Shox vs. Bluejays, Game 1

[shox1989]

You are correct about the '84 team. Even with a 40-22 overall record, NCAA Regional the previous year and a 2nd place CWS finish the year before that, it was no NCAAs.

If fact, I think the 2006 team was the worst Shocker team to get into a Regional without winning the MVC tourney.... 3rd place regular season (15-9) and a 46-22 overall record (.676).

Compare that to a current 3rd place (10-9) and 33-23 (.589). It has been the Shocker schedule and the MVC as a whole that has kept them in the discussion, not their performance. You take very weak North Dakota, KU, K St, Alcorn, and Bradley out and we're a 21-23 team.

The 40-22 record of the 1984 team was very deceiving. They played a lot of games against non-division 1 teams. They finished 4th out of 6 teams in the Valley. Their actual record against division 1 teams was under .500 compared to this years team which played an all division 1 slate and a tough one to boot (33-23 .589)

[ShockTalk]

The 40-22 record of the 1984 team was very deceiving. They played a lot of games against non-division 1 teams. They finished 4th out of 6 teams in the Valley. Their actual record against division 1 teams was under .500 compared to this years team which played an all division 1 slate and a tough one to boot (33-23 .589)

Don't believe I said they were deserving, but they did have a very current history in the NCAAs on their side. WSU no longer has that.

My post was comparing the 2006 and 2012 teams. Even with a tougher schedule, the difference in records is a lot to make up.

[tripleshock]

You are correct about the '84 team. Even with a 40-22 overall record, NCAA Regional the previous year and a 2nd place CWS finish the year before that, it was no NCAAs.

If fact, I think the 2006 team was the worst Shocker team to get into a Regional without winning the MVC tourney.... 3rd place regular season (15-9) and a 46-22 overall record (.676).

Compare that to a current 3rd place (10-9) and 33-23 (.589). It has been the Shocker schedule and the MVC as a whole that has kept them in the discussion, not their performance. You take very weak North Dakota, KU, K St, Alcorn, and Bradley out and we're a 21-23 team.

I wonder what our teams stats would look like if we took out N. Dakota? Would Coy be over .300 still? Would this team be hitting .250?

[shox1989]

I wonder what our teams stats would look like if we took out N. Dakota? Would Coy be over .300 still? Would this team be hitting .250?

I wonder what the team stats would look like if WSU had played 4 games against Chicago State? plus a couple more against Newman? Most past seasons would have included series like those instead of games against teams like Tulane, Texas Arlington and Purdue. At #36 the SOS is strongest I can ever remember for any WSU team.

Every team plays teams like North Dakota, so why should WSU's stats be adjusted for those games? At least we pounded them, Ku and Cu managed to lose to North Dakota.

[SB Shock]

I wonder what our teams stats would look like if we took out N. Dakota? Would Coy be over .300 still? Would this team be hitting .250?

WSU batting team batting average drops to 0.268
WSU average runs per game drops to 4.89
WSU already putrid slugging pct drops from 0.389 to 0.374
WSU ERA jumps up to 3.59

[Ta town]

WSU batting team batting average drops to 0.268
WSU average runs per game drops to 4.89
WSU already putrid slugging pct drops from 0.389 to 0.374
WSU ERA jumps up to 3.59

I see this and wonder how they have won 30 games outside of UND, crazy.

[shox1989]

I see this and wonder how they have won 30 games outside of UND, crazy.

All of the stats for the teams we played outside of UND would also drop a lot if you took out all of their easy games too (teams 201+ and non-division 1) and most of them played a lot more easy games than WSU this year.

[tripleshock]

I'm not saying those games shouldn't count. I was just simply wondering what the numbers would be. Indiana state is hitting .297 as a team. They also have a team Era around 3. On paper they look a bit more like Shockers than we do.

[ShockerFever]

I'm not saying those games shouldn't count. I was just simply wondering what the numbers would be. Indiana state is hitting .297 as a team. They also have a team Era around 3. On paper they look a bit more like Shockers than we do.

Indiana State also has a SOS of 149, WSU has a SOS of 38. Just sayin.

[tripleshock]

You can't polish a turd. Just sayin.

[ShockerFever]

You can't polish a turd. Just sayin.

Look, I'm probably the biggest anti-pumper out there. When you play easier opponents, your numbers tend to inflate. If the numbers were reversed, you know you would be doing the same thing, if WSU pumped numbers against a crap schedule.

I think sometimes you're looking a bit too hard to tear down the team. I'll give credit when credit is due, at the very least.

You do root for WSU to win games, correct?

[tripleshock]

I root for whatever gets Gene out of here. Until that happens this program is just treading water if we're lucky.

I have nothing against the players. I wish them the best and hope they do well. I wish they were given someone who could actually help them and not tear them down.

[shockfan89_]

I understand there has been reason for criticism this year but you also have to look at how young this team is and how much progress they have made as the year went on. Today we started 4 freshman, 3 sophomores, 1 junior and 1 senior. On the mound we started a freshman and used a sophomore reliever. 2 of our 3 weekend starters are now freshman and we have won 7 of our last 8 games and have a decent shot at making the NCAA. This was done in spite of some injuries and dismissals.

If this was the basketball team we would be excited about our young team and praising the coaching staff for their recruiting and the progress all the freshman made during the season. Yes I understand expectations are higher for the baseball team and we finished 3rd in the MVC. But it's also hard to compare the 6th ranked conference in the country to the 11th - 15th. Aren't there years in the "old days" where we finished 2nd, or maybe even barely won the MVC with a very young team? Are we really that far behind by finishing 3rd in a very competitive conference? I'm not trying to say there isn't some reason for concern, but you also have to concede that the next two years could/should be pretty bright. I have real concerns about the age of this coaching staff and think we NEED a younger assistant coach NOW. But I don't believe for a second this program is treading water. I could very well be wrong and if we don't win the MVC in the next couple of years I will gladly admit I was wrong.

I am curious to know what others think about the strength of the MVC this year. How does this compare to 1st and 2nd place finishes in the past in MUCH lower rated MVCs? Not calling anyone out but I know Fever has kind of changed his tone when he realized our SOS and conference RPI. I know SB has commented that the MVC RPI is due largly to adding DBU to the MVC schedule for most teams. I agree 100% but isn't that the same reason other conferences are good too? Take Texas A&M out of the Big 12 and where are they? 8th? Lower?

[shock10]

IF the Valley was a BCS conference and 6 rated they would expect no demand at least half of there schools in the dance. So if ISU Blue MSU WSU and Dallas Baptist get in then there you go if not then they get screwed. Just the way I see it. I count DB because they played and SHOULD be in the Valley.

[ShockTalk]

I think it would be very interesting to know just how much impact DB had on the Valley's RPI standing. Say, take their games out of the formula, see what the RPI/SOS is of each team they played and the Valley as a whole. Then add back 3 games to each of those teams schedule, equal to each team's new SOS, and recheck the numbers. I'm guessing they've had a big impact.