Bumblin' B's

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Since the discussion is happening on three different boards, I'll post here too.


Lincoln has every right to score 200 points, so long as the bench is doing all the scoring.  Those last five guys deserve a chance to play big minutes when the opposition is weak enough.

As far as I can tell, the other four starters were on the floor less than 15 minutes each.  The biggest fault was putting Wylie in at the end of the game to run the score up.  That's inexcusable.

[njlincolnlion]

Hoops Fan:

I couldn't agree with you more!

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Hoops Fan:

I couldn't agree with you more!

I might make you a little more angry.  I just got another look at the full box score.

Questionable Moves:
Garrick Wooten, the starter who only played 6 minutes had only averaged 3 minutes a game so far this season and was obviously starting because the opponent was so poor.

Wylie and White normally start; they played 24 and 19 minutes respectively.

Ja'Juan Robinson and Dean Dwight both came off the bench playing 24 and 22 minutes respectively.  Both of these guys typically start for Lincoln.

Of the seven players who played less than 10 minutes for Lincoln in this game, three played less than their season average to this point and the other five played within three minutes of their average.

Of the top six players in Lincoln's rotation (those averaging the most minutes to far this year), four of them played at or above their average minutes (including Wylie who is only averaging 24 minutes per game this season).  The other two players (Robinson and Dwight) both played only four less minutes.

In their defense:
Vincent Carter-Bey rarely plays; he got to start and played 16 minutes.

The fifth starter was Thomas Lahart, who has been the 1st or 2nd guy off the bench all season.  He played only 12 minutes.



As much as I will always maintain that the end of the bench can score as much as they want and play as hard as they want, Yuille's offenses in this game outweigh his graces.  Those guys at the end of the bench should have gotten more than the 6 minutes their last five guys in minutes played averaged in this game.

While I think Ypsi is totally wrong, I don't think I can defend anything about this game anymore.

[Mr. Ypsi]

Hoops,

Your last sentence leaves me rather confused.  You can no longer defend anything about this game anymore, yet "Ypsi is totally wrong"?!! 

About what was I wrong?  That 40 minutes of full court press against a team that dressed 6 players is just wrong?  That getting a steal and making a 3 when there is NO defender between you and the basket (and up by 100+) is just wrong?  That having your AA candidate make 36 of your last 56 points against a ridiculously overmatched opponent is just wrong?

[David Collinge]

I don't know who's totally wrong, but I think diehardfan is totally right (see Daily Dose).

[NW Hope Fan]

I don't know who's totally wrong, but I think diehardfan is totally right (see Daily Dose).

Yeah, except this is a basketball board, not a PETA, OXFAM, or Greenpeace board. April does point out some other misgivings of athletics in general that I'll agree with, but I think it is OK for basketball fans to get bent about basketball issues... No?

[sac]

Without actually seeing this game its pretty difficult to say anything critical really...............but I wonder how difficult it would have been for Lincoln to maybe run a little time off the shot clock.

I saw a team do it beautifully last weekend up 20 at the half and they won by 20.

Just a thought, and I do believe this show very poor sportmanship.

[David Collinge]

I don't know who's totally wrong, but I think diehardfan is totally right (see Daily Dose).

Yeah, except this is a basketball board, not a PETA, OXFAM, or Greenpeace board. April does point out some other misgivings of athletics in general that I'll agree with, but I think it is OK for basketball fans to get bent about basketball issues... No?

I don't know what PETA, OXFAM, or Greenpeace have to do with this.  You can feel any way you want about the results of the game, just as I can feel that some people are overreacting.

[John Gleich]

Nicely said Oxybob

[Ryan Scott (Hoops Fan)]

Ypsi was wrong for saying they should have pulled off the press.  If that's what they do, they shouldn't have to stop it.  I just don't think that's fair to the guys at the end of the bench.  I added more info on this on the daily dose.


However, after having examined the stats, I see that Lincoln didn't give their bench guys any more time than they had in any other game.  If they had kept up the press with the last five guys on the bench, I doubt it would habe been anywhere near 200 points to begin with and an 80 point win with your bench guys in against an inferior team would be drawing far less attention.

I disagree with Ypsi's statement (thus the strong 'wrong' language, which was probably a bit inaproriate) although I recognize his foundation for believing it (no matter how vehemently I oppose it).  In closing, I apologize for saying 'wrong' that was disrespectful of me.

[David Collinge]

OxyBob, I believe your halftime instructions amount to telling the team that they will play the rest of the game in a manner that they don't practice and don't use in any other game.  (I say "I believe" because I don't know enough about Lincoln to be sure.)  That's fine.  When I say there are no easy answers, I mean that I don't know where to draw that line, the line between a normal style of play and an altered one for the sake of "respect" or "sportsmanship."  You seem certain where that line is, and I'm glad for you. 

I also think it is an open question whether it is respectful or sportsmanlike to play with one hand tied behind your back.  Again, I don't know where to draw that line.

I am not defending, and have not even addressed, the issue of who played in the second half. 

I wasn't at the game, and I am reluctant to rush to judgment over something I don't have first-hand knowledge of.  I'm also believe, rightly or wrongly, that the great majority of D3 coaches conduct themselves as sportsmen, and am willing to extend to them the benefit of the doubt.  Because of that, I'm willing to consider alternative explanations other than the one that seems so obvious to so many.

[John Gleich]

And yet... in youth games, pressing isn't allowed.  The thought behind this is that some players are just head over heals better than their opponents and would have an unfair advantage.

Similarly, I know of leagues for players a bit older (middle school age and a bit younger) where there is a cap for pressing... if you're up 20, you have to stop pressing.  This is so that the other team isn't completely humiliated.

The point is that, the same way that a football team runs the ball to keep the clock moving and takes a knee during the end of a game on their opponent's 15 yardline instead of running up the score, a basketball team shouldn't be airing it out, with starters, and pressing for 40 full minutes when they're up more than 100 points!

And I fully understand the heart behind April's post, I really do.  But I also feel that there are parallels between how you act and how you carry yourself in something like a basketball game and how you act and how you carry yourself in life.  If someone would completely humiliate his fellow man on the basketball court, which, seemingly, has little to know real bearing on his existance, how will he treat his fellow man in life?  Will he carry though life believing that, just because he can trample someone, he should?  

Don't get me wrong, I'm not even going to begin to say that every participant should recieve the same sized trophy and everybody should get a ribon and a cookie just for participating, but, even in victory, if you carry yourself with humility and grace instead of pompus personal pride and arrogance, then it will affect those around you in a positive way, not a negative one, and it will carry over into life... it will breed leaders who don't think it's their God-given right to lord themselves over those who are below them, rather that they, as leaders, are there to serve, not to crack the slave-driver's whip.

Perhaps this is all a stretch, but then again, maybe it's not.

[David Collinge]

DC:

>>I wasn't at the game, and I am reluctant to rush to judgment over something I don't have first-hand knowledge of.<<

You have the box score, which has a running play-by-play. And, with all due respect, saying that you have no opinion because you weren't there to see it for yourself would pretty much eliminate you from opining about anything.

OxyBob

I didn't say I have no opinion, I said I won't rush to judgment.  Not the same thing at all. 

The other day, there was a game played between Denison and Wittenberg in which Denison shot under 39% from the field.  And one of the most knowledgable posters in our room, who was in attendance, posted that Denison sank pretty much everything they put up, or words to that effect.  It turns out that they were hitting the jumpers but missing the bunnies.  It's hard to tell that from the box score.  A few days before that, there was a game between Wooster and Georgetown that had a high number of turnovers and a fairly high shoting percentage, and one well-respected poster who was following the live stats concluded that the play was sloppy and lacking in defensive intensity.  In fact, the opposite was true; the defensive intensity caused the turnovers and led to a disproportionate number of high-percentage shots.  Those are just simple and recent cases where the box score and play by play account can give you one impression, while being at the game can give you a quite different one.

I agree with virtually everything PS says in his post above (I'm in favor of the ribbon-and-cookie idea, though.  )  He makes this point:

If someone would completely humiliate his fellow man on the basketball court, [...] how will he treat his fellow man in life? 

I turn that on its head; I assume as a starting point that Lincoln's players and coaches treat their fellow man in life with respect and dignity.  (Lincoln University does have that tradition.)  If so, then there must be some other explanation for the game, other than they set out with deliberate and malicious intent to humiliate OSU-Marion.  I assume, rightly or wrongly, that Lincoln had some degree of respect for their opponent, and took some steps to minimize the humiliation.  It may be that they did something that is not evident from the box score.  Even if that doesn't turn out to be the case, at least they'll be proven guilty and not just assumed to be guilty.

Believe me, I was as shocked and appalled as anyone else when I heard of this score (although I candidly admit that some part of me likes to see the words "Ohio State" on the wrong end of a blowout ).  I doubt that Lincoln is blameless, and if I looked into it any deeper I think it's possible that I'd become angry about it, as some of you already are.  But I have no desire to become angry about how a basketball game was played, especially when my anger will change nothing.  At the risk of ridicule, I'll say that I try to save my stronger emotions for things like poverty and oppression.  Maybe I can't do anything about them, either, but I can't go through my life being angry about everything.  I have to pick and choose, as do we all.

[Mr. Ypsi]

David,

Good post (as always!), but you ignore two things in the box score that cannot possibly be explained away.  The five players with the fewest minutes going in to the game averaged less than SIX minutes - it was NOT their scrubs who put up 201 points!  Their AA candidate Sami Wylie had 36 of the LAST 56 points scored.

It didn't occur to me until today, but the ONE person who has the MOST reason to be p***ed is last year's national POY, Kyle Myrick.  His name is erased from (one part of) the Lincoln record book because (while, if I remember correctly, every one of his 62 points was NEEDED by Lincoln) his former coach and former teammate conspired to break his single-game record against a team that sounds like Ypsi High would probably beat them (this is NOT an example of my frequent hyperbole - YHS IS very good, OSU-M is clearly very bad) - what a slap in the face to Lincoln's best-ever player!  What does Coach Yuille have planned for the future - schedule a Brownie troop so next year's star can go for 64?!

Sometimes the evidence is SO clear that eyewitness testimony is unnecessary!  I am NOT condemning LU in general as an institution; I AM saying they made a horrible misjudgement and owe an institutional apology to OSU-M.

[It goes without saying that I share your distaste in EVER being nice to a school with OSU in the name ( ), but, while it obviously has not even the remotest parallel to Bush's actions in Iraq or inactions in Darfur, what Lincoln's coach did is still disgusting.  I can be angry at MANY different levels, without getting mixed up between lack of sportsmanship at a bball game and children dying of easily preventable (or curable) diseases in Africa.]

[David Collinge]

David,

Good post (as always!), but you ignore two things in the box score that cannot possibly be explained away.  The five players with the fewest minutes going in to the game averaged less than SIX minutes - it was NOT their scrubs who put up 201 points!  Their AA candidate Sami Wylie had 36 of the LAST 56 points scored.

Yes, I have ignored this, as I mentioned earlier.  I have not considered the use of players, and I don't intend to consider it.  I just don't care enough.  I only got into this discussion in the first place because I was interesed in the academic question of whether you should change your basic style of play (e.g. press or no press) in a situation like this, and got dragged further into it by agreeing with diehardfan's reminder that there's unsportsmanlike conduct all around us and her plea for a little calm perspective.  I'm not knowledgeable of Lincoln's player rotation, and thus I do not defend (or condemn) it.  Like Jim Tressel, I abstain. 

But...

Sometimes the evidence is SO clear that eyewitness testimony is unnecessary! 

The lawyer in me screams his disagreement with this.  Circumstantial evidence is never clear enough to render eyewitness testimony unnecessary, when that testimony is available.  Maybe some of those scrubs were injured, or ill, or out of shape, or in the doghouse.  Maybe the coach thought he was showing respect for his opponent by using his normal rotation.  Maybe he thought that the scrubs were playing too hard, and the starters were more likely to ease up since they had no need to impress him.  Maybe he decided that everyone on his bench was far superior to every Scarlet Wave player, and that it didn't matter who played.  There's a myriad of possibilities, some more likely than others, but all plausible.  I don't know what anyone was thinking, and I'm unwilling to decide based solely on what the box score says.  I'm not stupid; I know what it looks like, and maybe that's what really happened, but I'm not ready to pick up my torch and tarbucket based on that evidence alone.  That's all I'm saying.