Chief's less than brief Brimah Vivisection

[Chief00]

This is sad.

From a coach's perspective - quite frankly- when breaking down the game - you need to take the emotion out of it - be it "sad" or "thrilled" about something. You need to be analyletical.

 

[Chief00]

Who's asking you questions?

You are not serious? Read the thread! LOL

 

[Doctor Hoop]

Brimah had no lower body strength, weak hands, little BBIQ but he did rebound better senior year. He ended up on the floor nearly every game. The one think I want to emphasize is that he was a great teammate and he tried very hard by all appearances, and we had no one much better to put in for him though I wish Enoch had gotten more minutes. I'm watching the tournament and seeing mid major talent in the 5 position that would easily surpass what we had and I ask myself how did these programs get these players and how does a 4 time national champion not get them? The recruiting staff not identifying, not trying, making the judgement that what we had was good enough? I'm perplexed.

There's only a certain number of bigs in the top 200 that P6/AAC/top schools can target. The key for these mid majors is to identify kids who have the potential to be as good as those, and develop them. But if we were to do that it wouldn't make people who value those top 100 or 200 rankings happy, and you are rolling the dice a bit. However, when it works you end up with someone like a Christian Vital.

 

[dennismenace]

Brimah was a project - pure and simple
He whetted many an appetite with some good things during his freshman year when he had a very good team surrounding him.
When it came to him being one of the "contributors", his short comings really appeared
Granted it didn't help that he had some injuries.
However, not claiming to be an insider, I don't think the kid had enough basketball IQ to process most of the things kids his age should already know and I feel he could not apply many of the skill sets he was being taught. I am in no way saying AB is not smart but he just isn't basketball smart. Maybe in practice he showed he could do some of it but either froze or just couldn't translate it in real game situations.
On a light side - I sure hope the guy was not a soccer goalie - but maybe he was thus its now basketball
As some have said, on to the next guy, but, I personally feel that AB was the most frustrating and the one UConn player who could have made a huge difference and fizzled more as time went on.
I hope he succeeds in whatever he pursues in life - he was always a great team rep.

I suspect he will do fine. Lots of enthusiasm. Gung ho. Just needs to find the right path(s). Good Luck AB!

 

[champs99and04]

I have a somewhat different take on this.

The staff deserves credit for identifying him as someone who, as a freshman, would outperform their recruiting ranking. I'd say many of us were pleasantly surprised by what a sub-200 recruit could give us right off the bat.

The staff did not, by any means, develop him. He was, at best, incrementally better in years 2-4 than he was in year 1.

If the staff wants to take credit for anything, it's identifying underrated talent, not developing that talent.

I think some of the subtle leaps that he made get distorted for a couple reasons:

1. While the coaching staff may have done a good job with him developmentally, they did not do a good job with him on game day. Too often they designed breakneck, hard-hedging schemes that worked with guys like Phil Nolan and Giffey and Daniels but not Brimah, who needed to be more paint bound.

2. For all the things he got better at, he never really shook his one fatal flaw of picking up fouls. He went from 4.3 fouls per 40 minutes as a sophomore to 4.9 as a junior to 5.2 as a senior. You can't have that from a player you're counting on to be a cog in the machine and that he did not improve in that area is his responsibility.

3. Dude was just a frustrating player and, much like Purvis, his flaws would jump off the screen in such a way that it caused us to understate his value. When you can't do things that a fan can do - like consistently catch the ball, track the ball off the rim, and keep your pivot foot - you begin to lose the benefit of the doubt.

But the one thing fans crushed him for throughout his career was rebounding, and by his senior year, he had gone from a 10.2% rebounding rate as a sophomore to 12.6% as a junior to 13.9% as a senior. His defensive rebounding rate went from 10.8% to 14.1% to 17.7% this season. That isn't a small jump, and during conference play he averaged 8 points, 7 rebounds, and 3 blocks per game. That's more than enough from a UConn center most years (especially given all of his advanced numbers - like box +/-, offensive/defensive rating, PER - ranked among the best on the team all three years he started), but this season, he was flanked by a crew that represented an enormous devolution from where he started as a freshman, surrounded by talented, smart players.

A lot of this is circumstantial, and when we claim he hasn't improved, it does not account for all of the variables that influenced our perception. Some of the s hit we saw this year - throwing bounce passes at his feet, force-feeding him in the post, using him as a primary screener - doesn't happen on better, more complete teams.

Facey, for instance, is billed as a feather in the staff's cap, but I would actually argue he improved less than Brimah. It's just that, he always had better players in front of him.

 

[CTBasketball]

I think some of the subtle leaps that he made get distorted for a couple reasons:

1. While the coaching staff may have done a good job with him developmentally, they did not do a good job with him on game day. Too often they designed breakneck, hard-hedging schemes that worked with guys like Phil Nolan and Giffey and Daniels but not Brimah, who needed to be more paint bound.

2. For all the things he got better at, he never really shook his one fatal flaw of picking up fouls. He went from 4.3 fouls per 40 minutes as a sophomore to 4.9 as a junior to 5.2 as a senior. You can't have that from a player you're counting on to be a cog in the machine and that he did not improve in that area is his responsibility.

3. Dude was just a frustrating player and, much like Purvis, his flaws would jump off the screen in such a way that it caused us to understate his value. When you can't do things that a fan can do - like consistently catch the ball, track the ball off the rim, and keep your pivot foot - you begin to lose the benefit of the doubt.

But the one thing fans crushed him for throughout his career was rebounding, and by his senior year, he had gone from a 10.2% rebounding rate as a sophomore to 12.6% as a junior to 13.9% as a senior. His defensive rebounding rate went from 10.8% to 14.1% to 17.7% this season. That isn't a small jump, and during conference play he averaged 8 points, 7 rebounds, and 3 blocks per game. That's more than enough from a UConn center most years (especially given all of his advanced numbers - like box +/-, offensive/defensive rating, PER - ranked among the best on the team all three years he started), but this season, he was flanked by a crew that represented an enormous devolution from where he started as a freshman, surrounded by talented, smart players.

A lot of this is circumstantial, and when we claim he hasn't improved, it does not account for all of the variables that influenced our perception. Some of the s hit we saw this year - throwing bounce passes at his feet, force-feeding him in the post, using him as a primary screener - doesn't happen on better, more complete teams.

Facey, for instance, is billed as a feather in the staff's cap, but I would actually argue he improved less than Brimah. It's just that, he always had better players in front of him.

I agree. We saw more developmental improvements from Brimah in comparison to Facey.

The fact Facey played really well from Dec. - early Feb. should raise some questions. One being why did this happen so late? If it only lasted for 1.5-2 months can we call it progression, or is it mainly just the law of averages? The latter meaning he started every game for 2 years, he had some skills, so he was going to break out at least a few times?

 

[Tenspro2002]

I agree. We saw more developmental improvements from Brimah in comparison to Facey.

The fact Facey played really well from Dec. - early Feb. should raise some questions. One being why did this happen so late? If it only lasted for 1.5-2 months can we call it progression, or is it mainly just the law of averages? The latter meaning he started every game for 2 years, he had some skills, so he was going to break out at least a few times?

I agree that the staff should not be pointing to Facey as a marker of success. He gave us basically 0.5 good year out of 4, for a former NY POY.

But the manner in which Facey fell short of expectations was far less frustrating than the manner in which Brimah fell short of expectations.

 

[Walker11]

How Brimah has not been developed into an NBA first round pick in 4 years is a tragicomedy.

Good luck finding another person on the internet who agrees with you. In a career full of bad takes, this takes the cake.

 

[Chief00]

I think some of the subtle leaps that he made get distorted for a couple reasons:

1. While the coaching staff may have done a good job with him developmentally, they did not do a good job with him on game day. Too often they designed breakneck, hard-hedging schemes that worked with guys like Phil Nolan and Giffey and Daniels but not Brimah, who needed to be more paint bound.

2. For all the things he got better at, he never really shook his one fatal flaw of picking up fouls. He went from 4.3 fouls per 40 minutes as a sophomore to 4.9 as a junior to 5.2 as a senior. You can't have that from a player you're counting on to be a cog in the machine and that he did not improve in that area is his responsibility.

3. Dude was just a frustrating player and, much like Purvis, his flaws would jump off the screen in such a way that it caused us to understate his value. When you can't do things that a fan can do - like consistently catch the ball, track the ball off the rim, and keep your pivot foot - you begin to lose the benefit of the doubt.

But the one thing fans crushed him for throughout his career was rebounding, and by his senior year, he had gone from a 10.2% rebounding rate as a sophomore to 12.6% as a junior to 13.9% as a senior. His defensive rebounding rate went from 10.8% to 14.1% to 17.7% this season. That isn't a small jump, and during conference play he averaged 8 points, 7 rebounds, and 3 blocks per game. That's more than enough from a UConn center most years (especially given all of his advanced numbers - like box +/-, offensive/defensive rating, PER - ranked among the best on the team all three years he started), but this season, he was flanked by a crew that represented an enormous devolution from where he started as a freshman, surrounded by talented, smart players.

A lot of this is circumstantial, and when we claim he hasn't improved, it does not account for all of the variables that influenced our perception. Some of the s hit we saw this year - throwing bounce passes at his feet, force-feeding him in the post, using him as a primary screener - doesn't happen on better, more complete teams.

Facey, for instance, is billed as a feather in the staff's cap, but I would actually argue he improved less than Brimah. It's just that, he always had better players in front of him.

Approved - Insightful post.
- Interesting comment about who improved more Brimah or Facey. I am considering a post on Facey.
- I agree about force feeding the post - I think we can agree that happened and did not work. You can argue if it was poor coaching design or poor player execution. I think the only safe pass to Brimah was the olley dunk pass.

 

[jibsey]

There's only a certain number of bigs in the top 200 that P6/AAC/top schools can target. The key for these mid majors is to identify kids who have the potential to be as good as those, and develop them. But if we were to do that it wouldn't make people who value those top 100 or 200 rankings happy, and you are rolling the dice a bit. However, when it works you end up with someone like a Christian Vital.

Not just the 5 slot, there's a lot of talented 6'6" guys who can work down low. I'm just thinking KO and staff have to think out of the box, but I know it's risky. They took a risk with Brimah and Kevin.

 

[Walker11]

I agree that the staff should not be pointing to Facey as a marker of success. He gave us basically 0.5 good year out of 4, for a former NY POY.

But the manner in which Facey fell short of expectations was far less frustrating than the manner in which Brimah fell short of expectations.

I could argue that Facey was more frustrating. Brimah never even showed that he could catch a pass. He never showed a single post move. But as champs continually harps on, Brimah consistently benefited our team because of his rim protection. For all of his faults, he was by far and away our best option at the C spot. Granted, the staff should have recruited over him but that isn't his fault. Facey's development bothered me because he would occasionally flash moves like one dribble step backs dating back to his sophomore year. He had miles more to work with offensively than Brimah. The fact that we got 3 good months out of Facey's career is an indictment on someone, likely our big man coach. Brimah was a low basketball IQ guy with terrible balance and footwork who still was a plus player overall and I truly believe that he likely reached his upside. Facey on the other hand could have and probably should have been a much more consistently impactful player than he was.

 

[CTBasketball]

I agree that the staff should not be pointing to Facey as a marker of success. He gave us basically 0.5 good year out of 4, for a former NY POY.

But the manner in which Facey fell short of expectations was far less frustrating than the manner in which Brimah fell short of expectations.

I also agree. Brimah sort of had expectations he simply could never achieve once he became a mainstay in the starting lineup his sophomore year. He was perfect his freshman year, high energy big off the bench to add defense. We didn't have a choice but to start him.

Facey had time to grow, but never really did anything besides a few double doubles his senior year. I want to say confidence was an issue - when he went into his slump middle of sophomore year, all of junior year, and beginning/end of senior year he simply settled to become a cog in the offense. It was almost like he required touches to make himself noticeable. His offense rebounding wasn't enough by itself.

 

[Chief00]

Tyler Olander scored the first UConn points in both 2011 Final Four games. I blame Glen Miller.

The opponent was defending per their scouting report.

 

[Chief00]

I could argue that Facey was more frustrating. Brimah never even showed that he could catch a pass. He never showed a single post move. But as champs continually harps on, Brimah consistently benefited our team because of his rim protection. For all of his faults, he was by far and away our best option at the C spot. Granted, the staff should have recruited over him but that isn't his fault. Facey's development bothered me because he would occasionally flash moves like one dribble step backs dating back to his sophomore year. He had miles more to work with offensively than Brimah. The fact that we got 3 good months out of Facey's career is an indictment on someone, likely our big man coach. Brimah was a low basketball IQ guy with terrible balance and footwork who still was a plus player overall and I truly believe that he likely reached his upside. Facey on the other hand could have and probably should have been a much more consistently impactful player than he was.

I agree Facey underachieved.

 

[Chief00]

Not just the 5 slot, there's a lot of talented 6'6" guys who can work down low. I'm just thinking KO and staff have to think out of the box, but I know it's risky. They took a risk with Brimah and Kevin.

Shonn Miller is an example - maybe add an inch.

 

[Chief00]

It defies logic that Glenn Miller spent 4 years of individual instruction teaching spin moves that were never executed in a game.

It is.

 

[Onions]

I think some of the subtle leaps that he made get distorted for a couple reasons:

1. While the coaching staff may have done a good job with him developmentally, they did not do a good job with him on game day. Too often they designed breakneck, hard-hedging schemes that worked with guys like Phil Nolan and Giffey and Daniels but not Brimah, who needed to be more paint bound.

2. For all the things he got better at, he never really shook his one fatal flaw of picking up fouls. He went from 4.3 fouls per 40 minutes as a sophomore to 4.9 as a junior to 5.2 as a senior. You can't have that from a player you're counting on to be a cog in the machine and that he did not improve in that area is his responsibility.

3. Dude was just a frustrating player and, much like Purvis, his flaws would jump off the screen in such a way that it caused us to understate his value. When you can't do things that a fan can do - like consistently catch the ball, track the ball off the rim, and keep your pivot foot - you begin to lose the benefit of the doubt.

But the one thing fans crushed him for throughout his career was rebounding, and by his senior year, he had gone from a 10.2% rebounding rate as a sophomore to 12.6% as a junior to 13.9% as a senior. His defensive rebounding rate went from 10.8% to 14.1% to 17.7% this season. That isn't a small jump, and during conference play he averaged 8 points, 7 rebounds, and 3 blocks per game. That's more than enough from a UConn center most years (especially given all of his advanced numbers - like box +/-, offensive/defensive rating, PER - ranked among the best on the team all three years he started), but this season, he was flanked by a crew that represented an enormous devolution from where he started as a freshman, surrounded by talented, smart players.

A lot of this is circumstantial, and when we claim he hasn't improved, it does not account for all of the variables that influenced our perception. Some of the s hit we saw this year - throwing bounce passes at his feet, force-feeding him in the post, using him as a primary screener - doesn't happen on better, more complete teams.

Facey, for instance, is billed as a feather in the staff's cap, but I would actually argue he improved less than Brimah. It's just that, he always had better players in front of him.

This was an excellent post but don't expect anyone to let facts get in the way of their narrative.

AB is an extremely flawed player, and his flaws are obvious, glaring and at times embarrassing. Watching him flopping around the floor after attempting a hook shot under pressure it is hard to believe that he contributed to the offense, but the fact is he did. The team scored at a higher rate when he was on the floor, and kept opponents scoring at a lower rate. These margins were not small. This may be more of an indictment of Enoch and Facey then a compliment to AB but it is a simple fact none the less. His fouling made his contributions wildly erratic, and I agree that this, more than his lack of offensive growth, was his biggest failure over his 4 years. Despite all his obvious failures Ab was a positive force for Uconn, and there isn't a team in our conference who wouldn't have gladly scarfed him up if he were available. He did not ever achieve what I had envisioned for him over the full course of any game, although he could totally dominate for minutes at a time. He was a frustrating player to be sure, but I will miss him next year.