Xavier Post Game Thread | Page 5 | The Boneyard

Xavier Post Game Thread

AntG168 said:
I will not see you after the St John’s win. You won’t be here. I’ll see you after our next loss, whenever that is
Expand ...
So let's flip it around: Dan Hurley is what you want as the Head Coach? His demeanor in late games situations is spot on to your expectation?

And I said Huskies would beat SJU by 30+.
 
superjohn said:
Wow, every loss and every win impacts your season. Losses hurt your team, wins help your team. This really isn't hard.
Expand ...
We were a 6 seed entering tonight. I guarantee you we’ll be a 6 seed after tonight. Some wins are better than others. And some losses hold a lot less weight than other. The trajectory of our season did not change after tonight. That’s what I call a bad loss. This isn’t hard.
 
Rakkasan said:
So let's flip it around: Dan Hurley is what you want as the Head Coach? His demeanor in late games situations is spot on to your expectation?

And I said Huskies would beat SJU by 30+.
Expand ...
Im in wait and see mode. He’s done incredibly more good than anything negative though
 
superjohn said:
Hurley is 6-25 in games decided by 4 points or less in his first 4 seasons at UConn.

He said, for the most part we beat up on the bottom half of the Big East and generally lose frustrating close games to the good teams in the conference. Marquette is the one exception.

Everything he said is true.
Expand ...
Is it really 6-25? I know it's bad but that seems unbelievably bad
 
AntG168 said:
I will not see you after the St John’s win. You won’t be here. I’ll see you after our next loss, whenever that is
Expand ...

Yeah because St John's sucks lol of course we should beat St. John's. We beat up on the bottom half of the conference. Marquette is the only good Big East team that we've beaten. We got totally embarrassed by Nova, outclassed by Providence in front of a sold out crowd at home, blew it against Seton Hall, and played a totally lifeless game against Creighton. Sure, we beat Auburn, but we shot at an insane percentage and played them before Jabari Smith had any time to develop. It's unequivocally true that we've generally faltered against good competition. I actually find it wild that anyone is arguing against this. It's clear as day to anyone whose head isn't buried in hurleys arse. And I like Hurley. We're just not there yet.
 
.-.
WeAreUCONN said:
We aren’t strong enough or skilled enough to prevent physical teams from having their way with us. We are soft.
Expand ...
We are strong enough. The problem is when teams can match up with strength wise we aren't skilled enough to beat them consistently. We need to get more scorers on this team. It always seems a chore to score for us.
 
AntG168 said:
Im in wait and see mode. He’s done incredibly more good than anything negative though
Expand ...
Cope out. I mean, which of us isn't in wait and see? "Incredibly" more good? Really?
How did he do vs AAC talent. Not great.
Last year, in admittedly a bizarre year, he generally won with his 1st rd NBA draft pick and not so much without him. Pretty vanilla given the opportunity and the talent in the BET and the NCAAs.
This year? I think the players are great. Is Dan Hurley pushing them to maximized potential? Mediocre potential?

So again, "incredibly" more good? Please. We should be so much better than what we are showing.
 
djct1999 said:
Villanova would have won this game by 20. Marquette, providence, seton hall.
Hell, even creighton would have won. Did you not see Xavier had nothing? We were lifeless. That is not the sign of a good team.
Expand ...
Do you mean the same Villanova that lost to Creighton by 20, and to Marquette twice?
 
wheelerdog said:
I would be interested in what that number is in league play.
Expand ...
Opponents are shooting 43% on 2 point FGs in conference play, 2nd best in the conference and we're #1 in the conference in blocks (not sure about block %).
 
superjohn said:
Hurley is 6-25 in games decided by 4 points or less in his first 4 seasons at UConn.

He said, for the most part we beat up on the bottom half of the Big East and generally lose frustrating close games to the good teams in the conference. Marquette is the one exception.

Everything he said is true.
Expand ...
1) Where are you seeing 6-25? That strains credulity.

2) If we have a small lead and push it to 8-10 to win at the end (e.g. vs. Marquette) that seems like a weird development to hold against Hurley.
 
.-.
superjohn said:
Hurley is 6-25 in games decided by 4 points or less in his first 4 seasons at UConn.

He said, for the most part we beat up on the bottom half of the Big East and generally lose frustrating close games to the good teams in the conference. Marquette is the one exception.

Everything he said is true.
Expand ...

Tenspro2002 said:
1) Where are you seeing 6-25? That strains credulity.

2) If we have a small lead and push it to 8-10 to win at the end (e.g. vs. Marquette) that seems like a weird development to hold against Hurley.
Expand ...
I checked, it's 6-19 so it's not much better. Looks like he got the 25 total with 25 losses
 
navery12 said:
I checked, it's 6-19 so it's not much better. Looks like he got the 25 total with 25 losses
Expand ...
But I think the question is how many games was it close and down the stretch we put it out of reach? I’d like to know his record in games where the game is within 4 with 2 minutes to play. We still need to win more close games moving forward
 
3rdbass said:
We are strong enough. The problem is when teams can match up with strength wise we aren't skilled enough to beat them consistently. We need to get more scorers on this team. It always seems a chore to score for us.
Expand ...
Hawkins should have played more in the second half. I agree with you that we are somewhat strong enough to matchup with teams but the difference in skill level is the difference. Too many players on this team are not efficient offensively.
 
navery12 said:
I checked, it's 6-19 so it's not much better. Looks like he got the 25 total with 25 losses
Expand ...
OK, but not counted in those "4 points or less" games are 3 overtime wins this year by 6, 7, and 8 points, nor several other 6-10 point wins where, I guess if we played worse down the stretch could have been 4-point wins, but would be incredibly misleading.

If there's a criticism to be had here, it's that we can rarely get over the hump and complete comebacks late in games.

We're actually pretty good at closing out games with small to medium leads.
 
3rdbass said:
We are strong enough. The problem is when teams can match up with strength wise we aren't skilled enough to beat them consistently. We need to get more scorers on this team. It always seems a chore to score for us.
Expand ...
Agreed. When someone steps up on offense like Polley, Jackson, or Hawkins we're a lot more dangerous, but none of those guys are even close to a consistent threat. Tyrese is the X factor (and to a lesser degree, so is Whaley), in my opinion, and tonight he didn't provide enough offensive punch. I think right now, he needs to generate points for us to win, and contributions from any of the aforementioned would be helpful too. I am interested to see Hawkins develop, and what someone else like a Karaban, Diggins, etc might provide next season. It looks like we're a little too easy for teams to figure out at this point.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
OK, but not counted in those "4 points or less" games are 3 overtime wins this year by 6, 7, and 8 points, nor several other 6-10 point wins where, I guess if we played worse down the stretch could have been 4-point wins, but would be incredibly misleading.

If there's a criticism to be had here, it's that we can rarely get over the hump and complete comebacks late in games.

We're actually pretty good at closing out games with small to medium leads.
Expand ...
Yeah I've wanted to find a way to quantify it for a while and haven't found a good way yet. But I agree it seems like there are a ton of close games we push up into a wider margin of victory. It is 9-19 if we extend to include those OT games which is fair.
 
.-.
WNConn said:
Yeah because St John's sucks lol of course we should beat St. John's. We beat up on the bottom half of the conference. Marquette is the only good Big East team that we've beaten. We got totally embarrassed by Nova, outclassed by Providence in front of a sold out crowd at home, blew it against Seton Hall, and played a totally lifeless game against Creighton. Sure, we beat Auburn, but we shot at an insane percentage and played them before Jabari Smith had any time to develop. It's unequivocally true that we've generally faltered against good competition. I actually find it wild that anyone is arguing against this. It's clear as day to anyone whose head isn't buried in hurleys arse. And I like Hurley. We're just not there yet.
Expand ...
"Outclassed by Providence"? We lost by 4 points. Sure it stung, particularly because they beat us at home, but to say we got "outclassed" is a little ridiculous.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
OK, but not counted in those "4 points or less" games are 3 overtime wins this year by 6, 7, and 8 points, nor several other 6-10 point wins where, I guess if we played worse down the stretch could have been 4-point wins, but would be incredibly misleading.

If there's a criticism to be had here, it's that we can rarely get over the hump and complete comebacks late in games.

We're actually pretty good at closing out games with small to medium leads.
Expand ...
Hurley is 19-33 in games decided by 8 points or less.
 
WNConn said:
Yeah because St John's sucks lol of course we should beat St. John's. We beat up on the bottom half of the conference. Marquette is the only good Big East team that we've beaten. We got totally embarrassed by Nova, outclassed by Providence in front of a sold out crowd at home, blew it against Seton Hall, and played a totally lifeless game against Creighton. Sure, we beat Auburn, but we shot at an insane percentage and played them before Jabari Smith had any time to develop. It's unequivocally true that we've generally faltered against good competition. I actually find it wild that anyone is arguing against this. It's clear as day to anyone whose head isn't buried in hurleys arse. And I like Hurley. We're just not there yet.
Expand ...
SJ played us tight at our home. No way a blowout.
 
We tend to over-analyze individual games. The truth is that UConn has lost their last 3 of 4 games, and the next 4 games look to be 2-2, possibly 1-3. It's disheartening to see such a veteran team not pull out more close games, and their inconsistent play from game to game lead me to believe that the most to hope for in the tournament is 1 win and then an exit
 
.-.
Okafour rings said:
We tend to over-analyze individual games. The truth is that UConn has lost their last 3 of 4 games, and the next 4 games look to be 2-2, possibly 1-3. It's disheartening to see such a veteran team not pull out more close games, and their inconsistent play from game to game lead me to believe that the most to hope for in the tournament is 1 win and then an exit
Expand ...

I really thought that this is the year that Uconn is back to dominating the big east. Now it’s looking like a middle of the pack finish and another “Just happy to be in the tourney” banner
 
superjohn said:
Hurley is 19-33 in games decided by 8 points or less.
Expand ...
He went 3-10 his first year here on a team that had Tarin Smith averaging 28 minutes a game

Bumped up to 7-9 and the following year on a team where Brendan Adams was getting 20+ min/game

3-6 last season, of which 3 of the 6 losses were without their best player

5-6 this season, of which 3 of those 6 losses were not a full strength

I have a bone to pick tonight with sitting Cole and Sanogo as long as Hurley did, but guys also gotta make shots, be smarter with fouling...the close game narrative doesn't really make sense to me. Are really going to penalize the guy for losing close games when Tarin Smith and Brendan Adams were getting heavy run? Or when he was missing his best player? Or when he is missing 2 of his 3 best players?

I'm not saying the guy is the next Calhoun or anything...at least not yet but that stat while may be true it lacks context.
 
Tenspro2002 said:
If we're going to be a consistent top 15-type team, 4 seeds and better, buzz around the program, we need to be winning this sort of game like 60-70% of the time. Instead it's more like 30-40%, which leaves us in that sort of ho-hum 20-30 range, 6-7 seed
Expand ...
4 years ago is was none percent of the time.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,510
Messages
4,579,557
Members
10,489
Latest member
Djw06001


Top Bottom