I read Reynold's article today in the Journal Star regarding Bradley's defense. I don't know about the rest of you, but I'm not convinced their defense is that good. The article is correct regarding the shooting percentages. But folks, we have been playing some very bad teams that are not offensive juggernauts. Field goal percentage and total points can be deceiving when judging good defense. For example, if you run the shot clock down with every possession, you're going to score fewer points. That doesn't equate to good defense. I equate good defense with denying passing lanes, anticipating passes in the passing lanes for steals and layups, steals from the weak side, strong weak side help, applying full-court pressure, drawing multiple charging fouls during a game, players diving on the floor for loose balls, not committing stupid fouls 25 feet from the basket. I see very little of this when I watch BU games. To me that is defense. If you play good defense you are not to allow teams to go 10-0 runs or 14-2 runs. You're going to prevent that by getting steals and layups, even when you go cold when shooting from the floor.
-
Welcome to BradleyFans.com! Visitors are welcome, but we encourage you to sign up and register as a member. It's free and takes only a few seconds. Just click on the link to Register at the top right of the page, and follow instructions. If you have any problems or questions, click on the link at the bottom right of the page to Contact Us.
BU Defense
- Thread starter Vent
- Start date
tornado
New member
according to the column we are playing historically great defense....but just not finishing on offense...
This is a perfect example of the entire problem from top to bottom...
nobody will actually admit there's major problems that have to be fixed...
someone - mostly the PJStar - keep calling bad good.
we are historically bad not just on offense, but on overall performance, blowout losses even to bad teams, but also on scheduling, on other sports besides basketball and on how everything is run in the Athletic Dept.
I am tired of hearing how hard it is, excuses for why it isn't getting done, then bragging on how good we are in hand-picked, selected data that is meaningless when you look at the poor schedule.
Going on four years now and it's not getting better...everyone knows what needs to be done before attendance drops to 2000.
This is a perfect example of the entire problem from top to bottom...
nobody will actually admit there's major problems that have to be fixed...
someone - mostly the PJStar - keep calling bad good.
we are historically bad not just on offense, but on overall performance, blowout losses even to bad teams, but also on scheduling, on other sports besides basketball and on how everything is run in the Athletic Dept.
I am tired of hearing how hard it is, excuses for why it isn't getting done, then bragging on how good we are in hand-picked, selected data that is meaningless when you look at the poor schedule.
Going on four years now and it's not getting better...everyone knows what needs to be done before attendance drops to 2000.
Here is Dave's latest column-
There's more to the Bradley men's team than poor shooting
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20141223/SPORTS/141229640/10962/SPORTS
I agree that Dave still has not taken off the rose colored glasses, and keeps trying harder and harder to find any sliver of a silver lining in Bradley's horrible 4-8 season. I agree that Bradley has played good defense for much of the season, but Dave's article completely ignores several other significant factors. Because opponents are shooting just 39.6% against Bradley, it does not automatically mean that it is all due to good defense, as Dave and Geno assume.
A review of some stats shows several other likely reasons for the improved defensive stats.
One is the poor quality of opponents- 9 of the 12 opponents shoot poorly and are below the D1 average, many of them well below.
Another reason is the good fortune of playing a team (Irvine) with their top shooter and scorer out. Mamdou Ndaiye is Irvine's leading scorer, and he shoots 70% from the field (2nd best in all of D1)
And yet another major reason is that Bradley padded their defensive stats by playing a weak Division III team (Eureka) as a regular-season game for the first time in anyone's memory. If the Eureka game (BU held them to a season-low 29.3%) is taken out of the equation, and it does not make much sense to put any stock in stats against a weak D3 team, our defensive FG% jumps up to 40.5%.
Here is a list of the teams we have played, with their shooting percentages versus Bradley, and for their entire season-
OPPONENT............FG% against Bradley......FG% for the season
Texas-Arlington................47.2%........................42.2%
Robert Morris...................40.9%........................40.1%
NC A&T...........................38.8%........................39.3%
Texas A&M-CC..................29.5%........................42.9%
TCU................................37.5%........................49.3%
St. Louis..........................48.9%........................41.5%
Central Michigan...............43.8%........................49.6%
Memphis.........................43.0%.........................44.0%
Kansas State...................35.3%.........................48.0%
Eureka............................29.3%........................37.9%
UC Irvine........................40.9%.........................46.4%
Arkansas-LR.....................39.5%.........................41.5%
As can be seen, Bradley has played some really poor shooting teams. Only 4 of their 12 opponents shoot better than 44%.
44.2% is the average FG% among Division I teams.
Bradley held their opponent to a significantly lower shooting percentage than their average in just half the games, 6 out of 12- against Texas A&M-CC, TCU, CMU, Kansas State, Eureka, and Irvine (but we still lost 3 of those games). But in the other 6 games, Bradley's opponent shot better or within 1% of their season average.
Also in Dave's column, the logic used by Dave and Geno is that the offense is certain to get better, but they never even consider the possibility that the defense might have trouble holding future opponents to the same defensive stats we've seen so far. In fact, I'd be willing to take anyone's bet that Bradley's defensive FG% will not be this good during the MVC season.
And again, as we have seen in virtually every article by Dave since last summer, he dwells on the injury issue as an excuse for losses. Tramique Sutherland's toe injury continues be brought up as an excuse for losing to Arkansas Little Rock. However, Sutherland played more minutes than any other Bradley player (34 minutes), and he scored 13 points, which is essentially his average. So I am just not buying that excuse.
There's more to the Bradley men's team than poor shooting
http://www.pjstar.com/article/20141223/SPORTS/141229640/10962/SPORTS
I agree that Dave still has not taken off the rose colored glasses, and keeps trying harder and harder to find any sliver of a silver lining in Bradley's horrible 4-8 season. I agree that Bradley has played good defense for much of the season, but Dave's article completely ignores several other significant factors. Because opponents are shooting just 39.6% against Bradley, it does not automatically mean that it is all due to good defense, as Dave and Geno assume.
A review of some stats shows several other likely reasons for the improved defensive stats.
One is the poor quality of opponents- 9 of the 12 opponents shoot poorly and are below the D1 average, many of them well below.
Another reason is the good fortune of playing a team (Irvine) with their top shooter and scorer out. Mamdou Ndaiye is Irvine's leading scorer, and he shoots 70% from the field (2nd best in all of D1)
And yet another major reason is that Bradley padded their defensive stats by playing a weak Division III team (Eureka) as a regular-season game for the first time in anyone's memory. If the Eureka game (BU held them to a season-low 29.3%) is taken out of the equation, and it does not make much sense to put any stock in stats against a weak D3 team, our defensive FG% jumps up to 40.5%.
Here is a list of the teams we have played, with their shooting percentages versus Bradley, and for their entire season-
OPPONENT............FG% against Bradley......FG% for the season
Texas-Arlington................47.2%........................42.2%
Robert Morris...................40.9%........................40.1%
NC A&T...........................38.8%........................39.3%
Texas A&M-CC..................29.5%........................42.9%
TCU................................37.5%........................49.3%
St. Louis..........................48.9%........................41.5%
Central Michigan...............43.8%........................49.6%
Memphis.........................43.0%.........................44.0%
Kansas State...................35.3%.........................48.0%
Eureka............................29.3%........................37.9%
UC Irvine........................40.9%.........................46.4%
Arkansas-LR.....................39.5%.........................41.5%
As can be seen, Bradley has played some really poor shooting teams. Only 4 of their 12 opponents shoot better than 44%.
44.2% is the average FG% among Division I teams.
Bradley held their opponent to a significantly lower shooting percentage than their average in just half the games, 6 out of 12- against Texas A&M-CC, TCU, CMU, Kansas State, Eureka, and Irvine (but we still lost 3 of those games). But in the other 6 games, Bradley's opponent shot better or within 1% of their season average.
Also in Dave's column, the logic used by Dave and Geno is that the offense is certain to get better, but they never even consider the possibility that the defense might have trouble holding future opponents to the same defensive stats we've seen so far. In fact, I'd be willing to take anyone's bet that Bradley's defensive FG% will not be this good during the MVC season.
And again, as we have seen in virtually every article by Dave since last summer, he dwells on the injury issue as an excuse for losses. Tramique Sutherland's toe injury continues be brought up as an excuse for losing to Arkansas Little Rock. However, Sutherland played more minutes than any other Bradley player (34 minutes), and he scored 13 points, which is essentially his average. So I am just not buying that excuse.
And in the Reynolds column today, Geno is quoted as saying "Defensively, I'm as happy as can be". I find it difficult to understand how a D1 coach can use the word "happy" to describe ANYTHING about an underperforming group of players that are currently sitting at 4-8 on the season. It doesn't matter to me if BU is holding opponents to 39.6% from the field or 9.6% from the field, 8 of our opponents have scored TOO MANY POINTS FOR US TO WIN!!
The constant, repetitive injury excuses are what bug me the most.
In the past, we have had fans lecture us that injuries can't be used as an excuse for losing. And that a coach should recruit enough quality players to compensate for injuries.
The previous coach was fired in 2011 after his only losing season in 6 years! And that season he lost 2 All-MVC starters (Sam Maniscalco & Taylor Brown) for virtually the entire season, plus dealt with injury issues to other key players and starters such as Dodie Dunson, Dyricus Simms-Edwards, and Walt Lemon.
Never once did Jim ever mention or refer to any of those enormous injury issues as an excuse for losing. Last year at UC Davis, he lost 3 starters for virtually their entire season, and again, he never made a single excuse.
Now we see the injury issues brought up, and dwelt upon in multiple paragraphs in every article that appears in the Peoria Journal Star. If a reader didn't know better, they could easily mistake the PJ Star for the excuse-making publicity arm of Bradley basketball.
This is year 4, and there is no excuse for not having recruited adequate players who can play and compete with the UC Irvines, Arkansas-Little Rocks, Robert Morris, Texas-Arlingtons, and Augustanas of this country. The PJ Star should be ashamed.
In the past, we have had fans lecture us that injuries can't be used as an excuse for losing. And that a coach should recruit enough quality players to compensate for injuries.
The previous coach was fired in 2011 after his only losing season in 6 years! And that season he lost 2 All-MVC starters (Sam Maniscalco & Taylor Brown) for virtually the entire season, plus dealt with injury issues to other key players and starters such as Dodie Dunson, Dyricus Simms-Edwards, and Walt Lemon.
Never once did Jim ever mention or refer to any of those enormous injury issues as an excuse for losing. Last year at UC Davis, he lost 3 starters for virtually their entire season, and again, he never made a single excuse.
Now we see the injury issues brought up, and dwelt upon in multiple paragraphs in every article that appears in the Peoria Journal Star. If a reader didn't know better, they could easily mistake the PJ Star for the excuse-making publicity arm of Bradley basketball.
This is year 4, and there is no excuse for not having recruited adequate players who can play and compete with the UC Irvines, Arkansas-Little Rocks, Robert Morris, Texas-Arlingtons, and Augustanas of this country. The PJ Star should be ashamed.
Buesch N Chips
New member
tornado
New member
fans are entitled to debate the effect of injury..
but as Da Coach will point out - the coaching staff from 2002-2011 NEVER used injuries as an excuse...this staff uses that excuse all the time
not even when playing with THREE starters out due to injury - they never talked to the press and gave the injury excuse - and the media sure never gave them any breaks due to injury either.
but as Da Coach will point out - the coaching staff from 2002-2011 NEVER used injuries as an excuse...this staff uses that excuse all the time
not even when playing with THREE starters out due to injury - they never talked to the press and gave the injury excuse - and the media sure never gave them any breaks due to injury either.
Buesch N Chips
New member
Fans have always discussed and debated the injury issue, and I have no problem with any fan who does. However, I see a lot of hypocrisy in some who lectured us a few years ago that injuries cannot be used as an excuse, and it's the coach's fault for not recruiting enough backup talent to deal with injuries.
Some of those same fans now suddenly appear to have done a complete 180?° and now don't mind dragging out injury excuses with every loss.
My comments apply to the coaches and the media, not the fans. The previous coach never used injuries as an excuse, even when it was obvious they played a significant part, and even helped lead to his firing. Now we see injuries and a myriad of other excuses applied after every loss, and the media now focuses on injury excuses for portions of every article.
Some of those same fans now suddenly appear to have done a complete 180?° and now don't mind dragging out injury excuses with every loss.
My comments apply to the coaches and the media, not the fans. The previous coach never used injuries as an excuse, even when it was obvious they played a significant part, and even helped lead to his firing. Now we see injuries and a myriad of other excuses applied after every loss, and the media now focuses on injury excuses for portions of every article.
Buesch N Chips
New member
Yes, I get all that. You've said it a million times. I want to know what you think, not about other fans, not about the media, but about the team. It's obvious you think injuries can be used as a reason for a team not performing the way they were supposed to, as you have done it already in this thread when you brought up Jim Les. Will you then say the same about this year's team?
OK, if you are asking for my own personal opinion.....Yes. I have always been consistent in saying that anyone being objective when watching or following a team can see and judge whether injuries have a significant impact on a team winning, or their overall success. But surely you aren't suggesting the injuries to a couple average players on a team that was picked 8th, that cost them a handful of games can be compared to season-long losses of a couple All-MVC stars in 2010-11 on a team picked high in the preseason poll?
That 2010-11 team was picked to finish 4th in the preseason poll, and because of injuries, they finished 9th. IMO, losing Taylor Brown and Sam Maniscalco, both key, All-MVC starters for that team, easily cost 10 or more wins, and a chance at a postseason tournament. And in the end, it gave Joanne Glasser an excuse to fire the coach.
Losing Sutherland for several meaningless early season games may have made a slight difference, but that is debatable. His presence these last 2 games sure didn't help keep Bradley from being beaten easily by 2 bad teams. And same with the Jones injury. When he was healthy, Bradley still lost multiple games to inferior teams, and he never showed that he could play defense. I think it would be hard to argue that if he had stayed healthy, that anything would have been much different.
This season Bradley was picked to finish 8th, even before those injuries, and that probably is where they will finish. So in the end, the 2 injuries this year will likely not change the outcome of this team's season significantly. Also, IMO, neither of those 2 players will ever be All-MVC players, so I don't see any way their loss compares with the loss of Brown & Maniscalco in 2010-11. This is a bad team with those players, and it is a bad team when they are out, so their injuries don't really change much, IMO. I think as the season progresses, that will become obvious even to those who disagree.
But here is what is most obvious- in past years, when a player got a minor injury, like a strain of a toe, they just played through the injuries. It was never mentioned by the coach, and even if the media knew about it, they never reported these kinds of minor injuries. And, of course, they were never implicated as excuses.
But this season the reporting is completely different. We keep being told every game about every minor injury like Mike Shaw's toe injury, or Tramique Sutherland's toe strain, etc. Even injuries like these that did not cause a player to miss a single game, or even miss a single minute of play, get played up in every article as an excuse for the team losing. It looks like a desperate attempt by the reporter to try to deflect criticism or blame away from the coaches.
I predict we will continue to see more of these minor injury reports all year, as the PJS will need to keep trying to come up with excuses.
tornado
New member
Of course the loss of star players can and do make a big difference - much moreso for a mid-major like Bradley than a team like Duke with All-Americans sitting on the bench.
but having said that ..never before in the 50 years that I have followed Bradley basketball have I ever seen
the INJURY EXCUSE used so much, so often, and so routinely in every post-game and pre-game story.....never! Even Dave Snell using it all the time.
Even sprained toes (Mike Shaw and Tramique), and nagging effects of surgery 6 months ago or more, bumps, bruises, and even referring to players out with disciplinary suspensions and academic ineligibility as out with injuries...
..it's been one injury excuse after another....
Like I said, the previous coach never made excuses for injuries - the current one does.
** the Board Chairman Doug Stewart has been quoted saying that BU basketball gets a pass until spring because...
"It is still early and injuries have impacted the ability to get a new team on the same page."
..it's almost like everyone got the memo and they are all using the same exact words in their excuses...
but having said that ..never before in the 50 years that I have followed Bradley basketball have I ever seen
the INJURY EXCUSE used so much, so often, and so routinely in every post-game and pre-game story.....never! Even Dave Snell using it all the time.
Even sprained toes (Mike Shaw and Tramique), and nagging effects of surgery 6 months ago or more, bumps, bruises, and even referring to players out with disciplinary suspensions and academic ineligibility as out with injuries...
..it's been one injury excuse after another....
Like I said, the previous coach never made excuses for injuries - the current one does.
** the Board Chairman Doug Stewart has been quoted saying that BU basketball gets a pass until spring because...
"It is still early and injuries have impacted the ability to get a new team on the same page."
..it's almost like everyone got the memo and they are all using the same exact words in their excuses...
Here are the current MVC stats-
http://www.mvc.org/mbb/stats/CONFLDRS.HTM
Bradley is 10th and last in several offensive categories. Their team defense is 2nd behind UNI, but unlike Dave Reynolds, I am not ready to declare this team a superb defensive team. Bradley has played one of the weaker non-conference schedules among MVC teams, and if the 38 points that D3 Augustana scored is taken out of the equation, Bradley's defensive average actually jumps up to a more mediocre, middle-of-the-pack average (Bradley's defensive average for the 11 D1 games is 61.3 ppg, which would rank 5th currently).
The stat that stands out the most, even more than the horrible (10th ranked in MVC and 301st ranked in D1) 63.6% free throw percentage, is Field Goal Percentage. Bradley's FG% of 37.5% is 10th and last in the MVC by a wide margin. Just to show how bad that is, Bradley's 37.5% FG% is 337th in Division I (out of 351 schools). That is only the 4th percentile (96% of teams shoot better), and the teams behind Bradley include some of the absolute worst teams in Division I.
There are only 14 teams that shoot worse than Bradley, and one of them is Bradley's next opponent UIC (they shoot 35.5% and rank 346th).
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas.../stat/field-goals/sort/fieldGoalPct/count/321
There are 293 Division I teams that shoot over 40%!
So instead of all the boasting about a marginally good defensive PPG average, the real focus should be on the near-all-time worst shooting stats we have seen so far this year. And note that virtually every team sees it's scoring and shooting averages drop every year in the conference season with better defenses and scouting. We can only hope that doesn't happen to Bradley or we could be down with Grambling State (the 351st ranked FG% of 32.3%).
And what is funny is that this is not a sudden new phenomenon.
Lots of fans on this board have been noticing and saying for 3 years that Geno needs to recruit better shooters. Bradley has lost numerous games over these last 3 1/2 seasons mainly because of poor ability to put the ball in the basket. And now we can't even shoot free throws.
So this staff has had plenty of time to recognize this glaring deficiency, and recruit adequate players to correct the deficiency. However, as we can all see, the shooting woes have only gotten worse, and worse.
And we do not have a single recruit committed that will help improve these painful shooting problems.
http://www.mvc.org/mbb/stats/CONFLDRS.HTM
Bradley is 10th and last in several offensive categories. Their team defense is 2nd behind UNI, but unlike Dave Reynolds, I am not ready to declare this team a superb defensive team. Bradley has played one of the weaker non-conference schedules among MVC teams, and if the 38 points that D3 Augustana scored is taken out of the equation, Bradley's defensive average actually jumps up to a more mediocre, middle-of-the-pack average (Bradley's defensive average for the 11 D1 games is 61.3 ppg, which would rank 5th currently).
The stat that stands out the most, even more than the horrible (10th ranked in MVC and 301st ranked in D1) 63.6% free throw percentage, is Field Goal Percentage. Bradley's FG% of 37.5% is 10th and last in the MVC by a wide margin. Just to show how bad that is, Bradley's 37.5% FG% is 337th in Division I (out of 351 schools). That is only the 4th percentile (96% of teams shoot better), and the teams behind Bradley include some of the absolute worst teams in Division I.
There are only 14 teams that shoot worse than Bradley, and one of them is Bradley's next opponent UIC (they shoot 35.5% and rank 346th).
http://espn.go.com/mens-college-bas.../stat/field-goals/sort/fieldGoalPct/count/321
There are 293 Division I teams that shoot over 40%!
So instead of all the boasting about a marginally good defensive PPG average, the real focus should be on the near-all-time worst shooting stats we have seen so far this year. And note that virtually every team sees it's scoring and shooting averages drop every year in the conference season with better defenses and scouting. We can only hope that doesn't happen to Bradley or we could be down with Grambling State (the 351st ranked FG% of 32.3%).
And what is funny is that this is not a sudden new phenomenon.
Lots of fans on this board have been noticing and saying for 3 years that Geno needs to recruit better shooters. Bradley has lost numerous games over these last 3 1/2 seasons mainly because of poor ability to put the ball in the basket. And now we can't even shoot free throws.
So this staff has had plenty of time to recognize this glaring deficiency, and recruit adequate players to correct the deficiency. However, as we can all see, the shooting woes have only gotten worse, and worse.
And we do not have a single recruit committed that will help improve these painful shooting problems.
As a followup to my last post, I checked the shooting percentages from Geno's first 3 teams. None of them reached the average shooting percentage nationally which usually falls between 44-45%.
2011-2012- Team FG%- 40.1%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Anthony Thompson 51.3%, Walt Lemon 47.1%, Jordan Prosser 45.5%, Taylor Brown 42.0%, Dyricus Simms-Edwards 35.4
2012-2013- Team FG%- 43.7%- Top FG% shooters among regulars-Jordan Prosser 50.6%, Tyshon Pickett 49.3%, Walt Lemon 45.1%, Will Egolf 43.1%, Jake Eastman 40.3%, DSE 37.9%
2013-2014- Team FG%- 41.9%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Jordan Prosser 49.2%, Tyshon Pickett 46%, Auston Barnes 43.6%, Walt Lemon 42.2%, Ka'Darryl Bell 35.1%Omari Grier 33.9%
2014-2015- Team FG%-37.5%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Josh Cunningham 44.4%, Auston Barnes 42.2%, Tramique Sutherland 42.1%, Mike Shaw 40.0%, Omari Grier 38.1%, Jermaine Morgan 36.0%, Warren Jones 35.2%, Ka'Darryl Bell 30.7%
Note that as Geno acquired more of his own players, the shooting percentages dropped. We now have no players shooting above the national average for D1.
2011-2012- Team FG%- 40.1%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Anthony Thompson 51.3%, Walt Lemon 47.1%, Jordan Prosser 45.5%, Taylor Brown 42.0%, Dyricus Simms-Edwards 35.4
2012-2013- Team FG%- 43.7%- Top FG% shooters among regulars-Jordan Prosser 50.6%, Tyshon Pickett 49.3%, Walt Lemon 45.1%, Will Egolf 43.1%, Jake Eastman 40.3%, DSE 37.9%
2013-2014- Team FG%- 41.9%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Jordan Prosser 49.2%, Tyshon Pickett 46%, Auston Barnes 43.6%, Walt Lemon 42.2%, Ka'Darryl Bell 35.1%Omari Grier 33.9%
2014-2015- Team FG%-37.5%- Top FG% shooters among regulars- Josh Cunningham 44.4%, Auston Barnes 42.2%, Tramique Sutherland 42.1%, Mike Shaw 40.0%, Omari Grier 38.1%, Jermaine Morgan 36.0%, Warren Jones 35.2%, Ka'Darryl Bell 30.7%
Note that as Geno acquired more of his own players, the shooting percentages dropped. We now have no players shooting above the national average for D1.
tornado
New member
...and the toughest part of our schedule - the 18 conference opponents who know us well, study and scout us and defend us better than what we've seen - is now coming up....
So the only reason our FG% in Geno's 1st 3 years wasn't as bad as now is because of the players who were left over in the cupboard?
Now that all those players are gone and Geno has ALL HIS OWN PLAYERS, we are among the worst 5-10% of the teams in DI in shooting percentage.
But - shouldn't we have known that and seen this coming since most of these guys couldn't score very well at the juco level or HS level.
So the only reason our FG% in Geno's 1st 3 years wasn't as bad as now is because of the players who were left over in the cupboard?
Now that all those players are gone and Geno has ALL HIS OWN PLAYERS, we are among the worst 5-10% of the teams in DI in shooting percentage.
But - shouldn't we have known that and seen this coming since most of these guys couldn't score very well at the juco level or HS level.