|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Feb 21, 2024 18:20:45 GMT -8
Lionel Simmons of La Salle won National Player of the Year Award over Payton. That should be all the evidence of West Coast bias you ever need. It is not lost on me that the East Coast Nets chose Derrick Coleman 1-1, allowing the West Coast Sonics to snatch up Payton at 1-2. Payton was the only future NBA Hall of Famer, who played domestically in 1990. What seems to have been lost on you though is that Nets had drafted Mookie Blaylock the year before, so PG wasn’t their biggest need. So that went with what was — a PF. You know, like Portland did a few years earlier when they went with their biggest need — a center — rather than Michael Jordan. It wasn’t East Coast bias. Interestingly, Bowie was on the Nets then as was Lester Connor I think. And that reminds me of one of my all-time favorite basketball quotes. Bobby Knight was good friends with Blazers GM Inman and reportedly was trying to convince Stu to take Jordan. Inman felt center was his team’s greatest need and said such to Knight. Knight’s reply? “So play him at center then.” Nets didn’t learn from Blazers mistake. |
|
|
|
Post by fridaynightlights on Feb 21, 2024 18:56:55 GMT -8
If I remember correctly, there was a fair amount of hype when they signed Lamar Hurd. I do remember being excited that he might be a difference maker, after seeing him play a few games I thought "that's it"?
I am glad that he found a home for himself in Oregon and is a successful broadcaster.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 21, 2024 21:52:03 GMT -8
Lamar's last season was 2005-06. We were 9-6 and had just beaten Arizona by 10 at home when he was injured. We lost the next game to ASU by 2, when Lamar got hurt, and finished 4-12. Lamar was the organizer of that team. One of the best players on that team had ADD and Lamar helped keep him focused.
There is some validity to his statement.
|
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 21, 2024 23:16:26 GMT -8
Warning, long post incoming. Wilky — I fully acknowledge that East Coast bias is real and it was worse back then. There is also a thing called fan bias and it is just as real. And I don’t think I leaned heavily on AP. I just included another thing that the committee uses that you code to completely omit. So let’s say the Beavs were under-ranked in AP. You really think they should have ended the regular season ranked #12 — the lowest ranking needed to be a 3 seed if only AP was used for seeding? Let’s say they should have been ranked 12 before Arizona blew them out. They dropped 6 spots with that loss (16 to 22), so I think it is reasonable to assume they would have dropped at least 4 spots from #12. That puts them at #16 or last #4 seed if AP was all that was used. Back quickly to East Coast bias. You wrote: “Sports Illustrated made a point of highlighting that Payton and Oregon State were criminally underrated, because they are on late.” I assume you’re talking about the early March issue that had Payton on cover. If so, that article was about how Payton was underrated not OSU. The only real mention of OSU the team by Kirkpatrick (great writer by the way) is “Remove Payton from the Pac-10-leading-but-lord-knows-how Beavers (21-4 overall through Sunday, 14-2 in the conference), and Oregon State makes an emergency call to the NAIA.” Hmmmm don’t see the word underrated there. In fact, that doesn’t read to me like the author thought Beavers were underrated let alone criminally so. I’ll also point out that his take was very similar to mine calling Beavers in large part a one man team for which I was taken to task by someone on here (though not you I don’t think). So, since you like ranking/rating systems that rely on SOS, I’ll throw another one out there — Simple Rating System, which uses SOS and margin of victory. Again, system has its problems, but premise is if playing an easier schedule should have a better MIOV. And MOV is used by selection committee I believe. Oregon State — 27 Michigan — 13 Duke — 5 Georgetown — 4 Louisville — 17 LaSalle — 30 Arkansas — 7 What drew me to it though is that I found a sortable source for it, which made it easy to expand “Quad 1” games beyond just AP ranked to better approximate Quad 1 games. I decided on top 50 SRS teams (seemed like a nice round number). That moves OSU “Quad 1” record to 4-3 (from 1-3) and LaSalle’s to 4-1 (from 0-1). I don’t know how looking at these various “data points” you can honestly say Beavers should have been a 3 seed. I’m a Beavers fan and that smells of fan bias to me. Should they have been a 4 and LaSalle a 5 seed? I think they were both 4/5 seeds and can make a case for both teams. If the Beavs hadn’t lost to AZ by 27 points in final regular season and then lost to a sub .500 Arizona St in first game of P-12 tourney, they would likely have been a 4 seed. I think that finish versus a 21-game winning streak is why they didn’t not East Coast bias. but I know I won’t convince you of that and that’s OK. But a 3 seed? C’mon. SRS is a full-season ranking, rather than a regular season ranking like RPI. You cannot pull out the pre-Tournament results, which color your data. RPI Oregon State Road Record SOS 10 Pac-10 (15-3) 8-5 36Quadrant 1 8 12/2 Arizona H W 84-61
8 3/3 Arizona A L 60-87
31 12/29 Louisiana Tech N W 82-81
32 1/27 UCLA A L 80-94
45 1/7 California A W 64-58
48 12/30 Oregon N W 71-68
48 1/13 Oregon A W 69-67
52 12/8 Memphis A L 72-78
63 1/5 Stanford A W 77-76
67 12/10 Tennessee A W 96-90
Quadrant 2 32 2/24 UCLA H W 83-74 45 2/1 California H W 98-81 48 2/11 Oregon H W 57-55 53 12/19 Loyola Marymount H L 113-117
63 2/3 Stanford H W 84-70
91 3/1 Arizona State A W 73-59
91 3/9 Arizona State A L 75-83
110 2/15 Washington A L 57-66
130 1/25 USC A W 92-82
Quadrant 3 91 11/30 Arizona State H W 87-64100 11/24 Marquette H W 71-57
110 1/20 Washington H W 70-63
117 12/27 Boston University N W 86-66
130 2/22 USC H W 98-94
178 2/18 Washington St. A W 83-63
Quadrant 4 178 1/18 Washington St. H W 79-64211 12/22 Boise State H W 76-42275 12/16 Gonzaga A W 82-61Oregon State was 7-3 against Quad 1 opponents. It is also always difficult to knock a schedule, where a 21-point win in Spokane against Gonzaga is the worst win on the entire schedule. Teams that La Salle played worse than Boise State: Canisius, Loyola, Niagara, Fairfield, Manhattan, Fairfield, Loyola, Manhattan, Army, and Fairfield.
That is all to say that Oregon State had 21 wins over teams with a semblance of a pulse, and La Salle had 19. Oregon State also played Loyola Marymount better than La Salle. La Salle being rated higher than Oregon State was a joke. Oregon State being anything short of a three-seed similarly was similarly laughable. |
|
|
|
Post by ag87 on Feb 21, 2024 23:22:01 GMT -8
Lamar's last season was 2005-06. We were 9-6 and had just beaten Arizona by 10 at home when he was injured. We lost the next game to ASU by 2, when Lamar got hurt, and finished 4-12. Lamar was the organizer of that team. One of the best players on that team had ADD and Lamar helped keep him focused. There is some validity to his statement. and if Lamar could have hit an open jump shot he would have been a nice player. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Feb 22, 2024 9:48:34 GMT -8
Wilky
Yes, SRS is a full-season ranking. Even with that, how “colored” are the results when for a very large majority of the teams it adds at most 1 game. For those playing 2 games or more in tourney, sure it will change things slightly. It still overall gives a strong approximation of what the committee was looking at real time with both SOS and margin of victory. Of course it doesn’t make Beavers look as good so let’s throw it out completely as you’ve done with the AP poll.
I never knocked Beavers schedule, so not sure why you mention the lopsided win over a terrible Gonzaga team. The cynic in me might think it is because you hope some will forget Gonzaga wasn’t “Gonzaga” back then and was even worse than normal that year (8-20). Idaho won by 20 that year at Gonzaga and they were only a 13 seed.
You list 10 games LaSalle lost to teams that had a worse RPI than Beavers vs Boise St. SRS has it at 3 games. Oh wait, those 3 postseason games all those teams played would have “colored the data.”
You say Beavers had 21 wins over teams with a pulse and LaSalle had 19. You do realize the committee also looks at losses right? Or have you created a reason to disregard Beavers 6 losses to LaSalle’s 1?
But my favorite is the mention that Beavers played Loyola Marymount better than LaSalle. Not quite on par with your mention of the SI article and writing that it said that the “Beaver team was criminally underrated,” but at least your L-M comment is actually true. Yes, Beavers did lose to L-M by only 4 at home while LaSalle lost by a whopping 5 at home to them. Yep, that certainly proves LaSalle being seeded higher than OSU was a joke.
Like I said previously, if OSU had a chance for a 3 seed, it died with a 27-point loss to AZ and an 8-point loss to sub .500 ASU in its final two games. I get it. If your orange colored glasses allow you to ONLY look at one thing (RPI) and you disregard other criteria we know committee used — polls, MOV, late season record — as well as other metrics of which we don’t have access to then Beavers should have been a 3 seed. Not the way it works though, but I realize you’ll go on believing that it should be the way it works no matter what I say. So let’s just call a truce on this. But thanks for pushing me to look back at my second favorite Beavers team and go down the Gary Payton internet highlight rabbit hole.
What I find very strange and a little amusing though is that you can drum up so much passion and belief in something that happened almost 34 years ago, yet you contend that the program has been so bad since Ralph’s departure that no qualified coach would want the OSU job and that Tinkle is the best we can do despite him closing in on the worst 3-year span for a coach here. That is bizarre to me and frankly a sad commentary on where Tinkle has the program today.
|
|
|
|
Post by Henry Skrimshander on Feb 22, 2024 9:58:45 GMT -8
Lamar's last season was 2005-06. We were 9-6 and had just beaten Arizona by 10 at home when he was injured. We lost the next game to ASU by 2, when Lamar got hurt, and finished 4-12. Lamar was the organizer of that team. One of the best players on that team had ADD and Lamar helped keep him focused. There is some validity to his statement. and if Lamar could have hit an open jump shot he would have been a nice player. I'd say if Lamar could hit open jumpers he'd been a better player. But that's just me. |
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Feb 22, 2024 11:39:13 GMT -8
Payton was obviously the star, but we were far from a one-man team. Teo was an outstanding player who, unfortunately, did not get along with Payton. Maybe because European players were new to college basketball at that time and their style of play was different. Teo was not a banger/rebounder, although people thought he should be because he was 6-7 or 6-8. Will Brantley had the potential to be a fantastic college basketball player, and he often was early in his career. From what I heard, he did not have a good work ethic and loved the party life and that seriously retarded his development. Scott Haskin was just too young then. Had he been a junior or senior ... Earl Martin was an excellent player. The other guys were workmanlike. This back and forth Wilky and I have been having has led me to watch (and rewatch in many cases) Payton highlights at OSU and some game clips. I don’t know if it was just happenstance but remembering what you wrote about Payton not liking Teo, it was noticeable how few of Payton’s assists they showed went to Teo. Don’t think I knew that about the two of them. Very interesting. |
|
|
|
Post by wilkyisdashiznit on Feb 22, 2024 14:38:47 GMT -8
Wilky Yes, SRS is a full-season ranking. Even with that, how “colored” are the results when for a very large majority of the teams it adds at most 1 game. For those playing 2 games or more in tourney, sure it will change things slightly. It still overall gives a strong approximation of what the committee was looking at real time with both SOS and margin of victory. Of course it doesn’t make Beavers look as good so let’s throw it out completely as you’ve done with the AP poll. I never knocked Beavers schedule, so not sure why you mention the lopsided win over a terrible Gonzaga team. The cynic in me might think it is because you hope some will forget Gonzaga wasn’t “Gonzaga” back then and was even worse than normal that year (8-20). Idaho won by 20 that year at Gonzaga and they were only a 13 seed. You list 10 games LaSalle lost to teams that had a worse RPI than Beavers vs Boise St. SRS has it at 3 games. Oh wait, those 3 postseason games all those teams played would have “colored the data.” You say Beavers had 21 wins over teams with a pulse and LaSalle had 19. You do realize the committee also looks at losses right? Or have you created a reason to disregard Beavers 6 losses to LaSalle’s 1? But my favorite is the mention that Beavers played Loyola Marymount better than LaSalle. Not quite on par with your mention of the SI article and writing that it said that the “Beaver team was criminally underrated,” but at least your L-M comment is actually true. Yes, Beavers did lose to L-M by only 4 at home while LaSalle lost by a whopping 5 at home to them. Yep, that certainly proves LaSalle being seeded higher than OSU was a joke. Like I said previously, if OSU had a chance for a 3 seed, it died with a 27-point loss to AZ and an 8-point loss to sub .500 ASU in its final two games. I get it. If your orange colored glasses allow you to ONLY look at one thing (RPI) and you disregard other criteria we know committee used — polls, MOV, late season record — as well as other metrics of which we don’t have access to then Beavers should have been a 3 seed. Not the way it works though, but I realize you’ll go on believing that it should be the way it works no matter what I say. So let’s just call a truce on this. But thanks for pushing me to look back at my second favorite Beavers team and go down the Gary Payton internet highlight rabbit hole. What I find very strange and a little amusing though is that you can drum up so much passion and belief in something that happened almost 34 years ago, yet you contend that the program has been so bad since Ralph’s departure that no qualified coach would want the OSU job and that Tinkle is the best we can do despite him closing in on the worst 3-year span for a coach here. That is bizarre to me and frankly a sad commentary on where Tinkle has the program today. I usually think that the chatter is worth it, even if neither of us convince each other or anyone else. A fun fact is that 1989-90 Gonzaga is the only Bulldog team with a losing record in the past 45 years. Dan Fitzgerald was in year eight of a 15-year buildout, turning a below average Big Sky team (even for Big Sky standards) into a perennial national power. The 8-20 season was his low point. It took Fitzgerald another four seasons to get Gonzaga to the NIT for the first time ever and the Tourney for the first time ever the year following. Dan Monson was his primary assistant beginning in 1988 and would replace Fitzgerald and take Gonzaga to the next level two years after Fitzgerald retired. Mark Few was a graduate assistant for that 1989-90 Gonzaga team and would be Monson's primary assistant from 1997-1999 before taking over head coaching duties in 1999. Gonzaga's best player was Jim McPhee, who had scored the most points for Gonzaga since the sixties until Drew Timme passed him on the list last year. It should be noted that a game with Gonzaga in Spokane probably looked like a lot more daunting game than the one that ultimately took place. And, as bad as 8-20 is, it should be noted that four of those wins were against sub-D1 competition. Gonzaga had wins against Western Montana, Eastern Oregon, Montana Tech, and Whitman. And yet, Gonzaga only lost by two at Fairfield in a game played in Fairfield, Connecticut! Meaning that Gonzaga probably beats Fairfield at a neutral site. And Fairfield finished ahead of Army, Canisius, Loyola, and Niagara in the MAAC in 1989-90. And Fairfield had a better RPI than Manhattan. Arguably 8-20 Gonzaga was better than the six teams mentioned above. I switched from Gonzaga to Boise in my post above, because Boise clearly was better than those six teams. Any ranking that had any of those six teams ahead of Boise is wrong. I am wary about SRS, because I do not know how it deals with wins against non-D1 competition. I am worried that it is including them, which makes the ranking even more unreliable than it would normally be. I trust RPI, because RPI excludes those games. Strength of Victory means a lot more than Strength of Schedule. You get judged on who you beat and where you beat them. Any committee that is hyper-focused on losses is approaching seeding backward. Pretty much every team can run up a gaudy record not playing anybody. You exclude losses, because you expect more against better competition. Why I brought up the Loyola Marymount games? Loyola Marymount played Oregon State in Corvallis in the Pacific Time Zone. Loyola Marymount played La Salle in Philadelphia, more than three times further away, three time zones away. Loyola Marymount and Oregon State were tied at 112 before Bo Kimble hit his bucket with 59 seconds left. Gary Payton fouled out on the play and Kimble hit the free throw, 115-112. Karl Anderson was fouled at the other end but could only hit one free throw to pull within two. Oregon State fouled Terrell Lowery, who hit both free throws with 19 seconds left. 117-113 the final. The last tie in the Loyola Marymount and La Salle game was at 109. Loyola Marymount hit a bucket with 4:06 left to go up 111-109. Loyola Marymount went up 115-110 before La Salle narrowed it to one with 2:09 left but could get no closer. Oregon State played Loyola Marymount better than La Salle did and enjoyed much less of a homecourt advantage. My basic contention is not that no qualified coach would want the Oregon State job. My first contention is that money to buy out Tinkle would be better spent almost anywhere else. My second contention is basically the same as with Riley back in 2014. While it is not impossible to find a better coach who would want the Oregon State job, it is highly improbable that the current AD will find and hire that guy. I have more faith in Barnes than I did in BDC, but I do not think that either is a serious, big time AD. But I would be happy to be proven wrong (rather than proven right in Riley's case). |
|
