Buffalo vs St. Bonaventure 12/4 - 4pm

[DocCas86]

7 minutes ago, DooleyBull06 said:

I definitely agree that the higher the ranking the better. And that there’s a correlation between a high ranking and sustained success. I just think it’s something that’s more of a discussion at years end. Right now this team doesn’t pass the eye test. But it’s still very early. WKU and UCI are two good test before we hit conference play. 

I rely more on the stats and rankings as for me personally, I am more comfortable thinking in terms of the outcomes of each game and understanding stats contributing to those outcomes.  That is one of the reasons I am not a basketball coach.  For example, how many points did you score for each possession vs how many did you allow?  I can look at the SFA game and say that was a really disappointing game because of turnovers.  If the team turned the ball over only 10 times instead of 20, we would likely have won by roughly 9 points.  The rankings, to me, are a more objective, albeit an imprecise view of performance.  I guess I am looking at it we are currently below where we want to be - but plenty of season left to improve on current perspective. Need to understand what you didn't do well to improve upon it.

[DooleyBull06]

21 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

I rely more on the stats and rankings as for me personally, I am more comfortable thinking in terms of the outcomes of each game and understanding stats contributing to those outcomes.  That is one of the reasons I am not a basketball coach.  For example, how many points did you score for each possession vs how many did you allow?  I can look at the SFA game and say that was a really disappointing game because of turnovers.  If the team turned the ball over only 10 times instead of 20, we would likely have won by roughly 9 points.  The rankings, to me, are a more objective, albeit an imprecise view of performance.  I guess I am looking at it we are currently below where we want to be - but plenty of season left to improve on current perspective. Need to understand what you didn't do well to improve upon it.

Numbers are funny. There’s a number or a formula for everything. And the more analytical things become the more we move away from actual game play. I too look at things like rebounding and if there’s a correlation to second chance points. Or turnovers and fast break points. Then theres games against non D1 schools that boost our efficiency numbers. And so on and so on. But I do agree that we aren’t where we want to be both in the rankings and on the court. Plenty of time to improve. 

[121Merrimac]

Only 20 DI teams are mediocre?   Less than 10%, that’s crazy.  I wonder how 1-79, and 101-~330 are described.  
I’d consider something like 150, +|- 30 mediocre.   But that alone isn’t worth much.  How many rungs on the ladder are we talking about?   1-3, 1-5, 1-10?

[DocCas86]

26 minutes ago, 121Merrimac said:

Only 20 DI teams are mediocre?   Less than 10%, that’s crazy.  I wonder how 1-79, and 101-~330 are described.  
I’d consider something like 150, +|- 30 mediocre.   But that alone isn’t worth much.  How many rungs on the ladder are we talking about?   1-3, 1-5, 1-10?

Maybe I got the range wrong?  😉 Based on clarification that was offered, I interpret the implication is that we haven't met expectations, which I agree with, but a very limited sample.  So I continue to hope for good things.  To illustrate 7 games does not make a season, in 2018, we were also 4-3 with a composite rank of around 125.  We had just lost to Bonnies by 11 at home, but did have a close loss to a very good Cincinnati team at a neutral site.   That team finished with a composite rank of 61. Point being, it is hard to evaluate a team after only 7 games.  One x Factor we added Wes Clark a few games later and that helped for strong finish.

[UBminicre]

4 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

Great post a lot to unpack. I’m over the coaching search from a few years ago. It is what it is. Whitesell is the guy. That said he came in with a win now window that is set to close after this season. Without a championship within that window things going forward could revert back to the days before Hurley. A championship extends the window and more importantly is a major recruiting chip and program booster/builder.

This is just a question for all but am I the only one that doesn’t get caught up in ranking? Oats use to say players wanna go where they can win…winning games and more importantly championships is all that matters. The rest is window dressing. For example, let’s say we finish top 65 but get knocked out in the semis…are we really happy bc we are a top 65 school? 

It’s a good question. I agree with the others. If I had to guess high correlation to higher rank and being a league champion. The MAC may actually be a bad indication of that cause there are so many team usually very close, between say 80-120. Since it’s a one game elimination, it becomes very random when looking at a dataset. Again this is speculation, I don’t have time or energy to do this myself - but I know some on this board kick ass on this. With that being said, I bet if you look across ncaa, when the disparity in best ranked team vs field is larger - I am sure there is a much higher correlation.

To answer question directly, I rather be ranked higher. Like someone said, I think it’s more indicative of sustained success, and is what we need as a program. 
 

One last thing I want to point out, even losing MAC championship last year, we also quickly faded away from the NIT scene too. Again, huge disappointment. We haven’t made any noise with the talent we had. Again, my view, unacceptable. I’m very scared this current team is best we will have for the foreseeable future. We better pick it up ASAP or this can get much worse very soon.

Edited December 7, 2021 by UBminicre

[121Merrimac]

18 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

Maybe I got the range wrong?  …

Maybe, but then I thought someone’s else started the mediocrity discussion.  That’s fine, my comment wasn’t meant to be personal, so I’m happy someone wanted to reply. 
The team hasn’t lived up to my expectations so far this season either. 

My issue was trying to equate words to numbers.  To me, mediocrity applies to the middle.  In a good/mediocre/bad scale, 80-100 isn’t in the middle.  We agree that it the team should be better than 100, but in the grand scheme of things, I think that that is still above mediocre.  It is not the same as the before Hurley days  

[DocCas86]

14 minutes ago, 121Merrimac said:

Maybe, but then I thought someone’s else started the mediocrity discussion.  That’s fine, my comment wasn’t meant to be personal, so I’m happy someone wanted to reply. 
The team hasn’t lived up to my expectations so far this season either. 

My issue was trying to equate words to numbers.  To me, mediocrity applies to the middle.  In a good/mediocre/bad scale, 80-100 isn’t in the middle.  We agree that it the team should be better than 100, but in the grand scheme of things, I think that that is still above mediocre.  It is not the same as the before Hurley days  

That was my interpretation of mediocre as well...and point of my original post.. underperforming yes...mediocre is not the word I would use.   I gather we all want the same, a MAC tourney win, we just have different ways of expressing our passion for the team.

So far this season, I see a bad game, SFA, a tough road loss to what I see as a good Bonnie team even without Lofton and a tough road win against a decent NT.  Hoping the team wins out the rest of OOC games putting us at 6-3 in D1 contests and on to MAC regular season.

[DooleyBull06]

44 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

I gather we all want the same, a MAC tourney win, we just have different ways of expressing our passion for the team.

100. And to this point it’s fair to be critical of the team and coach when it’s warranted. So long as it isn’t personal attacks. 

[DocCas86]

9 hours ago, UBminicre said:

It’s a good question. I agree with the others. If I had to guess high correlation to higher rank and being a league champion. The MAC may actually be a bad indication of that cause there are so many team usually very close, between say 80-120. Since it’s a one game elimination, it becomes very random when looking at a dataset. Again this is speculation, I don’t have time or energy to do this myself - but I know some on this board kick ass on this. With that being said, I bet if you look across ncaa, when the disparity in best ranked team vs field is larger - I am sure there is a much higher correlation.

 

Your assertion is correct, the more one team separates from pack, the greater expectation that they win three games.  Of course that is an estimate of that expectation not the exact probability.  For example in 2019, composite ranks were UB (17), Toledo (59), BG (106) and CMU (125).. I don't recall exact estimates, but let's just say they were 90% in 1st game, 80% in 2nd game and 70% for finals.  That corresponds to 50% chance win all 3.  If the rankings are more closely aligned, then the favorite may be as low as 30%.

[dutchcountry7]

11 hours ago, 121Merrimac said:

Only 20 DI teams are mediocre?   Less than 10%, that’s crazy.  I wonder how 1-79, and 101-~330 are described.  
 

Based on my experience on this board…

 

1-79 are national title contenders.

101-350 should just go D3 because they are a disaster.  
 

Of course that is absurd.  150 teams are solid and regularly knock off top-50 teams throughout the season.  
 

I find it interesting how people seem to forget that we lost MAC games with our greatest team ever.  
 

Everyone likes to pretend that the 2019 season should be the norm.  The year when we finished #22 in KenPom.  And every loss we have this year is treated as an embarrassment that would have never happened under the old staff.  
 

Except for the 2019 losses to Northern Illinois and Bowling Green that we had in 2019 seem to be forgotten. 
 

BG finished #105 with losses to Hartford and Cleveland State.

NIU finished #136 and had a losing record in MAC play. 
 

Good teams lose games to top-100 teams.  Just last night #19 Florida was crushed by #240 Texas Southern.  
 

 

[DocCas86]

19 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

Based on my experience on this board…

 

1-79 are national title contenders.

101-350 should just go D3 because they are a disaster.  
 

Of course that is absurd.  150 teams are solid and regularly knock off top-50 teams throughout the season.  
 

I find it interesting how people seem to forget that we lost MAC games with our greatest team ever.  
 

Everyone likes to pretend that the 2019 season should be the norm.  The year when we finished #22 in KenPom.  And every loss we have this year is treated as an embarrassment that would have never happened under the old staff.  
 

Except for the 2019 losses to Northern Illinois and Bowling Green that we had in 2019 seem to be forgotten. 
 

BG finished #105 with losses to Hartford and Cleveland State.

NIU finished #136 and had a losing record in MAC play. 
 

Good teams lose games to top-100 teams.  Just last night #19 Florida was crushed by #240 Texas Southern.  
 

 

First here is a composite rank of what I view are very reliable ranking sites:

As you can see, we still are viewed as the best team in MAC.  However, the separation between us and the other top six teams is small, suggesting a lower expected probability of winning the MAC which everyone on the team, the coaches and all of us fans agree is the goal.  The hope is that UB improves upon current ranking of roughly 90, which is competitive in the MAC, to a higher ranking (my range was 60-70).  Going 4-0 for remainder of OOC, including wins against WKU and UCI would move us in that direction.  

What I have been saying - which I have some resistance to - if they are ranked in 60s as per my expectation - probability of winning MAC with good Ohio and Toledo teams is going to be roughly 30-35%.  That is why I stop short of saying we need a new coach in that circumstance.  A ranking of 60 is pretty darn good even compared to recent years.  My opinion is I don't think there are many coaches that could do significantly better than 60 with this team (my estimate with Oats is this team would be around 40).  However, I do think there are coaches that can do better than 90-100 with this team.   I am not going to complain about the folks that add critical comments about coach.  However, I will admit any loss this team has - the fanboard is much worse than the loss itself.  Ok I will complain about the comments, a little 😉

 

[Jeseph]

1 hour ago, dutchcountry7 said:

I find it interesting how people seem to forget that we lost MAC games with our greatest team ever.

Nobody forgets/forgot about these losses. It's not as simple as W/L (on either side of the coin)...

There has been a complete change in program culture under Whitesell. I (obviously my opinion) don't think he instills a winning attitude in his players. There is a level of apathy for long stretches in games and even after losses players turn to social media highlights. Under Oats losses happened but players seemed to want nothing more than to go out and prove they were better. I don't see that now. There is a pattern of [seeming] unpreparedness, under-achieving what is "on paper" and sloppy play (TO as compared to assists, FTs, shot selection, defensive lapses) - these are what give me concern and causes me to complain. At the end of the day, certain Ws and Ls matter and from where I'm sitting Whitesell has not come through, but that is a result of the list above.

As far as rankings are concerned, it is not that I think teams over ~100 in ranking should hang it up. It's that I think UB has the profile and recruiting potential that they should not be nearly satisfied with that level.

[dutchcountry7]

20 minutes ago, DocCas86 said:

First here is a composite rank of what I view are very reliable ranking sites:

As you can see, we still are viewed as the best team in MAC.  However, the separation between us and the other top six teams is small, suggesting a lower expected probability of winning the MAC which everyone on the team, the coaches and all of us fans agree is the goal.  The hope is that UB improves upon current ranking of roughly 90, which is competitive in the MAC, to a higher ranking (my range was 60-70).  Going 4-0 for remainder of OOC, including wins against WKU and UCI would move us in that direction.  

What I have been saying - which I have some resistance to - if they are ranked in 60s as per my expectation - probability of winning MAC with good Ohio and Toledo teams is going to be roughly 30-35%.  That is why I stop short of saying we need a new coach in that circumstance.  A ranking of 60 is pretty darn good even compared to recent years.  My opinion is I don't think there are many coaches that could do significantly better than 60 with this team (my estimate with Oats is this team would be around 40).  However, I do think there are coaches that can do better than 90-100 with this team.   I am not going to complain about the folks that add critical comments about coach.  However, I will admit any loss this team has - the fanboard is much worse than the loss itself.  Ok I will complain about the comments, a little 😉

 

The difference between 90 and 60 is less than 3 points.   The difference between 60 and 30 is 5 points (using KenPom data).  
 

There are many teams of similar abilities in the NIT/NCAA Bubble range.  That’s where we are.  
 

Be careful about thinking that the ranking dictates the odds of winning the MAC tournament.   That really comes down to if the team has a good week or not.  One bad game by even a great team and there isn’t a MAC championship.  

[DocCas86]

43 minutes ago, dutchcountry7 said:

The difference between 90 and 60 is less than 3 points.   The difference between 60 and 30 is 5 points (using KenPom data).  
 

There are many teams of similar abilities in the NIT/NCAA Bubble range.  That’s where we are.  
 

Be careful about thinking that the ranking dictates the odds of winning the MAC tournament.   That really comes down to if the team has a good week or not.  One bad game by even a great team and there isn’t a MAC championship.  

I agree with your statement...that improving our ranking does not necessarily correspond to a win in Cleveland, and that is why I have stopped short of saying a win is a necessity. 

If we win rest of OOC and get 15/16 wins in conference, this will end up with 21/22 wins (ex PP / SJF). This team would probably be ranked around 60.  If they lost in finals after that, a possibility, I would be disappointed, but I would still leave window open for JW.  If however we end up 2-2 and 14 wins in MAC for a total of 19 wins (ex PP /SJF) and then lose MAC, that would not meet expectations.

[DocCas86]

1 hour ago, Jeseph said:

As far as rankings are concerned, it is not that I think teams over ~100 in ranking should hang it up. It's that I think UB has the profile and recruiting potential that they should not be nearly satisfied with that level.

especially this year as it is setting the JW ceiling.

[Kujo]

Good game Saturday.   Great effort to storm back.   I havent watched enough of UB to weigh in on your comments of the team seeming to play intensely in bursts- but considering the Bonnies have faced double digit deficits in 5 of 8 games, and yet are 7-1, I surely can relate.

I do not understand why both Bona and UB fans insist on going to that place in which they justify opposing players excitement over a win as a 'must be their superbowl' attitude.   I saw it on this thread, and I've seen a lot of it the last couple of years from Bona fans when they lost.   

The reason the Bona players, and some of the students, were so fired up is because of the emotionality behind beating what we all know is a very solid UB team without Lofton.    Try to consider- the last Bona game in which Lofton didnt start at PG, he was playing prep school ball.   I can count one hand, the number of games I recall them going more than 2 minutes consecutively without him in the game.   

The intangibles he brings as a 4 year floor general, pure PG, are immeasurable.   2 bona turnovers in 10 seconds that helped close a 9 point lead to 4 pt around the ~130 mark were hugely instrumental in the UB comeback, and a great example of the value Lofton brings to this team in his ability to run the show.   It's hard to imagine they both occur if he's out there, and the team was visibly panicky in how to handle the late game pressure.  The fact he was named captain by his teammates freshmen year, before he'd ever played a collegiate game, speaks volumes to how much they look to him as a leader.   Combine that with uncertainty and angst that hung over following his injury the other night, it's easy to see why they were filled with so much emotion when they won.  

Just wanted to provide a little more perspective.  I think UB has a solid team, capable of doing what 2018's team did.     Close games like several of the recent games in this rivalry, with atmospheres like what many of them have been, is great for the rivalry and for WNY.    Maybe some day, the people around WNY will wake up to the fact that there is good, national level sports in the area outside of the Bills and Sabres, and they can take a break from breaking those two teams down into painstaking detail and pay more attention to the couple of hoops teams who've made names for themselves of late.   I wont hold my breath on that one, but I can dream.

Best of luck the rest of the way.   Hoping to see you cut the nets in Cleveland. 

[UB92]

12 hours ago, DooleyBull06 said:

100. And to this point it’s fair to be critical of the team and coach when it’s warranted. So long as it isn’t personal attacks. 

(my italics and bf)

When has it been personal attacks?  It never has been, but thank you for policing that.

And your "when it is warranted"?  So you are the arbiter of that?

 

I miss the old board from five years ago or even ten years ago (when we had Reggie).  People got on Reggie for a lot of things related to basketball, but I think he had the respect of everyone (especially since he took UB to respectability).   Now?   The board's self-appointed police come out in droves if people are critical of the coach.  And then there are bend-over-backwards use of figures and tables to show that the team may be better than their record indicates (or something like that)...ad nauseum.

mikescherrer8...congrats on finally taking the red pill.  It took you long enough.

[DooleyBull06]

30 minutes ago, UB92 said:

(my italics and bf)

When has it been personal attacks?  It never has been, but thank you for policing that.

And your "when it is warranted"?  So you are the arbiter of that?

 

I miss the old board from five years ago or even ten years ago (when we had Reggie).  People got on Reggie for a lot of things related to basketball, but I think he had the respect of everyone (especially since he took UB to respectability).   Now?   The board's self-appointed police come out in droves if people are critical of the coach.  And then there are bend-over-backwards use of figures and tables to show that the team may be better than their record indicates (or something like that)...ad nauseum.

mikescherrer8...congrats on finally taking the red pill.  It took you long enough.

Damn dude relax. I am not policing anything nor do I care to police anything or anyone. Calm down. By personal attack I meant taking a shot at player like saying oh so and so sucks. Like there’s no substance to that take. And when I said warranted I meant so and so is having a bad game bc X and y. 

Look back at my post I’ve never policed anyone. I come on here to talk purely basketball. And I’m one who is very critical of the coach, just not calling for his job just yet. So please before you come at me, check the facts. I’m not a self appointed police officer.

[121Merrimac]

7 hours ago, UB92 said:

… Now?   The board's self-appointed police come out in droves if people are critical of the coach.  And then there are bend-over-backwards use of figures and tables to show that the team may be better than their record indicates (or something like that)...ad nauseum. …

UB92, I’ve appreciated your comments since my first day on this board.  Do you remember?  
But, I must say that calling out policing activities seems a bit hypocritical.  
I am also shocked that showing UB in context with other teams multiple ways is nauseating, while repeatedly saying ‘player x should stay on the bus’ appears to be just fine. 
You don’t want too much positivity, and I don’t want so much negativity.  If we both get our way, the board will be silent.  I doubt either of us want that.  The fan base needs to grow, not shrink. 
Cheers,

[UB92]

18 hours ago, 121Merrimac said:

UB92, I’ve appreciated your comments since my first day on this board.  Do you remember?  
But, I must say that calling out policing activities seems a bit hypocritical.  
I am also shocked that showing UB in context with other teams multiple ways is nauseating, while repeatedly saying ‘player x should stay on the bus’ appears to be just fine. 
You don’t want too much positivity, and I don’t want so much negativity.  If we both get our way, the board will be silent.  I doubt either of us want that.  The fan base needs to grow, not shrink. 
Cheers,

I am not saying it is nauseating -- heck, who doesn't love a good figure or table.  But the ad nauseum (not nauseating) use of figures and tables to show this or that often ends up in the conclusion that we aren't as bad as our record indicates (or something to that effect).  

It is not that I don't want too much positivity or negativity...it is the good discussion that I miss.  When people present a point of view that may be different than mine, but in a way that make me consider their point deeper (or even change my POV).  However, in the past year or so, people on this board literally wait until after a win to say something like "where are the anti-JW crowd now" or, if someone (e.g. "Chet") is being critical, he is taken to task.  And, thus, people who used to post just don't post anymore (or very rarely).  That approach shrinks the fan base.

 

Also, for the record (and I've said this before), it isn't that I don't like JW as a person, but I don't really think he was the right Head coach needed to keep up the momentum.   As someone mentioned in another thread (it was an anecdote about JW), he seemed to be doing a good job in his role on the staff.  So now you move him out of a role he was doing well with to a role that he has struggled in previously as HC (and you've also created a "hole" associated with his old role).  

Also, I am just not as excited at how the team plays now (visually).  It was fun to watch the Hurley and Oats teams, even when they lost.  The team now is not very fun to watch and reminds me somewhat of how RW played at certain points.   I know that Williams, Segu and Mballa are strong MAC players as seniors, so we have to get while the getting is good...and I am afraid (like many) of what happens next year (and beyond).  I don't want to go back to mediocrity (or worse).  I loved the "Gonzaga of the East" talk (if quite premature).  I fear we are on a trajectory away from that at the moment and the future doesn't look as bright as it is even now.

That's all.

 

[121Merrimac]

4 hours ago, UB92 said:

... ad nauseum (not nauseating) ...

It wasn't a mistake, people have been known to become sick from too much of a good thing.  😉

4 hours ago, UB92 said:

... It is not that I don't want too much positivity or negativity...it is the good discussion that I miss.  When people present a point of view that may be different than mine, but in a way that make me consider their point deeper (or even change my POV). ...

Thanks for calling this out.  After submitting, I realized that positive and negative weren't useful descriptions, but by then it was too late.  Thoughtfully stated arguments are sorely missed, on this we couldn't agree more!

[Jeseph]

Have to wonder if Williams was off for this one and just gutted out his remaining energy late…

[Jeseph]

An oops from Bona today, they got SHELLED.

[UBinMD]

3 hours ago, Jeseph said:

An oops from Bona today, they got SHELLED.

Maybe they were over excited to have Lofton back and they figured they would watch him play 

[John]

14 hours ago, UBinMD said:

Maybe they were over excited to have Lofton back and they figured they would watch him play 

Lofton not close to 100%. Another case of a team with all the players back and all the hype does not pan out. They don’t look like the same team as last year with no intensity. Another case that the mental part of the game can be as important as the physical part. They looked lost on both ends of the floor with no ball movement and just one on one play. The coach was right on - they were horrible. Will see if they can get their heads in the right direction once A-10 play starts. But still do want them to do well this year and maybe go to a game to see the Olean crazies.