Bradley's low post players - comparison over past 25 years

[Future Walk-On]

If our current post guys are the best we've had in 25 years, then I now finally know the answer why we have not won Arch Madness since it moved to St. Louis...

I criticize the development of JP OFFENSIVELY.

[BUBalum05]

could you imagine a 6'11" Pickett?

Yeah, I can imagine a 6'11" Pickett playing for Indiana or Duke...

[tornado]

Stats are stats and facts are facts... Using your rationale then Curtis Stuckey was the greatest player in Bradley's history.

no - and I never even cited anything regarding Curtis Stuckey - but quoting his stats is 180 degrees the opposite from drawing any subjective conclusion about how great he was -
I made no reference to who is greatest in anything - you are the one who drew that conclusion..
btw - there are about a million web sites that cite stats - from ESPN to the official MVC website to basketballreference.com .. do all those sites bother the heck out of you and do you send them e mails telling them they're way off and you don't like their "rationale"?

All I do is research and post facts - if those facts bother you, then find some of your own - but if they suggest the post players we have now are among the best we've had in 25 years, then give me even one fact to refute it other than "I don't like your rationale"

for those who say we have weak players currently playing the low post - then tell me who in the past 25 years of Bradley history you'd rather have..or who have we whiffed on that we should have landed?

[Future Walk-On]

Yeah, I can imagine a 6'11" Pickett playing for Indiana or Duke...

truth....

but what if he had a growth spurt this summer?

[Braves4Life]

All I do is research and post facts - if those facts bother you, then find some of your own - but if they suggest the post players we have now are among the best we've had in 25 years, then give me even one fact to refute it other than "I don't like your rationale"

Why do you get to be the one to make the rules as to who from the past 25 years to include on this list? If they're going to be just guys just guys that you want... and guys that you choose to exclude (POB, Zach, Cellus, etc) then you aren't allowed to make a credible and valid argument. Anyone can manipulate a set of statistics to prove a point if they get to set the parameters... to make up their own rules and criteria. It would be like arguing that Wichita St. is better than Duke or Michigan or Michigan State since WSU is in first place in their conference and those other schools are not in theirs. See, my criteria says that whoever is in first in one conference is better than another team that is not in first in their conference. Louisiana Tech is 24-3 and so therefore must be better than Michigan who is 23-4. See, my rules so best record means they're the best.

You create this great list of Bradley post players but what are the standards to be considered for that list since you have chosen to leave off select players? Is there a height requirement? Is there a position requirement? Is there a requirement based on the number of shots taken on the court? Who determines what players were "post" players, and who aren't?

Again, what gives you the right to make up these rules? Is it to consciously attempt to minimize the current Bradley coaching staff by skewing everything towards your made up rules, and then pass off your findings as facts. And, if your made up rules are indeed "fact" then what you're attempting to suggest (in a very passive aggressive way) is that the current Bradley coaching staff is not actually over-achieving with this group of players but rather under-achieving. I imagine in your world that this current group of players would probably be doing much better under different leadership.

[BU212121]

Cellus, Eddie Cage, and Deon were all low post players...

They could just also step out and hit jumpers b/c they were really good players.

[Future Walk-On]

Don't forget.

Jordan Clarke - 37 minutes, 20 points, 15 rebounds
Jordan Prosser - 23 minutes, 3 points, 4 rebounds

[JMM28]

All this shows me is that BU has been terribly weak in the post on average for the last 25 years. Hopefully Geno can change that.

BU can win the MVC behind good guards, but will never be an elite team with just guards. The years BU has been elite they have featured multiple strong post players. Cellus, POB, ZA in 06. That team should have been Top 25 all year looking back at it.

Oh and it shows that you left off Cellus, Deon Jackson, and Ed Cage. Probably 3 out of the 4 best post players of the last 25 years.

edit: And I just realized there is no Granger on this list. NBA All Star recruit from Mo as a forward. Hmmm... I can feel your 100% support...

[SFP]

This is pretty simple folks. It is called the eye test. WE is a good MVC post player when he's on the court. Those pesky foul issues are getting in the way to greatness (sarcasm). TP is an another good 4 in the MVC when he lets the game come to him. Neither is all conference as some of those in the past. JP has proven to be very average at this point. He's a good role player that would come off the bench on every Valley team.

I have to believe our staff is doing one heck of a job if anyone sees them as MVC 1st or 2nd team players. I like the guys but they are what they are. WE had how many major knee surgeries? TP is in his 1st year! JP is not who we many of us thought he was going to be.

Next subject please!

[Beninator]

Why do you get to be the one to make the rules as to who from the past 25 years to include on this list? If they're going to be just guys just guys that you want... and guys that you choose to exclude (POB, Zach, Cellus, etc) then you aren't allowed to make a credible and valid argument. Anyone can manipulate a set of statistics to prove a point if they get to set the parameters... to make up their own rules and criteria. It would be like arguing that Wichita St. is better than Duke or Michigan or Michigan State since WSU is in first place in their conference and those other schools are not in theirs. See, my criteria says that whoever is in first in one conference is better than another team that is not in first in their conference. Louisiana Tech is 24-3 and so therefore must be better than Michigan who is 23-4. See, my rules so best record means they're the best.

You create this great list of Bradley post players but what are the standards to be considered for that list since you have chosen to leave off select players? Is there a height requirement? Is there a position requirement? Is there a requirement based on the number of shots taken on the court? Who determines what players were "post" players, and who aren't?

Again, what gives you the right to make up these rules? Is it to consciously attempt to minimize the current Bradley coaching staff by skewing everything towards your made up rules, and then pass off your findings as facts. And, if your made up rules are indeed "fact" then what you're attempting to suggest (in a very passive aggressive way) is that the current Bradley coaching staff is not actually over-achieving with this group of players but rather under-achieving. I imagine in your world that this current group of players would probably be doing much better under different leadership.

I agree. It is very obvious what is going on here. Maybe we can use Will Egolf's production this year as a bit of an example. To date, Will has 208 total points. 49% of those points (102 points) are FG's, 39% from three point range and the remaining 12% (25 points) from freethrows. I have always thought that Will and JP are basically 4's forced to play the 5. That would be ok if they had some depth and a true wing player who would be a threat from the three. And speaking of threes.... The 81 points Will has made from the three this year is a huge improvement from the role Will played in the JL era. This IMHO signifies that JL did not utilize Will's abilities to their fullest extent.

[Da Coach]

...This IMHO signifies that JL did not utilize Will's abilities to their fullest extent.

Fair enough. But I would propose just the opposite- Will's 3-point percentage for the 3 years he played under Jim Les was:
Year.............3-point percentage
2007-2008.........0%
2008-2009.........0%
2009-1010.........0%
2010-2011.........0%
2011-2012.....did not play

I suspect if Jim Les encouraged Will to shoot more threes considering his percentage over the 4 years he was here under JL was 0%, fans here would have demanded he be fired years before he was.

[Braves4Life]

Fair enough. But I would propose just the opposite- Will's 3-point percentage for the 3 years he played under Jim Les was:
Year.............3-point percentage
2007-2008.........0%
2008-2009.........0%
2009-1010.........0%
2010-2011.........0%
2011-2012.....did not play

I suspect if Jim Les encouraged Will to shoot more threes considering his percentage over the 4 years he was here under JL was 0%, fans here would have demanded he be fired years before he was.

I, for one, am glad that this coaching staff was able to identify Will's strengths and talents and motivate him to put in the practice time necessary to show the level of improvement that he has shown. Though our post play is still weak compared to upper level MVC teams it is still vastly improved from our past few seasons.

[Da Coach]

Me too. But I would not say vastly improved. Scoring from our forwards is about the same (actually down slightly), and rebounding is not much different, and could be accounted for by the weaker non-conference schedule. But overall there has been improvement from last year.

[Braves4Life]

Me too. But I would not say vastly improved. Scoring from our forwards is about the same (actually down slightly), and rebounding is not much different.

Fair enough. I can concede some of that point Da Coach... though I think the overall game of our big men has improved some. Take note tornado.

[Beninator]

Fair enough. But I would propose just the opposite- Will's 3-point percentage for the 3 years he played under Jim Les was:
Year.............3-point percentage
2007-2008.........0%
2008-2009.........0%
2009-1010.........0%
2010-2011.........0%
2011-2012.....did not play

I suspect if Jim Les encouraged Will to shoot more threes considering his percentage over the 4 years he was here under JL was 0%, fans here would have demanded he be fired years before he was.

2007-08---0-14.......0%........19 games played
2008-09---0-0.........0%.........5 games played
2009-10---0-0.........0%.......31 games played
2010-11---0-2.........0%.......32 games played
2011-12............Did not play
2012-13...27-79......34.2%..24 games


If you take a closer look at the statistics, you will see that aside from his freshman year, which is a learning experience for most mid-major players, Will only attempted 2 three point shots in 68 games with the Jim Les offense from 2008-2011. Yet in Will's first and only year in Geno's system, he is hitting threes at a 34% rate with 63 more attempts than his total in the previous 3+ years. So I think it is very accurate to state that Geno and his staff have utilized Will Egolf's abilities far better than Jim Les!