Hang 2 jerseys this season

[FriendsofAN44]

In fact, as I peruse the media guide a little closer, there are only 6 Bonnies who have EVER scored 600 or more points in a season:

Greg Sanders (twice)
Earl Belcher (three times)
Bob Lanier (three times)
Tom Stith (twice)
Fred Crawford (twice)
JR Bremer (once)

3 of them have their number retired and the two at the top of the list should have !!

[woof]

Chaz said:

I say retire "one" this coming year and then another the next. Let their accomplishments stand alone and be recognized. Sanders & Belcher would be great for starters. Maybe put up a banner retiring the name Brown Indian also ?

I'm with you, Chaz - one at a time.

Great thread; thanks for starting it, jh.

[gcbona69]

while you're waiting for fjs64 to add his first hand input, i can add a little. i was just a youngster in the heyday of the Stiths, Crawford, Martin, Jirele, McCulley et al,but my big bro was a classmate and good friend of fjs64 and as a result i was able to cop tickets for a lot of the games in the Aud in Buffalo back when Bonas participated in the Canisius Saturday doubleheader program. Imagine that, the Varsity playing before the Junior Varsity every Saturday night. One of the keys to Tom Stith's being able to get off so many shots was that the Bonnies played a very up-tempo style which was keyed by a frantic full court press which resulted in a lot of loose balls, turnovers and resultant fast break opportunities,many of which TStith was able to cash in for easy money. the guards--Martin and Orrie Jirele--were tailor made for this type of pressure defense and it was a joy to watch. Fate intervened late in their best season --i think it would have been the 60-61 season--as Tom Stith and Freddie Crawford were both disgnosed with tuberculosis late in that season and they were elimnated in the NCAA tournament--backwhenit was 32 teams--by the ultimate home job at the hands of Wake Forest and Coach Bones McKinney who blatantly interfered with the play to his team's advantage. the "homer" refs managed to look the other way and simply chose to let his interference go with not even a reprimand. That was the first golden opportunity we had on the big stage to be derailed by physical ailments/injuries, to be followed several years later by the Lanier nightmare. Freddie Crawford did make a comeback after being cured of TB but it seemed like he was never quite the same after that. While he had a tremendous career at Bonas it just seemed to me that he never regained the electric aura that he had his first year. that may have had something to do with the cast of players that he was running with as well.

[fjs64]

I only had the opportunity to watch Tom Stith 1 year, he teamed with Fred Crawford, Bob McCulley, Whitey Martin, and Orrie Jirele, with Ed Petrovic, Tom Fitzmaurice, Mike Joyce (and a couple more.....memory is bit weak). Fast breaks were a mainstay of this team...wheeze to freeze to teeze (Whitey to Freddie to Tom), was the code they would use. Tom had the sweetest outside shot and inside he had moves. I still remember the Ohio State game (excuse me, The Ohio State......they were #1, with Lucas, Havelicek, Larry Siegfried, Bobby Knight, Mel Nowell (2 hall of famers and a hall of fame coach).....1st half they held Tom to 7 points as we were trailing 40-36 (of course Freddie had around 23, he was a sophomore). At halftime, when Red Auerback was interviewed (he drafted Havelicek), he said a good defensive player could stop a good offensive player. In the 2nd half, Tom had 28 points, being triple teamed by Lucas, Havlicek and others.

If not for TB, what could have been.

What follows is something I posted last year about TS.

How 2052 = 3403

This is an extrapolation on Tom Stith playing under today’s NCAA schedule/rules.

The changes I used in this model included: playing 4 years vs 3, increasing the number of games played, and adding the 3 pt shot. I included the Bonnies playing in the post season in each of the 4 years (they actually played in the NIT 3 times & NCAA 1 time, I added games from the A10 tourney which of course did not exist for an independent…..in fact the only conference that had a tourney back then was the ACC). I did not take into account today’s faster paced game (there was no 35 second clock back then, therefore increasing the number of possessions), nor quality of opponent (back then it did not matter if you played what we know as Div 2 or 3 teams). Of course there were less than 100 Div I teams.

Basically, I had Tom scoring 12.5 games as a Frosh (32 games), 34 games as a Sophomore, averaging 20.3 vs 18.3. As a junior he would have scored 34.5 (getting 3 additional points from 3 point land) and as a senior his average would be 32.6. I believe I was conservative on the 3’s, giving him 2, 3, 3 in each of his last 3 years. With his sweet outside shot he could have easily scored 5 or 6 points more per game than his performance during 1958-61. That increase would have put him over 4000 points (I remember his fadeaway jumper from the corner that would now be 3-pointers.

Just an exercise that I have always wanted to try…..by the way, in Tom’s senior year my model would have the Bonnies in the Final 4. Which was very plausible with the capabilities of that team. Before TB affected Tom (and Freddie Crawford) the Bonnies were 21-1 and 2nd in the nation to the only team that had beaten them (Ohio State by 2).

Anyway, have fun with this. Somebody should do the same exercise on Bob Lanier’s record. The number of games, the extra season (he probably would have averaged 20ppg as a Freshman), a 3-pointer every once in a while (he could shoot from outside).

[FroMunga]

Obviously there is no perfect way to formulate an analysis and be 100% accurate. Yet to satisfy a curiousity and make a general comparison your numbers come out very interesting.

It's always tough to compare different generations, especially when the rules are different. Nobody knows how many shots would have been 3 pointers. When they added the 3 point line, perimeter play also increased. Players didn't (and still don't) shoot the mid-range jumper as often, so what might have been a 15 footer that went in could have easily have been a 20 footer that missed.

My guess is as good as yours but if somehow you go make an accurate comparison I doubt there would be any significant change in the numbers, either up or down.

[DemBonnies]

Here's one of Fro Munga's more brilliant posts!!!

How you can argue with this logic "so what might have been a 15 footer that went in could have easily have been a 20 footer that missed. "

All FJS was trying to say is that if Stith made 6 long bombs in a game it would have added a half dozen more points.

Over a career it would have added up.

When you take Froster off topic (defense of the Shyster) he's like the Bumble with no teeth.


Capeche` Fromeister?

[DerekBrower]

FroMunga said:

Obviously there is no perfect way to formulate an analysis and be 100% accurate. Yet to satisfy a curiousity and make a general comparison your numbers come out very interesting.

It's always tough to compare different generations, especially when the rules are different. Nobody knows how many shots would have been 3 pointers. When they added the 3 point line, perimeter play also increased. Players didn't (and still don't) shoot the mid-range jumper as often, so what might have been a 15 footer that went in could have easily have been a 20 footer that missed.

My guess is as good as yours but if somehow you go make an accurate comparison I doubt there would be any significant change in the numbers, either up or down.

That post was classic......

[FroMunga]

And all I'm saying that is given the choice, perhaps Stith would have shot more long range shots than mid range jumpers if the 3 pt line was in effect. Wouldn't that ultimately lower his shooting percentage? Sure he gets an additional point for each one made but he would also lose points when you substitute 3 pt shots he missed instead of a 2 pt that he would have made. Once again the rose colored glasses get in the way of rational thinking.

I guess that kind of out-of-the-box thinking is a little to complicated for some of the Angee's crew. Maybe next time all the old timers meet at the DeSoto and relive the glory days I'll provide color diagrams for you to follow along.

[DemBonnies]

You knucklehead...your still not even close.

Take the shot chart from a Tom Stith game. Draw a 3 point arc. Count the shots he made from outside the arc and add a point to his total.

Don't replay the game!!!

Not a difficult concept.

But I'm feeling sorry for you Fro Blucha, so here's a softball..right down the old slot

VAN BREDA KOLFF KNEW OF TERRELL'S PROBLEMS ALL ALONG!!!

Go ahead big guy...swing away


attaboy

[bonagoose]

Why must we discuss the same issue every year at about this time?

[FroMunga]

Yet another person turns to the childhood antic of name calling on this board. New board…same stuff. I must say you are very creative. Never mind the fact that people usually resort to such behaviors when they have no other recourse because they were proven wrong once again by yours truly.

To merely draw an arc would be a rudimentary solution (which to some is the only conceivable solution), although not very credible. Why? For one, I guarantee the shot charts aren’t exact. They are a tool used more as a generalization than they are for factual accounts. Sure it could symbolize a shot from the corner but does it provide an accurate and definitive spot on the floor? Based on your rationale of not replaying the game, then you must believe the 3 point line has had no impact on shot selection. Is that correct? Stith would have taken the exact shots whether or not a 3 point line was on the floor? Starting to see flaw in your “logic?”<br>
Why stop with just one person’s stats. I’m sure we could find a handful of games from that era that they lost but that they could now claim they won based on drawing an arc and giving them additional points. I’m all for it. Who knows, maybe another NIT banner could be gained from it!

All of this could have been avoided if you had any reading comprehension skills. Note that I said perimeter play increased with the advent of the 3 pt line.

You want to talk shot charts? Look at charts of games played before and after and the line was installed. I guarantee you will see an increase in the number of shots from the outside. Furthermore, you will notice that after the 3 point line was introduced, most shots are either from around the arc or in the paint, the mid range shots are very few.

Nice try with the JVBK statement. You want this thread to turn into something else in an effort to hide your absurd reasoning on the 3 point line issue. Plus, you wouldn’t want me to discredit you once again now would you?

I can picture it now, a bunch of old timers sitting in your hotel room, bag of cheetos in one hand, old programs in the other and the funny florist from Indy taking pictures to post on the web. Cheez

[DemBonnies]

Tell me that you're really not as clueless as you appear to be!!!

Are you anywhere close to grasping this concept of a hypothetical stretch to equate past players/game situations with the modern era?

I know it's off topic for you (usually you're flogging the OJ is innocent thing..oops I mean JVBK is innocent thing) but I thought you had a sliver off basketball savvy and a little imagination.

Sorry I had you pegged wrong!!