Game thread
- Thread starter ctchamps
- Start date
- Status
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,577
- Reaction Score
- 24,404
This has been gruesome to watch. It's going to be a huge adjustment this season for those of us used to watching top-level UConn basketball.
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 17,013
- Reaction Score
- 39,973
This had better not be the "new reality". You'd also have a hard time convincing me that JC kept his promise to pass on the program in a position of strength.
Still a game up from where I was projecting them at the beginning of the season. Not much more you can pull from this borefest. Defense was OK, shooting sucked. Announcers were horrible, I got more from watching on mute. Rebounding was a better effort. Middle still lacks a lot.
.-.
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
He played decent defense but he was the 180 degree opposite from last game on offense. He had the one nice deep 2 that he used Wolf as a screen otherwise Nada.
ctchamps
We are UConn!! 6 >>>1!
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 17,784
- Reaction Score
- 45,781
But at least he got his midrange pull up jumper going in this game!
- Joined
- Aug 29, 2011
- Messages
- 687
- Reaction Score
- 806
Ollie's reality changed on Wednesday when he's now recruiting for a team in a watered down conference.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,577
- Reaction Score
- 24,404
I don't think I'll be able to bring myself to muster a write up from that fest, so I'll leave you with a few observations:
1. I wrote directly after the Michigan State game that the frontcourt might be better than expected. Fast forward six games, and I've changed my stance completely. I thought before the season our big men might not be Big East caliber - but after watching them get consistently outplayed by the likes of Quinnipiac and UNH, God, they might be worse than I even thought.
2. I do think they'll play much better next week against N.C. State. It's clear that UConn has made a concerted effort against the 'cupcakes' to run their sets to there fullest extent, involve the big men in the offense, and limit workload on Shabazz and Boatright. Tuesday I think Napier and Boatright will come out gunning from the jump and they'll both take 15+ shots if they have to.
3. The two foul rule **ing sucks! I'm for Ollie replicating Calhoun in every aspect of coaching EXCEPT this one. I hate it, I hate it, I hate it. It's illogical, and you're self-inflicting pain on your own team. It angers me to no end. I believe to my death that UConn would have beaten Butler by 20 in the National Championship had Calhoun not stupidly yanked Kemba, Oriakhi, and Lamb in the first half. Today Deandre Daniels was yanked in the first half leaving us with a grand total of zero competent front court players. Doesn't it make sense to play a kid until he picks up his fifth foul? Guess how many fouls Daniels finished the game with? Two. Talk about leaving bullets in your gun.
1. I wrote directly after the Michigan State game that the frontcourt might be better than expected. Fast forward six games, and I've changed my stance completely. I thought before the season our big men might not be Big East caliber - but after watching them get consistently outplayed by the likes of Quinnipiac and UNH, God, they might be worse than I even thought.
2. I do think they'll play much better next week against N.C. State. It's clear that UConn has made a concerted effort against the 'cupcakes' to run their sets to there fullest extent, involve the big men in the offense, and limit workload on Shabazz and Boatright. Tuesday I think Napier and Boatright will come out gunning from the jump and they'll both take 15+ shots if they have to.
3. The two foul rule **ing sucks! I'm for Ollie replicating Calhoun in every aspect of coaching EXCEPT this one. I hate it, I hate it, I hate it. It's illogical, and you're self-inflicting pain on your own team. It angers me to no end. I believe to my death that UConn would have beaten Butler by 20 in the National Championship had Calhoun not stupidly yanked Kemba, Oriakhi, and Lamb in the first half. Today Deandre Daniels was yanked in the first half leaving us with a grand total of zero competent front court players. Doesn't it make sense to play a kid until he picks up his fifth foul? Guess how many fouls Daniels finished the game with? Two. Talk about leaving bullets in your gun.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 1,766
- Reaction Score
- 3,759
I'm not a huge fan of the 100% yank with 2 fouls in the first half, but it worked pretty well in the Duke game in 04. To quote Espn...or the AP..."There are mismatches, bad mismatches -- and then there's Emeka Okafor vs. Nick Horvath."
.-.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction Score
- 140
Guys... I know I harp on the offense but everyone is commenting on the individual play of the players tonight and I blame this on the offense or lack there of. This offense is horrible and I don't want to hear that we aren't good or don't have the players. Yes we don't have 4 NBA players but that is not at all an excuse for the lack of offensive cohesiveness and complete disregard for offensive team fundamentals. This year, more than ever, offensive movement and spacing and TEAM based schemes are vital to success. First off, DD had two turnovers at the top of the key head up to the hoop in a 1v1 situation??? Giffy runs off screens and shoots so well and when he did that we had success he is not good back to the basket or 30 feet from the hoop in an iso. The offense waits forever to get into their sets (if you call them that). There are no secondary sets, ie. when we run through the offensive progression the offense stops. I AM SO SICK of these god damn on the ball screens with no roll, no pop nothing other than an absolute cluster prohibiting our ball handlers (our offense) from finding space and virtually halting the entire Offense. I would rather just run iso's for boat and baz every freaking trip because I think we are better off that way that this putrid game of basketball I have to watch.
I do not care how good or not good you think we are that has nothing to do with running a team offense. Don't tell me how good the offense looked in 2004 - no shit.
We have two possessions out of Time outs in the 2nd half where we ran a legit set with team movement and purpose including OFF BALL SCREENS.. and in one we have bazz get a great look from 16 feet and wolfe cleaned up the miss.
TO KO
do not start the offense with 15 seconds left - get into a set and get a good shot. allow yourself more time to find a good shot in the offense.
no more on the ball screens unless you clear a side and run a 2 v2 or pick and roll/pop and so on - our guards do not need a screen to get the offense started they can ball handle fine.
OFF BALL SCREENS OMG - BASKETBALL 101.... BOBBY KNIGHT SAYS designate a screen-er every possession where all they do is set off ball screens and go weak side. Wolfe for example.
run some SETS for certain players getting into their comfornt zone.- baseline sets with screens (like we had for bazz last game) this spreads the floor and creates driving lanes and passing lanes
I love KO but this is bad coaching and there is no way around it. don't tell me its because our players - BS. the coaching staff needs t get their shit together and fast. i
I do not care how good or not good you think we are that has nothing to do with running a team offense. Don't tell me how good the offense looked in 2004 - no shit.
We have two possessions out of Time outs in the 2nd half where we ran a legit set with team movement and purpose including OFF BALL SCREENS.. and in one we have bazz get a great look from 16 feet and wolfe cleaned up the miss.
TO KO
do not start the offense with 15 seconds left - get into a set and get a good shot. allow yourself more time to find a good shot in the offense.
no more on the ball screens unless you clear a side and run a 2 v2 or pick and roll/pop and so on - our guards do not need a screen to get the offense started they can ball handle fine.
OFF BALL SCREENS OMG - BASKETBALL 101.... BOBBY KNIGHT SAYS designate a screen-er every possession where all they do is set off ball screens and go weak side. Wolfe for example.
run some SETS for certain players getting into their comfornt zone.- baseline sets with screens (like we had for bazz last game) this spreads the floor and creates driving lanes and passing lanes
I love KO but this is bad coaching and there is no way around it. don't tell me its because our players - BS. the coaching staff needs t get their shit together and fast. i
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 3,223
- Reaction Score
- 10,706
Yes that worked out perfect for Calhoun that night. Okafor picked up his second foul before the 15 minute mark. I believe Calhoun has said before that if the game started to get out of hand he would have put Okafor back in. UConn kept the game around 7-10 pts and Calhoun stuck to his rule. Luckily for UConn, Williams fouled out for Duke and thats when we pretty much took over
- Joined
- Sep 19, 2011
- Messages
- 1,380
- Reaction Score
- 3,106
Joe D said on the post game the attendance was 8705
Welcome to the NBE
Welcome to the NBE
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 17,013
- Reaction Score
- 39,973
I strongly agree. Benching players in "foul trouble" is inflicting the punishment on yourself that you're hoping to avoid.
If you play a guy who has "foul trouble", there's a chance they foul out in the second half. Let's say if they usually play 36 minutes, there's a chance they only play 30.
If you sit a guy who has "foul trouble", you're guaranteeing to cut into their minutes.
It's like committing suicide to avoid the chance of death.
Fair raises some good points, but that rant was far too long. This team is young, our coach is younger in coaching years, and yet a W was awarded. This is the least talented team we have had in a while, but things could be a lot worse. 10 toes in is another step closer to where we are going.
nelsonmuntz
Point Center
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 46,834
- Reaction Score
- 40,182
+1
.-.
- Joined
- Aug 26, 2011
- Messages
- 9,577
- Reaction Score
- 24,404
Let's say player X picks up his second foul ten minutes in. There are two potential scenarios from there on out if a coach opts to let him play:
1. Player X finishes the game with less than five fouls, and plays as many minutes as the coach wants him to play.
2. Player X plays Y amount of minutes after picking up his second foul before fouling out.
By taking player X out after his second foul, you're effectively eliminating option one as a possible outcome. Isn't the goal of a head coach to maximize the minutes of his best players? (Duh) You're clearly not doing that.
The counter to that is, "Well, you want your best guys on the floor during crunch time" I would respond by saying a bucket in the first half is just as important as a bucket in the final minutes. That's what logic would dictate, anyway. Obviously you'd rather have your players playing in the final four minutes than the final four mintes of the first half, though, so I'll provide a little bit of leeway on that front. As a compromise, why not continue to play a guy when he picks up two fouls in the first half, then bench him when he picks up his fourth to ensure he plays the final five minutes? I will grant you a play in the final three minutes is more important than a play in the first three minutes, but is a play in the first five minutes of the second half more important than the last five minutes of the first half? I say no.
The two foul rule simply fails to maximize the playing time potential of a player and acts as if Player X fouling out is a foregone conclusion despite years of evidence to the contrary. Sorry for rambling on, but this has always been one of my pet peeves.
1. Player X finishes the game with less than five fouls, and plays as many minutes as the coach wants him to play.
2. Player X plays Y amount of minutes after picking up his second foul before fouling out.
By taking player X out after his second foul, you're effectively eliminating option one as a possible outcome. Isn't the goal of a head coach to maximize the minutes of his best players? (Duh) You're clearly not doing that.
The counter to that is, "Well, you want your best guys on the floor during crunch time" I would respond by saying a bucket in the first half is just as important as a bucket in the final minutes. That's what logic would dictate, anyway. Obviously you'd rather have your players playing in the final four minutes than the final four mintes of the first half, though, so I'll provide a little bit of leeway on that front. As a compromise, why not continue to play a guy when he picks up two fouls in the first half, then bench him when he picks up his fourth to ensure he plays the final five minutes? I will grant you a play in the final three minutes is more important than a play in the first three minutes, but is a play in the first five minutes of the second half more important than the last five minutes of the first half? I say no.
The two foul rule simply fails to maximize the playing time potential of a player and acts as if Player X fouling out is a foregone conclusion despite years of evidence to the contrary. Sorry for rambling on, but this has always been one of my pet peeves.
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2012
- Messages
- 164
- Reaction Score
- 140
I agree Dpross and I am sorry to rant on... but youth and coaching inexperience in my mind would play a roll in a blown lead or a bad turnover with 1 minute left or mental errors and so on. I am talking about team offensive basketball 101. You cant argue that when we ran a set early in our possession (ie out of the time out) we got better shots and were in position for rebounds and were able to rotate back for defense recovery.
There is no excuse for this. I have never coached a d1 game in my life and I guarantee you after 1 week this offense would look much better. I can make it very simple because our coach is soooo inexperienced. - Wolfe and niels set off ball screens every other possession and we call it set and fly. I am telling you we have players who move well off ball screens.. OC, RJ, BAZ, and especially DD work very well away from the ball off screens. i am not asking for an innovative princeton offense. just set some f'in screens and get players moving. by setting an off ball screen you automatically have 3 offensive players(ball handler, screen-er and cutter) movement and thus allow spacing, create mismatches and passing lanes and better shots.
No more excuses.
Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 36,419
- Reaction Score
- 101,826
Not really, there have been much deader crowds. The crowd was pretty good considering the opponent. I always get a kick out of "fans" that badmouth the real fans that spend money on the program and support the team.
Waquoit
Mr. Positive
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2011
- Messages
- 36,419
- Reaction Score
- 101,826
Yeah, but it didn't work when Caron played Maryland. He sat and Maryland got back in the game. They went on to win the NC.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 1,632
- Reaction Score
- 2,529
The counter argument is not just that you want your best guys in during crunch time, at least not in my opinion.
My belief is that a guy playing with 2 fouls in the first half may often be less effective than the backup at that position (obviously depending on the player and the bench in question).
There may be less aggressiveness offensively, less willingness to fight for 50/50 rebounds or loose balls, and less willingness to provide strong help defense or strip the ball. Additionally, a 2 foul player gives the other team a big red target to go hard after, especially if it's a post player. Lastly, I think (not positive) there tend to be more possessions at the end of games (close ones), meaning you would likely benefit more from a better player on a per-minute basis during crunch time than in the first half.
My belief is that a guy playing with 2 fouls in the first half may often be less effective than the backup at that position (obviously depending on the player and the bench in question).
There may be less aggressiveness offensively, less willingness to fight for 50/50 rebounds or loose balls, and less willingness to provide strong help defense or strip the ball. Additionally, a 2 foul player gives the other team a big red target to go hard after, especially if it's a post player. Lastly, I think (not positive) there tend to be more possessions at the end of games (close ones), meaning you would likely benefit more from a better player on a per-minute basis during crunch time than in the first half.
- Joined
- Aug 27, 2011
- Messages
- 1,766
- Reaction Score
- 3,759
I'll take a 50% championship return
Obviously there are pluses and minuses to this strategy. I prefer to start the 2nd half with a player who can still play defense as well as greatly increasing the odds that with the game on the line you don't have a scrub forced into the situation but the guy you depend on to win. In big games, I'd be okay with taking the air out of the ball in the first half if your #1 is on the bench due to fouls so the game doesn't swing too far away.
.-.
- Status