4ever....Kenny Smith says Guards Game

[dsfire]

Chief, did you watch the National Championship game?  Zoubek didn't do crap, the refs SHOCKINGLY swallowed there whistles on numerous calls against him, and they barely beat mid major to win a national championship.

I think putting the "mid major" qualifier in there is selling Butler short - they clearly showed they belonged in the final throughout the tournament by taking out Cuse, Kansas State and MSU.

[karavotsos]

Chief, did you watch the National Championship game?  Zoubek didn't do crap, the refs SHOCKINGLY swallowed there whistles on numerous calls against him, and they barely beat mid major to win a national championship.

So, by didn't do crap, you mean he played defense, rebounded, and generally controlled the painted area.  None of which are significant, I understand.  And when you say the refs swallowed their whistles on calls against him, you mean Zoubek was the more physical player, and the refs let the players decide the game.  The refs let Butler man up down low.  I prefer not to have the refs decide the game by being over-officious.

Also, Zoubek had 4 fouls with around 10 minutes left, and Butler never went after him to try to get the 5th.  They should have put in Jakes, got him out on the perimeter and went after Zoubek to get the 5th.  Not left it up to the refs to call a ticky-tack foul or left it up to Zoubek to do something stupid.  Though I guess it wasn't totally out of line to expect Zoubek to do something stupid.

[ChicosBailBonds]

so that got me thinking about the last 30 yrs of MU bigs .....

Rod Grosse
Roman Mueller
Joe Nethen
Jarrod Lovette
Richard Shaw
Yous Mbao
Greg Clausen
John Kyle Mueller

.........At least MU enjoyed good years from Tom Copa, Walter Downing, Damon Key, Jim McIlvaine, Amal McCaskill, Scott Merritt and Robert Jackson.  

That list is, uhm, uhm......less than "stud like"

Certainly Big Mac makes the list and he was highly rated but more of a defensive force than anything else. 

[ChicosBailBonds]

Bigs win the big games. 

Not without very good guards.  See North Carolina last year....not only could they not win the big games, they barely won ANY games.  UCLA last year...terrible, despite their size...no guards.  Look at all the premier bigs in college the last 25 years and many of them didn't win a championship or even come that close because they were devoid of guards.  David Robinson. Tim Duncan.  Shaq.  Etc, etc.  Those that had great guards, won.

[PuertoRicanNightmare]

You're citing David Robinson?!?!! He went to Navy, for chrissakes! And if memory serves, they (NAVY!) went to the ELITE 8!

[ChicosBailBonds]

Yes, he went to Navy.  Imagine how much further they could have gone with some guards that were worth anything.  I also listed plenty of other major bigs that couldn't get to the Final Four, let alone the championship.  Duncan only got past the Sweet 16 once in 4 years. Shaq never got to the Sweet 16 if I remember correctly.

As Kenny Smith said yesterday on the plane....our (UNC's) guard play last year was horrible.  We can't be good without great guard play.

[GOMU1104]

It is a guards game.

I could've sworn we've been through this 100s of tiimes. I dont know why it is so hard for you guys to understand. Do you even watch college basketball?  

Do you not remember what happened when Marcus Jackson was running the point for Marquette?

[4everwarriors]

Yeah man, I'm watching and seein' Pygmy guards crashing the boards in complete frustration, 195 lb. forwards trying to hold position and deflect a shot, and isn't it fun to watch opposing players stroll down the paint like it's the drive-thru lane at Mickey D's. Great teams have bigmen. Check out FF rosters over the past 30 years. Big man's game, without a doubt.

[chapman]

I'm sticking with my original position.  Debating a stupid cliche is pointless.  It's a basketball game.

[GOMU1104]

Yeah man, I'm watching and seein' Pygmy guards crashing the boards in complete frustration, 195 lb. forwards trying to hold position and deflect a shot, and isn't it fun to watch opposing players stroll down the paint like it's the drive-thru lane at Mickey D's. Great teams have bigmen. Check out FF rosters over the past 30 years. Big man's game, without a doubt.

And where would those teams be if they didnt have really good guards? Not in the Final Four...thats where.

Yes, great teams have complete rosters...duh.

You can win with good guards and no good big men (MU, for example), but you CANT win with weak guard play and good big men (UNC last year)

Why is this so difficult for you to understand?

[4everwarriors]

Here, in simpler terms:

The basket is 10 feet high. By definition, it's a big man's game.

[tower912]

Speed kills as much as size does.....as will be demonstrated against UW.  Or, what was more difficult to watch; Marcus Jackson bringing the ball up and trying to get our team into its offense, or Lazar trying to play the post?

[GOMU1104]

Here, in simpler terms:

The basket is 10 feet high. By definition, it's a big man's game.

This year, UW has 4 guys 6'10" and above, and 2 more guys listed at 6'8". 

Based on your limited understanding of the game of college basketball, the NCAA should just give them the title now and not waste everyone's time playing the season  out.

[karavotsos]

I still don't buy that UNC had a great- or even good- frontcourt last year.  Just because a team has tall people on it does not mean they have a good frontcourt.  Every time I watched UNC, their frontcourt was weak and got pushed around.  It certainly was not the case that when the ball was in the painted area they dominated, and the sole reason they lost was because they could not get the ball inside.  I undestand that Larry Drew turned the ball over way too much and that every team needs a point guard who can effectively run the team's offense.  However, that does not equate to college basketball being a guard's game.

UConn was a team with at least the second best starting backcourt in the Big East- based on pure talent-level- and they fizzled because their frontcourt was not good.  Stanley Robinson was supposed to be their frontcourt scorer, but he was not good so they went to the NIT.  They went to the Final Four with Thabeet and Adrian the year before and could have won the championship if Dyson had not gotten injured.  They lose their frontcourt, and they go to the NIT.

I would say that the Florida team that won back-to-back championships was the best team of the decade.  How good were Taurean Green and Lee Humphrey?  They were fine.  I don't think anyone would consider them a great backcourt, and they were basically asked to play defense, not turn the ball over, and make open 3's.  The team's frontcourt was Brewer, Noah and Horford was far and away the best in the country, and that's why they won. 

I don't understand how any of this makes the college game a guard's game.  Anytime a basketball game turns into a halfcourt game, it seems to me that you have an advantage if you have good big men.  The better team you are playing, the better they are at getting back on defense and shutting down transition opportunities.  In these tougher games, you'll have an advantage with good bigs.   

[rocky_warrior]

Do you not remember what happened when Marcus Jackson was running the point for Marquette?

Bad example. Unless I misunderstand, you're saying that if your center is playing point guard, your team is f'ed.  I don't think anyone here would disagree.

[MarquetteDano]

I don't understand how any of this makes the college game a guard's game.  Anytime a basketball game turns into a halfcourt game, it seems to me that you have an advantage if you have good big men.  The better team you are playing, the better they are at getting back on defense and shutting down transition opportunities.  In these tougher games, you'll have an advantage with good bigs.   

You act like games in the halfcourt are decided solely by the bigs.  If you have crap guards and the other team has good guards good luck starting an offense in the half-court.  They will get pressured, turn the ball over, and have a hard time getting the ball to the bigs.

I would love to see a game last year between the following teams:
Guard Team:
PG: John Wall
SG: Evan Turner
SF: Division Three player
PF: Division Three player
C:  Division Three Player

Bench: James Anderson
Bench: Greivis Vasquez


Big Team:
PG: Division Three Player
SG: Division Three Player
SF: Division Three Player
PF: Demarcus Cousins
C:  Cole Aldrich

Bench: Luke Harangody
Bench: Greg Monroe


Guard team wins by 20

[karavotsos]

I said you need a guard who can run your offense and not turn the ball over.  I simply said that does not make the game a guard's game.  In that scenario, give me Acker, Cubillan and a Gilbert Brown type, and you can have UNC's all-world frontcourt, minus Deon Thompson (not that it matters who your frontcourt is, because Anderson and Vazquez would be your starters, I'm guessing).  I think it would be an interesting game. 

If the statement that the game is a guard's game were true, then FL would not have won back-to-back championships.  Their guards were competent, but they were not one of the best backcourts in the nation.  If the game is a guard's game- meaning winning the backcourt battle wins you the game- then some team with a better backcourt would have dominated a game with their superior backcourt and won.  Didn't happen for two years when it mattered.

[MarquetteDano]

If the statement that the game is a guard's game were true, then FL would not have won back-to-back championships.  Their guards were competent, but they were not one of the best backcourts in the nation.  If the game is a guard's game- meaning winning the backcourt battle wins you the game- then some team with a better backcourt would have dominated a game with their superior backcourt and won.  Didn't happen for two years when it mattered.

This is the problem with the "guard's game" cliche, as I believe another poster said.  It means different things to different people.  Though I don't believe to anyone it means that the best backcourt always wins games.  What it means to me is that if you have a poor backcourt, you are not going anywhere in college basketball.  If you can have bad bigs and still go to the tourney.

Anyone who gets to the Final Four 95% of the time has at least good bigs and a good backcourt.   However, if you wanted to get to the tourney and had to choose between a bad bigs or a bad backcourt, you would choose bad bigs every time.

As evidenced by my two teams in the previous post... that guard laden team would win every time.

[bilsu]

It is a guards game.

I could've sworn we've been through this 100s of tiimes. I dont know why it is so hard for you guys to understand. Do you even watch college basketball?  

Do you not remember what happened when Marcus Jackson was running the point for Marquette?

I beleive we actually won the game that he was first used as point guard. However, that team was hurting. Diener and Grimm were injured. Mason was in Crean's doghouse. Novak was ineffective, because there was no other threat on the floor. At that point the team was bad and it had nothing to do with Jackson playing point.