-
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.
I care what seed we were because it shows that for the entire conference season we were the 5th best team. Not good enough! I will say 1 last thing and then get out of this discussion. In basketball and life, if you only expect mediocrity, that is exactly what you will get. And I strongly believe that Coach Les does not expect or accept mediocrity. Kudoos to him. My comments are not to trash BU or the players or the staff. It's just how I see it, and I hope that it gets better.
BradleyBrave
New member
So if BU finishes 7th and wins the MVC tournament from the play-in round, it the season a success because of one fluke weekend? I don't think it is. When does the body of work matter? When does a losing conference record matter? When does a losing record in the conference tournament matter? When does the lack of championships matter?
VeveJones007
New member
I understand what you're saying, but I look at it like this:
Conference play truly shows how your team and program are compared to other teams (those in your conference). Consistently finishing at the bottom of the conference suggests that Evansville's basketball program is pretty bad right now compared to the other teams in the Valley. Consistently finishing at the top of the Valley suggests that SIU is on the right track.
What a lot of the posters are saying is that they want Bradley to consistently finish in the top of the MVC like SIU. What did that bring the Salukis? Six straight trips to the NCAA's before this year. Success in your conference is directly related to more trips to the tournament.
I'll put it this way: If Bradley finishes in the top 3 of the Valley, I think they have a better shot at a trip to the NCAA's than definitely having to make a run through the conference tournament. If you're mediocre in the regular season, you put all your eggs in one basket for the conference tournament.
Lakeview Brave
New member
THe conference season means nothing???? How about the fact that the first place team from the conference has made the tournament the last 10 + years? It must be really hard for you to watch the first 29 meaningless games waiting and hoping we got hot for 3 games in St. Louis from the 4, 5.6 or 7 seed. I would rather have Creightons record over the last 10 years then ours.
Starting lineup if this year was any indication in the beginning of the season:
SM
DD
AW
TW
RA/SS
If we are having a good year 2nd 1/2 of the season:
DD, AW,TW, RA, AT
Right now only DD and AT are the only 2 factors that are unknown that can change the dynamics of this team. SM will come off the bench and play huge minutes and I'd like to see TW play more of the 3 with AW playing the 2. We also should have a little more team speed and be able to press a bit with all the guards something we were not able to do this year.
SM
DD
AW
TW
RA/SS
If we are having a good year 2nd 1/2 of the season:
DD, AW,TW, RA, AT
Right now only DD and AT are the only 2 factors that are unknown that can change the dynamics of this team. SM will come off the bench and play huge minutes and I'd like to see TW play more of the 3 with AW playing the 2. We also should have a little more team speed and be able to press a bit with all the guards something we were not able to do this year.
Yeah, but if we didn't get to the championship game, the Sweet 16 never would've happened. You get a top-three seed and you're in a much more serious conversation about getting in as an at-large, even if you lose in the semifinals. If BU finished third in the league last year instead of fourth, they likely get into the NCAAs.
BradleyBrave
New member
If the conference season means nothing, how did we get into the NCAA's in '06? Wasn't it based on our record against top 50 opponents IN OUR CONFERENCE?
beanocookschins
New member
BradleyBrave. Is it that the team is underachieving according to the ACTUAL talent or is maybe the talent just being talked about as being greater than the actual product?
That is why I am kind of done listening to the recruiting hype. Bradley has brought in some good players, some OK ones, and some bad ones. Jim Les isn't doing anything anyone else in the league isn't doing. Let's see them play before proclaiming them great shall we?
I am on record as wanting more freshman recruits and less JUCO's.
BradleyBrave
New member
I thought the '06 team was talented enough to go to the Sweet 16 about midway through the season (I said as much on the 'other' board at the time), and was fuming at how poorly they played throughout the season until February. I thought this year's team was talented enough to win the league (or at least the tournament), and beating Drake in Des Moines and spanking Creighton by 28 reaffirmed that. Unfortunately injuries and off-court issues gave us the built-in excuses not to defend or rebound. So yes, I do think that the talent recently has been good enough to contend for a league crown.
The funny thing is that last year's team was far less talented than either the '06 or '08 teams, yet finished higher in the league standings than either of them and was by far my favorite BU team of this regime.
N
numbr_9
Guest
I dont necessarily like our "brand" of basketball. It is fun to watch when we're hitting our shots, but how many games have we lost because we were just cold from the floor and unable to play good defense?
Rebounding needs to improve. Defense needs to improve. Inside play NEEDS to improve.
Guard-oriented teams can be fun, with the quick passing and fast tempo. But without consistency in the paint, the team will have trouble winning when jumpers aren't falling.
I don't think we need to be a forward/center oriented team. 3 guards is great, and can give the team a speed advantage. But the complete lack of development inside (TW notwithstanding) left us hurting. We were consistently out-rebounded, and how many games did we lose because we gave up layup after layup? I remember the 2nd half of that abysmal WSU game when i felt like I could have driven the lane at will. And i am terrible.
I like how JL is dedicated to a system, but I think he needs to re-evaluate just how far that system can take us. Maybe with the right players it can be highly effective. Sorry for my negativity, but i am exhausted with watching teams get offensive rebound after offensive rebound and driving to the hoop unimpeded.
Rebounding needs to improve. Defense needs to improve. Inside play NEEDS to improve.
Guard-oriented teams can be fun, with the quick passing and fast tempo. But without consistency in the paint, the team will have trouble winning when jumpers aren't falling.
I don't think we need to be a forward/center oriented team. 3 guards is great, and can give the team a speed advantage. But the complete lack of development inside (TW notwithstanding) left us hurting. We were consistently out-rebounded, and how many games did we lose because we gave up layup after layup? I remember the 2nd half of that abysmal WSU game when i felt like I could have driven the lane at will. And i am terrible.
I like how JL is dedicated to a system, but I think he needs to re-evaluate just how far that system can take us. Maybe with the right players it can be highly effective. Sorry for my negativity, but i am exhausted with watching teams get offensive rebound after offensive rebound and driving to the hoop unimpeded.
I do find it amusing that last year we thought JL was shafted because he did not win MVC COY, now we are tired of him
I almost do not think that Jim took his system to the extreme to his advantage. When you look at Drake, (also very perimiter oriented) Drake occasionally overloaded one perimiter corner with all 5 players to get the rest of the court empty, and sometimes had all 5 players spaced beyond the arc, which adds up to create more of their driving inside..
I think Jim is developing the type of inside players that will better compliment the system, so I think there is some light down the tunnel
Got bored in a meeting at work and kinda came up with this... This is how I could see it going in my head, playing-time wise... With what I know, which is admittedly almost nothing. 
Also sprinkled with plenty of hope regarding Thompson and Collins , hehe.
Minutes by position--
1 - Maniscalco (29), Dunson (9), McCain (2)
2 - Warren (28 ), Dunson (4), Roberts (2), McCain (2), Cole-Scott (2)
3 - Wilson (24), Dunson (6), Roberts (4), Warren (4), Egolf (2)
4 - Austin (20), Wilson (10), Egolf (10)
5 - Thompson (20), Collins (10), Austin (5), Singh (5)
Minutes by player--
Wilson (34)
Warren (32)
Maniscalco (31)
Austin (25)
Thompson (20)
Dunson (19)
Egolf (12)
Collins (10)
Roberts (6)
Singh (5)
McCain (4)
Cole-Scott (2)
Also sprinkled with plenty of hope regarding Thompson and Collins , hehe.Minutes by position--
1 - Maniscalco (29), Dunson (9), McCain (2)
2 - Warren (28 ), Dunson (4), Roberts (2), McCain (2), Cole-Scott (2)
3 - Wilson (24), Dunson (6), Roberts (4), Warren (4), Egolf (2)
4 - Austin (20), Wilson (10), Egolf (10)
5 - Thompson (20), Collins (10), Austin (5), Singh (5)
Minutes by player--
Wilson (34)
Warren (32)
Maniscalco (31)
Austin (25)
Thompson (20)
Dunson (19)
Egolf (12)
Collins (10)
Roberts (6)
Singh (5)
McCain (4)
Cole-Scott (2)
Last edited:
Exactly, 2005 was also a 2nd round NCAA team on paper. With an RPI in the 30's after a 9-2 start, it was BU's for the taking.
2006, had 6 good weeks out of a 20 week season. We capitalized in the end, but only because of the conference tourney run. We don't beat Wichita in the semis, MSU goes to the NCAA, Hinson is mayor of Springfield, and still employed.
It's fun to try to project minutes next year. I think Dunson will get a lot of minutes as you project, but I also think Roberts will get more than 6 minutes, because of his athleticism and shooting abilities. That is something Bradley will need from him.
But I'll wait until everyone is here and eligible before I project precise numbers. I suspect there is still yet another player or 2 to come.
But I'll wait until everyone is here and eligible before I project precise numbers. I suspect there is still yet another player or 2 to come.
Got bored in a meeting at work and kinda came up with this... This is how I could see it going in my head, playing-time wise... With what I know, which is admittedly almost nothing.
Minutes by position--
1 - Maniscalco (29), Dunson (9), McCain (2)
2 - Warren (28 ), Dunson (4), Roberts (2), McCain (2), Cole-Scott (2)
3 - Wilson (24), Dunson (6), Roberts (4), Warren (4), Egolf (2)
4 - Austin (20), Wilson (10), Egolf (10)
5 - Thompson (20), Collins (10), Austin (5), Singh (5)
Minutes by player--
Wilson (34)
Warren (32)
Maniscalco (31)
Austin (25)
Thompson (20)
Dunson (19)
Egolf (12)
Collins (10)
Roberts (6)
Singh (5)
McCain (4)
Cole-Scott (2)
I can almost guarantee you Dodie Dunson plays more that 13 minutes per ballgame. As for the rest.....we'll see, but I think a 12-man rotation might be a little ambitious. We have some talent but not enough to consistantly play 12 guys.
As for the poor defense and rebounding....the fact that we are a guard-oriented team or that we have poor interior play does not add up to people getting beat off the dribble from every position on the floor. As for rebounding, I can stomach bigger teams just getting up and going over us for boards or out-muscling us for boards but please GET A BODY ON SOMEONE. Most of the offensive rebounds we give up are uncontested! Quick players getting beat like they stole something off the dribble and uncontested rebounds does not reflect a talent-level or a size disadvantage it reflects a poor attitude.