Danny doesn't seem to win the second game of any tournament.

[gtcam]

I have to shake my head at the Ollie holdover BS. Both Polley and Whaley played far more games and years with Dan Hurley vs KO. If Dan Hurley didn’t want them or better yet if either player didn’t care for Dan Hurley they would be gone. BTW, the way CV played and how Polley and IW turned out - they weren’t terrible recruits.
Kevin is in Florida and doing something that feels good to him, UConn is heading for the dance - can we not forge ahead.

 

[8893]

No distress. You are screwed up today. It was a simple statement that 4 of our top players started out not under Hurley and two of those were under Ollie. They could’ve been under Jim Calhoun for all I care. If I’m not mistaken they were here before Hurley. That’s all I said. I didn’t say Hurley didn’t want them or the transfers . Obviously he wanted them.

If you want to get into semantics about the meaning of “ second-guessing” be my guest. Using the same thought more than once as a suggestion that somebody might be better served by doing something you think makes more sense than what they are doing is, well, repeating the same thought. I guess that isn’t “second-guessing”. Maybe third guessing. Go Huskies.

I am screwed up because—like many others here and elsewhere—I simply questioned whether we might have had a different result doing the same thing we did last time in the same situation, which, in fact, led to a different result?

Ok. Glad we got that squared away.

 

[freshler40]

I’ve said repeatedly that Martin’s ceiling is higher than I appreciated and I am impressed by his improvement, especially as a shooter. And I agree that he has established himself as the third-best offensive option.

I still don’t think he’s the answer on offense night-in, night-out; and as I noted, last night he, Sanogo and Jackson all shot essentially the same percentage. Martin was more efficient because of his threes.

Seems like Martin has to have several plays for him early in each game. Get him going! His effort is supreme if you do that. We continue to force, at times the ball, into Sanago. We are very predictable. Several late turnovers from that activity hurt in this game and many games. Whaley needs to look for his shot more and put up 6 - 9 points a game for us to win. He is a good shooter but, like Jackson, looks to pass too much. Everybody has to be somewhat of a threat for us to go into the third round of the NCAA's.

 

[navery12]

I don’t think we have the same understanding of the term “second guessing.”

I have always understood it to mean criticizing a decision in hindsight.

I’ve been on record about that decision since the start of the season, made the observation in real time at the last Nova game, and credited Kimani for realizing he needed to change the lineup. He did. We won.

Hurley didn’t. We lost. If he does the same next time and we lose is it second guessing again, even though it’s being said well in advance—again?

This is revisionist history, because Kimani didn't do anything differently than Hurley. You can go back and read all the posts after the Villanova win about how Kimani waited way too long to get Polley back in the game and how he should have done it sooner. But since Polley hit a big shot and we won the game it all gets glossed over.

 

[8893]

This is revisionist history, because Kimani didn't do anything differently than Hurley. You can go back and read all the posts after the Villanova win about how Kimani waited way too long to get Polley back in the game and how he should have done it sooner. But since Polley hit a big shot and we won the game it all gets glossed over.

I wrote many of those posts; I don’t need to review them. I was at the game and said it in real time at the three minute mark, so yes I thought he should have done it sooner. But to Kimani’s credit he realized it, made the change and drew up a play to get Polley a shot, which he hit.

What is getting glossed over?

 

[navery12]

I wrote many of those posts; I don’t need to review them. I was at the game and said it in real time at the three minute mark, so yes I thought he should have done it sooner. But to Kimani’s credit he realized it, made the change and drew and a play to get Polley a shot, which he hit.

What is getting glossed over?

The idea that Kimani did something different from Hurley to win us the Villanova game like you keep saying. Since Polley hit a shot and we won the fact that he waited too long to get Polley back in wasn't an issue and he gets praised.

In the first Nova game Polley was subbed out with 3:35 to go and wasn't subbed back in until the 31 second mark when he hit the 3. Last night he was subbed out with 4:06 to go and was subbed back in with 15 seconds to go. Yet one coach is praised for his choice and one is criticized

 

[8893]

The idea that Kimani did something different from Hurley to win us the Villanova game like you keep saying. Since Polley hit a shot and we won the fact that he waited too long to get Polley back in wasn't an issue and he gets praised.

In the first Nova game Polley was subbed out with 3:35 to go and wasn't subbed back in until the 31 second mark when he hit the 3. Last night he was subbed out with 4:06 to go and was subbed back in with 15 seconds to go. Yet one coach is praised for his choice and one is criticized

It was the second Nova game when Polley hit the shot and we won. Last night was the third.

Kimani pulled him later and put him back in sooner, AND he drew up a play to get him the shot we needed. It worked.

Hurley pulled him sooner and it was too late when he put him back in. I haven’t gone back and reviewed those 15 seconds but I don’t think Polley got a shot; wasn’t it AJax? Is that who you want shooting a three?

This has gotten beaten to a pancake of a dead horse at this point. My premise is a simple one and I’m surprised it’s so controversial here: when we are trailing a close game our starting lineup does not give us our best chance to win because it is too limited offensively. You have to get a shooter in the game, and it should be sooner than the last 15 seconds. How much sooner depends on how much you are down.

I have given tons of credit to Hurley for managing this unbalanced roster and I have repeatedly said that his gamble has paid off most of the time. I am simply talking about a specific end of game situation when I think it needs to be re-examined.

He is getting better, but he is still a very stubborn and predictable guy with his game plans, as last night showed. The announcers mocked him all night for sticking to his plan of letting Samuels and Slater beat us, because they did.

But the reality is they are a better team with a better coach, and their third, fourth, fifth and sixth players are better than ours, even if our two best cancel each other out—which on one level is what happened last night. It was like a chess game where we each neutralized each other‘s two best players. If you told me before the game that that was the plan, I would have expected a much worse result for us. So there’s that.

 

[cohenzone]

I am screwed up because—like many others here and elsewhere—I simply questioned whether we might have had a different result doing the same thing we did last time in the same situation, which, in fact, led to a different result?

Ok. Glad we got that squared away.

You win. The kid made a shot and you’re smarter than the coach. If he bricked it than it follows you would be wrong. That’s is the logic you are using to support a strategy that maybe at best works a third of the time. Isn’t the bigger problem for this team (if winning 23 games with unreliable shooters is really a problem) that we are in a lot of close games because the choice is about sitting better defenders in favor of kids who might or might not be on that day? It’s kind of why we have so many close games at the end. Looking at end game blows past the overall issues with the team. We haven’t even touched on a guy like Akok who potentially on O has the jumper to help and at least shot block some if not defend great so maybe the choice between a Whaley and Polley wouldn‘t be the main option. This team is maybe one more consistent shooter away from both drawing some attention away from Sanogo and having more breathing room the last few minutes. The margin of error for almost every BE team between winning and losing is paper thin. UConn has lots of company.

 

[navery12]

It was the second Nova game when Polley hit the shot and we won. Last night was the third.

Kimani pulled him later and put him back in sooner, AND he drew up a play to get him the shot we needed. It worked.

Hurley pulled him sooner and it was too late when he put him back in. I haven’t gone back and reviewed those 15 seconds but I don’t think Polley got a shot; wasn’t it AJax? Is that who you want shooting a three?

This has gotten beaten to a pancake of a dead horse at this point. My premise is a simple one and I’m surprised it’s so controversial here: when we are trailing a close game our starting lineup does not give us our best chance to win because it is too limited offensively. You have to get a shooter in the game, and it should be sooner than the last 15 seconds. How much sooner depends on how much you are down.

I have given tons of credit to Hurley for managing this unbalanced roster and I have repeatedly said that his gamble has paid off most of the time. I am simply talking about a specific end of game situation when I think it needs to be re-examined.

He is getting better, but he is still a very stubborn and predictable guy with his game plans, as last night showed. The announcers mocked him all night for sticking to his plan of letting Samuels and Slater beat us, because they did.

But the reality is they are a better team with a better coach, and their third, fourth, fifth and sixth players are better than ours, even if our two best cancel each other out—which on one level is what happened last night. It was like a chess game where we each neutralized each other‘s two best players. If you told me before the game that that was the plan, I would have expected a much worse result for us. So there’s that.

Those are when the numbers are from, no idea why I called it the first. I think I've just completely erased the road game from my mind

Your premise is not controversial, we need Polley and Hawkins in more to get shooting on the floor at almost all times and especially when we're behind. I'm not arguing that. What I'm arguing is you praising Kimani and criticizing Hurley for making the same decision with different results. The reality is the decision was wrong both times but only one gets criticized

If your argument is really that those additional 40 seconds are a substantial difference I have nothing else to say, that's beyond stupid. They were subbed in for a final offensive possession in both games and that's it

 

[8893]

Those are when the numbers are from, no idea why I called it the first. I think I've just completely erased the road game from my mind

Your premise is not controversial, we need Polley and Hawkins in more to get shooting on the floor at almost all times and especially when we're behind. I'm not arguing that. What I'm arguing is you praising Kimani and criticizing Hurley for making the same decision with different results. The reality is the decision was wrong both times but only one gets criticized

If your argument is really that those additional 40 seconds are a substantial difference I have nothing else to say, that's beyond stupid. They were subbed in for a final offensive possession in both games and that's it

Ok, we are making progress here!

We are in agreement that the decision was wrong both times, which was my initial point to @cohenzone in this thread.

The other point is that Kimani recognized it sooner and corrected it in time for it to make a difference. Hurley didn’t, and I’d say it’s made worse because he didn’t learn from the experience Kimani had in the second game.

The amount of time for it to make a material difference will vary by the situation, but Kimani did make the adjustment in enough time. What I was asking about last night—and I honestly don’t remember—is whether Polley was able to get shot in those final 15 seconds. If not, that kind of speaks for itself as to whether his re-entry was timely enough to make a difference. If it led to an AJax three point shot, which I seem to remember, I would say that’s probably the shot Wright wanted us to take.

 

[navery12]

Ok, we are making progress here!

We are in agreement that the decision was wrong both times, which was my initial point to @cohenzone in this thread.

The other point is that Kimani recognized it sooner and corrected it in time for it to make a difference. Hurley didn’t, and I’d say it’s made worse because he didn’t learn from the experience Kimani had in the second game.

The amount of time for it to make a material difference will vary by the situation, but Kimani did make the adjustment in enough time. What I was asking about last night—and I honestly don’t remember—is whether Polley was able to get shot in those final 15 seconds. If not, that kind of speaks for itself as to whether his re-entry was timely enough to make a difference. If it led to an AJax three point shot, which I seem to remember, I would say that’s probably the shot Wright wanted us to take.

Yeah but that's kind of my point, they were both inserted for an offensive possession and the play that was drawn up worked whether it was a Polley 3 in the win or a Jackson 3 in the loss. They hit both shots, is it only a good thing if Polley takes the shot and bad if he's just drawing the defense's attention?

Polley was going in for the next offensive possession in both games. Kimani didn't recognize anything sooner, in the win we got a rebound with 26 seconds left. In the loss yesterday Sanogo missed the rebound with 29 seconds left and we didn't get the ball back until later. That's why we lost, not because Polley didn't go in a few seconds earlier

 

[cohenzone]

Ok, we are making progress here!

We are in agreement that the decision was wrong both times, which was my initial point to @cohenzone in this thread.

The other point is that Kimani recognized it sooner and corrected it in time for it to make a difference. Hurley didn’t, and I’d say it’s made worse because he didn’t learn from the experience Kimani had in the second game.

The amount of time for it to make a material difference will vary by the situation, but Kimani did make the adjustment in enough time. What I was asking about last night—and I honestly don’t remember—is whether Polley was able to get shot in those final 15 seconds. If not, that kind of speaks for itself as to whether his re-entry was timely enough to make a difference. If it led to an AJax three point shot, which I seem to remember, I would say that’s probably the shot Wright wanted us to take.

So long as you stand by that strategy regardless of whether or not the a shot goes in, than fine. In hoops, a shot going in makes a coach look good. The real issue for this team is pretty much consistent throughout the game, lack of enough reliable shooters and defenders combined in each individual. It impacts everything and contributes to close games. The difference between our better defenders and our better shooting subs is pretty wide.

 

[8893]

So long as you stand by that strategy regardless of whether or not the a shot goes in, than fine. In hoops, a shot going in makes a coach look good. The real issue for this team is pretty much consistent throughout the game, lack of enough reliable shooters and defenders combined in each individual. It impacts everything and contributes to close games. The difference between our better defenders and our better shooting subs is pretty wide.

That is definitely true for Polley; Hawkins was getting better at both ends of the floor but unfortunately he wasn’t an option and I don’t know what to expect from him for the NCAAs.

But yeah, it‘s a glaring weakness, no doubt. That‘s why Nova will win most times if the game plan for each of us is to cancel out each other’s two best players and let the other players beat you. Their other players are better than our other players.

 

[UCTitleTown]

It's not silly; it's a valid observation and criticism and has nothing to do with hating.

It has everything to do with improving, which we all want.

The consensus is that we have Sweet 16 talent this season. Let's see if we can fulfill that potential.

We're projected to be a 6 seed. That's more like round 32 talent. 4 seed means Sweet 16 talent.

 

[HooperScooper]

We're projected to be a 6 seed. That's more like round 32 talent. 4 seed means Sweet 16 talent.

5 seed.

http://bracketmatrix.com

 

[NJHusky]

If Sanogo doesn't s___ the bed, this could easily have been a 67-63 win. That has nothing to do with game plan.

Is it possible he misses those shots because he’s gassed from sprinting from the basket to 3 pt line every defensive possession? That’s part of the game plan

 

[yungdowork]

People forget that coaches like Jay Wright spent a long time getting beat up and outcoached by Calhoun, Boeheim, Pitino, Jamie Dixon, etc. Hurley has been steadily improving, the talent level on the team has been steadily improving, and the winning percentage has been steadily improving. If that's the trajectory over the next couple years, I'm certainly not going to complain.

 

[businesslawyer]

Here's what I said. "It's true that it gets harder as you advance in the winners bracket."

Now you can answer your own question.

Pal is a master of these ”with all due respect” digs, where he thinks he’s free to take whatever digs he wants if he pretends he’s not taking shots but just “noticing” things.

We’re not where we ultimately want to be yet. No one thought we had the talent to be “there” at the beginning of the season. We’ve already done enough where we’ve improved over last year, as we’ve done every year since Hurley got here. Time to be getting revved up to see how positive a year this is as opposed to finding clever ways to point out we’re not fully back yet.

 

[willie99]

We were very competitive in a very good game against arguably a team with Final Four talent. I cannot fault coaching or game planning or effort in any way, shape or form.

We do have some flaws on the talent side of the equation. We don't shoot well. But our talent pool is improving, we're landing recruits that can and will break through that glass ceiling.

I'll close with this. I remember when UConn fans were saying Calhoun couldn't win the big one. He turned us around, but if we want to reach the Final Four, he had to go.

And no, THAT'S NO JOKE

 

[Palatine]

Pal is a master of these ”with all due respect” digs, where he thinks he’s free to take whatever digs he wants if he pretends he’s not taking shots but just “noticing” things.

We’re not where we ultimately want to be yet. No one thought we had the talent to be “there” at the beginning of the season. We’ve already done enough where we’ve improved over last year, as we’ve done every year since Hurley got here. Time to be getting revved up to see how positive a year this is as opposed to finding clever ways to point out we’re not fully back yet.

This is not " a dig" at Hurley. I consider him to be a very good and UConn is lucky to have him. I have also mentioned that this job is a learning experience for Dan Hurley. We have watched him get better over his time on the Huskies bench. When we got blow out by Iowa I was shocked. It caught my attention. That was the genesis of the original post. Time to figure it out.

BTW, I can't read your mind and would appreciate it if you stop pretending you can read mine.

 

[AdamaNation]

I didn’t check but did he win a tournament with Wagner or uri?

 

[UConnSwag11]

I wrote many of those posts; I don’t need to review them. I was at the game and said it in real time at the three minute mark, so yes I thought he should have done it sooner. But to Kimani’s credit he realized it, made the change and drew up a play to get Polley a shot, which he hit.

What is getting glossed over?

I don’t expect this first round game to be a nail-biter but if it is, it’ll be interesting which way Hurley goes. Or how many minutes Hawkins and Polley get in the second half

 

[TheChamps990411]

I was thinking about this earlier actually. It is very bizarre. 2K Sports we beat Syracuse, then got best by Iowa. 2019 AAC Tournament we beat USF, then lose to Houston. Charleston we beat Buffalo, then lost to Xavier. Last years Big East Tournament we beat DePaul, then lost to Creighton. Atlantis we beat Auburn, then lost to MSU. I know tournaments are random, but It’s very frustrating.

If he loses in the 2nd in the tourney i think we may have to call him Danny Deuces.

 

[Hankster]

True... not sure it means much. I think Danny has this team red-lined as far as effort is concerned. Never thought we'd get so much out of Martin. If he can consistently get this type of effort late in the season eventually things will go our way. In my opinion Martin is playing considerably better that Bouk did this time last year.

I agree. He is a monster this year. It seemed every game he got better and better. More aggressive. Many say he will do fine overseas. However, somehow he may break into the NBA. He went toe to toe with the best this year. Maybe I am thinking way out, but the kid looks great.

 

[8893]

Interesting observation, and now would be the time to make it, because that streak is about to end.

Good call.

 

[Get a Job]

Good call.

Not really. The streak continues.

 

[8893]

Not really. The streak continues.

No. He didn’t win the first game this time.

 

[Get a Job]

No. He didn’t win the first game this time.

The OP said Hurley seems to not win the second game of tournaments. That streak continues.

Hurley also has a trend of losing the second games of tournaments. That trend was bucked today.

 

[TJT]

I didn’t check but did he win a tournament with Wagner or uri?

He won all his first round NCAA games at URI (2x). Also won the A-10 Tournament there.