From the Scott Christopherson thread....
He would help this team, especially when teams start playing zone on us (which they will do in spades). - Chicos
"especially when teams start palying zone on us" - perfect statement that shows chicos has no idea of what he is even watching, completely BBAll ignorant. Ahh, chico's we have faced zone probably 75% of the time this year and pretty much 100% of the time tha last two games. But when teams start zoning us we will miss SC ;D
Someone who actaully knows anything about the game would prefer players that can not only shoot but can attack the zone off the bounce ala DJO and Buycks. Oh being athletic defenders that can handle the ball never hurt either.
We have shot 53% from 3 the last 2 games and have averaged over 90 pts agame and have 5 guys knocking them down at a high rate against teams that played exclusively zone... but we need SC. ::)
does anyone remeber how effective our offense was against zones When we had SC and the 8 years before that?
I'd also like to reiterate, that NO, SC WOULD NOT BE THE BEST SHOOTER ON THIS TEAM. I doubt the kid would be like 3rd-4th best behind Butler and Cubes right now.
Also, I'm thinking DJO might be one of the better shooters we've had in a while. Very nice form.
DJO is shooting 47% from 3, not bad for a guy who missed amonth and really only hit full speed a week ago. Cubi went 3-4 last night would love to see him get his stroke back. Our 3 point shooting #'s are really good and that is still all drug down by Lazar being only 2-13 from 3, i have full confidence his numbers will rise.
Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on November 25, 2009, 07:12:30 AM
DJO is shooting 47% from 3, not bad for a guy who missed amonth and really only hit full speed a week ago. Cubi went 3-4 last night would love to see him get his stroke back. Our 3 point shooting #'s are really good and that is still all drug down by Lazar being only 2-13 from 3, i have full confidence his numbers will rise.
Our guys can knock them down if they get the looks. The issue with this team will be whether or not we can generate the requisite penetration and interior threats to get the open looks from 3.
As for SC, last I checked they play basketball on both ends of the floor. Given our lack of size and our pressure man to man defensive philosophy, it is of paramount importance that we have quickness everywhere on the floor. SC's liabilties on D would more than offset his contributions on O. For his sake, I hope he becomes a star at Iowa State. It is the right place for him.
OK, OK....
I am willing to concede that I *may* have been wrong. ;)
Hayward it's obvious two of your greatest motivations to posts is: 1. Attack Chico's posts, 2. Let us all know how Crean is failing. I guess we all have passions in life.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 25, 2009, 07:22:50 AM
Our guys can knock them down if they get the looks. The issue with this team will be whether or not we can generate the requisite penetration and interior threats to get the open looks from 3.
As for SC, last I checked they play basketball on both ends of the floor. Given our lack of size and our pressure man to man defensive philosophy, it is of paramount importance that we have quickness everywhere on the floor. SC's liabilties on D would more than offset his contributions on O. For his sake, I hope he becomes a star at Iowa State. It is the right place for him.
CTWarrior I 100% agree with you but OMG!!! what will we do when we finally see a zone!!! :o. Coming from the guy who was telling everyone what channel the games have been on. So he cant say he was not watching. What will we do when we see a zone ...the season might go up in smoke. Our only hope is in Ames ::)
Quote from: NCMUFan on November 25, 2009, 07:27:18 AM
Hayward it's obvious two of your greatest motivations to posts is: 1. Attack Chico's posts, 2. Let us all know how Crean is failing. I guess we all have passions in life.
on the contrary...
1. i have over the years learned not to argue with short people.
2. in the spirit of the season and per the mods request...nary a mention of the thankfully departed. i am celebrating what we do have, not lamenting addition by subtraction of talentless former members of the program departed to points SE and SW of Milwaukee.
Success against cupcake zones does not guarantee success against BE zones we may see.
There may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone? Or the Louisville zone? But I have been pleased with the ball movement we have shown through 4 games of nearly exclusively zone. I am under the impression that Xavier is a m2m team. I want to see our man offense against a decent team.
Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on November 25, 2009, 06:44:25 AM
From the Scott Christopherson thread....
He would help this team, especially when teams start playing zone on us (which they will do in spades). - Chicos
"especially when teams start palying zone on us" - perfect statement that shows chicos has no idea of what he is even watching, completely BBAll ignorant. Ahh, chico's we have faced zone probably 75% of the time this year and pretty much 100% of the time tha last two games. But when teams start zoning us we will miss SC ;D
Someone who actaully knows anything about the game would prefer players that can not only shoot but can attack the zone off the bounce ala DJO and Buycks. Oh being athletic defenders that can handle the ball never hurt either.
We have shot 53% from 3 the last 2 games and have averaged over 90 pts agame and have 5 guys knocking them down at a high rate against teams that played exclusively zone... but we need SC. ::)
does anyone remeber how effective our offense was against zones When we had SC and the 8 years before that?
LOL. If you think the defenses we faced this year are indicative of anything we will face when we actually start playing someone, you're crazy. These "zone" defenses we have faced are a joke. Wide open 3 pointers all day long.
Our strength of schedule as of this morning....345th out of 347. I'm shocked we aren't dead last, but Michigan and South Carolina State are actually worse.
His D has improved considerably as well.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 25, 2009, 09:33:00 AM
LOL. If you think the defenses we faced this year are indicative of anything we will face when we actually start playing someone, you're crazy. These "zone" defenses we have faced are a joke. Wide open 3 pointers all day long.
Our strength of schedule as of this morning....345th out of 347. I'm shocked we aren't dead last, but Michigan and South Carolina State are actually worse.
His D has improved considerably as well.
I'm not sure what exactly you want.
When given open looks, the guys are knocking them down. I'm not going to hold it against them that they're getting open looks.
Will getting open looks be as easy against Big East competition? I suspect answer is 'no.'
So the question, then, isn't whether this team can knock down 3s - they're proving they can - but can they do it without such wide open looks and/or can they get such open looks against better opponents?
I fail to see how Scott Christopherson changes, much less answers, this question. Christopherson isn't the type of player who's going to create his own shots, at least against Big East-type competition. So he, essentially, would need teammates to create open looks for him. Except MU, it seems, already has guys who can knock down open shots when teammates create them and those guys are lesser liabilities in other parts of the game.
And upon what are you basing the comment that his 'D' improved "considerably?" Comments from Iowa State fans? The cyclones big wins over Tennessee State and Mississippi Valley State? Odd how MU's play vs cupcakes offers such little insight, but Iowa State's play against cupcakes is so telling.
well said becuase we all know if you knock down 60% against South Dakota it aint nothing, But if you knock down 60% of your threes against some other nobody in Ames it means something entirely different. ;D
QuoteThere may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone?
Look at what the Syracuse zone did to UNC. Does anyone not believe that UNC is not a longer, more athletic team with a deeper bench than MU?
We are in for an interesting season at the very least. Otule going down is going to hurt; hopefully EW can elevate his game and pick up some of the slack so that at least we'll have a little depth so that we aren't playing the same 6 guys all night long.
Go MU!
Quote from: tower912 on November 25, 2009, 08:49:55 AM
There may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone? Or the Louisville zone? But I have been pleased with the ball movement we have shown through 4 games of nearly exclusively zone. I am under the impression that Xavier is a m2m team. I want to see our man offense against a decent team.
[/quote/]
Agree that the Louisville and Syracuse zones are much tougher to crack, but at least beginning last year we had an effective plan to attack zones in general. Even with great perimeter shooters (Novak, Diener and to a lesser extent Chapman) you can't break a zone by merely passing the ball around the perimeter. Thank God many of our opponents stubbornly stuck to their "preferred" defense and played man in the TC era. MU won a lot of games because of it.
Quote from: Pakuni on November 25, 2009, 10:21:40 AM
I'm not sure what exactly you want.
When given open looks, the guys are knocking them down. I'm not going to hold it against them that they're getting open looks.
Will getting open looks be as easy against Big East competition? I suspect answer is 'no.'
So the question, then, isn't whether this team can knock down 3s - they're proving they can - but can they do it without such wide open looks and/or can they get such open looks against better opponents?
I fail to see how Scott Christopherson changes, much less answers, this question. Christopherson isn't the type of player who's going to create his own shots, at least against Big East-type competition. So he, essentially, would need teammates to create open looks for him. Except MU, it seems, already has guys who can knock down open shots when teammates create them and those guys are lesser liabilities in other parts of the game.
And upon what are you basing the comment that his 'D' improved "considerably?" Comments from Iowa State fans? The cyclones big wins over Tennessee State and Mississippi Valley State? Odd how MU's play vs cupcakes offers such little insight, but Iowa State's play against cupcakes is so telling.
+1000
I agree with everything that has to do with collapsing zone d's with athletic "slashers" to create shots for others.
I also believe that men don't usually menstruate, rainy days are wetter than sunny days, and alcohol is intoxicating .
(http://pix.motivatedphotos.com/2008/9/10/633566759644656226-signs.jpg)
This Hayward v Chico's lovefest would be comical if it wasn't so tiring...
I do find it ironic that this thread was started by Hayward in a very chico-esque fashion; digging up old posts to try to discredit it when new situations arises that help discredit it. Usually that's a chico's move which I'll credit him for at least doing so in a coherent manner.
In this particular case, I gotta (gulp) agree with Hayward's premise. Pakuni crystallized the point perfectly when suggesting that both ours and ISU's schedules thus far aren't that much different - both have been rather easy.
So far our guys have been hitting the open looks they're getting. They'll get fewer open looks against better teams. Even assuming CS would make marginally more of those open looks, DJO/Buycks/Ack/Cubi all are significantly better on D making them more valuable than what a CS would have been able to contribute. Furthermore, DJO and Buycks have the ability to create making them all the more valuable.
I'm taking his defensive improvement from remarks from McDermott, his coach. It's funny how many people bag on ISU, I have a feeling you'll see that they will be pretty good this year, better than Marquette most likely.
They started three sophomores and a freshman last year...all four are back plus they add folks like Scott off the bench. This is a team that will be fighting for a NCAA berth this season, yet a really sharp poster here thinks they are going to be terrible (all while he calls most other posters ignorant of basketball). You have to wonder what he really knows (not you Pakuni)
I would love to have a kid like Thomas from South Dakota. Someone who is a specialist plain and simple but able to drain 28-footers like nothing.
Early indications are nice but still think our guys may trend more toward the streaky side then reliable from deep. That said, a shooter in the mold of Thomas, Christopherson, or Rotnei Clarke would get on the floor.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 25, 2009, 12:11:05 PM
I'm taking his defensive improvement from remarks from McDermott, his coach. It's funny how many people bag on ISU, I have a feeling you'll see that they will be pretty good this year, better than Marquette most likely.
They started three sophomores and a freshman last year...all four are back plus they add folks like Scott off the bench. This is a team that will be fighting for a NCAA berth this season, yet a really sharp poster here thinks they are going to be terrible (all while he calls most other posters ignorant of basketball). You have to wonder what he really knows (not you Pakuni)
Who is bagging on ISU? It is not bagging on ISU to mention they've played a crappy schedule, too.
I don't question that in the right system Christopherson would be a fine addition to a BCS conference basketball team. I just don't think we're the right fit for him, because we are all about pressure man to man and if he can't keep in front of his man we don't have the kind of interior size you need to protect him. So I think quickness/athleticism on the exterior is of the utmost importance to this MU team. Now I'm the first to admit I haven't seen SC in 2 years, so he may be better at everything, but I cannot imagine he has gained enough quickness to compare with the guards we put on the floor.
His transfer is one of the good ones for everyone involved. He's in a better situation for him and we were able to find other capable guards who better fit our style.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 25, 2009, 01:45:50 PM
Who is bagging on ISU? It is not bagging on ISU to mention they've played a crappy schedule, too.
I don't question that in the right system Christopherson would be a fine addition to a BCS conference basketball team. I just don't think we're the right fit for him, because we are all about pressure man to man and if he can't keep in front of his man we don't have the kind of interior size you need to protect him. So I think quickness/athleticism on the exterior is of the utmost importance to this MU team. Now I'm the first to admit I haven't seen SC in 2 years, so he may be better at everything, but I cannot imagine he has gained enough quickness to compare with the guards we put on the floor.
Hayward and others have said ISU is a lower level Big 12 team. That's one person. He basically believes SC couldn't play at MU, was not a good recruit because someone he despises recruited him and he's basically a mid major recruit that could only play at a bigger school that was at the bottom of a conference (i.e. ISU, NW, etc).
I agree, he doesn't have the quickness of our guards, but let's slow down here for a second folks. There are other skills on the basketball court. Travis Diener was not overly quick and certainly Steve Novak wasn't. But they did other things well. Sometimes it's about simply getting open, playing smart basketball, moving without the ball, using your screens and if you can bury that shot, that's huge.
There is a great emphasis on having tremendous athletes, that makes sense. However, I also like having tremendous basketball players on a roster also, there is a difference. DJ was a great athlete, not a great basketball player. Steve Novak was a great basketball player, not a great athlete.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 25, 2009, 05:40:06 PM
I agree, he doesn't have the quickness of our guards, but let's slow down here for a second folks. There are other skills on the basketball court. Travis Diener was not overly quick and certainly Steve Novak wasn't. But they didn't other things. Sometimes it's about simply getting open, playing smart basketball, moving without the ball, using your screens but if you can bury that shot, that's huge.
Again, of course there are other skills. But let's not compare SC to Novak, an NBA talent who at 6-9 could be hidden down low on D and Diener, another NBA player. Besides, Diener had skills (court vision, ball handling, average quickness) that SC doesn't, not to mention interior help in Merritt, Sanders, Grimm, Jackson, etc. if he was beaten on D. Again, a spot up shooter is great, but now when you have to give up a penetrator (who after all, helps get people the open 3 point looks in the first place)/plus defender to get him on the floor.
Quote from: CTWarrior on November 25, 2009, 05:52:36 PM
Again, of course there are other skills. But let's not compare SC to Novak, an NBA talent who at 6-9 could be hidden down low on D and Diener, another NBA player. Besides, Diener had skills (court vision, ball handling, average quickness) that SC doesn't, not to mention interior help in Merritt, Sanders, Grimm, Jackson, etc. if he was beaten on D. Again, a spot up shooter is great, but now when you have to give up a penetrator (who after all, helps get people the open 3 point looks in the first place)/plus defender to get him on the floor.
Fair enough, but I think there is a way to accomplish both. I love how ISU is using SC right now. They have slashers that penetrate and can kick it out. SC is also not just simply roaming around the 3 point line, but he's also taking the midrange shot and going to the hoop.
He's currently hitting 65% of his 3 pointers (11 for 17), granted against poor competition. We'll see how he does the rest of the year, but I'd love that kind of production coming off the bench to stretch a zone or give a team a different look. Smart kid, love his grit.
We can put 5 guys on the floor who could hit 3's - this is one of the better 3 point shooting teams we have had. But we have to see if we can do it with tougher competition, if our guars can penetrate and dish, etc.
Watchin' Scotty grow: From an ISU Cyclones website a week or so ago--
Iowa State guard Scott Christopherson has been deadly with the ball in his hands this season, shooting 63.6 percent from 3-point range.
But his best work may be done without the basketball.
Even though Christopherson has been instant offense off the bench, he's been ISU's lockdown defender through the first three games.
"He has a desire to want to be our go-to defender, much like Rahshon Clark was a few years ago and Sean Haluska was last year," coach Greg McDermott said. "Scott wants that role and he is on his way to getting it."
He played like a go-to defender when guarding Drake's Josh Young on Tuesday, and he hopes to play like one against Mississippi Valley State today at 1 p.m.
Christopherson was a key reason why Young, who averaged 21.0 points against ISU the last two seasons, was held to 11 in the Cyclones' 90-70 win.
"It was a good confidence builder for Scott from a defensive standpoint," McDermott said. "I thought he really did some good things."
Christopherson credits his defensive success to the work he put in last season while redshirting. McDermott said Christopherson, who transferred from Marquette, has improved his defensive balance and anticipation skills.
Christopherson believes he has expanded his game in ways he may not have been able to if didn't sit out.
"Looking back on it, it was a good thing," Christopherson said.
http://gocyclones.com/news.php?ID=2160
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on November 25, 2009, 05:40:06 PM
Hayward and others have said ISU is a lower level Big 12 team. That's one person. He basically believes SC couldn't play at MU, was not a good recruit because someone he despises recruited him and he's basically a mid major recruit that could only play at a bigger school that was at the bottom of a conference (i.e. ISU, NW, etc).
I agree, he doesn't have the quickness of our guards, but let's slow down here for a second folks. There are other skills on the basketball court. Travis Diener was not overly quick and certainly Steve Novak wasn't. But they did other things well. Sometimes it's about simply getting open, playing smart basketball, moving without the ball, using your screens and if you can bury that shot, that's huge.
There is a great emphasis on having tremendous athletes, that makes sense. However, I also like having tremendous basketball players on a roster also, there is a difference. DJ was a great athlete, not a great basketball player. Steve Novak was a great basketball player, not a great athlete.
Steve Novak was not a great basketball player, he was a GREAT shooter. DJ was a better basketball player than Novak in every aspect other than shooting and being tall.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on November 25, 2009, 11:35:42 PM
Steve Novak was not a great basketball player, he was a GREAT shooter. DJ was a better basketball player than Novak in every aspect other than shooting and being tall.
Disagree. Steve understood basketball and was a great shooter, he just wasn't blessed with the athletic abilities as some. We'll just have to agree to disagree on that one, especially with some of DJ's decision making during crucial times during the game (i.e. going for blocks against G'Town, etc)....not smart basketball.
And that, in part, is why one is kickin' it in L.A. and the other is just probably waking up now in Turkey.
3's open up driving lanes. and vice versa. ben gordon's absence from the bulls is why d rose is driving less. being good at one helps the others out by spreading the floor for driving or opening up the perimeter to prevent driving. being good at something helps all other aspects of the game.
Quote from: 4everwarriors on November 26, 2009, 12:01:51 AM
And that, in part, is why one is kickin' it in L.A. and the other is just probably waking up now in Turkey.
Don't forget that the shooter is 6'10" and the athletic freak is 5'11."
The NBA will always welcome tall shooters.
Novak's lack of athleticism was hidden with Wade's ballhawking and Diener's sturdy defense along with RJax's clogging and Merritt's occasional shotblocking. But it was eventually exposed in the KU game.
But man...I remember Kansas players driving by him with ease...and one particular picture burned in my mind from that fateful Final Four game was Novak trying to guard Langford (?) and just getting burnt, disgracefully falling one leg upon the other to the floor.
Shamefully, our head coach, who had an entire week to prepare, couldn't devise an effective game plan. Yet even the most novice basketball fan, knew Kansas wanted to get out and run on each possession.
every basketball coach in america regardless of level has studied Roy Williams secondary break. Yet we were not prepared for it, other coaches dont mock our former coach as "tommy NAismith" for nothing!!
I think comparing SC with Diener and Novak is laughable. He wishes he could have (and most likely has) 1/10th the talent those two had.
Quote from: MOwarrior on November 25, 2009, 09:40:37 PM
Watchin' Scotty grow: From an ISU Cyclones website a week or so ago--
Iowa State guard Scott Christopherson has been deadly with the ball in his hands this season, shooting 63.6
But his best work may be done without the basketball.
Even though Christopherson has been instant offense off the bench, he's been ISU's lockdown defender through the first three games.
"He has a desire to want to be our go-to defender, much like Rahshon Clark was a few years ago and Sean Haluska was last year," coach Greg McDermott said. "Scott wants that role and he is on his way to getting it."
He played like a go-to defender when guarding Drake's Josh Young on Tuesday, and he hopes to play like one against Mississippi Valley State today at 1 p.m.
Christopherson was a key reason why Young, who averaged 21.0 points against ISU the last two seasons, was held to 11 in the Cyclones' 90-70 win.
"It was a good confidence builder for Scott from a defensive standpoint," McDermott said. "I thought he really did some good things."
Christopherson credits his defensive success to the work he put in last season while redshirting. McDermott said Christopherson, who transferred from Marquette, has improved his defensive balance and anticipation skills.
You mean this defensive assessment didn't come from ISU fans on a message board?
Quote from: lab_warrior on November 26, 2009, 09:18:45 AM
I think comparing SC with Diener and Novak is laughable. He wishes he could have (and most likely has) 1/10th the talent those two had.
You obviously didn't understand the comparison....it wasn't about talent, it was about being a great athlete vs a great basketball player. SC will never be TD or SN in terms of talent, will never happen nor did anyone say that. The point was that there is a place for players at the major DI level that are very good basketball players even if they don't possess the best hops, quickness, height, etc. There is something to be said about a kid that actually understands how the game is played.
Quote from: MR.HAYWARD on November 26, 2009, 09:09:16 AM
every basketball coach in america regardless of level has studied Roy Williams secondary break. Yet we were not prepared for it, other coaches dont mock our former coach as "tommy NAismith" for nothing!!
Buzz should have no problem going to the Final Four then, if someone as inept as tommy NAismith [sic] can do it.