MBB: University Athletic Association

[ADL70]

Well i didn't say it was true, but thanks for the info.

[Pat Coleman]

That's actually barely different.

I said a little differently.  If you look at the common use of the word little, it could be used to convey condescension, but not always.  Little...slightly...barely...they all explain the difference adequately in my mind.

It is your website and you can do what you want, but I am sure I speak for many when I say your nitpicks, found frequently around the boards, are unnecessary.

Ouch. I was just pointing out that it lines up pretty well with Massey there. Wasn't a personal attack on you but yet you responded with one ... why?

[WUPHF]

Ouch. I was just pointing out that it lines up pretty well with Massey there. Wasn't a personal attack on you but yet you responded with one ... why?

Your post could have easily been read as a contrarian opinion.  That is how I read it.  I'll take you for your word that you were just pointing out that there was little difference between the polls.  I hope you accept my apology.

As to the rest of what I said, I probably read a fraction of your posts.  Let me try it again: you are one of the more influential posters here.  I wish you used your status to foster more discussion.  I think you could do a lot more of that around the boards in what you say.  For example, you might have drawn in a few CCIW posters or possibly a long lost Maroons fan by asking about the discrepancy between the voters and Massey regarding Chicago.

I get bitter from bowling alone over here in the UAA thread.  Just ignore what I said.

[WUPHF]

CWRU got maybe its first vote ever.

Case Western Reserve is definitely the UAA story of the year.

[Pat Coleman]

For example, you might have drawn in a few CCIW posters or possibly a long lost Maroons fan by asking about the discrepancy between the voters and Massey regarding Chicago.

It's quite interesting how things change in a week. Last week, someone was giving a voter a hard time for considering a win vs. Chicago as a quality win. The poll is definitely about games that have been played (and that's all Massey looks at, of course), but it's also about voters' expectations. And if a voter still has an expectation that a team is better than the sum of its results, they can and should vote for them, or vote for teams that have beaten them ... within reason.

[WUPHF]

It's quite interesting how things change in a week. Last week, someone was giving a voter a hard time for considering a win vs. Chicago as a quality win. The poll is definitely about games that have been played (and that's all Massey looks at, of course), but it's also about voters' expectations. And if a voter still has an expectation that a team is better than the sum of its results, they can and should vote for them, or vote for teams that have beaten them ... within reason.

I like it when you go in-depth.

I do stand by my assertion that Chicago had nothing resembling a quality win and therefore could not be considered a quality win.  I had previously said that Washington University was vulnerable, lacking the depth of previous teams.

The Bears played the worst game that I have seen in the 10 years I have followed them.  I'll credit Chicago for playing a good game, and if they run with Emory, then I'll take back what I said.

[Pat Coleman]

Yeah, sorry -- it's a matter of time with me. I have a day job and three kids, so the time I spend on the websites is primarily focused on getting content out rather than making longer posts.

[blue_jays]

It's quite interesting how things change in a week. Last week, someone was giving a voter a hard time for considering a win vs. Chicago as a quality win. The poll is definitely about games that have been played (and that's all Massey looks at, of course), but it's also about voters' expectations. And if a voter still has an expectation that a team is better than the sum of its results, they can and should vote for them, or vote for teams that have beaten them ... within reason.

I like it when you go in-depth.

I do stand by my assertion that Chicago had nothing resembling a quality win and therefore could not be considered a quality win.  I had previously said that Washington University was vulnerable, lacking the depth of previous teams.

The Bears played the worst game that I have seen in the 10 years I have followed them.  I'll credit Chicago for playing a good game, and if they run with Emory, then I'll take back what I said.

The reason the Bears played a bad game was mostly because of Chicago, so they should be getting credit regardless of what happens versus Emory. The Maroons have the big bodies and athleticism to cancel out any rebounding advantage WashU usually has, and Barthel beasted them on the boards. All of Fatocki's shots were contested closely, which forced him into quick jumpers and faders. Palucki couldn't get a rhythm and Chicago went after them with purpose. You don't hold a top team to 43 points unless you're getting it done defensively.

[WUPHF]

The reason the Bears played a bad game was mostly because of Chicago, so they should be getting credit regardless of what happens versus Emory. The Maroons have the big bodies and athleticism to cancel out any rebounding advantage WashU usually has, and Barthel beasted them on the boards. All of Fatocki's shots were contested closely, which forced him into quick jumpers and faders. Palucki couldn't get a rhythm and Chicago went after them with purpose. You don't hold a top team to 43 points unless you're getting it done defensively.

A few things...

How many times have you seen Washington University play this season?

Have you checked the rebounding stats this year or you basing the +9 rebounds for Chicago on the teams Washington University from prior seasons?  Hint: Chicago is pulling down more defensive and offensive rebounds this season, while the Bears rank near the bottom of the conference in the latter category.  Chicago would have finished +4-5 had the averages held.

Is the defense forcing Fatoki, the fifth best player in the nation in terms of assists, to bring the ball down and jack up 18 foot fadeaways 10 seconds in to the shot clock?

As far as Palucki is concerned, sure it is always easier to watch two good teams and say "the defense held them to..." (see my first question).

I said Chicago played a good game.  Chicago scored their first quality win, but despite the personnel, coach, and performance last weekend, I want to see them run with Emory before I get excited because the Maroons beat a better Washington University two years ago before going 4-9 in the UAA.

[jaybird44]

I think that "Blue Jays" is on to something that I have mulled over after the Wash-U loss in Chicago; and I also agree with WUH.

I agree that the Maroons should be credited for having the intent and swagger to take a physical brand of basketball to the Bears that they may have expected, but didn't execute very well against it.  Barthel, Waller Perez, Nate Brooks, and Blaine Crawford were very tough to deal with--especially when the officials let the players play with minimal intervention.  There were only 13 fouls called on both teams in the first half, 4 on Chicago (by the way, this is not a criticism of the crew...just an observation of their style of officiating).  This, along with falling behind quickly by 6-0 and 17-10 scores, perhaps prompted Wash-U to take shots too quickly in its possessions without rebounding help, in order to try and close the gap.

The 20-day layoff has been discussed, and it may have lended a hand in the 30% overall shooting performance, and 2-for-19 shooting beyond the arc.  Some of the shots were attempted with a slight erosion of the good form that the top Wash-U shooters regularly possess.  But, if the Bears had shot the ball better, we wouldn't be talking about the lengthy time off from playing games.

It was just a bad day at the Ratner Center to roll out a clunker.  What is important now is how the Bears react in the first full weekend of UAA play, hosting Emory Friday night and Rochester Sunday afternoon.  I suspect they will take an even-keeled approach throughout the remaining preparation time, and enter the Fieldhouse with confidence.  They will need it, for Emory has seemingly recovered from its upset loss at Piedmont earlier this season and is playing some very good basketball.

Should be a lot of fun Friday night!

[WUPHF]

I am really looking forward to Emory vs. Washington University tonight at the Field House.  This will be the biggest test for the Bears so far, but I too believe that they will be ready.

I have been critical of the Bears three-point defense in past seasons, and tonight we will get to see what they can do against the eighth best three point shooting team in the nation with Alex Foster and Will Trawick both shooting over 40 percent from the line. 

Alex Foster was key to the win over UW-Stevens Point last season, but who knew that he would take over where Jake Davis left off?  Foster is having a brilliant senior season so far.  It will be interesting to see what the Bears throw at him tonight.

[WUPHF]

Washington University leads Emory 38-22 at the half.  The live stats say 38 rebounds for the Bears.

[7express]

Washington University leads Emory 38-22 at the half.  The live stats say 38 rebounds for the Bears.

38 rebounds in the first half??  Western Connecticut struggles to get 38 in a game!  Must be a mistake, if not it's a combination of: A) incredibly bad Emory shooting which has lead to a lot of Bears defensive rebounds B) bad Wash U shooting, but the Bears are completely dominating the offense glass which runs up the total rebound numbers or likely C) A combination of both A & B.

[WUPHF]

Washington University 80
Emory University 67

This is the offense that Bears fans all know and love. 

David Fatoki was the man tonight scoring 25 on 5-6 shooting from three point range to go along with nine assists.  Matt Palucki finished with a career high 17 rebounds and 15 points to register yet another double-double.  Nick Burt also finished with a double-double.  Mitch Styczynski continues to impress with 13 points and 7 rebounds.

The Bears did indeed finish the first half with 38 rebounds (56 for the game), but turnovers were a big problem tonight as the Bears matched their season high of 22 turnovers.

At one point, it looked like Will Trawick, who was quiet offensively in the first half, was going to shoot Emory back in to the game midway through the second, drawing the Eagles within 11 points.  But the Bears maintained their composure and handled the Emory press.

One final note: this game featured the worst officiating of the season by far.  I am know I am a traditionalist in a game that has mostly moved on, but this crew was the absolute worst.  At one point, Styczynski was leveled while trying to inbound the ball and nothing. 

[WUPHF]

Elsewhere in the UAA, Chicago, Carnegie-Mellon and Case Western Reserve all held serve at home as expected.  Lowly Rochester (4-9) scored 81 against Chicago in the 88-81 loss; the highest number of points allowed on the season so far.