|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 10, 2017 9:25:39 GMT -5
Massey has HC Favored by 4 (68-64) with a 68% chance for the win.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 10:02:05 GMT -5
thanks for the work, RGS, but obviously point spread in the first game means less than nothing
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 10, 2017 10:10:35 GMT -5
A weak prediction at best, to be sure. I appreciate your phrasing, and believe such spreads are only for their "entertainment" value (since we are again in the entertainment business), but not sure they are worth "less than nothing" How would that work?
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 10:14:43 GMT -5
A weak prediction at best, to be sure. I appreciate your phrasing, and believe such spreads are only for their "entertainment" value (since we are again in the entertainment business), but not sure they are worth "less than nothing" How would that work? math majors, of which I am not one, would call it a negative number
|
|
|
Post by lou on Nov 10, 2017 10:15:48 GMT -5
Nothing would be not reading it. Less than nothing would be trying to understand where the prediction could possibly come from 😎
|
|
|
Post by possum on Nov 10, 2017 11:51:33 GMT -5
Hoping for a win tonight but can't for the life of me figure how we can be favored in this game. On the road with a freshmen laden team playing their first game against a veteran team returning 6 of their top 8 players. Will be very interested in seeing how we rebound in this game think Lopez will be a very tough matchup.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 12:20:58 GMT -5
Hoping for a win tonight but can't for the life of me figure how we can be favored in this game. odds makers have no clue
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Nov 10, 2017 12:37:25 GMT -5
Pomeroy has SHU favored by two, which is more in line with what I think.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Nov 10, 2017 12:45:18 GMT -5
Some questions that begin to get answered tonight . . .
1. How long is the bench? Right now, hard to figure who will contribute significantly behind the "Trusted Seven." With foul trouble and injury being unavoidable at some point or points during the season, need one or two other guys to step up 2. Can JF and KC stay out of early foul trouble? 3. Will the sophs develop? 4. How do our frosh and sophs stack up against their counterparts around the rest of the PL? 5. What kind of defenses will we employ? Can we turn over opponents at a very high rate (like last year) and be effective inside (unlike last year)?
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 12:51:41 GMT -5
Some questions that begin to get answered tonight . . . 1. How long is the bench? Right now, hard to figure who will contribute significantly behind the "Trusted Seven." With foul trouble and injury being unavoidable at some point or points during the season, need one or two other guys to step up 2. Can JF and KC stay out of early foul trouble? 3. Will the sophs develop? 4. How do our frosh and sophs stack up against their counterparts around the rest of the PL? 5. What kind of defenses will we employ? Can we turn over opponents at a very high rate (like last year) and be effective inside (unlike last year)? very perceptive questions
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Nov 10, 2017 12:52:18 GMT -5
Remind me who your "Trusted Seven" are, Woo?
Charles, Benzan, Floyd, Green, Butler, Grandy, and Faw?
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Nov 10, 2017 12:53:00 GMT -5
Remind me who your "Trusted Seven" are, Woo? Charles, Benzan, Floyd, Green, Butler, Grandy, and Faw? Yes
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 12:54:43 GMT -5
just based on Assumption minutes, i guess Zig, CLS and Cope would be next 3 candidates
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Nov 10, 2017 13:13:53 GMT -5
Last year, creating TOs made the defense pretty "efficient" (98.5 pts per 100 possessions, 100th in D1), but not "effective" (53.5% EFG, 305th in D1), especially inside (54.9% 2FG, 337th). With a smaller and less inexperienced group in the front court, believe this year's team will be similarly challenged.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Nov 10, 2017 13:20:09 GMT -5
Been thinking about these sophs recently: Raymon, CU, Mahoney, Bost U, Gasperini, AU. Obviously we're not even close in the sophomore class, at this point anyway
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 13:25:15 GMT -5
Last year, creating TOs made the defense pretty "efficient" (98.5 pts per 100 possessions, 100th in D1), but not "effective" (53.5% EFG, 305th in D1), especially inside (54.9% 2FG, 337th). With a smaller and less inexperienced group in the front court, believe this year's team will be similarly challenged. less experienced, yes smaller ? Jehyve and Matt are a bit taller and quicker, though not as bulky as Malachi who played most of the 5's minutes. If KC is at the 4 this season as he was for most of the minutes last season, that is obviously the same. RC played most of the 3 minutes. He was the same size as JG.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 13:26:21 GMT -5
Been thinking about these sophs recently: Raymon, CU, Mahoney, Bost U, Gasperini, AU. Obviously we're not even close in the sophomore class, at this point anyway it is a good thing games are not broken up into classes
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Nov 10, 2017 13:31:59 GMT -5
Based only on Assumption, I'd say the primary 5 are Green, Benzan, Charles, Floyd, and, Grandison. Butler first little sub - Faw first big sub. 8th man Zignorski, 9th man - LeSann. Copeland was a distant 10th. If the game is tight, I'm guessing a short burn for Zignorski and a DNP after that. If someone had an awesome nine days that could shake up a bit.
Fouls will be a big issue. The two guys with the historical tendency to get in foul trouble are Floyd and Charles. If Karl is in trouble, Butler can move over to a small 3 with Zignorski at the 2. Not sure how that can have big minutes on the defensive end. If Floyd gets in trouble, you're forced to have an all freshman frontcourt for spells. Going back to freshman inconsistency, of Grandison or Faw are having an off night on foul trouble night, you're going to a guy who did mop up vs Assumption.
My big question going into this game is what will traffic be like around Hartford and on the Merit Pkwy?
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 13:45:38 GMT -5
Based only on Assumption, I'd say the primary 5 are Green, Benzan, Charles, Floyd, and, Grandison. Butler first little sub - Faw first big sub. 8th man Zignorski, 9th man - LeSann. Copeland was a distant 10th. If the game is tight, I'm guessing a short burn for Zignorski and a DNP after that. If someone had an awesome nine days that could shake up a bit. Fouls will be a big issue. The two guys with the historical tendency to get in foul trouble are Floyd and Charles. If Karl is in trouble, Butler can move over to a small 3 with Zignorski at the 2. Not sure how that can have big minutes on the defensive end. If Floyd gets in trouble, you're forced to have an all freshman frontcourt for spells. Going back to freshman inconsistency, of Grandison or Faw are having an off night on foul trouble night, you're going to a guy who did mop up vs Assumption. do not necessarily see it that way. even if either Grandy and Faw are both having off nights, we still have JF at the 5, KC at the 4, AB at the 3. no need for a mop up guy
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 13:52:03 GMT -5
Based only on Assumption, I'd say the primary 5 are Green, Benzan, Charles, Floyd, and, Grandison. Butler first little sub - Faw first big sub. 8th man Zignorski, 9th man - LeSann. Copeland was a distant 10th. If the game is tight, I'm guessing a short burn for Zignorski and a DNP after that. If someone had an awesome nine days that could shake up a bit. Fouls will be a big issue. The two guys with the historical tendency to get in foul trouble are Floyd and Charles. true, but KC fouled out only 4 times. JF twice. JF will most likely be left in longer when in some foul trouble. even with some foul trouble, KC averaged 31 mpg, 4th highest on the team. He also will probably be allowed to play in some foul trouble this season
|
|
|
Post by lou on Nov 10, 2017 14:06:13 GMT -5
My big question going into this game is what will traffic be like around Hartford and on the Merit Pkwy? Really? You have to ask?
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 10, 2017 14:07:15 GMT -5
not much traffic, but strong wind on Long Island Sound
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Nov 10, 2017 14:17:21 GMT -5
Based only on Assumption, I'd say the primary 5 are Green, Benzan, Charles, Floyd, and, Grandison. Butler first little sub - Faw first big sub. 8th man Zignorski, 9th man - LeSann. Copeland was a distant 10th. If the game is tight, I'm guessing a short burn for Zignorski and a DNP after that. If someone had an awesome nine days that could shake up a bit. Fouls will be a big issue. The two guys with the historical tendency to get in foul trouble are Floyd and Charles. If Karl is in trouble, Butler can move over to a small 3 with Zignorski at the 2. Not sure how that can have big minutes on the defensive end. If Floyd gets in trouble, you're forced to have an all freshman frontcourt for spells. Going back to freshman inconsistency, of Grandison or Faw are having an off night on foul trouble night, you're going to a guy who did mop up vs Assumption. do not necessarily see it that way. even if either Grandy and Faw are both having off nights, we still have JF at the 5, KC at the 4, AB at the 3. no need for a mop up guy The assumption was how to handle Floyd in foul trouble, so I wasn't counting him. Fair point about Charles as at the 4.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Nov 10, 2017 14:19:23 GMT -5
true, but KC fouled out only 4 times. True, but KC also picked up 4 fouls in nine other games. In the thirteen games in which he picked up 4 or 5, he averaged just 27mpg and 7ppg - on multiple occasions he picked up two fouls early in the first half and spent too much time on the bench accordingly. Unsurprisingly, HC was just 4-9 in those contests - can't afford to have a player of his calibre take himself out of games like this. www.sports-reference.com/cbb/players/karl-charles-1/gamelog/2017
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Nov 10, 2017 18:01:56 GMT -5
Following only via LiveStats. Commentary/observations by those watching, please.
|
|