All-State Boys Team
12/15/2015 10:15:06 AM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
If you think we messed up with our selections, or you just want to recognize someone that didn't make the list, here's your chance! Post your opinion below. Is anyone bold enough to make their own first, second, and third team lists?
If you think we messed up with our selections, or you just want to recognize someone that didn't make the list, here's your chance! Post your opinion below. Is anyone bold enough to make their own first, second, and third team lists?
12/15/2015 9:05:20 PM
Coach
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2
@CoachGeorgeRJR Coppi was 19th at NXN and he only made the CA honorable mention team? Only Herrera (17 seconds), Dodds (4 seconds) and Spencer (1 second) were ahead of him at NXN. He was ahead of Tamagno by 3 seconds, Cortes by 7 seconds, Khan by 9 seconds, Reynolds by 13 seconds, Ogden by 19 seconds, Robison by 23 seconds, and Landgraf by 27 seconds.
@CoachGeorgeRJR

Coppi was 19th at NXN and he only made the CA honorable mention team? Only Herrera (17 seconds), Dodds (4 seconds) and Spencer (1 second) were ahead of him at NXN. He was ahead of Tamagno by 3 seconds, Cortes by 7 seconds, Khan by 9 seconds, Reynolds by 13 seconds, Ogden by 19 seconds, Robison by 23 seconds, and Landgraf by 27 seconds.
12/16/2015 6:12:06 AM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@coachwiley Valid arguments, but the placements were not determined by any single meet, even NXN. I will tell you that I gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet, where he was the 3rd Dolphin, and was behind everyone you mentioned. I also looked for outstanding regular-season performances, using our rankings as a starting point, and Landgraf had one - his 3 Mile time from the Dana Hills Invite still ranks 8th in the state. By those criteria, I think the choice was justified. However, I can certainly see how someone else, with a different set of priorities, would see things otherwise. I had a hard time with the Dana Hills boys in general. Landgraf had flashes of brilliance, and was the team's #1 for much of the regular season. Coppi was consistently strong, and could easily have been the second Dana Hills runner on the list, swapping places with Landgraf. Ogden was behind the other two for the regular season, but he had an outstanding championship season. That made it very hard to place all three of them. With so much talent to reward, and only allowing myself 8 spots per team (and that was up one from the original 7 I started with), I guess it's inevitable that someone would seem to be placed lower than they deserve.
@coachwiley Valid arguments, but the placements were not determined by any single meet, even NXN. I will tell you that I gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet, where he was the 3rd Dolphin, and was behind everyone you mentioned. I also looked for outstanding regular-season performances, using our rankings as a starting point, and Landgraf had one - his 3 Mile time from the Dana Hills Invite still ranks 8th in the state. By those criteria, I think the choice was justified. However, I can certainly see how someone else, with a different set of priorities, would see things otherwise.

I had a hard time with the Dana Hills boys in general. Landgraf had flashes of brilliance, and was the team's #1 for much of the regular season. Coppi was consistently strong, and could easily have been the second Dana Hills runner on the list, swapping places with Landgraf. Ogden was behind the other two for the regular season, but he had an outstanding championship season. That made it very hard to place all three of them.

With so much talent to reward, and only allowing myself 8 spots per team (and that was up one from the original 7 I started with), I guess it's inevitable that someone would seem to be placed lower than they deserve.
12/16/2015 12:40:48 PM
User
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 4
The biggest issue with this list in specific and MileSplit in general is your over reliance on comparing cross country times from different courses. There is a vast disparity in degree of difficulty (and accuracy) of courses throughout California, for example 3 miles at Woodbridge is not the same as Crystal Springs for example. And while you say "I gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet", some of your choices for Boy's All-State are puzzling. For example on the 3rd team, Hirsch from Burroughs (Burbank) did not even compete at State while Janes from Martin Luther King had only the 139th fastest boys time of the day. Seems to me you were rewarding both of them for their fast times earlier in the year at Mt Sac and Woodbridge instead of end of season performance.
The biggest issue with this list in specific and MileSplit in general is your over reliance on comparing cross country times from different courses. There is a vast disparity in degree of difficulty (and accuracy) of courses throughout California, for example 3 miles at Woodbridge is not the same as Crystal Springs for example.

And while you say "I gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet", some of your choices for Boy's All-State are puzzling. For example on the 3rd team, Hirsch from Burroughs (Burbank) did not even compete at State while Janes from Martin Luther King had only the 139th fastest boys time of the day. Seems to me you were rewarding both of them for their fast times earlier in the year at Mt Sac and Woodbridge instead of end of season performance.
12/16/2015 1:12:01 PM
Coach
Joined: Dec 2013
Posts: 2
@CoachGeorgeRJR I don't mean to be argumentative, but when you mentioned Jack was their #1 runner nearly all season I had to look at the results again because I didn't realize that. Here's what I found: In 11 races Mason and Jack both competed in, Mason finished ahead of Jack in 9 of those races. Of 10 races Mason and Jake competed in, Mason finished ahead of Jake 8 times. To put that in perspective, Jack was their #1 runner one time this season, which was at Dana Hills Invite. Jake was their #1 guy at Mt. SAC Invitational and State. Mason was their #1 runner at 9 other races they did, which among others included the Clovis Invitational, Orange County Championships, League Finals, CIF Prelims, CIF Finals and NXN. Come on, it's OK to admit you missed him :-]
@CoachGeorgeRJR

I don't mean to be argumentative, but when you mentioned Jack was their #1 runner nearly all season I had to look at the results again because I didn't realize that. Here's what I found: In 11 races Mason and Jack both competed in, Mason finished ahead of Jack in 9 of those races. Of 10 races Mason and Jake competed in, Mason finished ahead of Jake 8 times.

To put that in perspective, Jack was their #1 runner one time this season, which was at Dana Hills Invite. Jake was their #1 guy at Mt. SAC Invitational and State. Mason was their #1 runner at 9 other races they did, which among others included the Clovis Invitational, Orange County Championships, League Finals, CIF Prelims, CIF Finals and NXN. Come on, it's OK to admit you missed him
12/16/2015 1:18:30 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@coachwiley Not argumentative at all. I wouldn't say that I missed him, but you can definitely say I should have placed him higher. I'm not afraid to admit mistakes, and I'm sure the list isn't perfect. It's easier said than done, though - if he was on the second team, someone else would have to go to one of the lower teams. Who would you suggest? It's hard to evaluate the kids and sort them into teams, and nobody can make this kind of list and have it considered perfect. Think of all the folks who talk about the athletes "snubbed" from Pro Bowl rosters, All-NBA teams, NCAA All-American lists, etc. It's hard to do, and I did my best. Most importantly, I respect Mason, and I DID include him on the list, just not as high as you think he should be. After all, only 32 guys in the whole state got mentioned at all! O:-)
@coachwiley Not argumentative at all. I wouldn't say that I missed him, but you can definitely say I should have placed him higher. I'm not afraid to admit mistakes, and I'm sure the list isn't perfect. It's easier said than done, though - if he was on the second team, someone else would have to go to one of the lower teams. Who would you suggest? It's hard to evaluate the kids and sort them into teams, and nobody can make this kind of list and have it considered perfect. Think of all the folks who talk about the athletes "snubbed" from Pro Bowl rosters, All-NBA teams, NCAA All-American lists, etc. It's hard to do, and I did my best.

Most importantly, I respect Mason, and I DID include him on the list, just not as high as you think he should be. After all, only 32 guys in the whole state got mentioned at all!
12/16/2015 1:27:19 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@37North I definitely took those other factors into account - just like in other sports, stats do matter. Does a football player who leads the state in receiving TD's get left off the All-State list, or a basketball player that leads the state in scoring, if his team is weak and doesn't advance far in the playoffs? Great athletes are allowed to have off-days; what if one happens to be at the state meet? I think you have to balance a lot of different things to write a list like this. I mean, what if a kid had a great season, then stumbles at the state meet, or is sick that day? I looked at big regular season performances, strong championship season races, AND success in the postseason, and tried to put together the best list I could. I'm sure it's not perfect - but I don't think any list could be. Different people will take issue with different choices. Take someone like Fiona O'Keeffe on the girls' list. She dominated the early season, then got hurt. She had the 16th-best finish at the state meet, coming back from injury. Should she be 2nd-team All-State when she led the state in the 5K and had the 4th-fastest 3 Mile time (on a challenging course, too)? Also, I DID consider course difficulty when working through the candidates. There were some meets that I disregarded entirely, because it was clear the courses produced inflated times.
@37North I definitely took those other factors into account - just like in other sports, stats do matter. Does a football player who leads the state in receiving TD's get left off the All-State list, or a basketball player that leads the state in scoring, if his team is weak and doesn't advance far in the playoffs? Great athletes are allowed to have off-days; what if one happens to be at the state meet?

I think you have to balance a lot of different things to write a list like this. I mean, what if a kid had a great season, then stumbles at the state meet, or is sick that day? I looked at big regular season performances, strong championship season races, AND success in the postseason, and tried to put together the best list I could. I'm sure it's not perfect - but I don't think any list could be. Different people will take issue with different choices.

Take someone like Fiona O'Keeffe on the girls' list. She dominated the early season, then got hurt. She had the 16th-best finish at the state meet, coming back from injury. Should she be 2nd-team All-State when she led the state in the 5K and had the 4th-fastest 3 Mile time (on a challenging course, too)?

Also, I DID consider course difficulty when working through the candidates. There were some meets that I disregarded entirely, because it was clear the courses produced inflated times.
12/16/2015 1:50:26 PM
User
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 4
It's a tough sport. Look at NCAA All-Americans. Top 40 on the day. Nothing else is taken into consideration. Also O'Keefe vs Janes is not a good comparison as she at least had the 16th fastest time at State. Janes had the 27th fastest time at SS Finals, 49th fastest at Clovis and 137th fastest at State. Plus how do you explain Hirsch? 3rd team based on Mt Sac alone? If you truly "gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet" then it would be reflected by your selections...
It's a tough sport. Look at NCAA All-Americans. Top 40 on the day. Nothing else is taken into consideration. Also O'Keefe vs Janes is not a good comparison as she at least had the 16th fastest time at State. Janes had the 27th fastest time at SS Finals, 49th fastest at Clovis and 137th fastest at State. Plus how do you explain Hirsch? 3rd team based on Mt Sac alone?

If you truly "gave the greatest weight to the state meet out of any single meet" then it would be reflected by your selections...
12/16/2015 3:09:27 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@37North It IS reflected in my choices. The top 24 guys at the state meet are in the article. "Greatest weight" is not the same thing as "the only factor considered." You've called into question 2 of the 32 boys I recognized, which is only 6% of the selections.
@37North It IS reflected in my choices. The top 24 guys at the state meet are in the article. "Greatest weight" is not the same thing as "the only factor considered."

You've called into question 2 of the 32 boys I recognized, which is only 6% of the selections.
12/16/2015 3:56:35 PM
User
Joined: Dec 2015
Posts: 4
I only called into question the two most obvious. I'm sure I could find fault with some other selections too. FWIW you didn't explain how someone who didn't even compete at State (or League or SS Prelims or SS Finals) could make it to 3rd team All-State when I'm sure there were more deserving athletes, like Croppi for example. Look I get it. It's your rankings and you can use whatever criteria you want. However if you don't like the feedback then don't ask for it.
I only called into question the two most obvious. I'm sure I could find fault with some other selections too. FWIW you didn't explain how someone who didn't even compete at State (or League or SS Prelims or SS Finals) could make it to 3rd team All-State when I'm sure there were more deserving athletes, like Croppi for example. Look I get it. It's your rankings and you can use whatever criteria you want. However if you don't like the feedback then don't ask for it.
12/16/2015 5:26:06 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@37North I'm not upset, and you have some valid points. I was just trying to explain how I arrived at the lists, that's all.
@37North I'm not upset, and you have some valid points. I was just trying to explain how I arrived at the lists, that's all.
12/16/2015 6:21:24 PM
Admin
SUBSCRIBER
Joined: Nov 2006
Posts: 2419
@coachwiley OK, having had time to think about this more, I AM willing to admit I messed up on Mason Coppi. It would have been better to have Mason and Jake on 2nd team and Jack 3rd team. I don't think I should go back and change things now, because I don't want to demote anyone who has already seen the article, but I might put a note on it.
@coachwiley OK, having had time to think about this more, I AM willing to admit I messed up on Mason Coppi. It would have been better to have Mason and Jake on 2nd team and Jack 3rd team. I don't think I should go back and change things now, because I don't want to demote anyone who has already seen the article, but I might put a note on it.

You must be logged in to comment.

Click Here to Log In.