How strong offensively were LU’s 5 main men in the CIB tournament last year?

By comparison, the number one team in scoring in NCAA Division 1 play last year averaged............84.0 points per game

RAMBLER MAIN MEN IN THE CIB
Points per 40 minutes
DOYLE.........19.1
PETERSEN.....17.7
TURK..........17.6
JAMES.........17.5
THOMAS......12.9
The Combined total of the LU 5 for the tournament per 40 minutes was:
Total............. 84.8 points per 40 minutes

Better the best scoring team in Division 1 averaged last year.

If all shot 17.0 points per 40 minutes played, they would average 85.0 points per game.

But each of the 4 returning seniors (Doyle with 2 years of eligibility left) averaged over 17.0 pp40:

DOYLE.........19.1
PETERSEN.....17.7
TURK..........17.6
JAMES.........17.5

I realize that LU’s final stats which included people who contributed in other ways, like Jeff White (3.0 pp40) and Joe Crisman (3.4 pp40), did not total 85.0 ppg.

But, with 4 returning seniors who can score like our main men, Rambler fans cannot be anything but encouraged.

Cal Kennedy's points per 40 minutes average for the season was better than any of the starters, at 21.8.

Maybe he should have started and played 40 minutes....

My point is that you have fallen in love with adjusting Rambler stats upward by using the Per 40 gimmick and are drawing conclusions from it which are not warranted by common sense.

In the real world, Loyola was #284 in scoring, averaging 62.8 ppg.

http://www.ncaa.com/stats/basketball-me ... eam/145/p6

swellafelon,

I am shocked, that you commented negatively about the Ramblers, without carefully reading the note! How unusual for you.

The note talked of LU’s last 5 games, the CIB tournament.

Cal Kennedy did not even play in the CIB tournament.

The stats are for the 5 LU players who played the most minutes in the CIB tournament, when these best 5 players were all healthy. It is not a mystery that the coach plays the best scorers for the most minutes, especially when they are all very good 2 or 3 point shooters (or both).

Why don’t you do some work & see what other MVC’s teams 5 leading minute men combined points per 40 minutes played were last year, if you do things like that.

Nothing personal, but in my youth I put felons in jail.

My negative comment was directed toward you (not you personally, but your obsessive and annoying pp40ing schtick), and not any Rambler player. I thought that was clear enough.

You used 40ing to try to demonstrate that Maurice Kirby was the second coming of Wilt Chamberlain, and now you are using it to show that the Ramblers are an offensive juggernaut, instead of ranking #284 in team scoring average.

I think this latest example is the most ridiculous one yet, because you are attempting to compare a REAL team scoring average over an entire season with a PROJECTED (pp40) one, using a cherry picked sample of players and a small sample size of games. That sir, is the definition of comparing apples and oranges.

But I may be acting a little prickly about this since it hurts nobody for you to do your little statistical manipulations. I only wish in real life there was an equivalent coefficient to pp40 that I could magically apply to make my mediocre achievements look more impressive.

And I know Cal Kennedy didn't play in the CBI. That's why I said "for the season" in connection with his impressive pp40.

Another thing to note, the CBI was testing out the 30 second shot clock plus a couple of other rules designed to increase offense.