The unofficial online home for fans of the Old Dominion University Monarchs. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

I would like to hear poster 757’s take on this. I know he follows the team a lot closer than I do now a days and posted recently that we might have a chance to be good. Not a great start to the season the first two games.

(11-11-2022 09:20 PM)Prideofalion Wrote:  Team is definitely more athletic and a little deeper, but you aren’t beating anybody good when u can’t shoot man. Mekhi Long put up zero. I mean.. they hit 3 threes in the entire game. It’s just the same ****. Team is gonna have to grind to have a winning record I think. You can’t hit 3 threes a game and win in 2022. It’s just not gonna get better. They will play some good games and win some ball games but no way in hell do they beat anyone worth a damn. That’s just the way it is.

This! No way you are winning a game these days hitting three treys. You can bludgeon a team on the boards but the three balls and free throws have to go in with some consistency and that’s not a Jeff Jones coaching trait.

(11-12-2022 07:01 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  I had to miss listening into the game last night, and it seems like that was for the best. From my perch of secondhand-only information, it sounds like we again have a team of promising athletes who are likely to underperform.

From a review of the box score, I see that Stines again went for an “0-fer” night, but don’t see any comments on him. Does anyone have a sense of what is going on? Is he playing out of position? Being assigned the defensive-specialist role? (Which I thought belonged to Long.)

Other concerns:

Just one assist for our point guard? Is that right? Maybe it’s because our shooting was so bad? 18 offensive rebounds, with little to show for it, would seem to suggest so. Or is it that Imo is not up quite to the job? Do we need to be praying to the satanic overlords at the NCAA for a favorable ruling on Tre Brown?

I actually am prepared to disregard the abysmal free-throw shooting as just an off night. That happens, and although UMES was not a test on most aspects of the game, the solid free-throw shooting from that game tells me that the team (other than Jason Wade) can do it. Unless they were playing scared. Is that what happened?

I see a solid number of minutes shared out among nine players. Is that what we can expect, or was that due to the early foul trouble?

Stines only played 12 mins but he could not hit anything. He's a guy that can shoot though.

Assists.....yes, we need more assists. However, if every field goal is called a foul, you are going to have trouble getting assists. There were 7 from us and 10 from them. Something to keep an eye on for sure, but for the other night, it was probably because they called a foul every time down the court (both ways). I thought Imo played well but he's not going to be an all conference player this year. Hes not going to rack up a ton of counting stats.

Free throws is an interesting point. Im not sure how good Dericko Williams is at free throw shooting. I tried to find out his numbers last year but I could not find them. He had 5 of our free throws (out of 21 and made only 1). If he is a bad FT shooter like a lot of big men and he leads in free throws, the numbers will look bad. TSG was 2-5, but is almost an 80% free throw shooter so Id imagine its just a sample size issue to start. Stanley is not a good free throw shooter. Long is not a good FT shooter. Jenkins doesn't have a track record. Smith is a good FT shooter but doesn't get to the line.

I think we saw what the rotation will be.

I think our defense will be solid and the rebounding will be really good. We wont be a great shooting team, but I would like to see more attempts for sure. We need to have TSG, Jenkins, Smith, Stines attempting more 3s. Too many missed bunnies underneath. I think the refs took control of the game in the first half and just allowed zero flow at all with silly ticky tack fouls 60 feet from the basket. Then they decided to swallow the whistle in the second half. Their guys responded well to it, ours did not. Thought the effort was there and got some decent looks, but we need to knock them down. Our bigs need to stop shooting jumpers. We need to get Jenkins and TSG more opportunities to knock down shots.

The 1-3-1 zone still needs a lot of work, IMO.

(11-13-2022 02:04 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(11-12-2022 07:01 AM)AdoptedMonarch Wrote:  I had to miss listening into the game last night, and it seems like that was for the best. From my perch of secondhand-only information, it sounds like we again have a team of promising athletes who are likely to underperform.

From a review of the box score, I see that Stines again went for an “0-fer” night, but don’t see any comments on him. Does anyone have a sense of what is going on? Is he playing out of position? Being assigned the defensive-specialist role? (Which I thought belonged to Long.)

Other concerns:

Just one assist for our point guard? Is that right? Maybe it’s because our shooting was so bad? 18 offensive rebounds, with little to show for it, would seem to suggest so. Or is it that Imo is not up quite to the job? Do we need to be praying to the satanic overlords at the NCAA for a favorable ruling on Tre Brown?

I actually am prepared to disregard the abysmal free-throw shooting as just an off night. That happens, and although UMES was not a test on most aspects of the game, the solid free-throw shooting from that game tells me that the team (other than Jason Wade) can do it. Unless they were playing scared. Is that what happened?

I see a solid number of minutes shared out among nine players. Is that what we can expect, or was that due to the early foul trouble?

Stines only played 12 mins but he could not hit anything. He's a guy that can shoot though.

Assists.....yes, we need more assists. However, if every field goal is called a foul, you are going to have trouble getting assists. There were 7 from us and 10 from them. Something to keep an eye on for sure, but for the other night, it was probably because they called a foul every time down the court (both ways). I thought Imo played well but he's not going to be an all conference player this year. Hes not going to rack up a ton of counting stats.

Free throws is an interesting point. Im not sure how good Dericko Williams is at free throw shooting. I tried to find out his numbers last year but I could not find them. He had 5 of our free throws (out of 21 and made only 1). If he is a bad FT shooter like a lot of big men and he leads in free throws, the numbers will look bad. TSG was 2-5, but is almost an 80% free throw shooter so Id imagine its just a sample size issue to start. Stanley is not a good free throw shooter. Long is not a good FT shooter. Jenkins doesn't have a track record. Smith is a good FT shooter but doesn't get to the line.

I think we saw what the rotation will be.

I think our defense will be solid and the rebounding will be really good. We wont be a great shooting team, but I would like to see more attempts for sure. We need to have TSG, Jenkins, Smith, Stines attempting more 3s. Too many missed bunnies underneath. I think the refs took control of the game in the first half and just allowed zero flow at all with silly ticky tack fouls 60 feet from the basket. Then they decided to swallow the whistle in the second half. Their guys responded well to it, ours did not. Thought the effort was there and got some decent looks, but we need to knock them down. Our bigs need to stop shooting jumpers. We need to get Jenkins and TSG more opportunities to knock down shots.

The 1-3-1 zone still needs a lot of work, IMO.

His Free Throw percentage in the past seems to be better than average -

CATEGORY OVERALL CONF
Games 29 12
Games started 26 11
Minutes 135 80
Minutes per game 4.7 6.7
FG 116-216 39-83
FG Pct 53.7 47.0
3PT 0-2 0-1
3PT Pct 0.0 0.0
FT 92-121 34-43
FT Pct 76.0 79.1
Off rebounds 82 33
Def rebounds 140 60
Total rebounds 222 93
Rebounds per game 7.7 7.8
Personal fouls 91 46
Disqualifications 5 3
Assists 24 10
Turnovers 54 23
Assist to turnover ratio 0.4 0.4
Steals 21 10
Blocks 42 13
Points 324 112
Points per game 11.2 9.3
Points per 40 min 96.0 56.0


https://tcceagles.com/sports/mbkb/2021-2...ricko_vyij

Not using my six tix tomorrow. VA Wes is not worth the trouble. DM me if you want them.

(11-13-2022 04:34 PM)Monarch Pride Wrote:  Not using my six tix tomorrow. VA Wes is not worth the trouble. DM me if you want them.

https://csnbbs.com/thread-911759-page-5.html

(11-12-2022 08:05 AM)mac Wrote:  I would like to hear poster 757’s take on this. I know he follows the team a lot closer than I do now a days and posted recently that we might have a chance to be good. Not a great start to the season the first two games.

I am hesitant to get really down on this team. Looking at scores every night from programs around the country, you will see good teams losing to bad teams. Going to Philadelphia and getting a win is not an easy task. Am I disappointed in the result, yes, I am very disappointed. However, the reality is, it doesn't matter until we get into the meat of the conference schedule, and see where we stand with a few things:

1. Health
2. Roles Identified
3. New coaches ability to scout/gameplan
4. PG position

I am worried about the PG position and I am not sure Tre Brown fixes anything, but maybe I am wrong.

I will say this...if our non-conference record is anywhere near .500 or below that, I will be pissed. Jones has had his chances, if they suck that bad this year, get him the hell out of here.

Messed around the efficiency and on/off splits bc I was curious about Imos impact (im also worried about PG)

Its early so sample size alert but...

The offensive efficiency with Williams on the court has been great 119, but defense has suffered 116. Still net positive.

The next best offensive players are TSG, Stanley and Stines. Jenkins, Imo, and Long are all still over 100. Fields and Smith are under 100. (meaning the offense has suffered with them on the court).

Defensively, TSG and Long have the 2nd worst numbers (surprised by Long). Stanley is 107 and Imo is 106. Stines, Jenkins, Smith, and Fields are all under 100.

I think we have some evidence that Stines has had a positive impact on the team when in the game. I think Jenkins has been the best player on the team so far. Stanley is great offensively and it probably still warrants some praise despite his sketchy defense. Imo has been net neutral. Long has been negative, but I'm guessing its because he played poorly Friday night.

Other interesting tidbits.

Our best offensive lineup (sample size again):
Essien, TSG, Stines, Long, Fields

followed closely by:
Essient, TSG, Long, Stanley, Williams (defensively have been a trainwreck though)

Defensively our bst lineups are:

Essient, Jenkins, Long, Stanley, Fields

and Jenkins, Stines, TSG, Long, Fields

(11-14-2022 12:15 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  Other interesting tidbits.

Our best offensive lineup (sample size again):
Essien, TSG, Stines, Long, Fields

followed closely by:
Essient, TSG, Long, Stanley, Williams (defensively have been a trainwreck though)

Defensively our bst lineups are:

Essient, Jenkins, Long, Stanley, Fields

and Jenkins, Stines, TSG, Long, Fields

Imo has a long way to go. The only thing he does well is not fouling while playing defense.

I don't disagree. I think he's more "doesn't help, doesn't hurt" than bad. I think Brown would have been playing siginificant minutes. Brown will probably get his waiver once the NCAA grants all the P5 waivers.

(11-14-2022 01:06 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  I don't disagree. I think he's more "doesn't help, doesn't hurt" than bad. I think Brown would have been playing siginificant minutes. Brown will probably get his waiver once the NCAA grants all the P5 waivers.

Hopefully that helps things, but I am not so sure. By default, it helps with depth, but we need more than that at the position.

(11-14-2022 12:15 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  Other interesting tidbits.

Our best offensive lineup (sample size again):
Essien, TSG, Stines, Long, Fields

followed closely by:
Essient, TSG, Long, Stanley, Williams (defensively have been a trainwreck though)

Defensively our bst lineups are:

Essient, Jenkins, Long, Stanley, Fields

and Jenkins, Stines, TSG, Long, Fields

When the "best offensive lineup" doesn't include the player that is by far the leading scorer (Stanley), it's just another indication of how stats don't tell the whole story. Not to mention the fact that he is hitting over 55% of his shots.

When someone tries to use a 2 game sample for any meaningful conclusions as opposed to just general information, then you know they don't understand what they are looking at. Or they just want to comment on every post for some reason.

Its not rocket science to understand that it is possible to have better scoring units on the floor without your top scorer. Or to also understand that it can change quickly.

(11-14-2022 01:38 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  When someone tries to use a 2 game sample for any meaningful conclusions as opposed to just general information, then you know they don't understand what they are looking at. Or they just want to comment on every post for some reason.

Its not rocket science to understand that it is possible to have better scoring units on the floor without your top scorer. Or to also understand that it can change quickly.

We agree then that posting stats 2 games into the season (3 now) is meaningless and potentially misleading data. That's pretty much what I just said. It wasn't rocket science to pick up on that.

Your sports stats aren't hard for anyone to understand. It's Pre-K level data. Try analyzing some engineering data for comparison.

You're averaging 27 post per week. I'm averaging just over half that amount - 16.

Stanley has upped his shooting percentage after last night's game to 57% from the floor. The team as a whole is hitting at just 42%. Still too early to draw any meaningful conclusions from the data as far as where things might be in a couple of months. The level of competition they have gone against thus far has been very low end. Business picks up starting on Thursday against VA Tech.

(11-15-2022 11:46 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 01:38 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  When someone tries to use a 2 game sample for any meaningful conclusions as opposed to just general information, then you know they don't understand what they are looking at. Or they just want to comment on every post for some reason.

Its not rocket science to understand that it is possible to have better scoring units on the floor without your top scorer. Or to also understand that it can change quickly.

We agree then that posting stats 2 games into the season (3 now) is meaningless and potentially misleading data. That's pretty much what I just said. It wasn't rocket science to pick up on that.

Your sports stats aren't hard for anyone to understand. It's Pre-K level data. Try analyzing some engineering data for comparison.

You're averaging 27 post per week. I'm averaging just over half that amount - 16.

Stanley has upped his shooting percentage after last night's game to 57% from the floor. The team as a whole is hitting at just 42%. Still too early to draw any meaningful conclusions from the data as far as where things might be in a couple of months. The level of competition they have gone against thus far has been very low end. Business picks up starting on Thursday against VA Tech.

Out of the 16, 15 are responses to me. I'm flattered but I guess we all have our obsessions.

If you don't like reading data on the Monarchs, then dont read. No one forces you to read anything. Others can read the data and make their own conclusions. Its not a difficult concept.

(11-15-2022 11:49 AM)Stat Geek Wrote:  

(11-15-2022 11:46 AM)ODU BBALL Wrote:  

(11-14-2022 01:38 PM)Stat Geek Wrote:  When someone tries to use a 2 game sample for any meaningful conclusions as opposed to just general information, then you know they don't understand what they are looking at. Or they just want to comment on every post for some reason.

Its not rocket science to understand that it is possible to have better scoring units on the floor without your top scorer. Or to also understand that it can change quickly.

We agree then that posting stats 2 games into the season (3 now) is meaningless and potentially misleading data. That's pretty much what I just said. It wasn't rocket science to pick up on that.

Your sports stats aren't hard for anyone to understand. It's Pre-K level data. Try analyzing some engineering data for comparison.

You're averaging 27 post per week. I'm averaging just over half that amount - 16.

Stanley has upped his shooting percentage after last night's game to 57% from the floor. The team as a whole is hitting at just 42%. Still too early to draw any meaningful conclusions from the data as far as where things might be in a couple of months. The level of competition they have gone against thus far has been very low end. Business picks up starting on Thursday against VA Tech.

Out of the 16, 15 are responses to me. I'm flattered but I guess we all have our obsessions.

If you don't like reading data on the Monarchs, then dont read. No one forces you to read anything. Others can read the data and make their own conclusions. Its not a difficult concept.

Thanks for replying to my post (again). Guess I should be flattered? When you post thoughts or opinions as if they are indisputable facts and they aren't, expect some differing thoughts and opinions on the posts. That's how message boards work Giles. You do that a lot more often than you probably realize.

I can appreciate data if it's not meaningless data. In the engineering world that I'm familiar with, data drives the bus so to speak, and we're typically able to differentiate between useful and irrelevant data.

Don't need you to tell me what I should read. I'm allowed to read and make my conclusions on your data if I want - thank you. No one forces you to read anything either. See how that door swings both ways? That also isn't a difficult concept (or rocket science as you sometimes like to condescendingly say).

You replied to my post (again) and made all of this mountain of rhetoric out of my simple response - "When the "best offensive lineup" doesn't include the player that is by far the leading scorer (Stanley), it's just another indication of how stats don't tell the whole story. Not to mention the fact that he is hitting over 55% of his shots." He's at 57% today while the team is at 42%. We both know that's a true statement.