Simply incapable of winning tight games

[Palatine]

You can point at some factor in today's game if you want. But the truth is that in close games, they find a way to lose. The defense collapses, or they commit TOs or the other team catches fire or they miss bunnies. But the result is always the same. They just don't get it done.

When pressure is on at the end of games they break as easy as an eggshell.

 

[wheelerdog]

Our guard play is just not good enough. I know that the defense today was awful, but we also had a bunch of empty trips in the last four minutes.

Hopefully Gilbert and a year older Adams is the answer.

 

[Chin Diesel]

So KO told them to just jog back on D today? I hate that game plan!

No, but there is a culture on this team that says if you do jog back on D, the reprecussions aren't severe enough compared to losing and getting physically manhandled.

This team loses to well coached teams because they are coached at a level that allows that to happen.

This team doesn't hate losing.

 

[Ts5034]

Saw a stat how this was our first home loss of the season by more than 2 points...

 

[Palatine]

Saw a stat how this was our first home loss of the season by more than 2 points...

Falling apart at the end.....

 

[Hankster]

It's not only close game. How many times this team has let the opponents come back. Actually the way they played in the first half was great. Until the last 5-8 minutes. Other team gets hot. Half time it is close while giving back an 9 point lead. We have seen it so many times. What makes this game any different. Even when this team wins it still shows the worst perimeter defense there is. So, who do you blame? Each player brings down the house, gets me off the chair pumping my fist only until the same player makes two bonehead mistakes that is costly. We seen it so many times.

 

[Palatine]

It looked so easy for Houston.

 

[imno1]

No, but there is a culture on this team that says if you do jog back on D, the reprecussions aren't severe enough compared to losing and getting physically manhandled.

This team loses to well coached teams because they are coached at a level that allows that to happen.

This team doesn't hate losing.

Luckily for us we play some scrubs like Shaka and Larry Brown. But what is true is we don't have that clutch guy who can create his own shot when the game is on the line. Someone like DeCorsey for Temple.

 

[3rdbass]

Yes, that has been our achilles heel this year. Too bad RB is not around.

 

[ConnHuskBask]

I don't see the fire or passion exhibited by a lot of guys on this team, coaches included. I'm not saying they don't play hard, I'm not saying they don't care, but I am saying we just don't seem to want it as much as other teams. There is a lot of luck in sports, but we simply can't win a close game the past two seasons.

 

[gtcam]

I don't see the fire or passion exhibited by a lot of guys on this team, coaches included. I'm not saying they don't play hard, I'm not saying they don't care, but I am saying we just don't seem to want it as much as other teams. There is a lot of luck in sports, but we simply can't win a close game the past two seasons.

Yeah, I call it snake bit
BUT that comes when you have an on court leaderless team - fragments and no cohesiveness - these guys haven't played together long enough (and don't bring up the Kentucky argument - none of these guys are really top 20 guys).

 

[tzznandrew]

No, but there is a culture on this team that says if you do jog back on D, the reprecussions aren't severe enough compared to losing and getting physically manhandled.

This team loses to well coached teams because they are coached at a level that allows that to happen.

This team doesn't hate losing.

We said this same thing about numerous JC teams. We just remember the great ones.

Today was an embarrassment, and JC would have been screaming bloody murder. Just because we don't see KO do that doesn't mean there aren't consequences.

 

[Tenspro2002]

What we know so far is that, absent a transcendent talent like Shabazz Napier, this staff does not know how to coach late-game situations. Aren't we something like 3-10 the last 2 years in games that were within a possession in the last minute?

 

[7774]

What we know so far is that, absent a transcendent talent like Shabazz Napier, this staff does not know how to coach late-game situations. Aren't we something like 3-10 the last 2 years in games that were within a possession in the last minute?

Fine, but who coached Shabazz into the transcendent talent he became, because no one on this board was calling sophomore year Shabazz Napier a transcendent talent.

 

[Palatine]

We said this same thing about numerous JC teams. We just remember the great ones.

Today was an embarrassment, and JC would have been screaming bloody murder. Just because we don't see KO do that doesn't mean there aren't consequences.

JC teams lost plenty of close games. But they didn't collapse, they were able to get shots off instead of getting shot clock violations, they showed fire down the stretch that was a reflection of the fire JC showed on the bench. When the game was close, they stepped up. Sometimes they lost. But they we up to the challenge.

With this team if the game is within a couple of points with five minutes left. Well..... you know.

 

[7774]

JC teams lost plenty of close games. But they didn't collapse, they were able to get shots off instead of getting shot clock violations, they showed fire down the stretch that was a reflection of the fire JC showed on the bench. When the game was close, they stepped up. Sometimes they lost. But they we up to the challenge.

With this team if the game is within a couple of points with five minutes left. Well..... you know.

I call shenanigans on JC teams never collapsing, it happened plenty of times. Hell, it happened multiple times just against Providence in the last decade, including a time where they had a fast break dunk contest for a entire second half.

 

[Palatine]

I call shenanigans on JC teams never collapsing, it happened plenty of times. Hell, it happened multiple times just against Providence in the last decade, including a time where they had a fast break dunk contest for a entire second half.

They lost. But they didn't play like they were lost. That's the difference. lost.

 

[7774]

They lost. But they didn't play like they were lost. That's the difference. lost.

Dude, I watched Calhoun teams give up, look like they didn't give a , or look lost on the court many times. Your stuff is total revisionist history.

 

[tzznandrew]

Dude, I watched Calhoun teams give up, look like they didn't give a , or look lost on the court many times. Your stuff is total revisionist history.

There's the 2007 team vs. Indiana that I remember turning off in disgust as teams kept dunking on us.

I seem to remember the 2008 team getting embarrassed as teams just dunked on us too against PC...and that was a solid team.

That 2010 team gave up multiple lay-up lines and almost lost to Northeastern in the NIT.

It's the selective memory of the posters' here that allow us to think every JC year was at the very least disciplined and hard working. People were so angry at the perceived laziness of the 2007 team that the only player they liked was Dyson. Imagine that, the board loving Dyson!

 

[Palatine]

Dude, I watched Calhoun teams give up, look like they didn't give a , or look lost on the court many times. Your stuff is total revisionist history.

Dude. You're out of it. You're using Calhoun's entire career to compare to this year's team. This year's team has collapsed more times in the final minutes then years of JC's teams.

JCs team followed a pattern. They played tight in the first part of the year. That's when most of the WT F loses occurred. They get wobbly in the middle of the season. But by the end of the year they play tenacious and with purpose. I watched this play out year after year. Some exceptions, sure. But the pattern is the pattern. We are now witnessing the second straight year where he team is lost at the end of games. The pattern is much different.

I never said there we no bad losses under Calhoun. I actually said the opposite. JC also had a problem with PC his entire career. They seemed to have JCs number. I still have nightmares about Linnahan. Sobeit. Not the point. But by the end of the year, the players knew what they were suppose to do. The season had a structure. They didn't lose because they didn't know what to do. They just couldn't do it. And when they didn't get it done, the coach went ballistic. He never accepted it.

Compare that to multiple shot clock violations we witness down the stretch this year. The TOs. The defensive lapses. This is much difference than we have seen under JC. It seems systemic rather than exceptional.

 

[RayIsTheGOAT]

It is clear there is a lack of leadership. Most can agree that the most painful thing to watch with this team is their complete ineptitude down the stretch. Everyone, especially led by Purvis, Hamilton completely shrivel when there is a close game with 3 minutes left.
This roller coaster season falls on the shoulders of the players AND Ollie.
Not sure if any of you watched Brad Stevens' Butler days, or especially Celtics games now. Stevens is in complete command of his team, and their execution is impeccable at times down the stretch of the game. Even if Brad's team is down 5 with 10 seconds left, there is absolutely no quit in his team. That's what separates a united team of talent from a disconnected team of talent.
It's ok if you lose a lead once or twice a season and shrivel at the end, but not when it happens 8-9 times, continuously throughout the season. We have not been outmatched in ANY of our 9 losses so far. All were winnable games. We just completely lose our marbles from Ollie, on down to the players.

 

[mauconnfan]

Dude, I watched Calhoun teams give up, look like they didn't give a , or look lost on the court many times. Your stuff is total revisionist history.

Yeah a couple times, happens. But not too many that's for sure, JC's guys played with fire or sat. Doesn't happen as much now.

I'm not sure of the argument here, this team doesn't give up how could they? They are in every game they've lost for the most part, they're just not that brilliant on the court.

 

[7774]

Dude. You're out of it. You're using Calhoun's entire career to compare to this year's team. This year's team has collapsed more times in the final minutes then years of JC's teams.

JCs team followed a pattern. They played tight in the first part of the year. That's when most of the WT F loses occurred. They get wobbly in the middle of the season. But by the end of the year they play tenacious and with purpose. I watched this play out year after year. Some exceptions, sure. But the pattern is the pattern. We are now witnessing the second straight year where he team is lost at the end of games. The pattern is much different.

I never said there we no bad losses under Calhoun. I actually said the opposite. JC also had a problem with PC his entire career. They seemed to have JCs number. I still have nightmares about Linnahan. Sobeit. Not the point. But by the end of the year, the players knew what they were suppose to do. The season had a structure. They didn't lose because they didn't know what to do. They just couldn't do it. And when they didn't get it done, the coach went ballistic. He never accepted it.

Compare that to multiple shot clock violations we witness down the stretch this year. The TOs. The defensive lapses. This is much difference than we have seen under JC. It seems systemic rather than exceptional.

Seems like more revisionist history to me, but I really don't care, and we can just agree to disagree. I'm simply responding to the other post you made.

JC teams lost plenty of close games. But they didn't collapse

Objectively false many times.

they were able to get shots off instead of getting shot clock violations

Again, just not a true statement based upon what actually happened in the games. This board has been complaining about pounding the ball for 30 seconds and then throwing up a prayer or getting a shot clock violation for years and years and years at this point.

they showed fire down the stretch that was a reflection of the fire JC showed on the bench.

Sure, most teams did, and there were also many teams that didn't.

When the game was close, they stepped up. Sometimes they lost. But they we up to the challenge

Again, most teams did, and there were also teams that didn't.

 

[gtcam]

They lost. But they didn't play like they were lost. That's the difference. lost.

You have a short memory my friend - very short
Also, when JC was HC and KO was on the staff do you think KO had anything to do with the development of some of the players???

 

[uconngb]

We said this same thing about numerous JC teams. We just remember the great ones.

Today was an embarrassment, and JC would have been screaming bloody murder. Just because we don't see KO do that doesn't mean there aren't consequences.

Yesterday the only consequence was that KO called his players out in the post-game news conference, and didn't take ANY of the blame himself. He actually said he and the coaching staff had the team prepared yesterday. Really? That is not only bad coaching, it's terrible leadership. You can call out your players, but you better take some of the responsibility yourself when your team comes out sleepwalking in game #29, at home, with its postseason chances hanging in the balance.