• Welcome to OGBoards 10.0, keep in mind that we will be making LOTS of changes to smooth out the experience here and make it as close as possible functionally to the old software, but feel free to drop suggestions or requests in the Tech Support subforum!

Is there something to this "change in chemistry"?

Deacsfan27 said:
According to KenPom (final rankings)--MAAC ranking since Patsos took over (out of 10 teams in the MAAC)

2012- 3rd (currently)
2011- 6th
2010- 9th
2009- 8th
2008- 5th
2007- 4th
2006- 6th
2005- 10th
Click to expand...

What does that put them at nationally over those years? (Not this year tho, since that isn't statistically significant yet.)

Cheers.
 
jamesda3 said:
my question is are we ever going to get a big decent center ever again to play for us? We have not had one since Eric Williams
Click to expand...

Kyle Visser?
SEASON TEAM MIN FGM-FGA FG% 3PM-3PA 3P% FTM-FTA FT% REB AST BLK STL PF TO PTS
2006-07 WAKE 29.0 6.1-10.4 .584 0.0-0.1 .000 4.8-7.5 .644 7.4 0.6 1.4 0.7 2.5 2.0 17.0
 
Recently I got a 32" flat screen Panasonic. Hope I can maintain some self control when the schedule kicks up a couple of notches. I have the Sports Pass from TW, so even though we may get sent to one of those side road channels, my chances of seeing the Deacs look pretty good.
Right now I'm getting a lot of women's volleyball, which can be very entertaining, if you know what I mean.
 
Deacsfan27 said:
According to KenPom (final rankings)--MAAC ranking since Patsos took over (out of 10 teams in the MAAC)

2012- 3rd (currently) 159
2011- 6th 188
2010- 9th 214
2009- 8th 229
2008- 5th 172
2007- 4th 194
2006- 6th 190
2005- 10th 197
Click to expand...

Updated
 
much like mike tyson's infamous quote "everybody has a plan till they get punched in the mouth," i feel like lots of teams appear to have great chemistry until they lose a couple of games. we've seen it on our own squads in the past. i'm not sure we can know anything yet.
 
bmoneydeac said:
much like mike tyson's infamous quote "everybody has a plan till they get punched in the mouth," i feel like lots of teams appear to have great chemistry until they lose a couple of games. we've seen it on our own squads in the past. i'm not sure we can know anything yet.
Click to expand...

Good point. I was comparing them to last year's team and they literally stumbled right out of the gate. I guess the good news is this team has not yet stumbled...an improvement over last year already.
 
I do think that Georgia Southern's run that cut it to 5 would have caused last year's team to fold like tissue paper.
 
The Stig said:
I do think that Georgia Southern's run that cut it to 5 would have caused last year's team to fold like tissue paper.
Click to expand...

Funny, I had exactly that thought when it got to 5. Then McKie and CJ settled things down.
 
I am a big supporter of Jeff's and absolutely believe in a change of chemistry and the importance of that to on the court success. Anybody who has played a team sport knows that the chemistry flows from the players and that one needs a critical mass of players who "run the team" in order to beat down the guys with egos or lack of effort.
 
joepaterno.jpg
 
The chemistry was so bad last year because none of those players had intentions of playing for [Redacted]. Their coach was fired and they had no input into that decision or on who to hire next, even though it seriously affected their future. And given that [Redacted] is hardly Mr. Personality, it is completely understandable that they weren't happy last year. Now those players have either learned to adjust or they are gone. So yeah... I expect that the chemistry would be better. That doesn't say anything about the coaching except that [Redacted] apparently isn't so much of an asshole that the kids are still resentful 18 months later.
 
redwing42 said:
The chemistry was so bad last year because none of those players had intentions of playing for [Redacted]. Their coach was fired and they had no input into that decision or on who to hire next, even though it seriously affected their future. And given that [Redacted] is hardly Mr. Personality, it is completely understandable that they weren't happy last year. Now those players have either learned to adjust or they are gone. So yeah... I expect that the chemistry would be better. That doesn't say anything about the coaching except that [Redacted] apparently isn't so much of an asshole that the kids are still resentful 18 months later.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. If a player has any kind of competiveness or pride, he will at least play as hard as he can. Many stories about successfull coaches that aren't the most liked. That being said, good chemistry is important and I think it has improved. I guess what I'm saying that most of the chemistry issue falls on those that left.
 
Deac65 said:
I respectfully disagree. If a player has any kind of competiveness or pride, he will at least play as hard as he can. Many stories about successfull coaches that aren't the most liked. That being said, good chemistry is important and I think it has improved. I guess what I'm saying that most of the chemistry issue falls on those that left.
Click to expand...

I don't really disagree with this, but some coaches can bring players together to fight a common cause. I don't think [Redacted] is that kind coach. That's fine as long as in the future we don't find ourselves with a collection of such disparate personalities.
 
Chemistry is better, but there is still a sizeable talent deficiency and a severe size deficiency. We're simply going to get pushed around by ACC teams. I don't see anything more than 2 or 3 conference wins, tops.
 
Deac65 said:
I respectfully disagree. If a player has any kind of competiveness or pride, he will at least play as hard as he can. Many stories about successfull coaches that aren't the most liked. That being said, good chemistry is important and I think it has improved. I guess what I'm saying that most of the chemistry issue falls on those that left.
Click to expand...

Playing hard is not the same as playing well. There is a huge difference between being efficient as an individual and being effective as a team. While it is easier to see in other sports, it is equally true for baskeball (example, when I was playing third grade basketball, I guarded my man so efficiently, I missed it when my my teammate lost his man, leading to a secondary break (althouh I had no idea what a secondary break was at the time)).
 
Winkathomelygirl said:
Playing hard is not the same as playing well. There is a huge difference between being efficient as an individual and being effective as a team. While it is easier to see in other sports, it is equally true for baskeball (example, when I was playing third grade basketball, I guarded my man so efficiently, I missed it when my my teammate lost his man, leading to a secondary break (althouh I had no idea what a secondary break was at the time)).
Click to expand...

As a team, I don't think we did either last year. At least this year (in our ridiculously small sample size), we appear to be playing hard as a team.
 
I think it would do people some good to watch a game from early last year and then watch one of our two from this year.

Ari and JT went for over 40 points combined against Stetson and we still lost because they also played a big part in letting Stetson drop 90 on us.

This year we're still playing man defense, with less athleticism and a paper thin front court, but I don't see this team giving up 90 points to a team like Stetson.
 
Stetson scored 90 on us last year?!! Good grief, I must have suppressed a lot of last year's details.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top