Chief’s Briefs - Insights 4 Casual Fans | The Boneyard

Chief’s Briefs - Insights 4 Casual Fans

C

Chief00

Joined
Feb 20, 2021
Messages
20,719
Reaction Score
45,698
Sanogo, Martin, Whaley and Jackson played well today. Cole was off.

One interesting statistic mentioned by the TV crew, is in UConn wins Polley averaged 9 points, and in our loses 3 points. Today he had 8 points and we won.

It’s kind of a paradox and difficult for Chief to explain, but while our usual starters played well, they played best when mixed in with other rotations. Polley started, Chief assumes for Senior night, and we did not fall in the usual early hole. Not because of Polley’s scoring but because they did not double Sanago with 2 non shooters in there. So Sanogo ran a torture chamber as Chief use to say about Kevin McHale.

Jackson Jr had a great game, Chief is so proud of the young man who listens, learns and works. His game has become so incredibly efficient. 3-4 FG, 8 Rebs, a 4 assist to turnover ratio.
 
Chief00 said:
Sanogo, Martin, Whaley and Jackson played well today. Cole was off.

One interesting statistic mentioned by the TV crew, is in UConn wins Polley averaged 9 points, and in our loses 3 points. Today he had 8 points and we won.

It’s kind of a paradox and difficult for Chief to explain, but while our usual starters played well, they played best when mixed in with other rotations. Polley started, Chief assumes for Senior night, and we did not fall in the usual early hole. Not because of Polley’s scoring but because they did not double Sanago with 2 non shooters in there. So Sanogo ran a torture chamber as Chief use to say about Kevin McHale.

Jackson Jr had a great game, Chief is so proud of the young man who listens, learns and works. His game has become so incredibly efficient. 3-4 FG, 8 Rebs, a 4 assist to turnover ratio.
Expand ...
I’ll respond chief.
 
Chief00 said:
Sanogo, Martin, Whaley and Jackson played well today. Cole was off.

One interesting statistic mentioned by the TV crew, is in UConn wins Polley averaged 9 points, and in our loses 3 points. Today he had 8 points and we won.

It’s kind of a paradox and difficult for Chief to explain, but while our usual starters played well, they played best when mixed in with other rotations. Polley started, Chief assumes for Senior night, and we did not fall in the usual early hole. Not because of Polley’s scoring but because they did not double Sanago with 2 non shooters in there. So Sanogo ran a torture chamber as Chief use to say about Kevin McHale.

Jackson Jr had a great game, Chief is so proud of the young man who listens, learns and works. His game has become so incredibly efficient. 3-4 FG, 8 Rebs, a 4 assist to turnover ratio.
Expand ...

The idea that one of Polley or Hawkins should be on the court with one of Sanogo or Whaley makes a lot of sense. The pieces fit better together, even if one of your best pieces is on the bench. The one thing we don't know is if we start playing those lineups more, will opposing coaches find holes to exploit, so that those lineups start doing worse.
 
Dan Hurley does not have to make wholesale changes to the starting lineup. Wondering if TP should start with AJ or IW coming off the bench? This will give AS room underneath to do his damage. AJ and IW will still be major contributors. I know Dan Hurley's mantra is defense. But I am getting tired of slow starts on the offensive end. If TP gets hot early that will bring more pressure on the opposition. If he doesn't.... take him out. TP is showing a new dimension to his game by driving to the hoop.

Just think about it Dan Hurley. If he comes out cold...take him out.
 
GHSWolverines said:
Dan Hurley does not have to make wholesale changes to the starting lineup. Wondering if Tyler Phommachanh should start with AJ or IW coming off the bench? This will give AS room underneath to do his damage. AJ and IW will still be major contributors. I know Dan Hurley's mantra is defense. But I am getting tired of slow starts on the offensive end. If Tyler Phommachanh gets hot early that will bring more pressure on the opposition. If he doesn't.... take him out. Tyler Phommachanh is showing a new dimension to his game by driving to the hoop.

Just think about it Dan Hurley. If he comes out cold...take him out.
Expand ...
I don't know what happened LOL. Tyler's last name became Phommachanh
 
I liked the line-up change. The more offensive threats we have on the court and less predictable defensive options for opposing coaches the better. Sanogo has more room to work. With his current resting periods he has more lift and got his soft shots over the rim and thought the net! Better to be ahead by 5-8 points at half time than climb the steep hill in the second half.
 
.-.
Against lesser competition this team can win without hitting outside shots but we will need Polley, Cole and Martin to make them against teams of higher caliber. So is it Polley for O or Whaley for D at the start? Whaley will start.
We are a 5 seed say. We beat the 12 and then play the 4. Then the 1. As a 4 there’s little difference. It’s only as a 3 that we get 2 “easy“ games in theory and eventually face a 2. In any case we’ll need Cole at full force. Don’t know what happened yesterday, off day.
‘The important thing is that we have offensive rebounding and a beast in the middle if the refs don’t sit him down. Lately I’m thinking that Gaffney is emerging to what we thought he could be. Woulda been nice to have Hawk as a threat.
 
mussels said:
Tyler Phommachanh is on the UConn football team so somehow the auto-correct must have done its thing based on your prior usage.
Expand ...
The Boneyard has its own autocorrect. Watch as I type the letter A followed by the letter F:
 
pj said:
The idea that one of Polley or Hawkins should be on the court with one of Sanogo or Whaley makes a lot of sense. The pieces fit better together, even if one of your best pieces is on the bench. The one thing we don't know is if we start playing those lineups more, will opposing coaches find holes to exploit, so that those lineups start doing worse.
Expand ...
Exactly, I know that’s not how people traditionally think. They think the 5 “best”players should play at the same time, most of the game. My argument, has been tough to make, since it’s more nuisance. It who plays best together complementing each other and meeting certain needs.
 
jibsey said:
Against lesser competition this team can win without hitting outside shots but we will need Polley, Cole and Martin to make them against teams of higher caliber. So is it Polley for O or Whaley for D at the start? Whaley will start.
We are a 5 seed say. We beat the 12 and then play the 4. Then the 1. As a 4 there’s little difference. It’s only as a 3 that we get 2 “easy“ games in theory and eventually face a 2. In any case we’ll need Cole at full force. Don’t know what happened yesterday, off day.
‘The important thing is that we have offensive rebounding and a beast in the middle if the refs don’t sit him down. Lately I’m thinking that Gaffney is emerging to what we thought he could be. Woulda been nice to have Hawk as a threat.
Expand ...
Gaffney is emerging and Chief personally would pick him over Polley but I understand the arguments and his points averaged in wins and loses are hard to dispute. But, since we have 8 loses, it means he’s very inconsistent, at best, against good teams.
Of course, Hawkins is more talented than either but not sure where things stand with protocol and then at one point of progress he’s made this season will he play again in?
 
Chief00 said:
Exactly, I know that’s not how people traditionally think. They think the 5 “best”players should play at the same time, most of the game. My argument, has been tough to make, since it’s more nuisance. It who plays best together complementing each other and meeting certain needs.
Expand ...

It's tough for coaches to find the right way to cut or untie the Gordian knot. They have to think about whether they invest scarce practice time in getting their best players to play better together, or in developing young players and integrating them in, or in finding the best combinations and plans to win games at the expense of player development and showcasing.

It's easy for Dan Hurley to hope that he can find an offensive game plan that works for Sanogo-Whaley-Jackson and lets him keep his best players on the court. Another consideration is that you are developing guys for the pros and you don't want to sabotage the chances of someone like Whaley who's a great kid of getting a European gig, or Sanogo of getting drafted by the NBA. Helping them along will aid recruiting. What do you optimize for?

I remember Jim Calhoun in 2011-12 with Shabazz Napier, Jeremy Lamb, Andre Drummond, Ryan Boatright, Alex Oriakhi, Roscoe Smith, Deandre Daniels, Niels Giffey - a lot of great pieces - the team underperformed but Andre was selected as an NBA lottery pick at age 18. Did he optimize for the right things? Who knows?

I once interviewed a player who had played for Gale Catlett at West Virginia, and asked him how he was as a coach. He said Catlett was great at game planning and winning games, but he never developed players - none of his players went to the NBA - and he regretted having gone there.

Gale Catlett would probably have found a way to win a few more games with this team than Hurley has, but the players would have developed less and have worse NBA prospects. You can't have every good thing at once - can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. If Polley-Sanogo is better than Whaley-Sanogo for winning games but worse for player development and pro prospects, who should Hurley play? That's Hurley's job and I leave those decisions to him. I'll root for whoever he puts out there.
 
Last edited:
.-.
pj said:
It's tough for coaches to find the right way to cut or untie the Gordian knot. They have to think about whether they invest scarce practice time in getting their best players to play better together, or in developing young players and integrating them in, or in finding the best combinations and plans to win games at the expense of player development and showcasing.

It's easy for Dan Hurley to hope that he can find an offensive game plan that works for Sanogo-Whaley-Jackson and lets him keep his best players on the court. Another consideration is that you are developing guys for the pros and you don't want to sabotage the chances of someone like Whaley who's a great kid of getting a European gig, or Sanogo of getting drafted by the NBA. Helping them along will aid recruiting. What do you optimize for?

I remember Jim Calhoun in 2011-12 with Shabazz Napier, Jeremy Lamb, Andre Drummond, Ryan Boatright, Alex Oriakhi, Roscoe Smith, Deandre Daniels, Niels Giffey - a lot of great pieces - the team underperformed but Andre was selected as an NBA lottery pick at age 18. Did he optimize for the right things? Who knows?

I once interviewed a player who had played for Gale Catlett at West Virginia, and asked him how he was as a coach. He said Catlett was great at game planning and winning games, but he never developed players - none of his players went to the NBA - and he regretted having gone there.

Gale Catlett would probably have found a way to win a few more games with this team than Hurley has, but the players would have developed less and have worse NBA prospects. You can't have every good thing at once - can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. If Polley-Sanogo is better than Whaley-Sanogo for winning games but worse for player development and pro prospects, who should Hurley play? That's Hurley's job and I leave those decisions to him. I'll root for whoever he puts out there.
Expand ...
Coaches who don’t win games are looking for other lines of work.
 
cohenzone said:
Coaches who don’t win games are looking for other lines of work.
Expand ...

True but not responsive to what I wrote. There is more than one way to win games. For example, there are ways to win early sacrificing the future, and ways to win more in the future sacrificing the present.
 
pj said:
It's tough for coaches to find the right way to cut or untie the Gordian knot. They have to think about whether they invest scarce practice time in getting their best players to play better together, or in developing young players and integrating them in, or in finding the best combinations and plans to win games at the expense of player development and showcasing.

It's easy for Dan Hurley to hope that he can find an offensive game plan that works for Sanogo-Whaley-Jackson and lets him keep his best players on the court. Another consideration is that you are developing guys for the pros and you don't want to sabotage the chances of someone like Whaley who's a great kid of getting a European gig, or Sanogo of getting drafted by the NBA. Helping them along will aid recruiting. What do you optimize for?

I remember Jim Calhoun in 2011-12 with Shabazz Napier, Jeremy Lamb, Andre Drummond, Ryan Boatright, Alex Oriakhi, Roscoe Smith, Deandre Daniels, Niels Giffey - a lot of great pieces - the team underperformed but Andre was selected as an NBA lottery pick at age 18. Did he optimize for the right things? Who knows?

I once interviewed a player who had played for Gale Catlett at West Virginia, and asked him how he was as a coach. He said Catlett was great at game planning and winning games, but he never developed players - none of his players went to the NBA - and he regretted having gone there.

Gale Catlett would probably have found a way to win a few more games with this team than Hurley has, but the players would have developed less and have worse NBA prospects. You can't have every good thing at once - can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. If Polley-Sanogo is better than Whaley-Sanogo for winning games but worse for player development and pro prospects, who should Hurley play? That's Hurley's job and I leave those decisions to him. I'll root for whoever he puts out there.
Expand ...
Hurley pretty much knows who to put out there though he can't be perfect. It's an inexact and tough science, whose making shots, whose hot. Many fans here wanted the freshman point guard out there, Hurley knew better. Ultimately a coach is only as good as his talent and Hurley is open to criticism because we do have holes in that talent that show itself in our results from time to time.
 
Chief00 said:
They think the 5 “best”players should play at the same time, most of the game. My argument, has been tough to make, since it’s more nuisance. It who plays best together complementing each other and meeting certain needs.
Expand ...
I think a minority of the posters on this Board, but a majority of the outspoken Hurley bashers, don’t grasp this nuance. They just keep hollering that “we have the most talented starting lineup in the BE” without recognizing that the players don’t complement each other effectively. So while we might have the most talented starting 5 it is not the best starting 5. It’s probably the third best as reflected in the final standings.
 
.-.
pj said:
It's tough for coaches to find the right way to cut or untie the Gordian knot. They have to think about whether they invest scarce practice time in getting their best players to play better together, or in developing young players and integrating them in, or in finding the best combinations and plans to win games at the expense of player development and showcasing.

It's easy for Dan Hurley to hope that he can find an offensive game plan that works for Sanogo-Whaley-Jackson and lets him keep his best players on the court. Another consideration is that you are developing guys for the pros and you don't want to sabotage the chances of someone like Whaley who's a great kid of getting a European gig, or Sanogo of getting drafted by the NBA. Helping them along will aid recruiting. What do you optimize for?

I remember Jim Calhoun in 2011-12 with Shabazz Napier, Jeremy Lamb, Andre Drummond, Ryan Boatright, Alex Oriakhi, Roscoe Smith, Deandre Daniels, Niels Giffey - a lot of great pieces - the team underperformed but Andre was selected as an NBA lottery pick at age 18. Did he optimize for the right things? Who knows?

I once interviewed a player who had played for Gale Catlett at West Virginia, and asked him how he was as a coach. He said Catlett was great at game planning and winning games, but he never developed players - none of his players went to the NBA - and he regretted having gone there.

Gale Catlett would probably have found a way to win a few more games with this team than Hurley has, but the players would have developed less and have worse NBA prospects. You can't have every good thing at once - can't have your cake and eat it at the same time. If Polley-Sanogo is better than Whaley-Sanogo for winning games but worse for player development and pro prospects, who should Hurley play? That's Hurley's job and I leave those decisions to him. I'll root for whoever he puts out there.
Expand ...
Nice post.
 
pj said:
True but not responsive to what I wrote. There is more than one way to win games. For example, there are ways to win early sacrificing the future, and ways to win more in the future sacrificing the present.
Expand ...
I know what you wrote. And I gave my thoughts. There isn’t a collge coach in the country who values player development over winning , especially in a year when they are expected to win but the margin is really narrow. See UConn this year. They use practice for development.
 
pj said:
I remember Jim Calhoun in 2011-12 with Shabazz Napier, Jeremy Lamb, Andre Drummond, Ryan Boatright, Alex Oriakhi, Roscoe Smith, Deandre Daniels, Niels Giffey - a lot of great pieces - the team underperformed but Andre was selected as an NBA lottery pick at age 18. Did he optimize for the right things? Who knows?
Expand ...
Calhoun also lost Oriakhi by starting Drummond over him. Alex coming off a national championship maybe deserved better but Drummond the better prospect obviously. Glad Drummond came to UConn but he was a lottery pick regardless and his presence in the end probably a negative for that team that had a first round tourney exit.
 
cohenzone said:
Finally you get it. Your posts are definitely nuisance. Just a small nuance.
Expand ...
LOL - thanks - the autocorrect World that we have a window of 15 minutes to correct - with everything else going on.
 
Hi-Low said:
Calhoun also lost Oriakhi by starting Drummond over him. Alex coming off a national championship maybe deserved better but Drummond the better prospect obviously. Glad Drummond came to UConn but he was a lottery pick regardless and his presence in the end probably a negative for that team that had a first round tourney exit.
Expand ...
Chief has posted this before, the 2011/2012 season was very usually. Calhoun had both an NCAA suspension and serious health abscences. He made it through the season by sheer will power and courage. Then add in the school sitting the Boatshow for several games due to another NCAA investigation. So I wouldn’t draw too many conclusions / since there just wasn’t the usual opportunities for Jim to mold that team, that he would have other years.
 
.-.
cohenzone said:
Finally you get it. Your posts are definitely nuisance. Just a small nuance.
Expand ...
This is perfect. We can post "Chief is a nuance" when he gets out of hand.

Casual Boneyarders may be clueless to what we are saying true, dedicated Boneyarders will fully understand.
 
I liked AJ coming off the bench
But not open to any idea of IW not starting
Cole's struggle may, in hindsight, be a glimmer of light for this team - I hate when a team relies on one player so much. It happened last year when Bouknight was on the court. It's more evident with Cole for he is more important to this team based on time played and leadership.
 
gtcam said:
I liked AJ coming off the bench
But not open to any idea of IW not starting
Cole's struggle may, in hindsight, be a glimmer of light for this team - I hate when a team relies on one player so much. It happened last year when Bouknight was on the court. It's more evident with Cole for he is more important to this team based on time played and leadership.
Expand ...
That’s why in Chief’s opinion, Gaffney is so important. Other guys may think they handle the ball, but by PG standards, Gaffney is the only one who has that potential without Cole.
 
Chief "assumes" Polley started because it was senior night?

Doesn't Chief know? How is Chief going to be our go to inside guy if Chief isn't sure about this?

PS: I agree, it's obvious, we're much better when Polley hits a couple if 3s
 
willie99 said:
Chief "assumes" Polley started because it was senior night?

Doesn't Chief know? How is Chief going to be our go to inside guy if Chief isn't sure about this?

PS: I agree, it's obvious, we're much better when Polley hits a couple if 3s
Expand ...
I was out of town, watched it on TV, as I mentioned quoting the commentator about Polley points in wins and loses.
I did notice Jackson started the second half, so that was the basis of my senior night thought in regards to the first half start. Seemed like a reasonable assumption.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,326
Messages
4,564,060
Members
10,458
Latest member
Liam Rainst


Top Bottom