MBB: Great South Athletic Conference

[mattgrubb]

again the debate will arise, is the POY the best player on the best team or the guy with the best numbers, so when the scots win it all again, which alex bowers promised me before the season that they will, then it will be alex

Go scots

what about this, last year there were co mvp's and Bobby was voted an all american, should anyone share the award when the rest of the country votes them an all american?

[batteredbard]

OMG are we already on the POTY criteria debate

let's see a conference game first! And as goofy as the system gets to hand out awards for four men's teams lets have an MVP, player of the year, best offensive player and best defender and maybe everybody will get a guy in one or the other and we can really watch it fly on here

Coach was it you or someone else at the GSAC tourney last year that told me Rust had taken down the mounted goals and put up floor goals that the students like to try and rock courtside for the visitors? If that's the ase MC could have an interesting trip this weekend.

[old_lion]

again the debate will arise, is the POY (1) the best player on the best team or (2) the guy with the best numbers, so when the scots win it all again, which alex bowers promised me before the season that they will, then it will be alex

POY ... and all GSAC selections ...
Not my favorite subjects ... too subjective ... and IMHO, the subjectivity of the GSAC selectors has pretty much stunk the last couple of years ... it has appeared to me that the selectors have focused on the top scorers ... and pretty much ignored the other stuff that I feel is also important . (Seems the "other stuff" hasn't been adequately considered since Placeres graduated.) The selection of "volume shooter" (to use your term, Matt) Bo Mason over other guys most coaches would prefer to have on their team, (there is now circumstantial evidence that Lambert finally agrees) still sticks in my craw. But enough of that ...

Back to your question ...

It s/b neither of those. It's a subjective, not an objective, selection. The POY s/b, in the opinion of the selectors, the best player ... after all of the tangible and intangible factors are considered. Appears to me, our selectors don't do such a good job considering intangibles in the GSAC ... so ... who knows ... 

[old_lion]

OMG are we already on the POTY criteria debate

let's see a conference game first! And as goofy as the system gets to hand out awards for four men's teams ...

Re conference games ...

OK ... early on in this "debate" let's put the term "conference game" in perspective ... Basically, in the GSAC world, it's a meaningless term ...

There are only 4 men's teams, so there are only 6 of them ... the GSAC gets no AQ to the NCAA tourney ... so the games that are more meaningful (if anyone feels that they must focus on some subset of the overall schedule) than the rest of the schedule are the South Region games. In other words, your performance in your 17 or so South Region games (which include the 6 GSAC games) are what gets you a shot at the NCAA tourney. Also, 17 games, as opposed to 6, is a much more reasonable sample size ... and therefore, will yield much more statistically valid results for evaluating performance.

So please, let's not even start over emphasizing those 6 games towards the end off the season ... talking about a player's numbers "in conference", and other such silliness ...

[mattgrubb]

I do want to emphasize the GSAC tourney as an important step in preparing teams for the NCAA tourney.
Tournament bball is different than regular season bball.  Old Lion, ask some of the guys that have been around the pc program for a couple of years about the McCord Miracle, PC played the game of their lives and came up short.  The conference tournament can either prepare a team for their tournament run or keep a good team from getting in, while it have never happened in the GSAC, it could at some point, maybe this year.

For once Old lion, i do firmly agree with your theory on conference games vs. regular season in region games.  Wow, i feel cold, but i still agree.

[batteredbard]

So you just want to assume everybody has the same strength of schedule in the south region and look at those numbers? At least the conference games are a baseline with the same teams. I suppose we could go through and pull out all the comon opponents and try to figure that out to compare howa  guy is doing in comparison to another but if you're talking conference awards then shouldn't it be based on conference games?

Anyway I borrowed the link from the USAC board but look what Greensboro has to offer for fans who cant make a game (plus there's last night upset of Guilford on there right now)
http://www.ustream.tv/gcpride
Wonder if the Scots have this in the works. Know DeBaby's MHS football commentary was run over a videocast during the regular season. It would be nice to have this kind of stuff available from Cooper.

[old_lion]

So you just want to assume everybody has the same strength of schedule in the south region and look at those numbers?  I suppose we could go through and pull out all the common opponents and try to figure that out to compare howa  guy is doing in comparison to another but if you're talking conference awards then shouldn't it be based on conference games?

Not necessarily, I just said looking at the #s from all those region games would be much more meaningful than looking at just 6 GSAC games.

At least the conference games are a baseline with the same teams.

Bard, stop and think a minute ... you are trying to apply logic that may make sense in a real conference, say with 10 or 12 teams, to the GSAC ... we only have 4 teams and 6 games!

If you want to talk about differences in strength of schedule look at those 6 games. Traditionally Murvul has been head and shoulders above the rest of the GSAC, agreed? Everybody but Murvul plays Murvul in 33% of their "conference games". To paraphrase you ... "So you just want to assume everybody has the same strength of schedule in the conference and look at those numbers?" 

Over 17 or so games, the strength of schedule issue at least has a chance to even out. Over 6 games, where the bottom 3 teams are playing 2 of their 6 games against a perennially tougher opponent ... and the perennially best team is playing all 6 games against weaker opponents ... well, do you think that evens out? Plus, maybe even more importantly, 6 games are just too few games to create a statistically valid sample. One, or two, unusual games can skew the #s too easily.

but if you're talking conference awards then shouldn't it be based on conference games?

Obviously not. If you still don't understand why not, you're just not trying ...

I refer you to my earlier post ...

So please, let's not even start over emphasizing those 6 games towards the end off the season ... talking about a player's numbers "in conference", and other such silliness ...

[mattgrubb]

Speaking of strength of schedule, lets give love to Coach Haynes
Hampden Sydney??  Coach Haynes, how did you get the BOYS from HSC to come to Lagrange??  BTW, their school has all dudes and no the people at Longwood do not like them.

also on the panthers schedule, Centre, Rhodes, Methodist, and BSC

Looks like a good south region schedule, if i won all of those games listed and my conference i would expect a bid, especially if i beat NAIA Berry.  Looks like Coach Haynes knows how to schedule, he is building it a piece at a time.  Good work coach.

Old Lion, please build your case for PCs strength of schedule

[coachwgh]

I have the strength of schedule but no strength of team.....

[batteredbard]

Lets not get into my trying or not just because I'm debating the other side of the discussion.

If strength of schedule naturally balanced out, it wouldn't be rated and wouldn't be a discussion topic come selection time. So lets not assume the four schools have equal sos without some numbers - haphazard as the rating systems may be.

I'll concede that with only six GSAC games on the sked that one big game by a palyer could skew it up pretty good statistically speaking so I think you could safely include games with Rust, Sewanee and Oglethorpe because they play all four schools - with Methodist (no meeting with HC) and Emory (no PC) in the discussion as well.

If one school is dominant (and I don't know that one will be again this year) then isn't it dominant and its players worthy of recognition for their numbers? Actually, that was just a gag line. Even I can't carry the argument to that level with a straight face.

[sludge]

I have the strength of schedule but no strength of team.....

I don't get it.  Are you a real coach, who is insulting his own team?

[scottiedoug]

Anybody who has seen LaGrange play knows that they do not play as if they think their coach insults them.  They play hard all the time.

[Ralph Turner]

I have the strength of schedule but no strength of team.....

I have seen LaGrange respond to their coach.  Coach Haynes is a good coach, and motivates his team very well.

I think that he is honest about this year's team.

[mattgrubb]

coach haynes is the man

MC over Rust 98-45 obviously a beat down

Great win for PC over catholic, catholic has a national title this decade, so they are obviously a solid program.

Again, Coach Haynes, how did you get HSC to come to Lagrange this year??

MC vs. Carson Newman this year and CN is a loaded D2 school, tons of talent.  one of their studs is from Maryville High School, he should have been a scot.

[old_lion]

Lets not get into my trying or not just because I'm debating the other side of the discussion.

If strength of schedule naturally balanced out, it wouldn't be rated and wouldn't be a discussion topic come selection time. So lets not assume the four schools have equal sos without some numbers - haphazard as the rating systems may be.

I'll concede that with only six GSAC games on the sked that one big game by a palyer could skew it up pretty good statistically speaking so I think you could safely include games with Rust, Sewanee and Oglethorpe because they play all four schools - with Methodist (no meeting with HC) and Emory (no PC) in the discussion as well.

If one school is dominant (and I don't know that one will be again this year) then isn't it dominant and its players worthy of recognition for their numbers? Actually, that was just a gag line. Even I can't carry the argument to that level with a straight face.

Bard,

I appreciate your self-deprecating sense of humor and I apologize ... didn't mean to be insulting with the "not trying" comment ... it's just that I feel strongly that it's silly to focus on only six games ... and to pretend that it's reasonable to try to determine anyone's real value over such a short time period.

It would be sort of like getting all excited about someone's .500 World Series batting average and trying to pretend that determined how good they were more than their .250 batting average over the entire regular season.

I really can't get too excited one way or other about the strength of schedule issue ... my primary point is that focusing on only 6 games, to the exclusion of the vast majority of the season is ridiculous.

You certainly make a valid point that a dominant team is very likely to have good players. You say that was a gag line, so I'm sure you realize that it doesn't necessarily follow that they have the best players. There are lots of other variables in the dominant team formula besides having the best players. For instance ...  a good program, good system, good coaching, a winning tradition, a large number (depth) of good players ... etc. etc. 

Seems clear to me that some of the best players are very likely to be spread across some other, not so dominant teams ... with that lack of team dominance being no fault of said players ... but then, that's just my opinion ...  I could be wrong.