Xavier post game thread. | Page 7 | The Boneyard

Xavier post game thread.

tykurez said:
I also think part of the problem is that Samson is decidedly a 4 playing as a 5. You see it when Karaban gets put at the 5 as well. I do think Samson has some tendencies he needs to nip in the bud, but we’re asking a kid who came up as a long, stretch-4 to now play primarily in the post. With Clingan back I think we see improvements from Johnson.
Expand ...
Samson’s weird as he’s a tweener currently. But moreso because he lacks things at both positions.

He doesn’t have the handle or jumpshot to be a stretch 4 and he doesn’t have the girth or strength to be a true 5.

He’s perfect as a change of pace 5 off the bench but he’s struggling to be an anchor back there for long stretches without DC. It’s also year 3 for him so I’m not sure what he has time to improve on in a year to fix these things.
 
navery12 said:
Yeah I feel like that's pretty consistently called a flagrant. Watching it back this morning I don't know if it 100% was, can definitely see how it could be considered incidental contact. But that feels like a call that's made all the time as an unintentional elbow but still a flagrant foul
Expand ...
Kansas just won against TCU the other night almost directly as a result of a flagrant 1 for head contact which was obviously incidental.
 
Team showed its good enough to win on the road in the BE without DC. Huge for seeding. Need a healthy DC to have a good shot at a repeat, but Hurley doesnt need to rush him.
 
Palatine said:
They did continue to run the offense. They ran it poorly. That's according to Hurley.

You absolutely bleed the clock in that circumstance. And if by "almost cost us the game," you mean we won. You're right.
Expand ...
10-4
 
.-.
navery12 said:
I think they were doing a really poor job of conveying some mixture of these 2 rules

View attachment 95015
View attachment 95016
Expand ...

Aparently, the Refs apply the "Slenderman Rules" to Karaban when assessing "Section 39. Verticality" for Alex.

Interestingly, S39, Article 1, Item h is the most ignored/abused rule in all of CBB. The amount of defensive fouls called that are, in fact, contact initiated by the offensive player has to be upwards of 75%, probably even 90%+.
 
CL82 said:
Somewhat agree. It used to kill me when Calhoun would choose to run clock at the end of some games. Inevitably the score would get closer and we would give up points in exchange for running down the time. But, the vast majority of these games we won.

Last night, however, we appeared to stop running our offense. As if burning clock and running your offense were too mutually exclusive choices. They are not. You can still burn clock while swinging the ball around enforcing the defense to adjust to you. As someone pointed out in chat our normal offense runs about 20 to 25 seconds off the clock and ends with a decent scoring opportunity.
Expand ...

The other thing that's maddening about the "dribble off 20 seconds at halfcourt" approach to killing clock is that you have a team that's battered, bruised, behind, and on the ropes. You decide your finishing strategy is to let them catch their collective breaths for 20sec, then tell them they have to play concentrated good D for only 10 sec.

Make them work their arses off for the full 30sec...they will be less likely to be able to run their offense at 100% capacity...even if you miss your shot.
 
That out of bounds call was insane. Nobody likes the fact that those spirit/flow of the game calls only get overturned in the last two minutes, but those are now the rules with replay. Except this time they just completely ignored the video.
 
.-.
Palatine said:
Win the game. Any coach that speeds up play ahead 14 points with three minutes left is guilty of malpractice.
Expand ...
Don't speed up the play, but run the offense normally until it's under 10 instead of one guy standing dribbling while everyone else stands motionless. That way if a clear breakdown happens that leads to a layup you can take advantage of it, making the shot and/or drawing a foul. Our offense normally works with perimeter motion and handoffs and off ball screens. That will still work to run the clock.
 
HuskyWarrior611 said:
Samson’s weird as he’s a tweener currently. But moreso because he lacks things at both positions.

He doesn’t have the handle or jumpshot to be a stretch 4 and he doesn’t have the girth or strength to be a true 5.

He’s perfect as a change of pace 5 off the bench but he’s struggling to be an anchor back there for long stretches without DC. It’s also year 3 for him so I’m not sure what he has time to improve on in a year to fix these things.
Expand ...
Thought he was noted as having a jump shot/3 point shot.
 
tykurez said:
I also think part of the problem is that Samson is decidedly a 4 playing as a 5. You see it when Karaban gets put at the 5 as well. I do think Samson has some tendencies he needs to nip in the bud, but we’re asking a kid who came up as a long, stretch-4 to now play primarily in the post. With Clingan back I think we see improvements from Johnson.
Expand ...
I think the flip-side of this argument is that he hasn't really showed any stretch 4 skills for us. He hasn't put the ball on the floor, I can only think of one jumper he's taken all season, haven't seen many indicators he could defend on the perimeter against guys who are legit stretch 4's.

I think his best position will continue to be the 5, but he has to figure out how to defend without fouling. He's good for about 2 fouls a game that are just unnecessary, and as the only 5 Hurley currently sees as playable, that just can't happen. I think, to his credit actually, most of his fouls aren't coming from getting overpowered or outmanned, they're just from not maintaining legal guarding position or trying too hard to block a shot vs contesting a shot.
 
Xavier is not a good team, surprised they smoked Seton Hall. With clingan, this game is not close.
 
Last edited:
.-.
Husky68 said:
Thought he was noted as having a jump shot/3 point shot.
Expand ...
He hasn’t shown it. And he’s had plenty of opportunities to do so as guys don’t guard him outside of the paint.
 
navery12 said:
Yeah I feel like that's pretty consistently called a flagrant. Watching it back this morning I don't know if it 100% was, can definitely see how it could be considered incidental contact. But that feels like a call that's made all the time as an unintentional elbow but still a flagrant foul
Expand ...
Ellis kept on saying if the elbow was parallel with the court, well it wasn't.
 
Mookson said:
Xavier is not a good team, surprised they smoked Seton Hall. With clingan, this game is not close.
Expand ...
Xavier is actually a good team especially defensively. They don't shoot well (except when they play us).
 
Edward Sargent said:
Xavier is actually a good team especially defensively. They don't shoot well (except when they play us).
Expand ...
Yeah there's a reason that was a Q1 win. Kenpom had them ranked above Providence going into last night and I'm fairly certain they were top 25 in the country in defensive efficiency.
 
Edward Sargent said:
Xavier is actually a good team especially defensively. They don't shoot well (except when they play us).
Expand ...

To be fair, after that 4-4 stretch to start the 2nd half they were pretty bad from 3 (1 of 8).
 
JustbrewitMan said:
Aparently, the Refs apply the "Slenderman Rules" to Karaban when assessing "Section 39. Verticality" for Alex.

Interestingly, S39, Article 1, Item h is the most ignored/abused rule in all of CBB. The amount of defensive fouls called that are, in fact, contact initiated by the offensive player has to be upwards of 75%, probably even 90%+.
Expand ...
And whenever an offensive player falls to ground when driving to basket, 90% of the time the defense is given a foul- the refs' thinking must be "if player is on floor, they must have been pushed or tripped".
 
.-.
yungdowork said:
I think his best position will continue to be the 5, but he has to figure out how to defend without fouling. He's good for about 2 fouls a game that are just unnecessary
Expand ...

The good thing is those fouls are fixable. Ones where he's reaching or going for the block instead of staying straight up. He's only 225lbs, so some big bruisers like Soriano are going to draw some more fouls, but if he can avoid the IQ fouls and play honestly, he'll be alright. Get in the film room!
 
JustbrewitMan said:
Interestingly, S39, Article 1, Item h is the most ignored/abused rule in all of CBB. The amount of defensive fouls called that are, in fact, contact initiated by the offensive player has to be upwards of 75%, probably even 90%+.
Expand ...

They need to rewrite that rule or get some new guidance. The game of basketball would change entirely if that was called consistently and by the book. Initiating contact is something kids are learning to do in middle school.

A good driver is initiating contact on every single possession they can. You control the physicality and take the angle to the rim you want instead of letting the defender take your angle away; makes finishing much easier. Steph is really, really good at that.
 
Edward Sargent said:
Xavier is actually a good team especially defensively. They don't shoot well (except when they play us).
Expand ...

They do some things pretty well but their offense is ugly and it’s getting worse. Not taking anything away from the huskies though, great win.
 
.-.
You must log in or register to reply here.

Forum statistics

Threads
168,207
Messages
4,556,867
Members
10,442
Latest member
Virginiafan


Top Bottom