Home Blog Page 308

Oregon State @ Towson

88

Sorry dudes, forgot it was an early game today. No write up.

Go Beavs!

Link: http://espn.go.com/watchespn/index/_/id/321156/

Realism vs Pessimism

84

First off, happy Thanksgiving Beavlettes!

Okay, in the comment area I saw these negative comments (ironic, no?) aimed at this site and its commenters:

1. Man the naysayers come out when they smell blood in the water. It is this kind of pessimistic shit that led to 20+ losing seasons. Support the team during the season, leave your bitching for the offseason. These kids deserve better.

2. Concur, with fans like these, you don’t need enemies.

First off, our players are men, not kids. When men embark on a task and fail, they deserve constructive criticism. It's good for everyone. Empathy is a good trait, but only to a point (think Jim Harbaugh's character with cruelty comment). "Bleeding hearts" prolong problems.

Moving on, the thing is, I am not negative or a pessimist. I don't believe in being negative for the sake of it. Yes, I have a critical eye, but ultimately I'm a realist. If a team is good (e.g. The Ducks) I say so; if a team is bad (e.g. The Beavers) I say that, too. That is a realistic and balanced outlook. A truly negative person would say both the Ducks and Beavers suck. For a realist, every bad has an opposite good.

This doesn't stop with football. Here's another example: I exited the stock market in 2008 because it was clear housing was in a bubble. The optimists (and Herman Cain *hehe*) said it wasn't a bubble, that those people were just negative Nancy's who probably owned put options and thus wished for the end of the world. No, I was just a realist and understood the underlying fundamentals were unsound. Same with the market today. It may irrationally rally to Dow 13,000 on good news out of Europe, but true forward-looking value and underlying fundamentals put fair value at around 8500 and possibly much lower (if interest rates increase), so eventually that's where it's going. Therefore, I am out once again. Does that make me negative? A pessimist? Should I blindly throw money into stocks just to be optimistic, a good American, support the system?? Again, this "negative" outlook has a positive counterpoint: I am going to save myself money, and given that stocks are in a bear market, there is likely a bull market somewhere else (e.g. gold). Balance, see?

I found this paragraph, written by "Phil B", interesting. Sums it up nicely:

I'm often called a pessimist, yet I consider myself a realist. I think real pessimists are very negative and depressed most of the time, so I don't consider myself one. I have high hopes for myself, my family, my friends, and humanity.

However, this leads to the point that realism is much closer to pessimism than it is to optimism. And so what if it does? In my opinion, if realism causes negativity, then so be it. People must face the truth, no matter how awful or depressing it may be. Only when people are fully aware of the facts, can people accept reality. As I stated in a previous article about the advantages of negativity, I believe being realistic and thus more negative has advantages. Specifically, negativity highlights opportunities for people to grow and improve their surroundings. Furthermore, only when people are aware of all possibilities, can people accept these possible outcomes and be the most prepared for even the worse case scenario.

One more thought: if Oregon fans had blindly supported Mike Bellotti, the Ducks most likely wouldn't have made a National Title game; if Auburn fans had blindly supported Tommy Tuberville, they most likely wouldn't have won a National Title; and, if Oregon State fans blindly follow Mike Riley, they'll sow their ultimate destination, too.

Hopefully this clarifies my/our "negative" outlook to the Pollyannas. Now, time to go eat some fantastic turkey with my lady and enjoy this beautiful Central Coast weather.  :D

Civil War (Pre-Game)

139

People (or a lone wolf) are calling for a Civil War thread.

I had to decide: do I write about the Civil War or trim my nose hairs, pick the lint out of my belly button, or take a pumice stone to my calloused toes? When presented with those alternatives, I decided to cave in and write about the Civil War.

This one is so easy to predict that I'll just bullet point it:

  • Ducks will score early.
  • Chip Kelly goes for two, Ducks up 8-0.
  • Beavs drive but stall inside the 30, settle for a FG attempt.
  • Romaine misses the FG.
  • Ducks score, Chip decides to kick the extra point. 15-0.
  • Beavs drive again, Riley thinks "We need to get on the board" and settled for a 45 yard FG attempt.
  • Romaine kicks a low line drive that hooks just inside the left upright. 15-3.
  • Ducks get a monster kick return and regain momentum. James runs for a 50 yard TD. Telecasters gloat "His speed [blah blah blah]…you have to wrap him up."
  • Chip goes for two to make it an even twenty. 23-3.
  • Mannion leads a good drive. Beavs score. 23-10.
  • With a minute and a half left, Ducks have the ball at their 20. Riley thinks they'll take knee and go into the half, but they drive down to the 20 yard line. Only thing that stops another score is the clock, now at 7 seconds. Ducks tack on a FG and regain momentum going into the locker room. 26-10
  • Beavs get the kickoff, return it to the 30.
  • Mannion throws an interception.
  • Ducks score. 33-10
  • Beavs defense is tired, bordering on wiped out.
  • After a 3 and out by the offense, they have to take the field again.
  • Ducks score. 40-10
  • Mannion drives the team into FG range. Riley rightfully passes on the FG attempt, goes for it on a 4th and 3. Autzen goes crazy, Remmers false starts. It's now 4th and 8. Mannion completes a 7 yard pass. Ducks ball, turnover on downs.
  • Black Mamba gets in on the action, ripping off an 80 yard run. 47-10 Ducks.
  • 4th quarter. Beavs are happy the game's almost over. Defense is sucking wind.
  • Riley spotted on the sideline laughing it up with Banker. Lip readers think they see a "You'll get 'em next year, Mark"…status-quo advocates rejoice.
  • Ducks show some mercy. D. Thomas milks the play clock after each 12 yard run. 4th quarter ends with a whimper and one more score. 54-10, Ducks.

Vandy @ Oregon State (East Rutherford)

317

Jack

Vanderbilt started the year ranked in the top ten, but they never looked right in their first three games, losing to Cleveland State in a non-contest at home last Sunday. But they look like they’re turning their season around with a little time together on the floor.

Vandy runs a version of the backdoor offense which has the high post setting a lot of topside screens to free their scoring guards, junior John Jenkins (6’4″) and senior Brad Tinsley (6’3″). Jenkins was the scoring leader in the SEC last year with 19.4 ppg, and he hasn’t slowed down this year, averaging 23 ppg thus far.

Vandy is without defensive and board specialist Festus Ezeli, so they will present three active forwards in their front court. Senior Steve Tchiengang (6’9″) mans the middle with good length and solid play. He can step outside to sink the trey, but he is relied upon to do the yeoman’s work inside without Ezeli present. Senior Lance Goulbourne (6’8″) takes the PF minutes with great lateral quickness and a nose for boards. He can score when asked to do so, but he tallies his points by taking high percentage shots run through the offense and making his way to the line for the easy 15-footers. Senior Jeffery Taylor (6’7″) is the athletic forward relied upon by this Vandy team to produce their front court points.

I’ve read more than one preview of this game which suggests that Taylor will be tasked with defending Jared in tonight’s game. But I don’t see this as a possibility given Taylor’s bulk. He’s a tough, smart and athletic wing, but he doesn’t have the skills necessary to tag along with a guard as fast as Jared. I would say the match-up tonight will be Jared on Jenkins, yet another defensive challenge for him. If he can treat Jenkins like he did Mike Moore and J’Covan Brown, then he could be on his way to another big night.

While Vandy starts a lot of experience, they lack said experience on their bench. The frosh duo of Kedren Johnson (6’4″) and Dai-Jon Parker (6’3″) join soph Kyle Fuller (6’1″) in spelling Tinsley and Jenkins and pushing coach Kevin Stallings’ smaller sets at times. There’s more skill in these three than their production thus far would suggest. We can only hope none of them finds their game tonight, because they throw up a bunch of perimeter shots.

Soph F Rod Odom (6’9″) is the only real size coming off the bench, though frosh C Josh Henderson (6’11″) will likely be called upon to counter the Beavs size and depth. Odom is another wing with varying inside/outside skills. But he also has yet to find his comfort zone, relying on his athleticism instead of his head to get shots up.

With all the experience on Vandy’s starting line-up, they tend to control the pace of the game for their own needs. But they are unusually susceptible to turning the ball over this year, especially when hit with an aggressive defense. The frosh and sophs off the bench are actually more security-minded than the starters, but that may just be a function of the time spent on the floor. They also sorely lack an interior defensive presence without Ezeli. One can only assume they will be a different team when he returns.

They have the speed in the backcourt to defend in transition, but I don’t know if they have enough to do it all game long. And the Beavs will be looking to get it out often on this team. The faster Coach Rob forces Stallings to go to his bench, the more likely it is that OSU makes Vandy think itself out of this game.

Despite a late game run which made the score look a little prettier, Vandy did give up when faced with a pressure D in the form of Cleveland State. But, hearing what Stallings was shouting on the sideline, I don’t think they’re about to do the same for the rest of the season. The one thing their experience does do is make runs to end games. And if they are close or leading toward the end, then the Beavs need to work a little extra crunch time magic to seal the win.

This game will be about pace. The Beavs are scoring a bunch of points without production from some of their likely suspects. Vandy is doing the same without bench production. If anyone in the shadows steps up, they can be the difference on the scoring end. The Beavs size, speed, defense and pace all portend bad things for Vandy, but I wouldn’t discount their experience and skill just yet. Vandy has had their let-down game in the non-con schedule. The Beavs haven’t allowed themselves to have one yet. This could be an interesting battle of will versus skill… in either direction.

I honestly don’t know which will win out in this one. There’s a reason Vandy is ranked in the top 20. If the Beavs want to go there themselves, they need to win games like this. Will that pressure make our boys finally lose focus?

I don’t think so.

Beavs 78 – Dores 68


Angry

The Beavs' opponents have been getting progressively stronger. That has allowed their confidence to build slowly as they pass each gradual test. I thought they could play with Texas but not beat them. I've been forced to reassess my (negative) bias, which had carried over from last season. The team we've seen the first four game is the team we expected last year. We were a year early and too anxious. In other words, typical fans.

Now the question is do we buy in and accept the Beavers are this good?

Well, there are troubling aspects. A player like Devon Collier is excellent at creating second chances and getting to the line, but empirical evidence says he misses half those shots. Moreland has the same problem. So, the bigs who can play inside and draw the fouls are leaving double-digit points on the floor. Can they continue to do that and win games? When the opponent is bad or average, yes, but the Beavs (especially the aforementioned bigs) need to shoot 70%+ from the line to win tonight.

The most encouraging aspect thus far has been team chemistry. Guys know their roles and genuinely like one another. They're in it together. The big thing is to not let the success get to their collective heads, and to remain humble and unified.

Jack mentioned Vandy has some legit bigs…that makes me nervous. Beavs haven't gone up against any good centers thus far. The Beavs have an undersized front court. I see Collier and Moreland getting into foul trouble unless they can force the tempo and play a hectic game.

I'm a believer in this team, but I'm not yet a believer they're a top 20 team. No pick tonight because I can't gauge this team yet, but you can probably read between the lines and concluded I'd be (pleasantly) surprised if they win this game and ascend into the top 25. This is the most excited I've been about a hoops game since I began following the team. Beavs have an opportunity to enter the prime time.

Craig Robinson: Good Coach?

70

As many people who follow this blog know, I've loved Craig Robinson since day one, mainly due to this recruiting ability and understanding of sports psychology. However, last season tested even my patience. In March I wrote:

Personally, I'm more disturbed that I've become so emotional about Craig Robinson. I started out loving the guy for his recruiting prowess, then the love turned to anger after his dubious substitution patterns, and now I'm just up and down with every win or loss. It can't be this way…we need to choose sides. I'm withdrawing into the "needs one year with his own recruits" corner and staying there this time…

Last season was a roller coaster. Robinson seemed to "regress" as a coach. So, my question this morning is this: how much of this game is talent, and how much is coaching? Was Craig a bad coach last year, and suddenly he is a good coach this year? That seems so unlikely. It's more plausible to say athletic talent trumps coaching, and that the truly great teams have both.

I think we struggle with the question of coaching vs talent on this blog. Many of us blame coaches (e.g. this year with football), but are their poor results due to a lack of talent? When we call for a guy's head, are we being emotional, irrational fans? I try so hard not to be that guy.

Maybe I woke up in a good, forgiving mood today since yesterday was one of the best days ever to be a Beaver fan. Granted, very possible. But I think of how Calvin Haynes, Omari Johnson, and Lathan Wallace held back CR last year. And it makes me wonder if Grant Johnson, Mike Remmers, and Burke Ellis are doing the same to Riley et al. Probably. For various reasons (outlined in my chess analogy post), I still think Craig Robinson's ceiling is higher than Riley's, but Riley is probably better than he looked this past season. He's an eight win coach when he has adequate talent. Whether eight wins is good enough is the real debate.

Anyway, that's my feeling on it. Something to think about….