He DID say "poor mans"...they couldn't afford milk and didn't grow as tall as the Oakland kids did.
-
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.
How Good Is Wofford?
- Thread starter AZ BU Fan
- Start date
He DID say "poor mans"...they couldn't afford milk and didn't grow as tall as the Oakland kids did.
Braves4Life
New member
Agreed! That is typical of the teams in this league. We should be able to match up well with our smaller lineup since I believe we have both better athletes and basketball players than Wofford at that height and position.
If we try to play our unathletic bigs we will probably suffer the same fate as Pitt (almost) and Georgia. Small ball will win this game (and I know OoB and the "big" boys aren't gonna like it)
MacabreMob
New member
He DID say "poor mans"...they couldn't afford milk and didn't grow as tall as the Oakland kids did.
Well, that's what I was thinking... Squirrel did say "poor mans". I didn't bother looking up roster sizes, but bugregshu did... which made me ponder what the heck Squirrel is getting at... So I ask. Wofford plays a solid inside game (tho maybe lacking adequate size to do so)? --- and/or --- Wofford is a great fundamental team that knows how to box-out no matter how short they are against their opponent?
Both don't sound good to me.
squirrelgotdead
New member
They play 2 maybe 3 guards 6'2 or shorter. Everyone else of concern that will play will be strong, athletic guys 6'5-6'8 (they'll have maybe 5-6 that size that will play). . .they may lack a true center, but they have strong forwards, a couple big guards, and are fundamentally sound, love to crash the boards, and thrive on defense.
I'm not necessarily saying they are big. . .they do have more size than a lot of teams we will see. . .simply pointing out they will be a very similar team to Oakland that we'll need to matchup against. Their forwards are better at interior play than ours. I'm not saying that willy-nilly. I watched Wofford play several times last year and every time, they reminded me of Oakland. Oakland is built like a BCS team. Wofford obviously isn't, hence the "Poor man" comment.
I'm not necessarily saying they are big. . .they do have more size than a lot of teams we will see. . .simply pointing out they will be a very similar team to Oakland that we'll need to matchup against. Their forwards are better at interior play than ours. I'm not saying that willy-nilly. I watched Wofford play several times last year and every time, they reminded me of Oakland. Oakland is built like a BCS team. Wofford obviously isn't, hence the "Poor man" comment.
Haha, nice job doing your research. I love BU fans, don't try to pull a fast one on any of us...
squirrelgotdead
New member
My explanation points out it is a little bit of both.
In all fairness... BU didn't "actually schedule" the Wofford game either... it is a part of the Las Vegas tourney...
Wofford has a regular line-up of about 10 players. Here they are, in order of expected minutes played.
Dahlman - 6'6" Forward
Salters - 6'1" Guard
Loesing - 6'0" Guard
Godzinkski - 6'8" Guard
Rundles - 6'1" Guard
Giltners - 6'5" Guard
Johnson - 6'5" Forward
Diggs - 6'2" Guard
Dawson - 5'10" Guard
Martin - 6'6" Forward
I count 5 guards in their rotation who are 6'2" or shorter. They have 7 guards and 3 forwards in their 10-man rotation (according to the Wofford athletic website) and 5 of the top 6 players receiving the most minutes are considered guards, 3 of which are 6'1" or shorter. The average height of the players on Wofford is 6'3", whereas the average height of the top 10 players that Bradley has is 6'5".
I listened to the radio broadcast today, and it seemed like their coach really liked to make substitutions and get different combinations of players on the court. The most popular combo seemed to be Salters, Loesing, Rundles, Godzinski, and Dahlman, which, according to the Wofford athletics site, is technically 4 guards, and a 6'6" "center"
So I understand the crashing the boards part, which is something we need to work on, but according to everything I've come across, they are a relatively undersized team and I don't understand how this will be "one of the bigger teams" that we will come across.
Nobody ever said they did. It was only stated above that we'd be criticizing Wofford if ISU played them, and my posts merely pointed out just the opposite, that Wofford would be the best team on ISU's home schedule except maybe the BB return game with Niagara.
BUGregshu, great work. I am not a huge fan of 4-guard lineups and such, but I accept it. What I really can't stand are naysayers who try to make arguments, to argue, rather than based on facts. This is good analysis and helps me know what to expect come Sunday.
Braves4Life
New member
Yes! Good job bugregshu! I knew this about Wofford because I've seen the teams in their conference play; they are a true mid-major league and team. They are well-coached, hustle, scrap, and play small ball. I am very confident that if we play AW, EM, SM, CR, TB, DSE, and WE significant minutes we will win by 10+, If we try to "go big" for most of the game they will out-quick us and run right by us.
AZ BU Fan
New member
BTW BFL, I don't fit your profile....I am an engineering graduate from Iowa State, played college sports, was pretty successful at Cat, invested wisely, retired early, have many other pro teams I root for in that sports genre...
I fully support JL's proposition BU can be successful without sacrificing its integrity with alumni..why don't you?
squirrelgotdead
New member
I think you missed my point. If I knew people would misinterpret what I was saying, I guess I should have qualified my comment with pointing out my understanding that Wofford is actually in the bottom third of DI in terms of height! There, I said it. But overall height was never my point.
And yes, Wofford's coach loves to sub. . .his bench accounts for 33% of the teams overall minutes, but of those 10 you are likely counting in the regular rotation, without seeing a single box from this year I doubt more than 7 get more than 15 minutes/game. I'm talking about the effectiveness of their forwards. I did hear elsewhere that Dahlman also was plagued with foul trouble and played 12 minutes below his average, so more guys would have played more minutes today than normal.
I do know they had 3 of the top 500 players in the ORtg last year, including the 18th best in the entire country Dahlman. And I'm pretty sure they were all 6'5 or taller.
Furthermore, Wofford rated in either the top 100 or top 125 for nearly ALL big man statistic categories (Off rebounds 66th, Blocks 124th, 98th in paint FG% among others). They also get 52% of their points inside the arc (also a top 100 ranking), with 39% coming from the paint. The offensive boards was better than Bradley last year, and that says something. Bradley was substantially higher in blocks, largely because Collins numbers were quietly very good in that regard. Points in the paint are about even.
For a team that averages just 6'3 those are awfully good interior-numbers. LOL. That's because the players you need to pay attention to are the 6'5-6'8 forwards and wings. They are adequate in size, not overwhelming ("Poor man"), but above average in ability and effectiveness.
If we don't approach Wofford as a big team we will pay for it.
That's fine if you don't want to believe me and haggle over average height which is totally missing my point. I'm talking key players and interior abilities of their forwards and big guards.
And yes, Wofford's coach loves to sub. . .his bench accounts for 33% of the teams overall minutes, but of those 10 you are likely counting in the regular rotation, without seeing a single box from this year I doubt more than 7 get more than 15 minutes/game. I'm talking about the effectiveness of their forwards. I did hear elsewhere that Dahlman also was plagued with foul trouble and played 12 minutes below his average, so more guys would have played more minutes today than normal.
I do know they had 3 of the top 500 players in the ORtg last year, including the 18th best in the entire country Dahlman. And I'm pretty sure they were all 6'5 or taller.
Furthermore, Wofford rated in either the top 100 or top 125 for nearly ALL big man statistic categories (Off rebounds 66th, Blocks 124th, 98th in paint FG% among others). They also get 52% of their points inside the arc (also a top 100 ranking), with 39% coming from the paint. The offensive boards was better than Bradley last year, and that says something. Bradley was substantially higher in blocks, largely because Collins numbers were quietly very good in that regard. Points in the paint are about even.
For a team that averages just 6'3 those are awfully good interior-numbers. LOL. That's because the players you need to pay attention to are the 6'5-6'8 forwards and wings. They are adequate in size, not overwhelming ("Poor man"), but above average in ability and effectiveness.
If we don't approach Wofford as a big team we will pay for it.
That's fine if you don't want to believe me and haggle over average height which is totally missing my point. I'm talking key players and interior abilities of their forwards and big guards.
squirrelgotdead
New member
Wofford does not run and gun. Part of what makes them dangerous is they are methodical, and physically tough and will work it inside to their forwards or bigger guards.
I've seen all the other teams in the Big Ten play. . .so Northwestern is always a threat to go deep in the NCAA. j/k :lol:
MacabreMob
New member
All good Squirrel - tks for the breakdown of the stats.
One small question: are the stats valid and relative to SOS? Bradley could play NJIT and look like a "world-beater" based on their stats.
Just wondering how reliable the valid stats are. :biggrin:
One small question: are the stats valid and relative to SOS? Bradley could play NJIT and look like a "world-beater" based on their stats.
Just wondering how reliable the valid stats are. :biggrin:
Out of Balance
New member
Wow B4L:-o This is very strong, disrespectfully and so wrong:!: I am very surprised and disappointed that this is coming from you:!: I did not know BU Fans were divided/classified into two groups:!: Most of these townie fans, that I prefer to call local fans (friends) support and root for BU the best they can. Most have families that have been BU Fans through generations, way before you and I were:!: Local Fans are hard working people of the community with some working or have had family members that have worked hard at BU. Most fans would have loved to of had their son or daughter go to BU and obtain a degree:!: But for reasons could not:!: Most Fan's take their money and families to BU BB games to have fun and root for their team. Thats right,their team, because these local fans consider BU as much of a part of them as anyone attending or graduated from BU. I moved to P Town about 25 years ago. One of the first things I learned and saw was you had to be a BU Fan, WIN or LOSE! What % do you think of all the fans at any home game are non BU grads:?: I love BU BB, I respect the people who live here and I respect the people who are living here for 4 years while at BU:!:
T, DaCoach or who ever, please remove me as a active member of this site:!: Thanks
squirrelgotdead
New member
Brilliant question.
These are all "equalized" numbers, meaning they are calculated so that they appear to everyone played the same or similar schedule.
But for instance last year, Wofford played Dayton, South Carolina, and Clemson in the non-con. And the SoCo had 6/11 remaining teams with winning records. The rest of their sked was pretty crummy.
So it's not like their original sample was completely worthless.
Tulsa Brave
New member
Good luck getting even 6500...Bears play Sunday evening.
BU will have to play their best game to date by far to win this one.
squirrelgotdead
New member
Good point Tulsa. The Bears didn't even play last Sunday and there was no way the announced 9K+ were there.
Lucky the old folk came to the game after they ate their dinner last Sunday, the student section was only half full.