|
Post by classof83 on Jan 29, 2019 17:37:42 GMT -5
Bill Carmody is on tonight's show at 7 with Pat Benzan.
Can be heard on WEEI 1440 at 7 - Can probably be heard on-line as well on Facebook Live
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 29, 2019 17:52:00 GMT -5
Wish fans could ask questions during these shows.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Jan 30, 2019 9:17:43 GMT -5
When this thing started a couple of years ago at the Compass Tavern, it was billed that you could ask questions. Most people at the Compass didn't care about the radio broadcast going on in the corner and had no questions.
I don't think that they have any set-up for phone calls. However, if you're in Hogan on a Tuesday, you could write something down and hand it to Dick before the broadcast. My guess is decorum would prohibit just yelling stuff out. This isn't talk radio so DIck will probably screen questions and not ask it if he doesn't like it
My personal speculation - and I emphasize speculation: Something like "How close are the freshmen to being ready to contribute minutes in meaningful situations?" would probably fly whereas something like "Why don't you focus more on rebounding?" might not get asked.
Either way, since Coach Carmody seems to adhere to the Coach Belichick (Bill - not Amanda) school of media answers, you might not get a straight answer.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jan 30, 2019 9:55:15 GMT -5
And if you do, some will not like it. Such is life.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 10:14:03 GMT -5
Carmody's keys for the BU game: - "Stay within 10 rebounds." After Lutsk started to laugh, Carmody replied with, "No, I'm serious."
- "Make shots. We're going to get good shots and then we just have to make them...You pass the ball around, every team does, and at the end of the clock, someone's got the ball and you've gotta put it in. And the good teams put it in more than the other teams."
Carmody also refuted Lutsk's claim that Benzan and Floyd were Co-Captains, stating that he hasn't had captains in 20 years.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Jan 30, 2019 10:20:51 GMT -5
The rebound thing should not be so mysterious. Isn't he in effect saying "My strategy does not emphasize rebounding; still we can't let our opponent get every loose ball. As long as we stay within 10 rebounds, we should be good." Another coach, e.g. one who does not emphasize three point shooting, might say "if team X only makes 5 more threes than we do we should be okay".
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 10:26:06 GMT -5
The rebound thing should not be so mysterious. Isn't he in effect saying "My strategy does not emphasize rebounding; still we can't let our opponent get every loose ball. As long as we stay within 10 rebounds, we should be good." Another coach, e.g. one who does not emphasize three point shooting, might say "if team X only makes 5 more threes than we do we should be okay". The volume of 3FG attempts versus 2FG attempts is a strategic decision that can be made as a coach. But there are still going to be shots attempted. Unlike the type of shots attempted (3FG vs 2FG), a coach has no control over whether there are missed shots (rebound opportunities) in a game. There is no excuse for making a decision to allow your team to be dominated in rebounding every game.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 30, 2019 10:29:34 GMT -5
We desperately need a new coach.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Jan 30, 2019 10:36:19 GMT -5
While I respect your opinion, I disagree. "We" do not IMHO desperately need a new coach.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jan 30, 2019 10:38:40 GMT -5
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 10:44:58 GMT -5
The volume of 3FG attempts versus 2FG attempts is a strategic decision that can be made as a coach. But there are still going to be shots attempted. Unlike the type of shots attempted (3FG vs 2FG), a coach has no control over whether there are missed shots (rebound opportunities) in a game. There is no excuse for making a decision to allow your team to be dominated in rebounding every game I don't like the number of defensive rebounds we don't get and obviously would prefer that we got more offensive rebounds, but the concept that getting back on defense is more important than trying to get offensive rebounds is not out of the mainstream of coaching. paceandspacehoops.com/offensive-rebounds-vs-getting-back-on-defense-which-is-more-effective/In the last three years, we have ranked 304-308-328 in defensive rebounding. There is absolutely no excuse for that. If you are then going to combine that with not gaining any of those "lost" possessions back on the offensive glass (347-346-333 OR ranks), it's even more inexcusable. To just hand the opposing team extra possessions on both ends of the floor is a losing strategy, and partially explains why Carmody's has a losing record over the last 18.5 years.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 30, 2019 10:55:05 GMT -5
Our inability to rebound it either end is a much better and bigger indicator of our lack of success than being third in the country in assists / FGM.
|
|
|
Post by alum on Jan 30, 2019 11:05:53 GMT -5
In the last three years, we have ranked 304-308-328 in defensive rebounding. There is absolutely no excuse for that. If you are then going to combine that with not gaining any of those "lost" possessions back on the offensive glass (347-346-333 OR ranks), it's even more inexcusable. To just hand the opposing team extra possessions on both ends of the floor is a losing strategy, and partially explains why Carmody's has a losing record over the last 18.5 years. I don't disagree with you and, to the extent that some of this is driven by the size and skill sets of the players available to do the rebounding, that's on the coach and his staff for their recruiting priorities, however, making decisions not to pursue low chance offensive rebounds has some empirical support.
|
|
|
Post by crusader12 on Jan 30, 2019 11:12:05 GMT -5
We desperately need a new coach. Another FADNP mess to clean up.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Jan 30, 2019 11:17:14 GMT -5
Tough crowd ... fire the coach after a radio interview. May be a first
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 30, 2019 11:24:55 GMT -5
Tough crowd ... fire the coach after a radio interview. May be a first Nah, it wasn't the interview that did it for me. It was actually a bad record going on four years now, in which we find ourselves in the unenviable position of not having a better than .500 record in the PL under Carmody.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 30, 2019 11:41:16 GMT -5
Through Milan Brown's first four years as head coach at HC, the average ranking of our offense and defense by Ken Pomeroy was 218.5 and 204, respectively.
Carmody's tenure to date at HC has produced the following: offense - 266.5, defense - 220.25.
Supporters of the program were growing very restless with Milan Brown in his fourth season as coach, which was justifiable. Why isn't there similar outcry for the poor job Carmody has done through 3.5 seasons?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 11:41:59 GMT -5
In the last three years, we have ranked 304-308-328 in defensive rebounding. There is absolutely no excuse for that. If you are then going to combine that with not gaining any of those "lost" possessions back on the offensive glass (347-346-333 OR ranks), it's even more inexcusable. To just hand the opposing team extra possessions on both ends of the floor is a losing strategy, and partially explains why Carmody's has a losing record over the last 18.5 years. I don't disagree with you and, to the extent that some of this is driven by the size and skill sets of the players available to do the rebounding, that's on the coach and his staff for their recruiting priorities, however, making decisions not to pursue low chance offensive rebounds has some empirical support. Sure, it's possible to be successful while conceding offensive rebounds, but a very quick analysis indicates that a team is far more likely to be successful if they are good on the offensive glass. (KenPom 2019 Data) AVG rank for bottom 50 offensive rebounding teams: 220.3 AVG rank for top 50 offensive rebounding teams: 108.8 AVG rank for bottom 100 offensive rebounding teams: 212.1 AVG rank for top 100 offensive rebounding teams: 130.6 Diving a little bit deeper into the teams that were lousy at offensive rebounding, but still manage to be successful: Bottom 50 Offensive Rebounding TeamsAVG Defensive Efficiency for teams that rank in top 50: 10.0 (n=2)AVG Defensive Efficiency for teams that rank in top 75: 40.0 (n=3)AVG Defensive Efficiency for teams that rank in top 100: 65.8 (n=5)In summary, there are only 5 teams that rank in the bottom 50 in offensive rebounding, but are still able to rank in the top 100 overall (10%), and these teams have an average defensive efficiency that ranks in the top 20th percentile of D1 teams. In the last 10 years, Carmody has finished better than than the bottom 50 in offensive rebounding one time, and he has not had a team with a defensive efficiency ranking in the top 20th percentile since 2001. Carmody's system is a losing formula.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Jan 30, 2019 11:44:30 GMT -5
Bring Back, I'd be interested to know the average ranking of teams who rank in the bottom 50 of both offensive and defensive rebounding.
If a team happens to be poor on the offensive glass, perhaps that's just the strategy of the coach and the team is good on the defensive glass. The fact that we rank in the bottom 50 of both departments is a serious problem.
Woo Gray posted in another thread that our effective FG% at 54.2% is the highest it has EVER been (or at least in the Pomeroy era), and we still find ourselves in the position of being 3-5 in the PL and 12-9 overall with a ranking of 198th.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Jan 30, 2019 11:45:28 GMT -5
Carmody also refuted Lutsk's claim that Benzan and Floyd were Co-Captains, stating that he hasn't had captains in 20 years.
I suppose it depends on your definition of "captain" Floyd and Benzan meet with the officials and opposing captains before the game. Before the season, I would guess that it was those guys (maybe Ziggy or LeSann too) who called all the guys and organized some games of pick-up, or other workouts. Last year the unnamed captains were Charles and Benzan. When Charles was dismissed from the team, rumor has it that Benzan was the one who called a team meeting after the Navy game. There is a role associated with the title captain. Even if you don't use the word, someone is filling that role. Semi-amusing side bar: At the beginning of the season, the website listed Charles and Benzan as captains of the 2017-18 squad. History has been re-written to just list Benzan
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Jan 30, 2019 11:52:06 GMT -5
Since he left Princeton, Carmody's teams have consistently been good at shooting, taking care of the ball, and not committing a lot of fouls. They have sometimes been defensively efficient, when they generate above average numbers of turnovers, thus causing opponents to be "inefficient." They have generally been mediocre in defending shooters (defensive EFG%). They have usually been poor at offensive rebounding (a deliberate strategy that some good teams adopt), and defensive rebounding (a defect that no good teams adopt, resulting in this instance from high-risk, high-reward defensive schemes), and they don't get to the free throw line much. And they behave this way, year after year after year. This is Carmody's coaching DNA - it is not player-specific, and it is not going to change. I don't offer this so much in the spirit of criticism or support of his approach, as to note how remarkably consistent that approach has been over the course of his last seventeen seasons. As Casey said, you could look up. TeamRankings.com has a treasure trove of statistical info going back 20+ years (scroll down a bit and click on "team stats" on the left). I've posted a lot of the supporting data before, won't bore folks with it again. I do hope anybody interested will take a look-see some time. www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-basketball/stat/effective-field-goal-pct
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 12:09:51 GMT -5
Bring Back, I'd be interested to know the average ranking of teams who rank in the bottom 50 of both offensive and defensive rebounding. If a team happens to be poor on the offensive glass, perhaps that's just the strategy of the coach and the team is good on the defensive glass. The fact that we rank in the bottom 50 of both departments is a serious problem. Bottom 50 in OR & DRAvg Rank: 292.4 (n=5)Bottom 50 OR / Bottom 75 DRAvg Rank: 278.3 (n=9)Bottom 50 OR / Bottom 100 DRAvg Rank: 261.6 (n=11)And going back to my previous post that referenced the few teams that managed to be successful despite being in the bottom 50 in offensive rebounding, the average defensive rebounding ranking for the 5 teams who rank in the top 100 despite OReb in the bottom 50 was 46.8. Carmody has never had a team finish that high in defensive rebounding, with only 1 team in the top 100 in the last 17 seasons (2011: 79 -- his best team in the last 17 years, with a final ranking of 50). Losing strategy.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Jan 30, 2019 12:40:51 GMT -5
I know attrition and injuries are part of the game but I don't think we'd be having this discussion about coach BC if Karl Charles was here and Niego was healthy. The necessity to recruit in the summer to find players to enroll in August was unfortunate, to say the least.
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Jan 30, 2019 12:48:21 GMT -5
I know attrition and injuries are part of the game but I don't think we'd be having this discussion about coach BC if Karl Charles was here and Niego was healthy. The necessity to recruit in the summer to find players to enroll in August was unfortunate, to say the least. Yes, because this season is such an outlier for Carmody, who has lost 14+ games in 15 of the last 16 seasons... And while we're on hypotheticals perhaps if he had captains and emphasized leadership from his upperclassmen, he wouldn't have had 4 players booted off the team over a ~14 month period.
|
|
|
Post by A Clock Tower Purple on Jan 30, 2019 12:55:23 GMT -5
Dean Wormer: can you move this thread under a new header named "more regurgitated Carm bashing" as that's all this thread, like most others, has become.
|
|