PDA

View Full Version : Last year's team vs. this year's team?



TR11Zag
01-24-2010, 11:01 AM
Obviously this is impossible to figure out, especially because I've got Bouldin on both teams, but, who wins this game?

Last year:
Pargo
Bouldin
Downs
Heytvelt
Daye

vs

This year:
Goodson
Bouldin
Grey
Harris
Sacre

VinnyZag
01-24-2010, 11:07 AM
We do.

Zagregious
01-24-2010, 11:14 AM
Ira Brown

bartruff1
01-24-2010, 11:22 AM
We do....perhaps the best post I have ever seen on the board...thank you Vinny..

sittingon50
01-24-2010, 11:36 AM
:clap:

TR11Zag
01-24-2010, 01:57 PM
But which team is better? This year's or last year's?

Which team will go further in the tournament?

I don't feel like we've lost a step on last year's squad.

Once and Future Zag
01-24-2010, 02:47 PM
I suspect last year's team would take 7 out of 10 against this year's team.

IMO, last year's squad was one of the two best teams from top to bottom we've ever put on the court since '99 - the Ammo/Batista machine was the other.

I like this year's team, but they still seem out of sync a lot.

NovaZag
01-24-2010, 02:52 PM
I don't know, but the Bouldin vs. Bouldin matchup would be fun to watch. I'm sure they'd try to post each other up. Maybe Senior Bouldin knows some tricks that Junior Bouldin hasn't picked up yet.

Would that mean SR Bouldin would remember being a JR playing against himself as a SR and future 2010 GU team? Trippy.

DixieZag
01-24-2010, 03:04 PM
Last years team would have no answer for Harris.

This years team probably lacks a little bit of talent and experience that last years team had, but this years team (Thurs/Sat excepted) is tougher and seems closer as a team. I think in 10 games they are 5-5.

dim4sum
01-24-2010, 03:19 PM
"I knew Jeremy Pargo and Meech Goodson is no Jeremy Pargo."
Jeremy had his weak moments but at least he was good for 12-14 points a game and by his senior year led the team in assists and had a 2-1 assist ratio.
Meech is nowhere near that. Offense-wise the team is a good seven points a game weaker with Meech in there and that means a lot in post-season when games are traditionally closer.
Now the old argument is that Meech is there for his defensive prowess. Back to back career games by Pepperdine's Bell (37 points) and Loyola's Teel (27 points) doesn't say much for the defensive prowess of the guy guarding them.
In both cases, it was Meech. He's the difference maker. That's why I think last year's team was better.
Now, if the coaches put Gibbs in in place of Goodson, maybe I'll reconsider.
Just reverse the minutes. Whatever Goodson got before, give Gibbs. etc.

B-hamZag
01-24-2010, 03:49 PM
Harris would have made Daye realize he needs one more year of college ball. Boy what a team if Daye would have stayed.......

FuManShoes
01-24-2010, 04:23 PM
Can't access this year's roster yet, but this site provides the ability to simulate such matchups http://www.whatifsports.com/ncaab/default.asp

This year's team would consistently win the battle of the boards, but last year's team would be better from the line and from three. Pargo would take Meech to the rack repeatedly, but Harris would probably own Daye down low and get him in foul trouble. Heytvelt vs Sacre? Tough to say what happens there. Heytvelt probably has to take his game outside and rely on bank shots and treys, further reducing the rebounding ability of that squad. Sacre may be able to get Josh in foul trouble, but I can also seem him getting stripped by Daye/Micah. Speaking of Micah, he and Kong trade threes. This year's Steven runs laps around last year's Steven and this year's Bouldin defends himself better and scores more easily than last year's.

IrishEv211
01-24-2010, 04:58 PM
Can't access this year's roster yet, but this site provides the ability to simulate such matchups http://www.whatifsports.com/ncaab/default.asp


This is one of the coolest sites I've ever seen

titopoet
01-24-2010, 06:09 PM
I think in a game between the two versions of the zags, Matt Bouldin would be the difference. He would score the winning basket for the Zags.

bartruff1
01-24-2010, 06:17 PM
Can you imagine last summer even thinking of making this comparison ? Great surprise....

Ezag
01-24-2010, 06:31 PM
This is a down year for talent in college basketball compared to last year and this years young team has had more success in terms of RPI, SOS.

Teams were better last year.

Our bench is far better then last year. Bol, Kong, Manny, KO, Gj, GG.

In my opinion... Last year vs this year...

Pargo was far better then Goodson is now.
Bouldin is better then Bouldin was then.
Steven is better then Downs was then.
Heytvelt was far better then Sacre is now.
Harris is far better then Daye was and possibly is now (IE: in the paint, rebounds, double team, toughness and determiniation).

We are far better at rebounding this year with Harris, Steven and our Bench. Sacre gets some too.

We are far better at moving the ball this year.

If you cloned Matt bouldin and put the copy on last years team with a slight defect and you use the benches as you would in a team, I would say this years team would win. That is my opinion only.

+1 but Forget Daye, Downs is the guy i would love to have on this years team, though I would give that up for 2 Matt Bouldins!:D

zagtastic_voyage
01-24-2010, 06:34 PM
We should ask Ehlo and Heister this question...they would laugh and Heister would go "EHLO! I'm going with the Zags on this one."

surfmonkey89
01-24-2010, 06:42 PM
Chuck Norris

mgadfly
01-24-2010, 07:41 PM
Last year's team, at least statistically speaking...

2010 vs 2009
Offensive Efficiency: 30th vs 5th
Defensive Efficiency: 83rd vs 18th

2009 would win 7 or 8 out of ten. Offensive and Defensive efficiency takes into account shooting percentages, ability to draw fouls and get to the line and convert, offensive and defensive rebounding, turnovers, steals, and blocks. It is basically how often they score or prevent a score per possession (to account for different tempos).

Looking deeper into the numbers this is where 2010 would have an advantage:
Offensive Rebounding 32.6% of opportunities (194th in the nation) vs 2009's 31.6% (222nd). Not a huge difference as both teams are mediocre to poor on offensive boards.

Defensive Rebounding. 2010 is 21st best in the nation giving up offensive rebounds to opponents 27.7% of the time. 2009 was 100th in the nation giving up offensive boards 31.1% of the time.

Getting to the foul line. 2010 is the 5th best in the nation. 2009 was 197th.

Not having shots blocked. 2010 is 22nd in the nation on avoiding getting blocked. 2009 was pretty good, but only 71st.


Everything else, GU 2009 was better. Effective FG%, 2FG%, 3FG%, FT%, blocks, steals, avoiding turnovers, avoiding steals, etc... Last year's team's ball handling advantage alone more than makes up for the possession advantage gained by the better rebounding numbers. They also had three very good shot blockers including one of the best shot-blockers we ever had.

I think 2009 did have an answer for teams that took a lot of shots in the paint (in fact, four answers on a regular basis, Heytvelt, Daye, Downs, and Foster). Heytvelt may have been a perimeter player on offensive, but he was always a strong, athletic presence in the paint on defense. I'm also not sure 2010 could guard all those shooters on the perimeter. There would be some interesting match-ups: Heytvelt vs Sacre and Daye vs Harris. I don't think that this year's bench would be as effective as Downs was last season.



Will GU 2010 get to or past the sweet 16? If the West continues to stink it up with the exception of BYU and GU, and GU gets a high seed located in Spokane, I think it is very possible to reach the Sweet 16. That game would be against Duke or better level of competition and we looked very young in the Garden this season. Anything can happen, that's why I take off every March Madness and sit around the television and root for the underdogs, it's what is great about College Basketball, but I don't think we've shown consistently that we are a Top 10 quality team.

I think the better comparison to last year's team may be 2011 or 2012 depending on who goes, who stays, and who arrives.

webspinnre
01-24-2010, 08:02 PM
I think last year's team was better, but the good news is that teams were also better last year as well, and we've got the talent to take a deep run if things go well.

ZagsGoZags
01-24-2010, 08:14 PM
This year's team would win 6 of 10 I think, in spite of Pargo's superiority in passing and scoring over Meech. This year's team is mentally tougher than the zags have been for 4 years and maybe more.

Reborn
01-25-2010, 09:03 AM
This year's team would win. They are tougher, and more cohesive. This team bends but does not break. If we had won the Wake Forest game we would just have 2 losses (and we would have won that one if.............). We'd be in the top 5 I think. I think we have a good chance of going into Memphis and coming away with a victory...the first ever against Memphis. Harris would be unstoppable, and score 30, and Bouldin is way better this year. He'd get 23, and Steven is better this year than Downs was. This year's team wins by 10.

zagtastic_voyage
01-25-2010, 09:11 AM
This year's team would win. They are tougher, and more cohesive. This team bends but does not break. If we had won the Wake Forest game we would just have 2 losses (and we would have won that one if.............). We'd be in the top 5 I think. I think we have a good chance of going into Memphis and coming away with a victory...the first ever against Memphis. Harris would be unstoppable, and score 30, and Bouldin is way better this year. He'd get 23, and Steven is better this year than Downs was. This year's team wins by 10.

We probably should have won the Michigan State game too. The Duke game was our only true loss, one that didn't slip away from us at any point. We were just dominated. First rule about Duke...is you don't talk about Duke.

FlyZag
01-25-2010, 09:23 AM
The Duke game was our only true loss,

You know what they say about morale victories...

mgadfly
01-25-2010, 09:41 AM
Mgafly,

I am suprised by some of those numbers. The problem with some of them are that this years team is just getting to the easier part of their schedule where those numbers should improve.

Anyone know of a site that could crunch those numbers for last Years team where we are now?

I don't know of a site that does this, but I watch these numbers all year long because they usually give a good idea of what a team is good at, what they are weak at, and how likely they are to make it to the Elite 8 or Final Four (only George Mason cracked the code without being in the top 10 efficiency for a season in the past decade). Last season we were top ten to twenty efficiency wire to wire, including being #1 to #4 for some long stretches.

cjm720
01-25-2010, 09:50 AM
I'd say last year's would win - better defense, better FT%, less TOs, more maturity. I'm pretty sure it would be quite competitive, however.

88-81

mgadfly
01-25-2010, 09:52 AM
This year's team would win. They are tougher, and more cohesive. This team bends but does not break. If we had won the Wake Forest game we would just have 2 losses (and we would have won that one if.............). We'd be in the top 5 I think. I think we have a good chance of going into Memphis and coming away with a victory...the first ever against Memphis. Harris would be unstoppable, and score 30, and Bouldin is way better this year. He'd get 23, and Steven is better this year than Downs was. This year's team wins by 10.

I'm not sure what team was "tougher." Stylistically, this year's team pounds the ball inside more and gets it done with powerful back to the basket post moves, but I'm not sure that makes them tougher. Their is a certain "toughness" to a guy that wants the ball in his hands in front of thousands of screaming fans, and has the ability/toughness/nerves/what-have-you to knock a contested shot down from twenty-one feet away too. Little guys (or skinny guys-think Downs and Daye) can be tough too, even if they don't bang inside like Harris and Sacre.

Cohesiveness is important, but I'm not sure how this team is "more cohesive." We've already had a defection. There seems to be plenty of people upset about playing time and I'd wager that we'll lose at least one player after the season ends as a transfer. We turn the ball over a lot more, use a fraction of the sets that we did last season, and for much of the year simplified our defense and didn't run zone because, according to Mark Few, he didn't have time to "put it in." An effective zone is about cohesiveness, communicating, and playing together, something our coaching staff trusted 2009 to do, and has been reluctant to do with 2010 (not that anyone should blame the coaches or players, as there are so many newcomers).


As for wins and losses, 2009 didn't have anything that resembled the spanking Duke put on us. We did get beat up by Memphis and North Carolina. The other losses were extremely competitive games, most of which came on the heels of losing our 7'0" center. If we'd won those games last year's team would have only had 2 losses, but "if's" aside, we didn't win those games, and we didn't beat Wake Forest, Michigan State or Duke.

We were very good last year and lost four guys that are being paid to play professional basketball. We are very good this year, and Harris has made us better than a lot of us thought we'd be, but we are still young and have a long way to go.

Once and Future Zag
01-25-2010, 09:53 AM
Mgafly,

I am suprised by some of those numbers. The problem with some of them are that this years team is just getting to the easier part of their schedule where those numbers should improve.

Anyone know of a site that could crunch those numbers for last Years team where we are now?

If those are Ken Pomeroy's numbers (and they appear to be), then they are adjusted for level of opponent. And as I recall, last year we stuck around those levels for most of the year, and didn't really see much of a boost in Conference play, really. I don't have the CSV's captured though. That's a lot of data to pound through to re-do it up to a arbitrary mid-season date.

Last year's team was REALLY good. Maybe not clutch, but good nonetheless.

mgadfly
01-25-2010, 04:13 PM
You guys agree that this years WCC is much better all over vs last years? SMC might be close to the same, but others. Last years teams were not much I do not think. I hope it helps come March.


If you asked me whether the WCC is better this year (excepting GU from the question) than last year, my initial reaction would be: yes.

However, looking at this a little closer... Last season we were the #13 conference by kenpom and we are currently #14 (though that is including GU in the mix which was #7 on kp last year and is #46 currently). So, this is what KP has to say:

2010:
1. Saint Mary's #42
2. Gonzaga #46
3. Portland #81
(no one else in the top 200, but the worst team being Santa Clara at #249)

2009:
1. Gonzaga #7
2. Saint Mary's #56
3. Portland #110
4. Santa Clara #142
5. San Diego #177
6. San Francisco #238
7. Pepperdine #299
8. LMU #320

This season we have three good teams and five below average teams.
Last season we had one great team, one good team, an above average team, an average team, a below average team, and two horrible teams.

So this season may seem more competitive because we have no real "freebies" like we did last season and we have tougher competition at the top (Portland and Saint Mary's), but we also shouldn't be having as much difficulty against the middle of the pack.

On a side note, I think GU is better than #46, they just have a tendency not to play up to potential against bad teams. I think that is part of being young and by the end of this season or sometime next season they'll be able to put teams away and keep their foot on the gas for the full forty.

Once and Future Zag
01-25-2010, 06:07 PM
You guys agree that this years WCC is much better all over vs last years? SMC might be close to the same, but others. Last years teams were not much I do not think. I hope it helps come March.

The thing about his analysis, is that a hypothetical team would get about the same "ratings" whether they were in the ACC, or in the Big south - which would make sense due to it being the "same" team, just different levels of competition.

That we're in the WCC is essentially irrelevant as the sample size by the end of the year is enormous, and is usually pretty close to the final numbers after 12-15 games.

UberZagFan
01-25-2010, 07:11 PM
Would last year's Few coach last year's team and this year's Few coach this year's team? Or vice versa?

mgadfly
01-25-2010, 07:20 PM
Would last year's Few coach last year's team and this year's Few coach this year's team? Or vice versa?

vice versa.

AzZag
01-25-2010, 08:45 PM
Would this year's Kennel Club be louder than last year's Kennel Club?

bartruff1
01-26-2010, 05:06 AM
The home team would win 10 of 10...

lothar98zag
01-26-2010, 11:46 AM
Good stuff in this thread. (esp from mga & others for discussing kenpom. I'm happy to see that.) I'm also glad this didn't turn into a "trash on last year's team" thread. For all the problems/issues last year, the bottom line is they were a very good (almost great) team and the numbers back it up.

Zag79
01-27-2010, 11:08 PM
i cant decide, its too tough. i say tie. :D i like everyones reasons, they all make sense. the only thing i differ on from what i have seen is daye and harris. i think harris is a stud, best overall player on the team if you ask me. but my how fast we forget. daye was no push over. he only averaged 1 less rebound a game than harris who seems to gobble up every bound possible. daye also scores only 3 points less per game, in 3 minutes less per game. daye swatted 2 shots a game, harris hardly any. i still dont know who would win, but last years team was a S16 finisher, who lost to the champs (nba jr tar heels).

titopoet
01-28-2010, 05:31 AM
Actually with the time dilemma of Special Relativity, the game would rip apart life as we know it. If last years team play this years team, the two Mark Fews, Matt Bouldins and Steven Grays (not to mention the two Will Fosters) would cause a tear in the space time continuum releasing all the dark energy. The resultant higgs boson particles would reveal the truth about 42. Then the universe would implode and all being as we know it would cease. It would lead to outlandish results like calming Dickie V, making Coach K into the all time losing coach, and making the Huskies a good road team (yes, that much dark energy would be released). Best to not play God, and accept both teams as great Zags teams, lest we destroy reality as we know it.

alaskazagnut
01-29-2010, 02:19 AM
was 16-4. So this year is 1 game better and they have a slightly higher strength of schedule at this same point in time. They were undefeated in WCC but lost by 18 to Memphis. We also have a slightly higher SOS currently (43) than at the same time last year (58) and for the rest of the regular season. We ended with a 93 SOS last year and will end with approx 70-75. I believe we have an overall, more athletic team with respect to stamina, strength and speed. But overall, less fundamental and experienced with the X's and O's (in other words youthful). The sheer hours of practice a team needs to have high FT and 3pt shot percentages is less this year and I am hoping that this is due to that youthful average age and not a change in coaching/practice philosophy.

This years team will be formidable and scary if they can simply just do 2 things from here on out, and I mean two simple simple things: shoot 70% FT's and shoot 40% from 3pt line.

If we can improve a little bit in each of those, we will have what it takes to control both the paint and the perimeter as well as capitalize on the huge number of fouls our teams athleticism can draw. But if we continue like this, teams know who and when they can foul us, they know we won't shoot more than 10 3pt shots per game because WE KNOW we can't make most of em. So by improving those stats we would add probably 5-6 points per game and at the same time draw their zone out and open up the baseline or paint for 1 or 2 more uncontested shots, adding another 2-4 points per game. I know this is wishful thinking but I believe we would not lose to Duke again, we would beat Kentucky in overtime, and Syracuse would go down in the National Championship game by 5. This is the year!! and we have a slightly better chance at a final four than any other, EVER.

On the other hand, if we can't get better at the 3 Pt's and the FT's then we better take care of the ball and cut TO's from our average of 13 TO's per game down to about 8 TO's per game. Plus increase our positive rebound margin from the current +6 to a +9. Those two improved stats, if our shooting percentage stays the same, will add an extra 5-6 points per game and take 2-4 of the opponents points away. (Thats enough to have changed the MSU and Wake Forest losses into wins!!) and I believe will be enough to propel us into the final four.

Less turn overs and more rebounds is something they can do by just using brains and brawn. Better FT's and 3's require time and practice, and its that precious time we are running out of this year.

I take this years team!!!

azzagfan
01-29-2010, 02:28 AM
I've loved both teams (a few of my Zag favorites to be honest).

Last year's team was amazingly fun to watch, and my only frustrations came when they relied too much on talent and not enough on hard work.

This year's team is also amazingly fun to watch, and my only frustrations come when we rely too much on energy and hard work and leave our brains in the locker room (Duke and 1st half of Santa Clara are examples) and give the other team the ball too often in spurts.

To be honest...I'd take both for very different reasons, but I often think back to my first Zag games I used to watch with Jamie Dudley and Jared Davis and realize we've come a long, long way (and that's not to discredit those guys who I loved to watch as well).

mgadfly
01-29-2010, 06:20 AM
Points allowed: 69.0 (2010) vs 63.0 (2009).

U Zig, I Zag
01-29-2010, 06:55 AM
Points allowed: 69.0 (2010) vs 63.0 (2009).

Heart attacks induced: up 35%

Last year's team had more talent. I am not sure how anyone could disagree with that. This current crop in 1 or 2 years? Potentially more talented but up against a bunch of Seniors like the boys last year would have this team folding I think. I might not have thought that earlier this year because of the strong OOC play but these last 3 or 4 games show some real weaknesses.