Big West - 2009 predictions - Page 5 - TennisForum.com

Reply
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
post #61 of 66 (permalink) Old May 10th, 2009, 11:46 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

Form I can tell you don't have a valid comeback when you change the subject.

But winning a national title acts like a great deodorant. It covers up some of the stink in other sports.


In the middle of the #3 doubles tie-breaker there was a stoppage of play. What was that about? The live video doesn't have any sound.

Did you make the trip to Stanford? What did you think of their tennis facilities?

Hopefully next year I'll have a reason to make the trip to Stanford, site of the men's volleyball 2010 Final Four.

Last edited by gouci; May 10th, 2009 at 11:58 PM.
gouci is offline  
Sponsored Links
Advertisement
 
post #62 of 66 (permalink) Old May 11th, 2009, 12:40 AM
Junior Member
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 59
                     
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

Come on Gouci, you were the one to change the subject to men's volleyball on a tennis forum . I think form's response of an empty tennis trophy case is spot on considering the neighborhood. .

I have a question regarding the competitiveness of the top BW teams compared to teams ranked 15 - 30 nationally, and since I am only really familiar with LBSU's players, I will use them as an example.

Next year LB returns their entire team minus Weeks and Grady, the most successful player in the program's history. The program also has some pretty good talent coming in. How far down the lineup would the current team members need to fall in order for the team to really compete with top 25 teams. Would the number 2, Manasee, have to fall to number 4 with the rest to follow in order. Or could Rachel stay at 2, and then a gap, with the rest in order say at 5, 6, and bench. I guess my question is, at what position in the line-up would Manasse, Armstrong, Dallara, Luzar, and Sutton be at on a 15 - 30 team, and would the incoming recruits fill the holes. From what I gather here on this board, Malenovska would be competitive nationally at the 1 and Alawi is also a solid player.

So based on my cursory understanding of the game and LB's team, would the following line-up be a legitimate top 25 team: 1. Malenovska, 2. Manasse, 3. Alawi, 4. Dallara, 5. Armstrong, and 6. Jeczmionka. For conversation's sake, I left Sutton and Luzar off, but I am sure they have a great shot at competing for a roster spot.

Last edited by RobertCB; May 11th, 2009 at 01:09 AM.
RobertCB is offline  
post #63 of 66 (permalink) Old May 12th, 2009, 08:14 AM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

Rob this is my take:

1. Regards to Alawi. With international players you may not know what you have until after they play some fall tournaments. Alawi had a WTA career ranking high of #884. For example Lisa Haegele's WTA ranking high was better at #864. Alawi may be the next Stephanie Bengson or she may be the next Lisa Haegele who was a bust. Only time will tell.

2. Regards to winning 1 or 2 rounds. For the Big West the NCAA 1st round is the women's tennis Super Bowl. Because their will always be a top 16 national seed waiting in the 2nd round to end your season. The top 16 teams may have anywhere from 4 to 6 Grady or better caliber players in their line-up. So unless LBS is hosting their own regional winning a 2nd round match is unrealistic. Now the best chance a BW team has of winning the 1st round is being ranked as a top 32 team. That way you face a team ranked behind you in the 1st round.

3. What's the gap between LBS and the top 25? Well LSU was ranked #25 and they destroyed Long Beach St. who probably would have lost 0-7 if the match wasn't stopped. Ask yourself what LBS needs to add to beat #25 LSU and take their ranking.

4. Regards to LBS beating a top 32 lineup. Luzar was essentially 1-9 in dual matches at No. 5 singles against teams that were ranked at season's end. Sutton was essentially 0-10 at No. 6 singles againt ranked teams. Both Luzar and Sutton needs to be bumped down to the bench or improve a lot for LBS to beat a top 32 team. Otherwise with one or both in the singles line-up it's like starting the match down 0-1 or 0-2 versus ranked teams.

Last edited by gouci; May 12th, 2009 at 08:21 AM.
gouci is offline  
post #64 of 66 (permalink) Old May 12th, 2009, 02:50 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

Gouci, you really should stick to spotting recruit commitments and my statistical typos...

Rob this is my take:

1. Regards to Alawi. With international players you may not know what you have until after they play some fall tournaments. Alawi had a WTA career ranking high of #884. For example Lisa Haegele's WTA ranking high was better at #864. Alawi may be the next Stephanie Bengson or she may be the next Lisa Haegele who was a bust. Only time will tell.

You have no clue about Haegele.. but I'll help you. Highly rated German who had never ever lost a match to Julia Trunk in juniors. Problem: Signed LOI in 11/06 and showed up for school in 9/07; in between... stopped playing tennis though not quite what LB was led to believe. Basically pulled a US Junior move and just wanted scholarship but not to play tennis. So your 800's ranked ITF Jr stuff is a joke (it means nothing in 800's as it's too small a sample)for projecting... you have dig deeper.

2. Regards to winning 1 or 2 rounds. For the Big West the NCAA 1st round is the women's tennis Super Bowl. Because their will always be a top 16 national seed waiting in the 2nd round to end your season. The top 16 teams may have anywhere from 4 to 6 Grady or better caliber players in their line-up. So unless LBS is hosting their own regional winning a 2nd round match is unrealistic. Now the best chance a BW team has of winning the 1st round is being ranked as a top 32 team. That way you face a team ranked behind you in the 1st round.

In theory you are correct because BW teams will almost always be stuck at USC/UCLA/CAL/STANFORD (Fresno presently a freak of nature) but it 'could happen' ...

2006... the only BW women's team to ever advance to Rd 32 and only BW team ever a # 2 seed was LB. In round of 16, LB lost 4-0 to USC... BUT, LB was leading or third set tied in the other three matches and the deciding 4th point was 4-4 in the 2nd set before she fell. It would have been nice to have LB get a chance to play a non Pac 10 school that year.


3. What's the gap between LBS and the top 25? Well LSU was ranked #25 and they destroyed Long Beach St. who probably would have lost 0-7 if the match wasn't stopped. Ask yourself what LBS needs to add to beat #25 LSU and take their ranking.

PS... LB was # 25 at one point though I will acknowledge that was a fluke of computer at the time. H

owever, on September 15 LB had a top 25 team. Had their # 2 not quit to return to Australia and then their long time # 5 not suffered a hip tear that took her out of singles this year... this was a team the 'could have'. Even then, hard to believe they won 6th consecutive league title bascially down 1 3/4 players... kind of embarrassing for the others in BW...
one in particular with the most depth.

4. Regards to LBS beating a top 32 lineup. Luzar was essentially 1-9 in dual matches at No. 5 singles against teams that were ranked at season's end. Sutton was essentially 0-10 at No. 6 singles againt ranked teams. Both Luzar and Sutton needs to be bumped down to the bench or improve a lot for LBS to beat a top 32 team. Otherwise with one or both in the singles line-up it's like starting the match down 0-1 or 0-2 versus ranked teams.

Read comments above... you can figuer out where they were likely projected on Sept 15.

But it is what it is. LB has 'signed' some nice athletes but you never know who will show, or sadly who will quit... . CP and UCI no doubt are lining up some pretty strong transfers as they still have 3 and 2 vacancies to build with. LB might now miss out on some transfers. Who knows... that's why the play the games.

Big West is a mid-major. Probably one of the 2 or 3 best mid majors for depth and strength(Colonial pretty good too; Sun Belt is a tweener since they do play some football). Given the budgets, they get a pretty good return on investment and the top 3 schools would be about 6-7th place in the Pac 10 every year which makes you ask questions about some of those schools.
form is offline  
post #65 of 66 (permalink) Old May 12th, 2009, 04:24 PM Thread Starter
Senior Member
 
gouci's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Posts: 4,111
                     
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

Looks like Form has cheered up.

Quote:
Originally Posted by form View Post
So your 800's ranked ITF Jr stuff is a joke ...
Actually I listed WTA pro rankings not ITF junior rankings, a big difference Rob.

And I agree Form, you make more statistical typos than any other poster I know.
gouci is offline  
post #66 of 66 (permalink) Old May 12th, 2009, 05:03 PM
Senior Member
 
form's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2008
Posts: 806
 
Re: Big West - 2009 predictions

800's in WTA is a joke too... it's just points. Have the played many or two? Not enough data.

I'll take my typos... and keep the trophies too.
form is offline  
Reply

Quick Reply
Message:
Options

Register Now



In order to be able to post messages on the TennisForum.com forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.

User Name:
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.

Password:


Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.

Email Address:
OR

Log-in









Image Verification
Please enter the six letters or digits that appear in the image opposite.

Registration Image

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Show Printable Version
Email this Page Email this Page



Posting Rules  
You may not post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are On
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are On

 
For the best viewing experience please update your browser to Google Chrome