Dave in Green

We would have still lost to Eastern Kentucky, which outscored us whether Bardo was in or out. Also, I wouldn't make the leap that just putting in any center makes a team better. Many teams in both college and the NBA play long stretches without a center. It's called "playing small," and usually consists of 2 or 3 forwards and 2 or 3 guards. It's because there aren't that many good bigs who play center well. Most teams consider themselves fortunate to have one.I trust KD to do what he thinks is best for the team. I believe that if he thought the team could produce the same results with Swiech on the floor as with Bardo, he'd simply sub them back and forth and keep one of the two centers in most of the time. Like others here, I think Swiech has some potential. But I've only seen him play for a few minutes, so I haven't seen enough to make a call. KD has seen Swiech for endless hours in practice. That's where a player makes his case for game time.

Of course my stats are one sided. They address only the specific question I was trying to answer for myself of how good the Zips are when Bardo is on the floor versus when he is on the bench. The simple box score doesn't tell the whole story, so I did a more thorough analysis.It's a bit time consuming to go through the play-by-play and calculate the plus and minus scores when a player is in or out. But anyone reading this should feel free to do the same with any other player to see how the team's performance compares when that player is on the floor or on the bench.The more data analyzed, the more informed our opinions.

Skip, it took me awhile to figure out where you were coming from. I've been known to be overly pessimistic at times, and it does have the benefit of producing more good surprises than expected. But I'm generally pleased that the Zips have a good coach, good players and a winning record every year. The next step of winning championships is a tough one, but I think within reach in the near future. This year is a big challenge with so many young players. They'll continue to make mistakes along the way, and we'll lament the poor showings here. But I think it's fair to expect them to continue improving throughout the year and perhaps peak in time for the MAC tournament.By the way, Hilltopper took me to my first Zips game back in the 1985-86 era, so I guess I also qualify as an old timer. There were some pretty lean years there between Huggins and KD.

I did a quick analysis of Bardo's contribution to the team in four games against quality opponents in addition to Pitt -- Dayton, VCU, Niagra and Eastern Kentucky:Pittsburgh:Bardo in: +4Bardo out: -33Zips lose by 29DaytonBardo in: +1Bardo out: -5Zips lose by 4VCUBardo in: +8Bardo out: -12Zips lose by 4NiagraBardo in: +11Bardo out: -7Zips win by 4Eastern KentuckyBardo in: -5Bardo out: -7Zips lose by 12Totals for the 5 gamesBardo in: +19Bardo out: -64In all cases, the Zips did better when Bardo was on the floor than when he was on the bench, although there wasn't much difference in the Eastern Kentucky game.

Hope for the best, but prepare for the worst. (old English proverb)Some are better prepared than others.

Maybe if you guys pool your money you can get Blagojevich to appoint the Zips as champions.

I ran an analysis of the Rhode Island game play-by-play on gozips.com, and found that the Zips outscored URI by 4 points during the 24 minutes that Bardo was on the floor, and were outscored by 33 points during the 16 minutes that Bardo was on the bench. I posted the details on the "C production" thread for further discussion.

A smart coach evaluates his individual players by how well the team performs when each individual is on the court versus when he's on the bench. It's pretty easy to do by simply looking at the play-by-play, noting when a player is subbed in and out, and whether the team has plus or minus points versus the opposing team for each segment.A detailed analysis of the Rhode Island game play-by-play on gozips.com shows that the Zips outscored URI by 4 points during the 24 minutes that Bardo was on the floor, and were outscored by 33 points during the 16 minutes that Bardo was on the bench.Any question why KD appreciates Bardo, and why Zips fans should, too?20:00 (0-0) Bardo starts15:37 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (7-8) -1 with Bardo in12:26 SUB IN: BARDO, Mike (7-15) -7 with Bardo out03:22 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (21-32) -3 with Bardo in02:33 SUB IN: BARDO, Mike (23-34) 0 with Bardo out00:33 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (23-36) -2 with Bardo in00:00 (25-36) +2 with Bardo out20:00 (25-36) Bardo starts18:02 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (32-38) +5 with Bardo in13:36 SUB IN : BARDO, Mike (32-51) -13 with Bardo out11:03 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (38-51) +6 with Bardo in08:39 SUB IN: BARDO, Mike (40-59) -6 with Bardo out04:40 SUB OUT: BARDO, Mike (47-67) -1 with Bardo in00:00 (50-79) -9 with Bardo outTotals:-1 with Bardo in-3 with Bardo in-2 with Bardo in+5 with Bardo in+6 with Bardo in-1 with Bardo in+4 with Bardo in-7 with Bardo out0 with Bardo out+2 with Bardo out-13 with Bardo out-6 with Bardo out-9 with Bardo out-33 with Bardo out-33 +4 = -29 (final margin)

The stats are scary bad. Conyers once again played a good game. But when his 8 points are the best any Zip can do, you know things are just awful. Conyers deserves all the credit in the world for shooting 4 of 8 from the field, leading the team with 10 rebounds and tying for most assists with 3. He also played the most minutes, 32. Bardo had an offensive explosion, hitting 3 of 5 from the field. And B McKnight was 3 of 6. Beyond that, it was pretty sad -- 21 of 60 for the team.Even with Conyers getting 10 rebounds, the rest of the team got only 18, and the Zips were outrebounded 40-28. The free throw situation was laughable -- 2 of 4. Not for any one player, but for the whole team! And 16 turnovers on top of all that. I'm not sure I want to know any more details about this game.

Looks like it wasn't worth watching.

Looking at RI's results to date (see below), they've played a tougher overall schedule than the Zips and have looked good against some major teams. It will take the Zips best game of the year to win this one.Brown 76-74 (W)@Duke 79-82 (L)@Monmouth 85-62 (W)VCU 92-86 (W)Hartford 94-72 (W)@Penn St. 77-72 (W)Villanova 65-78 (L)@Northeastern 85-72 (W)@Providence 65-66 (L)New Hampshire 88-56 (W)C. Connecticut St. 77-69 (W)@Oklahoma St. 82-86 (L)@Fair. Dickinson 95-80 (W)

A little perspective here: UNC Greensboro led Can't at halftime and only lost by 11. So while the Zips weren't overwhelming, they deserve credit for playing consistently better against this team than Can't did.

Name one college coach in the country who would even think about redshirting the country's 8th highest rated center in his high school class.

Waters proves he's not quite ready for the coaching hall of fame as Cleveland State falls, 71-62, to Wright State, which climbs to 7-7 with the win.Meanwhile, CSU victim Can't takes out its frustrations on poor little Shawnee State, 93-42.

Ohio is doing to St. Francis tonight what we had hoped the Zips could do. With 15:24 left in the second half, Ohio is easily handling St. Francis 54-24. Every team has on and off nights. But it would be really nice for the Zips to have a big night and just destroy someone.

The only problem here is that some people are asuming the intent behind the words of others. Intent is the most difficult thing to prove in a court of law, and is even more difficult to interpret on an internet forum. It's not possible to consistently and reliably interpret everyone's intent.Rather than assume incorrectly and start a big argument over nothing, it's much more productive to simply ask someone to clarify the intent of their post.Of course, every forum has a few people who aren't at all interested in reasonable discussion, but are more interested in keeping things stirred up all the time. The most productive way to deal with people like that is to totally ignore them.

It was just an ugly game. The Zips started fast, everyone was playing their role well and I was feeling a little sorry for the St. Francis guys. Then it appeared as if either the Zips relaxed, St. Francis adjusted or a combination of the two. Through the middle of the game I was feeling a little sorry for the home team. Finally the Zips seemed to wake up, adjust and take control when it mattered.The fact that the Zips can turn it on late to win suggests to me that it's not a conditioning issue. They seem to be able to play with intensity late in the game when it matters. The sloppy play in the middle of the game seems more related to taking an early, easy lead, and then relaxing and losing their way. Not to pick on Roberts, because he wasn't alone in this, but I lost track of how many times he threw a lazy pass directly into the waiting hands of a St. Francis player. I'm not used to seeing this from Roberts. But St. Francis was simply playing harder and smarter during the middle of the game, and none of the Zips looked great during this spell.I really think it's more mental than physical. For example, late in the game Brett was showing a lot of energy. I like the way he was going after rebounds, and his fake and inside pass to a breaking Conyers for a bunny was a thing of beauty that should be repeated several times a game. McNees was pretty steady throughout the game, and is starting to get into that quick release rhythm I expected to see from him this year on his 3s.Overall I think this year's team is a big tease. They've shown the potential to play close against higher-ranked teams like Dayton and VCU, and even Pittsburgh for a half. Yet they struggle at times against weaker teams. They usually regain enough focus at the end of close games to put away weaker opponents but not stronger ones. Even great teams have bad stretches, just fewer of them than weaker teams.I just really don't know how much the coaches and players might be holding back for conference play. It's been said many times on this forum that the MAC is a one-bid conference, and the only thing that matters is winning the MAC tournament. If the coaches and players all believe that, and if they're all focusing on that, and if all the off-and-on struggles we're seeing prior to conference play are related to that, then I'm OK with it. Make your mistakes early in the season, learn from the mistakes and peak at the end of the season.I sure hope the season plays out that way. I think this team is capable of doing it, and it's all going to come down to mental sharpness and execution in crunch time. Which team will show up for conference play?

Good story with lots of info. Gotta love Humpty's attitude: ''I want an NCAA championship. I know there are many great teams out there, but that's my goal. I feel we can do big things in Akron.''

This would sure be a dull, uninteresting place if people didn't have different opinions and weren't allowed to express them. Fortunately, everyone is free to state their opinions here, as long as they respect the rules of the forum, and others can choose to agree or disagree with part or all of what anyone else says.For example, I understand the point that skip-zip is trying to make. Some coaches have taken over programs with worse records than the pre-KD Zips, and produced amazing turnarounds.I just think the use of the word "inherit" is somewhat misleading in this context. Inherit is normally used to describe someone being given what someone else created. But I suppose it's technically accurate to say that KD the coach inherited players recruited by KD the assistant coach. The key point is that KD deserves full credit for recruiting better players, developing better teams and producing a better winning percentage than the coach he inherited the program from.What KD has not yet done is produce teams that consistently win the big games and championships. I don't see anything wrong with anyone comparing KD's record to other head coaches, or debating whether or not he and his teams will continue to improve.I always learn things from discussions like this one, so I hope we can all continue without anyone getting upset and taking anything personally.

Here's the last roster before KD became HC.Take away Joyce, Travis & Wood (all recruited to UA by KD).What's left? An All-MAC roster, or one that brought down a the dean of MAC coaches at the time? By merely pointing out that KD is on track to out pace Huggins, I've been accused of doing that. See Huggins is the guy who coached the OVC title game .. I remember & I was there. It was awesome. KD is on that path here .. he's having success .. but by comparing Huggins to KD, I'm dragging down Huggins. 3 guys he had recruited, that GREW into top notch players on his watch.If this team was in such good shape, why isn't D-Hip still here?Exactly what I was thinking. If KD recruited top notch players to Akron before he became head coach, then he did not simply come in from out of nowhere and inherit those players. He earned it all himself, just like those other coaches who create something out of nothing by first recruiting better players and then coaching them to a better record than previous teams.

When someone says on a Zips fan forum that a coach at a nearby school is better than a Zips coach, it brings up all kinds of questions that are guaranteed to fuel a healthy debate.Better in what ways? Recruiting? Teaching fundamentals? Winning percentage? Winning the big ones? Winning championships? Maintaining high standards? Obeying both the letter and spirit of all rules and regulations? Graduation rate? Etc.? Etc.? Etc.?Better enough overall to make you want to ditch your own coach and go after the better one?Would it be better for a year or two and then maybe get a lot worse?It's fair for anyone to say they like a Zips coach while questioning exactly how good he is compared with his peers. Just don't be surprised at the inevitable discussion to follow.

There are many ways to judge whether or not one coach is "better" than another. At the collegiate level, it's not just about winning games, but also how well the coach contributes to helping build player character, resulting in the graduation of more mature and responsible citizens. This is an area where I think KD does well, but I don't know enough about Waters to even try to make a comparison.Since readily available numbers are much easier to compare, career game statistics are the generally accepted measure. Looking at their college records side-by-side, Waters has a statistical edge in post-season accomplishments and strength of schedule (due to coaching in the Big East), while KD has a significantly better winning percentage:http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Keith_Dambrothttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gary_Waters

VCU made a run in the second half, but Oklahoma prevailed as you would expect the #4 team would, 81-70. Maynor had an off night with 5 of 19 from the field and 8 turnovers. But VCU is deffinitely a quality opponent.

Just happened upon a broadcast of the VCU-Oklahoma game from Oklahoma City, and was surprised to see VCU leading #4 Oklahoma with a couple of minutes left in the first half. Oklahoma has since scored a few, and will take the lead into halftime. But VCU is playing really well against a top team.

It's disappointing whenever you let one get away against a good team. I think VCU is a lot like Akron, and perhaps it would have turned out differently on our homecourt. But when you lose one like this, the best you can hope for is that lessons learned will help win some later in the season.If there's any kind of pattern to be seen in this, it may be that the Zips are not quick enough in their adjustments. This is not purely a player problem, but also involves the coaching staff. The Zips started strong, VCU adjusted and came back in the first half to take a big lead. The Zips adjusted pretty well at halftime and won the seoncd half. But what if they had adjusted before the end of the first half and kept it close?I don't like to second-guess too much, because I am not a basketball genius. I just try to make the most of what I understand about the game. Ultimately, the answer may be that there was good reason why all the "experts" thought the Zips wouldn't be that good this year. Perhaps they are playing reasonably close games against better teams because they are over-achieving. If so, both the coaching staff and the players deserve credit for making games closer than expected.What does that mean for the rest of the year? I just don't know. I think the Zips will always perform at least a little better than a cold analysis of each player's individual talent might indicate because KD is an above-average coach. If everything goes really well, I think they have a chance to win the MAC Tournament and get to the big dance, regardless of their pre-conference record. The odds are probably against it, but it's not so hopeless that we should all give up.