Author: John Paulsen (Page 41 of 937)

How the BCS keeps small bowls alive

Oklahoma Sooners fans celebrate as the Sooners scored a touchdown against the Connecticut Huskies during the second half of the Fiesta Bowl college football game at University of Phoenix Stadium in Glendale, Arizona, January 1, 2011. REUTERS/Joshua Lott (UNITED STATES – Tags: SPORT FOOTBALL)

I’m reading Death to the BCS, an excellent book about the truth behind the Bowl Championship Series written by Dan Wetzel, Josh Peter and Jeff Passan. It’s an eye-opening read about how the bowls are fleecing colleges under the guise of non-profit (or charity) status. I really can’t recommend the book enough.

Here’s an excerpt about how the BCS keeps small bowls alive:

Know this about the bowl system: It is not subject to a free market, and this is where the future of the smaller bowls comes into play. If left alone, the minor bowls would collapse, and they would collapse spectacularly.

The BCS operates much like a government, offering a form of welfare to ensure the survival of small bowls. Industry insiders estimate just fourteen of the thirty-five current bowl games are self-sufficient. The rest profit from a system that takes money from universities and guides it into the pockets of bowl operators.

It’s more shell game than bowl game. Take Minnesota, which agreed to buy 10,500 full-price tickets to the 2008 Insight Bowl in Tempe, Arizona, according to records the school filed with the NCAA. When Minnesota sold only 1,512, it incurred a $434, 340 loss on tickets alone. It spent an additional $1.2 million on travel costs and other expenses. In the end, it cost Minnesota $1.7 million to collect the bowl’s $1.2 million payout. In a vacuum, Minnesota’s bowl experience would have been at least a half-million-dollar financial drain.

Continue reading »

Does a 40-point game help the team win?

Los Angeles Lakers Kobe Bryant reacts during their NBA basketball loss to the Sacramento Kings in Los Angeles, California, January 28, 2011. REUTERS/Lucy Nicholson (UNITED STATES – Tags: SPORT BASKETBALL IMAGES OF THE DAY)

Dwight Howard’s 46-point, 19-rebound effort in a Game 1 loss to the Hawks got me wondering — when a player scores 40+ points in a game, does it give his team a better chance to win? Conventional wisdom would be yes, it should increase the chances of his team winning, but by how much?

To find some answers, I fired up Basketball-Reference’s excellent Player Game Finder. Here are a few of the more interesting results:

— Since the 1985-86 season (which is as far as BR’s data goes back), a player has scored 40+ points 1,734 times or 66.7 times per season, including the postseason.

— In those games (both regular season and playoff), teams who had a player score 40+ points won 1,205 of 1,734 games (.695) so it does indeed mean a team has a better chance to win.

— A player has scored 40+ in the postseason a total of 148 times. His team won 104 times (.703), so it does not make a huge difference whether or not the game is regular season or postseason when it comes to win %.

— Of the 1,734 games, 893 (51.5%) were by guards, 657 (37.9%) were by forwards and 184 (10.6%) were by centers.

— The most points scored in a game (since 1985) was Kobe Bryant’s 81 points against Toronto in 2006. David Robinson scored 71 against the Clippers in 1994. Michael Jordan scored 69 against the Cavs in 1990. The most points scored in a playoff game in that span was a tie between Charles Barkley (1994 vs. Golden State) and Michael Jordan (1992 vs. Miami), each with 56 points.

Continue reading »

Here’s what worries me about the Thunder…

Oklahoma City Thunder guard Russell Westbrook (C) shoots against against Denver Nuggets guard Raymond Felton (20) during the second half of Game 1 of the Western Conference NBA basketball playoffs in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma, April 17, 2011. REUTERS/Bill Waugh (UNITED STATES – Tags: SPORT BASKETBALL)

Watching the fourth quarter of Game 1 of the Thunder/Nuggets series, I noticed that OKC didn’t utilize Kevin Durant much down the stretch, even though he had 37 points in the game with seven minutes to play. Over those final seven minutes, Durant was just 1-2 from the field.

Here’s how the Thunder’s final possessions went, before the Nuggets had to start fouling with 0:11 to play:

7:26 Kevin Durant makes two point shot (Russell Westbrook assists)
7:05 Kevin Durant makes 14-foot two point shot (Russell Westbrook assists)
6:13 Russell Westbrook makes 19-foot two point shot
5:45 Russell Westbrook lost ball (Raymond Felton steals)
5:28 Kevin Durant misses 25-foot three point jumper
5:05 Russell Westbrook misses 17-foot two point shot
4:26 Russell Westbrook misses 24-foot three point jumper
4:01 Thabo Sefolosha misses 23-foot three point jumper
3:26 Kevin Durant makes 11-foot jumper (Thabo Sefolosha assists)
2:38 Serge Ibaka misses 16-foot jumper
2:09 Russell Westbrook misses 17-foot jumper
1:40 Russell Westbrook bad pass (Nene Hilario steals)
1:06 Russell Westbrook misses 11-foot jumper
1:05 Kendrick Perkins makes tip shot
0:22 Russell Westbrook makes 15-foot two point shot

Not counting those first two possessions, someone other than Durant shot the ball (or turned it over) on eight of the next 10 possessions. During that span, Russell Westbrook shot 2-for-6 for four points, zero assists and two turnovers. (He did assist on the first two Durant makes.)

If not for the blown goaltending no-call on Kendrick Perkins’ tip-in, the Thunder would have found themselves down by one without the ball with a minute to play. Under those circumstances they easily could have lost the game and they would have those previous eight possessions to blame.

I like Russell Westbrook and he’s obviously a great player, but he doesn’t have a point guard mentality. This has been only major gripe with his game since he has come into the league and that probably won’t change anytime soon. He went 2-for-6 with two turnovers, so he was responsible for five empty possessions in the final seven minutes. It would have been six if not for Perkins’ illegal tip-in.

At some point, Westbrook needs to figure out a way to get Durant (arguably the league’s best scorer) the ball in a position where he can be successful, especially in crunch time when Durant is obviously the team’s best chance at winning. If teams are going to double-team Durant, fine. Let Durant use his size to find the open man. I didn’t see a lot of that down the stretch. Instead, I saw Westbrook dribbling around and firing up contested jumpers. The shoot-first point guard can be successful depending on team make-up (i.e. Derrick Rose, who is clearly the Bulls’ best offensive weapon), but OKC cannot afford to waste crucial possessions in a tight game.

For this reason, I don’t know that the Thunder are championship caliber, at least not yet. They’re my favorite team in the West, but without heady point guard play, it’s tough to win those nailbiters down the stretch.

« Older posts Newer posts »