KO gets an "A"

[Clockshop]

http://youtu.be/eynS3Y0vZrw

 

[Tenspro2002]

However, there's one other thing that makes Kevin the perfect choice -- this job is not a stepping stone for him. I truly believe that he's here long term. This is really important, and it's something I haven't seen mentioned.\

You're acting like we're some scrub program, like an Iowa State or Clemson or Oregon. That might be what the media wants the rest of the country to believe, but that's not the kind of attitude we need to be lending any credence to.

We're UConn, G*d d*mmit, we're a top 10 program. The only openings where a coach might leave us are UNC, Duke, and maybe Kansas.

 

[jleves]

You're acting like we're some scrub program, like an Iowa State or Clemson or Oregon. That might be what the media wants the rest of the country to believe, but that's not the kind of attitude we need to be lending any credence to.

We're UConn, G*d d*mmit, we're a top 10 program. The only openings where a coach might leave us are UNC, Duke, and maybe Kansas.

Did you perhaps forget about a league called the NBA?

 

[Huskies4ever]

You're acting like we're some scrub program, like an Iowa State or Clemson or Oregon. That might be what the media wants the rest of the country to believe, but that's not the kind of attitude we need to be lending any credence to.

We're UConn, G*d d*mmit, we're a top 10 program. The only openings where a coach might leave us are UNC, Duke, and maybe Kansas.

I think what dogpause was implying, is that some people think KO might opt out for one of those programs or the NBA, when the time's right. And he's correct, not gonna happen. KO isn't here because we are a top 10 program. KO is a Husky, and this is his dream job.

 

[Pudge]

Now that KO has his new deal, I'm hoping the poormouthing of the talent level on this team can come to an end. UConn starts 4 Top 50 players. This doing more with less notion is just not so.

I give Ollie a B to date. My main issue is the play of Bazz and Boat. They were awful yesterday. And not just because they missed some shots. Too many times this season whichever guy took the ball down the court, shot it. This happens way too much. I'm sick of those guys trying to beat the double team instead of finding the open man. You can get away it with for a time, but in the grind of a season that selfishness takes a toll on team chemistry. When those two did give up the rock, the rest of the team played some nice halfcourt ball. They did it despite the PG's, not because of them. That's ass backwards.

On the good side, that shows that Ollie can teach offense. On the bad side, KO has to do a better job getting through to his star players.

Friend ...

New Hampshire had a better post player. Think about where we start every game. We have three guys 6'9 and above that have a tough time stopping that kid Pilcher. And the talent level is going to better in the next few months. Ollie does not have anywhere what we have had the last 15 years. It's crucial that we re-stock.

 

[dogpause]

You're acting like we're some scrub program, like an Iowa State or Clemson or Oregon. That might be what the media wants the rest of the country to believe, but that's not the kind of attitude we need to be lending any credence to.

We're UConn, G*d d*mmit, we're a top 10 program. The only openings where a coach might leave us are UNC, Duke, and maybe Kansas.

Maybe you haven't heard, but we're no longer in a top conference. Only a fool would think that doesn't matter. Some other coach might not have the same loyalty as Kevin.

 

[Waquoit]

Friend ...

New Hampshire had a better post player. Think about where we start every game. We have three guys 6'9 and above that have a tough time stopping that kid Pilcher. And the talent level is going to better in the next few months. Ollie does not have anywhere what we have had the last 15 years. It's crucial that we re-stock.

It isn't about comparing this team today with other UConn teams, it's about comparing this team to other teams playing now. I think everyone overrates the talent level of other teams out there. Every team has weaknesses, not just UConn. We just beat a PAC-10 team with our two best guys having bad games. I want those two leaders to play better team ball. Geez, all I did was give Ollie a B.

 

[mauconnfan]

It isn't about comparing this team today with other UConn teams, it's about comparing this team to other teams playing now. I think everyone overrates the talent level of other teams out there. Every team has weaknesses, not just UConn. We just beat a PAC-10 team with our two best guys having bad games. I want those two leaders to play better team ball. Geez, all I did was give Ollie a B.

And their best guy shot the ball terrible because our guards, who were awful on one end really created trouble for him getting comfortable..........I think it's a good thing they beat this team and outrebounded them despite a subpar performance........"B" is fair but others just think this team, whether playing Washington, Michigan ST, Vermont UNH or anyone is really overachieving at 10-2.........

 

[8893]

Geez, all I did was give Ollie a B.

No, you failed to recognize that he is dealing with a front court comprised entirely of bench players, i.e., guys who were never expected to be starters.

No problem with the grade, but overlooking the lack of talent in the front court is not fair or reasonable imo.

 

[CL82]

I think KO has done a good job so far. He has shown that he is able to get buy in from young men and shown that he has solid game management skills, the big question mark for me at the start of the season.

That said, the jury is still is out whether he can recruit, as a head coach, and put together a balanced successful team. He now has the tools to be able to compete for recruits, so we'll see how that goes. The second part of the season, against more taleneted opponents and better coaches may be a long hard slog. It will be interesting how he'll hold up.

 

[mauconnfan]

I think KO has done a good job so far. He has shown that he is able to get buy in from young men and shown that he has solid game management skills, the big question mark for me at the start of the season.

That said, the jury is still is out whether he can recruit, as a head coach, and put together a balanced successful team. He now has the tools to be able to compete for recruits, so we'll see how that goes. The second part of the season, against more taleneted opponents and better coaches may be a long hard slog. It will be interesting how he'll hold up.

Good call........"A" with this team in this part of the schedule........jury is still out though and there' many more chapters to come........BE play being one but my expectations are just compete, maybe 7-11 is good or 9-9 is real good who knows but how he keeps them motivated as they come closer the realization there will be no March/April with any meaning will go a long way!! But in order to really have a real comparison he will need to get good players (on him) and they need to get stability in their future scheduling/conference to lure these kids........still lots of variables!!

 

[Waquoit]

No, you failed to recognize that he is dealing with a front court comprised entirely of bench players, i.e., guys who were never expected to be starters.

No problem with the grade, but overlooking the lack of talent in the front court is not fair or reasonable imo.

I'm not overlooking anything. I think folks like you are guilty of looking at this team in a vacuum.

 

[8893]

I'm not overlooking anything. I think folks like you are guilty of looking at this team in a vacuum.

I don't understand that charge. We're a team that unexpectedly had two front court starters transfer and one declare early for the NBA, with no one replacing them. This is not a good front court by any standard, and anyone expecting things to improve on that score in Big East play is delusional imo. No matter who the head coach is, I don't think it is fair to expect him to make a silk purse from a sow's ear.

That doesn't mean I'm not expecting growth, or a competitive team. But for a guy who preached incessantly about how this season meant nothing to you because there is no post-season, you seem to be expecting it to mean something all of a sudden.

 

[OkaForPrez]

Good call........"A" with this team in this part of the schedule........jury is still out though and there' many more chapters to come........BE play being one but my expectations are just compete, maybe 7-11 is good or 9-9 is real good who knows but how he keeps them motivated as they come closer the realization there will be no March/April with any meaning will go a long way!! But in order to really have a real comparison he will need to get good players (on him) and they need to get stability in their future scheduling/conference to lure these kids........still lots of variables!!

Here's the thing Mau, its not like we haven't seen quality opponents in the pre conference schedule. Our current SOS is #44 with a projection of #9.

MSU's current RPI is #25
NCSU's current RPI is #4
New Mexico's current RPI is #8

UConn's is 22.

The Washington team we got up big on, put it in neutral, and then distanced from again seemingly at will is 91.

We are 4-2 vs. the RPI top 100.

Here are conference opponents outside the RPI top 100:

Rutgers, Providence, Depaul, Nova

SJU, Marquette and USF are in the 90's.

We have played competitive basketball with two top 10 RPI teams and beaten a top 25 RPI team. The indications are there.

 

[Waquoit]

I don't understand that charge. We're a team that unexpectedly had two front court starters transfer and one declare early for the NBA, with no one replacing them. ...

That doesn't mean I'm not expecting growth, or a competitive team. But for a guy who preached incessantly about how this season meant nothing to you because there is no post-season, you seem to be expecting it to mean something all of a sudden.

Your 2nd sentence explains the 1st. That a bunch a guys left is irrelevent. The current discussion is all about the players that are here now. And the guys that are here now should be compared to the other teams out there. There not a ton of great teams out there. And very few with a back court as good as ours.

And I guess you got me on the 2nd. This situation sucks. But I'm a big UConn fan. I buy tickets at full price and go to the games, even in a foot of snow. And when you go to the trouble of actually attending games, you can't help but get into it. As an HOF coach once said, if you are going to keep score you might as well win the game (or root for your team to win the game).

 

[8893]

Your 2nd sentence explains the 1st. That a bunch a guys left is irrelevent. The current discussion is all about the players that are here now. And the guys that are here now should be compared to the other teams out there. There not a ton of great teams out there. And very few with a back court as good as ours.

And I guess you got me on the 2nd. This situation sucks. But I'm a big UConn fan. I buy tickets at full price and go to the games, even in a foot of snow. And when you go to the trouble of actually attending games, you can't help but get into it. As an HOF coach once said, if you are going to keep score you might as well win the game (or root for your team to win the game).

I agree with you about the back court, but to your point, you can't look at that in a vacuum either. I haven't scouted the Big East yet this season, but I'd bet that our front court does not compare favorably to many, if any, of the other teams out there. And I think that part of the problem you're seeing in our front court often results from two guys trying to do the work of five--and they are the two shortest guys on the team.

Whatever your motivation, I'm glad you found a reason to get into it. The situation does suck, and the dismal outlook for the conference made it worse. For me, watching Ollie in his first year as head coach has made the season more interesting than it would have been otherwise. And I'm hoping that the experience our front court is gaining this season will pay dividends in the future.

 

[Gurleyman]

That a bunch a guys left is irrelevent..

How do you figure that? We lost several guys at a time when we couldn't possibly replace them - even with JC in his prime. Recruiting season was over. Even Bradley left, who was an unknown, but he had two years in the program and probably would have contributed this year after the others transferred. As a result, we have a team that is imbalanced and shorthanded.

We can try to make the most of what we have, but opposing teams do not really have to worry about defending our big men at all, which makes it tougher on our guards. The help defense is arriving a step or two sooner than it would if opposing bigs had to stay at home on defense (or worry about a quick recover). And teams can just double-team our guards when a big sets a screen. As raw as he was, you had to stay attached to Drummond because a guard could just throw a lob up to the rim and he'd go get it (and AO could muscle smaller people if he could catch the ball) so that gave our guards a little more space.

With our current bigs, maybe TO will knock down a couple 15-18 footers once in a while, or Wolf will hit a little hook over a smaller help defender, but that's a chance you can take to make sure Bazz and Boat don't beat you.

 

[Waquoit]

How do you figure that? .

Because the discussion is about the players that are here not the players that left. Drummond and Bradley have as much to do with the team that I saw play on Saturday as Walt Dropo. It's all water under the bridge, crying after spilled milk, good money after bad, etc.

 

[arnie3]

Neither Boat nor 'Bazz were rated top 50 coming out of high school. Boat was in the low 60's and 'Bazz barely made the top 100. Daniels was #10 (I believe with Rivals), and Calhoun was around low 30's. I'm doing this from memory, so I could be off, but my point is that these numbers proved to be insignificant when you think how good these are guards are. Daniels is on the cusp of being very good this year. It's taken some imagination on the coaches part, and some grit by the players to overcome a thin front line. Like I said from the beginning of this year, I'm hoping for the best because this is a work in progress!

 

[Waquoit]

I agree with you about the back court, but to your point, you can't look at that in a vacuum either. I haven't scouted the Big East yet this season, but I'd bet that our front court does not compare favorably to many, if any, of the other teams out there. And I think that part of the problem you're seeing in our front court often results from two guys trying to do the work of five--and they are the two shortest guys on the team.

Maybe you are right, and it's coming from trying to do to much. And I'm not trying to say we don't have a limited frontcourt. But they aren't total stiffs, they all have some things they can do pretty well. They aren't low post scoring threats. But Wolfie is a nice passer out of the high post. He barely touched the ball there last game. TO is having a rough patch but he can make an open jump shot. Our two stars would be better off with less "trying to make a play" and more getting others involved. It will just make their own lives easier when they get the ball back. I hate seeing the same guy that brought the ball down dribble for 20 seconds before launching a crappy shot. That happens way too much with this team. The non-stars seem to know their roles pretty well, the stars are the ones that need to make the O work better.

 

[Pudge]

Because the discussion is about the players that are here not the players that left. Drummond and Bradley have as much to do with the team that I saw play on Saturday as Walt Dropo. It's all water under the bridge, crying after spilled milk, good money after bad, etc.

Coaching is Teaching.

When I arrive for my class & see 45 students in front of me in Finance 101 (how to learn to use a calculator) you take who is on that class roster ... you are right that having Drummond or Bradley or Dropo is irrelevant. What is relevant is the DEVELOPMENT of those 11 scholarship athletes. So ... I agree on the A Grade being either too high or too early. I agree that both Napier & Boatwright did not play a complete game against UW. But, my view is that Kevin Ollie has greatly improved several players that we never suspected could attain a BE caliber production. And one, DeAndre Daniels, who is showing us he may have the potential written about before his arrival.

Ollie should be in line for an A at this point based on my view ... but it's way too early.

On all the Off-the-court stuff? I am really impressed. I am also really impressed with the effort & the enthusiasm. Recruiting? Incomplete. (*with the asterisk)

 

[Waquoit]

Coaching is Teaching.

When I arrive for my class & see 45 students in front of me in Finance 101 (how to learn to use a calculator) you take who is on that class roster ... you are right that having Drummond or Bradley or Dropo is irrelevant. What is relevant is the DEVELOPMENT of those 11 scholarship athletes. So ... I agree on the A Grade being either too high or too early. I agree that both Napier & Boatwright did not play a complete game against UW. But, my view is that Kevin Ollie has greatly improved several players that we never suspected could attain a BE caliber production. And one, DeAndre Daniels, who is showing us he may have the potential written about before his arrival.

Ollie should be in line for an A at this point based on my view ... but it's way too early.

On all the Off-the-court stuff? I am really impressed. I am also really impressed with the effort & the enthusiasm. Recruiting? Incomplete. (*with the asterisk)

Prof, I agree with it all. Perhaps, you are moving me up to a B+. The players are developing, they play hard and they show flashes of nice offense. But in the world of elite college hoop, a big factor is the way a coach handles his star players. Getting the stars to perform at a consistantly high level is more important than getting a 3-minute guy up to 7 minutes. It's no easy matter. How do you handle the self-proclaimed leader who throws a lousy pass than glares at the guy for missing it? What do you do with a PG that doesn't like to pass so much? What approach do you take? I'd just like to see a bit more team ball from our Top 2 before I give an A. ( I know, I know, WGARS)

 

[Gurleyman]

Because the discussion is about the players that are here not the players that left. Drummond and Bradley have as much to do with the team that I saw play on Saturday as Walt Dropo. It's all water under the bridge, crying after spilled milk, good money after bad, etc.

Except unlike Walt Dropo, those other players were actually going to be on this current team, and were not replaced, and there is a glaring hole where they used to be. There's no waiver wire to find replacements.

 

[aceboon]

Maybe you are right, and it's coming from trying to do to much. And I'm not trying to say we don't have a limited frontcourt. But they aren't total stiffs, they all have some things they can do pretty well. They aren't low post scoring threats. But Wolfie is a nice passer out of the high post. He barely touched the ball there last game. TO is having a rough patch but he can make an open jump shot. Our two stars would be better off with less "trying to make a play" and more getting others involved. It will just make their own lives easier when they get the ball back. I hate seeing the same guy that brought the ball down dribble for 20 seconds before launching a crappy shot. That happens way too much with this team. The non-stars seem to know their roles pretty well, the stars are the ones that need to make the O work better.

And how many times have you actually seen this happen in a game? TO's shooting prowess is nothing more than practice lore, he rarely knocks that shot down, he doesn't even consistently knock down 2 free throws when he gets to the line.

 

[8893]

Prof, I agree with it all. Perhaps, you are moving me up to a B+. The players are developing, they play hard and they show flashes of nice offense. But in the world of elite college hoop, a big factor is the way a coach handles his star players. Getting the stars to perform at a consistantly high level is more important than getting a 3-minute guy up to 7 minutes. It's no easy matter. How do you handle the self-proclaimed leader who throws a lousy pass than glares at the guy for missing it? What do you do with a PG that doesn't like to pass so much? What approach do you take? I'd just like to see a bit more team ball from our Top 2 before I give an A. ( I know, I know, WGARS)

I'm not trying to raise the grade, but I have had concerns about the limitations of the Boat/Bazz tandem since last season, and I'm not sure they are completely curable even with the best of coaching. They have gotten better together for longer stretches, but still not ideal for much of the time imo. I think a lot of it is hard-wiring that may not be able to be changed.