Valpo vs Drake @ The ARC 1/11/20 3pm CST on ESPN3

[valpo64]

We are hearing some pretty amazing comments about the Drake game...we win because we were lucky, the opposition doesn't hit a high %-age of 3's because they were off but our defense on the 3's was not a factor,  our coaches make some strategy moves with positive results but those results were because of Drake's bad luck or lack of execution.  When we have a bad free throw shooting game the coaches should have the team shoot more free throws at practice.   When we shoot them well  and make them in the clutch as we did vs. Drake, no one gives anyone any credit.  Are some of us afraid to give the Coaching Staff ANY credit for our successes?

[crusader05]

I feel like we (collective) have moved from Rose colored glasses during the Drew era to " " colored ones.

Not to say that the last few years haven't been rough but I think there's also a tendency to forget that complaints about never being able to win the big games on the road or beating a ranked team, or playing like deer in headlights at times, were pretty common critiques during Bryce's tenure as well.

I Also think the High of the Alec Peters era coinciding with losing Bryce at the same time made for a jarring transition as I feel like no matter who stayed on as coach, the year after Peters was going to be a pretty big letdown.

[oklahomamick]

I could really care less if we score from timeouts, inbound plays, out rebound, play a small line-up or play street ball.  Doesn't matter.  Results which are wins is what matters.  Get enough of those and you can justify whatever it is that you do as a coaching staff.   

[wh]

It was apparent when you watch the tape (I admit I'm old school in my language) that we were consciously focused on defending the 3.  Drake had some looks, but were rushing their shots as their % was declining for the game.  It was also apparent that Valpo was giving up inside penetration and backdoor cuts to defend the 3 based on the exceptionally high % for 2s by Drake.  Also, Def eff numbers seem to focus intensely on shooting %.  We turned Drake over 18 times leading to 20 points.  Yes, our overall shooting % defense needs to continue to improve.  To win conference, you have to not only score, but stop teams.  But, would not state Drake was unlucky shooting 3s.  We focused on holding them down.  We were more effective at that.  A most interesting stat is that Jonah Jackson has taken 90 of his 92 FGAs as 3 pt shots this year and hits at a 38% clip after going 0-5 Saturday.  He averages about 2 3s a game.  So, if we focused on reducing his volume and his made %, then we were very effective defensively on him (not luck). 

Different words, but Gore made that exact point in the post game radio interview.   

[valpo64]

Did someone mention that they heard that Fazekas may return this week?   Or was it wishful thinking?

[valpo84]

WH--that's what happens when you stay at a Holiday Inn Express and play amateur sports broadcaster on weekends as my "side-hustle" as the millennials say.   You start to sound like coaches in pressers.

[crusader05]

I believe that Lottich referred to him as though he was starting to practice with the team or is about to start so maybe that's where that came from. I think, based on his injury, he'd be back within the next two weeks.

[bbtds]

I really don't want to hear how we were "lucky" that Drake had an off shooting day. Valpo has been the "unluckiest" team in the MVC over the past 2 seasons in terms of extended injuries to a star player. That's genuine bad luck. Saying we were lucky that Drake had an off shooting day is an insult to our team and the great effort we put forth on defense Saturday.

I have to argue again that Ryan Fazekas is injury prone much like David Chadwick. He has a history of repeatedly getting injured. That is just something that some guys are stricken with. You will see just how long Ryan is playing before he injures himself again. Nothing has changed for Ryan in the past 4 years. He was injury prone at Providence too. More than half the time at Providence he was injured.

[VUBBFan]

Did someone mention that they heard that Fazekas may return this week?   Or was it wishful thinking?

I had heard he was progressing nicely   

[PlumStreetBum]

"STATS ARE FOR NERDS"
   - this board

If the Drake game is the start of an incredible 3pt defense renaissance, I will eat crow.

But if we give up, say, about 36% from 3 across the next 2 games, I'll be curious to see how y'all react 

Honestly I'm glad so many of you are so positive, it's healthy for pessimists like me - sometimes it even rubs off!

[JD24]

The sarcastic "lucky" posts I made were highlighting previous posts made by other posters. I suppose SIU was lucky in their win over Valpo and we can apply "luck" to any win or loss. Frankly, it is extremely weak analysis.

but Drake also shot like 2-21 from 3

Hmmm.  Central Michigan shot 1 for 17 from the 3.  Could it possibly be that we play lock-down defense against the 3?? 

Well, having watched Drake miss a lot of open looks, and knowing that on average this season our opponents shoot at a 34.6% rate from 3 (260th best 3pt defense in D1), and knowing Drake this season is shooting 34.7% on 3pt attempts and they average nearly 8 made 3pt shots per game, yes I'd say we were lucky that Drake made 10% (2 for 20) of their 3pt shots. Or is that weak analysis?  I'm glad we won and will take all the luck I can get, but let's not pretend we're suddenly a world-beating lock-down team around the perimeter.

Who said any of that? If you're going to attribute wins and losses to good or bad luck it is weak analysis. The "pretend" part of your statement only makes your argument weaker since no one at all said that.

[PlumStreetBum]

The "pretend" part of your statement only makes your argument weaker since no one at all said that.

I said it; it's called an inference. What about the rest of the analysis? No rebuttal to the stats?
Valpo will play at least 15 more games this year. Plenty of time to see if our 3pt defense has improved with Drake as the inflection point. I hope you're right and it is, but I'm gonna need more than 1 data point to believe the defense has turned the corner. (I hope you're right.)

[valpotx]

The term 'hater' pre-dates social media, sorry to say .  I am now 38, and remember it being thrown around while I was at Valpo.  I don't need to 'stop' anything, as it is my generation's communication style .

I would have taken "Ok, boomer" as a correct response too.    That said, I do hope no generation so completely characterizes "critical thinking" as "hating" that it becomes offensive and intolerable.

Haha, I actually thought of saying that in response, but it is not a phrase I would ever use.  I think that is a millennial or gen-z phrase, but it is funny that they think calling folks a 'boomer' is an insult to them.  I get that they are just calling folks old, but it shows a lack of creativity.  My birth year is technically between gen-X and millennial, so I see folks calling us xennials and the Oregon Trail Generation.  We don't really slot in very easily with either gen-x or millennials, but have bits and pieces of each.

[wh]

I've learned from the workplace that there are great millennials.  The key is to separate the wheat (thoughtful, respectful young adults with good values) from the chaff (entitled narcissists) during the interview process. Something I've learned to ask is  "Tell me about a time when you doubted your abilities." Their answer helps determine their level of coachability, and whether they've been able to transform self-doubt into self-growth.  Entitled narcissists really struggle to come up with an acceptable answer because they consider themselves a finished product. Concepts like self-reflection, introspection, personal growth, etc. are so foreign to them, they struggle to even make up a phony answer.   

[vok22]

I've learned from the workplace that there are great millennials.  The key is to separate the wheat (thoughtful, respectful young adults with good values) from the chaff (entitled narcissists) during the interview process. Something I've learned to ask is  "Tell me about a time when you doubted your abilities." Their answer helps determine their level of coachability, and whether they've been able to transform self-doubt into self-growth.  Entitled narcissists really struggle to come up with an acceptable answer because they consider themselves a finished product. Concepts like self-reflection, introspection, personal growth, etc. are so foreign to them, they struggle to even make up a phony answer.   

Is this not true for every generation ?

[Just Sayin]

I've learned from the workplace that there are great millennials.  The key is to separate the wheat (thoughtful, respectful young adults with good values) from the chaff (entitled narcissists) during the interview process. Something I've learned to ask is  "Tell me about a time when you doubted your abilities." Their answer helps determine their level of coachability, and whether they've been able to transform self-doubt into self-growth.  Entitled narcissists really struggle to come up with an acceptable answer because they consider themselves a finished product. Concepts like self-reflection, introspection, personal growth, etc. are so foreign to them, they struggle to even make up a phony answer.

Is this not true for every generation ?

Not if you're just talkin' 'bout my g-g-g-generation

[wh]

I've learned from the workplace that there are great millennials.  The key is to separate the wheat (thoughtful, respectful young adults with good values) from the chaff (entitled narcissists) during the interview process. Something I've learned to ask is  "Tell me about a time when you doubted your abilities." Their answer helps determine their level of coachability, and whether they've been able to transform self-doubt into self-growth.  Entitled narcissists really struggle to come up with an acceptable answer because they consider themselves a finished product. Concepts like self-reflection, introspection, personal growth, etc. are so foreign to them, they struggle to even make up a phony answer.   

Is this not true for every generation ?

Of course; it's simply a matter of degree.

Here's an article from Psychology Today that you might find interesting:

Why Is Narcissism Increasing Among Young Americans?

Over the years, these questionnaires have been administered to many samples of college students, and analyses that bring all of the data together reveal that the average narcissism score has been steadily increasing and the average empathy score has been steadily decreasing ever since the questionnaires were developed [3.]  The changes are highly significant statistically and sufficiently large that approximately 70 percent of students today score higher on narcissism and lower on empathy than did the average student thirty years ago.


https://www.psychologytoday.com/us/blog/freedom-learn/201401/why-is-narcissism-increasing-among-young-americans

[JD24]

The "pretend" part of your statement only makes your argument weaker since no one at all said that.

I said it; it's called an inference. What about the rest of the analysis? No rebuttal to the stats? Valpo will play at least 15 more games this year. Plenty of time to see if our 3pt defense has improved with Drake as the inflection point. I hope you're right and it is, but I'm gonna need more than 1 data point to believe the defense has turned the corner. (I hope you're right.)

I haven't said the Valpo defense has turned any corner at all. All I've said is that attributing luck to analysis of a game is weak....and I'll throw lazy into the mix too.

[justducky]

70 percent of students today score higher on narcissism

Well at least their scores have improved on something! 

The "pretend" part of your statement only makes your argument weaker since no one at all said that.

I said it; it's called an inference. What about the rest of the analysis? No rebuttal to the stats? Valpo will play at least 15 more games this year. Plenty of time to see if our 3pt defense has improved with Drake as the inflection point. I hope you're right and it is, but I'm gonna need more than 1 data point to believe the defense has turned the corner. (I hope you're right.)

I haven't said the Valpo defense has turned any corner at all. All I've said is that attributing luck to analysis of a game is weak....and I'll throw lazy into the mix too.

Ding Ding Ding Ding
Each to your corners while I remind you that no low blows are allowed on this board even when things evolve into street brawls!

[Just Sayin]

I know that there are a lot of Kiser haters out there, but I am still a fan.  The guy does so many little things for us, and it showed today.  Yes, he is not an offensive dynamo.  No, he is not fast, and quicker Guards can blow by him.  Look back at the film, however, and you will see that he battled the hell out of their 7-footer, and made some key plays for us throughout the game.  He is the 'glue guy' for us, in playing whatever role we ask of him, and not panicking when things get rough.  Go Kiser!

Kiser for the season as of 1/11/20


Pom Rankings: Note - Minimum 40% minutes played and 2 shots per game to qualify


EffFG%: 6th Conference rank. 58%. First on team. 2nd Clay 54.1%


2Pt%: 15th in Conference. 55.8%. First on team. 2nd Milleek 51.9%


3Pt%: Did not qualify for Pom MVC ranking because need 2 shots per game. But his 3Pt% is 41.4% which puts him in 2nd place on the team behind Eron 47.4%


OR% (Offensive Rebound %) 20th in conference at 5.8%. 3rd place on team behind Nick Robinson 6.8% and Mileek 6.3%


Turnover% - 37th fewest @ 18.8% in conference. 3rd place in lowest TO% on team behind Javon 13.3% and Clay 18.7%


Assist Rate - 35th place in conference, 5th on team


Steal Rate - 29th in conference, 6th on team


Fouls committed per 40 minutes - 51st place 3.73, 6th fewest on team.


Fouls drawn per 40 minutes - 64th in conference, 6th on team. Leaders in front of Kiser are Javon 5.2 fourth in conference, Mileek 4.2 17th in conference, Nick 33rd in conference, Sackey 42nd in conference, Eron 53rd in conference, Clay 60th in conference. 


Free throw percent. Doesn't qualify in Pom ranking, need two shots per game.
For the team though, he is 13-16, or 81.2%, higher than those who qualified for rankings such as Javon 2nd place 72.5%, Nick 70.6%, Sackey 69.4%

Memories.  Kiser has always been a killer.