPJ at UVa. Never understood not playing in-state schools.

UVA will be in the convo next season. I'm certain it will be the highest attended game in years here.

We should have a better team next year than this year.... Also, I agree about the not playing Va schools. So many good teams in the state that would spark interest at home. Ashamed that Bourne and Co feel this way.

I think at JMU it is the responsibility of the head coaches to assemble their out of conference schedule (football may be the exception). So if you don't like the schedule I don't think this one is on Bourne.

(11-20-2013 12:06 AM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  We are the second youngest team in Div I and the second tallest.

BSKB, for what its worth, our average experience (measurement of youth) is 0.88 years which would make us the 11th youngest team in D1. Our roster is the 4th tallest team in Div 1 at 79.0 and our effective height (Game minutes-weighted height in inches) is a respectable 60th in D1 right now. Effective Height will fluctuate throughout the year based on game play and factors like injuries.

Other notable height based JMU data: JMU has the tallest PGs, second tallest SGs and the fourth tallest SFs in D1.

Just a side note - KY leads both of the aforementioned categories as they are the youngest team with an ASTOUNDING average experience of 0.28 years and they have the tallest average height at 79.6.

All stats mentioned above are per Kenpom.com

Feeling a bit bad for these guys going on the road for an entire month.

(11-20-2013 04:32 PM)JMUETC Wrote:  Feeling a bit bad for these guys going on the road for an entire month.

Yeah that's pretty frustrating. These kids are definitely being thrust into the fire very quickly.

Have we sold out all the 100 level seating at the convo for both MBB and WBB? As mentioned on here, it’s never too late to shuffle seats for the good of the team. I’m sure the paying fans won’t mind as long as they have equivalent seats that they’ve paid for.
Move all the paying patrons to behind the player benches and give the opposite side to entirely students (at least the lower level). If I were still in school, this would give me incentive to come out to game #2 even if we lose the rest before that game because it’s NEW and exciting. It would promote a truly intimidating home court advantage for JMU. The likes which have not been seen in Hburg for many many years. Someone here must have some connections with all your “sources” :-)

(11-20-2013 04:18 PM)JMU_Degenerate Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 12:06 AM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  We are the second youngest team in Div I and the second tallest.

BSKB, for what its worth, our average experience (measurement of youth) is 0.88 years which would make us the 11th youngest team in D1. Our roster is the 4th tallest team in Div 1 at 79.0 and our effective height (Game minutes-weighted height in inches) is a respectable 60th in D1 right now. Effective Height will fluctuate throughout the year based on game play and factors like injuries.

Other notable height based JMU data: JMU has the tallest PGs, second tallest SGs and the fourth tallest SFs in D1.

Just a side note - KY leads both of the aforementioned categories as they are the youngest team with an ASTOUNDING average experience of 0.28 years and they have the tallest average height at 79.6.

All stats mentioned above are per Kenpom.com

Whoa! I'm 6'4"". What is my effective height? You lost me on this one.

Was listening to the game last night. It's going to be a long friggin year, and how Nation adjusts when he gets back will be telling. Good thing is that the CAA is looking even worse than last year with the exception of Drexel and Towson. We need to get out while we can, and abandon this awful conference. We may laugh at teams like George Mason and Old Dominion, but look what Mason just did, they just beat a top 40 Northern Iowa team without three of their starters!

(11-20-2013 04:43 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Whoa! I'm 6'4"". What is my effective height? You lost me on this one.

This is from Kenpom.com and explains it better than I can:
Height and Experience Data
Height data
- Overall average height is computed by taking the average listed height of every player on the team, weighted by minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.

- To calculate the positional height data, the minutes played for each team are ordered by height. Thus the 20% of minutes played by the tallest players are assumed to be center minutes, the next 20% are assumed to be power forward minutes, etc.

- Effective height is the average of the center and power forward position. The rationale for this is described in more detail here.

Experience
- The experience value is in terms of years of college experience where a player’s eligibility class is assumed to determine this. For the purposes of the calculation, a freshman has zero years of experience, a sophomore has one year of experience, etc.

- Like the average height calculation, the experience calculation weights the experience of each player on the roster based on minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.


BASICALLY, using minutes weighted data from Kenpom gives a better gauge because the data is based on the players that actually enter the games and removes from the math any proverbial benchwarmers. A 7'11" guy who sits the bench with an injury all year would not skew up our height data for instance.

(11-20-2013 05:06 PM)JMU_Degenerate Wrote:  

(11-20-2013 04:43 PM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  Whoa! I'm 6'4"". What is my effective height? You lost me on this one.

This is from Kenpom.com and explains it better than I can:
Height and Experience Data
Height data
- Overall average height is computed by taking the average listed height of every player on the team, weighted by minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.

- To calculate the positional height data, the minutes played for each team are ordered by height. Thus the 20% of minutes played by the tallest players are assumed to be center minutes, the next 20% are assumed to be power forward minutes, etc.

- Effective height is the average of the center and power forward position. The rationale for this is described in more detail here.

Experience
- The experience value is in terms of years of college experience where a player’s eligibility class is assumed to determine this. For the purposes of the calculation, a freshman has zero years of experience, a sophomore has one year of experience, etc.

- Like the average height calculation, the experience calculation weights the experience of each player on the roster based on minutes played. Players that have played less than 10% of their team’s minutes are not included.


BASICALLY, using minutes weighted data from Kenpom gives a better gauge because the data is based on the players that actually enter the games and removes from the math any proverbial benchwarmers. A 7'11" guy who sits the bench with an injury all year would not skew up our height data for instance.

I'm pretty good with statistics and formulas, but KenPom is on another level with his analysis.

I sat two rows behind BSKB24, so I can ditto his observations. Kent had two open good look 3s he passed on, down the stretch. I screamed: "Shoot it!" , alas he didn't. I think it may be a freshman hesitating/ playing PG, not calling his own number kind of thing. Hopefully that will change quickly. I agree on the fatigue factor with our FT shooting as many landed short on the front rim. They are still learning how to play zone, sometimes not filling in the hole at the foul line. But I like the potential of this zone as they get more experience. Thank God Detroit did not have Jack Tatum.
I love Vodanovich, he reminds me of Jim Loscutoff, except bigger. (Seeing if all the youngins on here react to that one.) He does not back down and will not be intimidated. It will be fun to watch them grow and get better.

I think the strategy was to pound it inside late in the game. It worked as JMU came back and went to the foul line. They also fouled out two Detroit starters and another had 4 fouls. The problem was that JMU could not make free throws. Also, a lot of shots barely rolled off the rim after seemingly going half way down the basket. On the other side, Detriot was clanking shots off the rim at times only to have them fall in the basket. They also hit more threes than normal.

I have to disagree with BSKB on the zone defense. Our zone gave up a lot of easy baskets early in the second half. There were three defenders pressing out beyond the three point line above the key because Detroit was shooting better than expected. That was opening up the lane for close range shots. It also let #11 get several very good looks in the corner for threes.

I like what I see in these guys. Brady's first class looked like they needed to grow into their bodies. They did not appear to be D1 ready physically. These guys are already full grown men and yet, they still look like they have room to fill out more.

I really like the potential of this years Freshman. They can rebound, are long and seem to have much better basketball IQ then past classes. Of course, potential only sounds good while they are young. If they don't develop, we will all be singing the blues over the next couple of years.

(11-21-2013 08:07 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  I think the strategy was to pound it inside late in the game. It worked as JMU came back and went to the foul line. They also fouled out two Detroit starters and another had 4 fouls. The problem was that JMU could not make free throws. Also, a lot of shots barely rolled off the rim after seemingly going half way down the basket. On the other side, Detriot was clanking shots off the rim at times only to have them fall in the basket. They also hit more threes than normal.

I have to disagree with BSKB on the zone defense. Our zone gave up a lot of easy baskets early in the second half. There were three defenders pressing out beyond the three point line above the key because Detroit was shooting better than expected. That was opening up the lane for close range shots. It also let #11 get several very good looks in the corner for threes.

I like what I see in these guys. Brady's first class looked like they needed to grow into their bodies. They did not appear to be D1 ready physically. These guys are already full grown men and yet, they still look like they have room to fill out more.

I really like the potential of this years Freshman. They can rebound, are long and seem to have much better basketball IQ then past classes. Of course, potential only sounds good while they are young. If they don't develop, we will all be singing the blues over the next couple of years.

I agree that Detroit seemed to solve the 3-2 zone for a while in the second half. Two things; We may have "over-substituted" some in the second half. Brady played a lot of different combinations and that leads to a little confusion at times defensively. Second, I think we need to switch up defenses a little more. When they started getting it to the middle and dumping to the baseline behind the zone and to the corners we should have tried a 2-3. They were "solving" how to beat our zone at that point so the thing to do is re-establish yousrelf defensively by switching it up. The two greatest coaches in the history of the ECAC South/CAA ( Dick Tarrant and Lou Campanelli) were masters at it. If you run the same defense too long any team will usually learn how to attack it.

(11-21-2013 11:03 AM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  

(11-21-2013 08:07 AM)JMUNation Wrote:  I think the strategy was to pound it inside late in the game. It worked as JMU came back and went to the foul line. They also fouled out two Detroit starters and another had 4 fouls. The problem was that JMU could not make free throws. Also, a lot of shots barely rolled off the rim after seemingly going half way down the basket. On the other side, Detriot was clanking shots off the rim at times only to have them fall in the basket. They also hit more threes than normal.

I have to disagree with BSKB on the zone defense. Our zone gave up a lot of easy baskets early in the second half. There were three defenders pressing out beyond the three point line above the key because Detroit was shooting better than expected. That was opening up the lane for close range shots. It also let #11 get several very good looks in the corner for threes.

I like what I see in these guys. Brady's first class looked like they needed to grow into their bodies. They did not appear to be D1 ready physically. These guys are already full grown men and yet, they still look like they have room to fill out more.

I really like the potential of this years Freshman. They can rebound, are long and seem to have much better basketball IQ then past classes. Of course, potential only sounds good while they are young. If they don't develop, we will all be singing the blues over the next couple of years.

I agree that Detroit seemed to solve the 3-2 zone for a while in the second half. Two things; We may have "over-substituted" some in the second half. Brady played a lot of different combinations and that leads to a little confusion at times defensively. Second, I think we need to switch up defenses a little more. When they started getting it to the middle and dumping to the baseline behind the zone and to the corners we should have tried a 2-3. They were "solving" how to beat our zone at that point so the thing to do is re-establish yousrelf defensively by switching it up. The two greatest coaches in the history of the ECAC South/CAA ( Dick Tarrant and Lou Campanelli) were masters at it. If you run the same defense too long any team will usually learn how to attack it.

I was surprised it gave Detroit so much trouble and took them until after the half to figure out they needed to seal the post in order to open up the corner. When they did it opened up everything for them. That's when they caught our guys with their backs turned to the play (Kent did it several times). I kept waiting for a little more full and even half court pressure too. I thought we had some great opportunities to trap in the half court. Sitting behind the visitor's bench I had a good look at our d in the second half

What we all need to acknowledge is that Vodanovich did not get hit by the handsome stick.
That makes me root for him harder.

So, are we a near exclusively zone team?

(11-21-2013 11:03 AM)BSKB 24 Wrote:  I agree that Detroit seemed to solve the 3-2 zone for a while in the second half.

So you are saying that the other team looked at what we did in the first half and made half time adjustments to their game plan?? Must be Mickey's fault we lost to Detroit.

Bingo BSKB. JMU needed to switch to the 2-3. They did come out in a zone that looked like a man to man a couple of times in the second half and it confused Detroit. I thougth that was a good coaching move by Brady. Bottom line is that this game was JMU's to have and they let it slip away. The Dukes were the better team but they could not get over the hump.