82Cards

The Travelers vs. Jackson Tigers game @ 5:00 pm Eastern on Sunday will be live streamed at Nike EYB. I believe that this is the only Travelers game this weekend that will be live streamed.

Just like Coca-Cola, McDonalds and every other company out there, Nike wants to get its hooks into its consumers at a young age and keep them for a lifetime. It's clear that in some indirect ways Nike benefits from the exposure it gets and connections it makes from hosting the EYBL. That's not debatable. It's all about marketing and expanding the brand. The benefits Nike gets from the EYBL are very valuable, but they are intangible and not quantifiable, even to Nike. There is no question that the EYBL itself is a money loser for Nike as the direct expenses far outweigh any revenue. It's not a problem for Nike because it just writes it off as a marketing expense (the entire cost of the EYBL is probably just a rounding error on its corporate expense statement anyway). However, the suggestion from a prior poster that Nike would drop Travelers for Manimal because that would allow Nike to make more money is ludicrous. Nike doesn't make money off the Travelers and wouldn't off Manimal either. The EYBL is not designed to make money off the participating teams. Truth is that both the Travelers and Manimal are irrelevant to Nike and its overall corporate profitability and marketing strategy. Nike could pull the contract of the Travelers (or Manimal if it had one) and the EYBL would not miss a beat. They would just add another team from another state and keep on rolling. The EYBL is way bigger than any one team. If I were the Travelers, I wouldn't have any concerns whatsoever about losing my contract with Nike over money issues, because the money is irrelevant. I would be more afraid of losing my contract because Nike decided that it needed to do a favor for an NBA star that would like to have his Kentucky-based AAU team in the EYBL.

How does Nike make money off the EYBL? The players don't pay a fee of any kind to play in the EYBL. Nike gives each player a ton of gear for free. Nike pays for the facilities where the events are held. In the contract Nike has with each of the EYBL teams, Nike pays each team big $$$ to cover the substantial cost of transportation, lodging and food for each of the events across the country. The EYBL teams don't pay Nike anything. So, please ask your reliable source exactly how Nike is making money and exactly how will they make more money from Faried?

CovCath by 15.

You need to add Matt Rose from Lexington Christian to your list. He will be with the Travelers again this summer.

I know one group who was not surprised at the outcome of the coach's vote--the parents. They never think the coach gets it right!

Agree. Not a violation.

Henry Clay is on a roll right now and it's dangerous to pick against a team and a player (Jordan Green) that is playing really well. However, Scott County has size, toughness and experience on their side (and a pretty good player in Trent Gilbert as well), so Scott County wins by 8.

If a star player doesn't score much in a game either because his shots were limited or he was forced to take tough shots, then credit the defense. If the star player was missing good looks, then blame the player for a bad night.

It's pretty obvious where the strength is in the 11th Region. Looks like 42nd vs. 43rd for the championship (and I don't mean Henry Clay vs. LexCath)!

I still think there's no doubt that Jackson Davis was the MVP because Lafayette doesn't come close to beating Catholic without him. Heck, they wouldn't even have beat LCA without Jackson Davis who took over the game in the 4th quarter. Simply, Catholic still had a decent chance to win without Talbott. Lafayette had no chance to win either game without Davis. So, yes, Davis was clearly the MVP. As for the solution, maybe MOP is the way to go. Have the winning coach select the MVP. Have the media select the MOP. Sometimes the same player would be the MVP and MOP, sometimes not.

Does anyone agree that it isn't really fair that the tournament MVP automatically comes from the championship team? Does this need to change? For example, the MVP in the 43rd District Tournament was Michael Talbott, the PG for Lexington Catholic, who had 14 against Dunbar and 16 against Lafayette. He had a good tournament, but it doesn't come close to Lafayette's Jackson Davis who had 28 & 12 against LCA and 32 & 31 against Lexington Catholic in a 2 OT loss. The MVP is not a team award. It is an individual award and when you don't give the MVP to the best player on the court, then "MVP" loses its meaning. How is the MVP selected anyway? Is it the prerogative of the winning coach? Is there a better way to select the MVP? Are there sufficient media covering district tournaments to have the media select the MVP? What about the tournament director or some other independent person or group of people? It just doesn't seem fair that a double-overtime loss in the championship game apparently eliminates a player from MVP consideration after the performance Jackson Davis just put up.

Should be a great game! Too close to call, but I will anyway--Boyle by 3.

Matt Rose from LCA should be on your First Team. I looked up the stats online and Rose's numbers are remarkably similar to those of Jordan Green of Henry Clay, who many consider the 3rd best player in the 11th Region. Rose is a significantly better shooter (especially from 3pt and the FT line) and is a more efficient scorer in terms of points/shot. Green is better at getting to the FT line and has a better assist/turnover ratio. All other stats are basically identical between the two. Also, to my knowledge, there are only 4 players in the 11th Region that currently have a D1 scholarship offer--Jackson Davis, Trent Gilbert, Jordan Green and your Second Team selection, Matt Rose.

Not surprising. He was already a great player but his stock has gone up even more in the past several months. Wish him the best.

GRC by 8.

Owensboro Apollo vs. Daviess County--2 of the top 3 teams in the 3rd Region face off in the first game of the 9th District Tourney.

I agree with your Top 5, except that Newport Central Catholic should be #2.

Dunbar is at home and playing well lately. Catholic is on the road and not playing so well lately. However, Catholic knows how to win games like this. If Catholic stays out of significant foul trouble and they get normal production from Johnson, they win by 5.

He's very young for his grade (late summer birthday). Good size for a freshman and put together well. Dad is 6'8" and former D1 player. Has excellent hands and a solid stroke. Great kid from a great family. He has a bright future.

LexCath now 1-4 in last 5 games over past 9 days all against good teams. Is lack of bench depth the issue or are the wheels starting to come off? LexCath will probably be 1-5 in last 6 after going to Wayne Co. on Friday night. They look to be entering the 43rd District tournament on a roll (not the good kind).

Good point. Wasn't familiar with Christian Fellowship. Deleting them gives the 4th an average of 61.30, good for 17th toughest district. Looking over the results again, I noticed two other schools that might be in the same situation as Christian Fellowship, but don't know for sure--Covington Latin in the 35th and Riverside Christian in the 55th. If these latter two schools are excluded for the same reasons, then the 35th (Beechwood, Covington Catholic, Holy Cross, Covington Holmes) becomes the 8th toughest district and the 55th district moves from 2nd weakest to middle of the pack.

OK, so I was bored this weekend and put the Cantrall computer ratings on a spreadsheet to see where the toughest and easiest districts in the state are located. The toughest districts are generally in the Louisville and Lexington areas, while the easiest districts generally appear to be in far Eastern KY and far Western KY. 10 Toughest Districts by Average Cantrall Rating 73.94 22nd Butler, DeSales, Doss, Iroquois, Western 72.03 42nd Bryan Station, Henry Clay, Sayre, Scott County 70.38 43rd Lafayette, Lexington Catholic, Lexington Christian, Dunbar, Tates Creek 68.75 24th Bullitt East, Fern Creek, Jeffersontown, Whitfield Academy 67.45 9th Owensboro, Daviess County, Apollo, Owensboro Catholic 67.06 14th Bowling Green, Greenwood, South Warren, Warren Central, Warren East 66.78 27th Atherton, Seneca, Trinity (Louisville), Waggener 65.47 48th McCreary Central, Southwestern, Wayne County 65.03 29th North Oldham, Oldham County, South Oldham, Trimble County 64.90 54th Buckhorn, Hazard, Leslie County, Perry County Central 10 Easiest Districts by Average Cantrall Rating 38.50 58th Allen Central, Betsy Layne, Piarist, Prestonsburg, South Floyd 41.95 55th Breathitt County, Jackson City, Wolfe County, Riverside Christian 42.20 60th Belfry, Phelps, Pike County Central 42.55 1st Carlisle County, Fulton City, Fulton County, Hickman County 43.38 64th Ashland Blazer, Boyd County, Fairview, Rose Hill 44.03 7th Caldwell County, Dawson Springs, Hopkins County Central, Madisonville 44.68 11th Breckinridge County, Frederick Fraize, Hancock County, Meade County 44.90 5th Crittenden County, Livingston Central, Lyon County, Trigg County 46.05 4th Calloway County, Marshall County, Murray, Christian Fellowship 46.65 12th Butler County, Edmonson County, Grayson County, Trinity (Whitesville)

Sorry, Hickory, but you are wrong. Had LCA won against LexCath, LCA would in fact have been the #2 seed in the 43rd district (one of the toughest in the state) and LexCath would have been the #4 seed. Here's why: If LCA had won, LCA, LexCath and PLD would all have been tied with 4-4 records in the district. Per the KHSAA, the first tiebreaker in the 43rd District is head-to-head among the teams tied (meaning games played against Lafayette and Tates Creek are not considered for purposes of determining the first tiebreaker). Had LCA won, it would have had 3 tiebreaker wins (LexCath twice and PLD once), while PLD would have had 2 tiebreaker wins (LexCath, LCA) and LexCath would only have had 1 tiebreaker win (PLD). Odd as it may seem, PLD was guaranteed the #3 seed regardless of who won this game. The LCA/LexCath game was important because the winner was guaranteed to be the #2 seed and the loser was guaranteed to be the #4 seed. Only if the three teams all had the same records against each other (all 2-2) would you get to the second tiebreaker of pulling names out of a hat. None of this tiebreaker stuff matters now since LexCath won giving it 5 district wins and the #2 seed, PLD ended up with 4 district wins and the #3 seed, and LCA finished with 3 district wins and the #4 seed.