After two pretty big collapses on the road, no team will ever give up against this MU team. No team will feel like they are out of it.
Hopefully our guys will not let these two collapses get to their heads.
I think it is to late for that.
This was nothing like L-Ville.
Quote from: HoopsMalone on January 22, 2011, 08:26:07 PM
After two pretty big collapses on the road, no team will ever give up against this MU team. No team will feel like they are out of it.
Hopefully our guys will not let these two collapses get to their heads.
Louisville was an epic collapse, this one not so much. 12 points is not a lot in college basketball.
We work very hard on defense and mostly rely on jump shots. We are undersized and do not have much depth. It's not surprising we struggle to finish games.
Quote from: Jacks DC on January 22, 2011, 08:34:01 PM
Louisville was an epic collapse, this one not so much. 12 points is not a lot in college basketball.
We work very hard on defense and mostly rely on jump shots. We are undersized and do not have much depth. It's not surprising we struggle to finish games.
but i thought we were supposed to be deeper this year????????????????????
Quote from: 79Warrior on January 22, 2011, 08:48:41 PMbut i thought we were supposed to be deeper this year????????????????????
I think most of us thought that. Most of us thought Jones and Blue would both be reliable off the bench for a combined 12-20 mpg. Blue alone looked like he'd give that for awhile, but not so much lately. I think people also expected Erik Williams and Junior Cadougan to make big jumps; that still hasn't happened with Williams while Cadougan has provided spotty (but improving) minutes. And we expected a healthy Fulce to be able to contribute solid minutes and rebounding (which is finally happening).
Bottom line, the optimist saw this as a team that could go ten deep, possibly even deeper when we first saw flashes from Davante Gardner early in the season. But as the season has gone on, our depth has shrunk rather than grown. It's unfortunate, but the way the game goes sometimes :-\
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 22, 2011, 10:19:06 PM
But as the season has gone on, our depth has shrunk rather than grown. It's unfortunate, but the way the game goes sometimes :-\
I'm starting to think this is a Buzz thing, He likes to spend a month or two figuring out who he thinks are his 7/8 horses and then he rides them to the end.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 22, 2011, 10:19:06 PM
I think most of us thought that. Most of us thought Jones and Blue would both be reliable off the bench for a combined 12-20 mpg. Blue alone looked like he'd give that for awhile, but not so much lately. I think people also expected Erik Williams and Junior Cadougan to make big jumps; that still hasn't happened with Williams while Cadougan has provided spotty (but improving) minutes. And we expected a healthy Fulce to be able to contribute solid minutes and rebounding (which is finally happening).
Bottom line, the optimist saw this as a team that could go ten deep, possibly even deeper when we first saw flashes from Davante Gardner early in the season. But as the season has gone on, our depth has shrunk rather than grown. It's unfortunate, but the way the game goes sometimes :-\
Pretty good synopsis of the season. I think we all got spoiled when we went 4-4 with quality recruits in Lazar, DJ, McNeal, and Wes. We had it right in front of us with guys like Mason and Mbakwe, and relative to his potential Merrit, did not work out. We kind of assumed a four star would be able to step right in anc contribute.
This could still be a really good season. I know that there is something that appears cowardly about blaming a game on the refs, but this game could be the exception. On the road, literally nothing went our way. We should be .500 after this tough stretch of games and then turn it on at the end to get to 10-11 wins again with the talent we have.
Buzz is doing one heck of a job. Don't forget, this is a tough year after a coaching change since the 2007 and 2008 recruiting classes were decimated by a coaching change. We had no depth last year, and this year Buzz is developing depth. Buzz has brought in players who show signs and some great JUCO's to fill in the gap. If this is the growing pains of a coach building his program, I will take it.
I think it's also important to remember that while we have a lot of inexperience on the bench in terms of players, we also have a lot of inexperience in terms of the head coach as well. I hope that Buzz either learns better how to make in-game adjustments, draw up plays, and manage timeouts, or hires an experienced assistant who can help with those aspects of Buzz's game to make him a better coach in the long run. While our lack of experienced depth hurts us at times, our lack of experienced coaching hurts us far more frequently.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 22, 2011, 10:53:47 PM
I think it's also important to remember that while we have a lot of inexperience on the bench in terms of players, we also have a lot of inexperience in terms of the head coach as well. I hope that Buzz either learns better how to make in-game adjustments, draw up plays, and manage timeouts, or hires an experienced assistant who can help with those aspects of Buzz's game to make him a better coach in the long run. While our lack of experienced depth hurts us at times, our lack of experienced coaching hurts us far more frequently.
It's possible that we were all so in awe of going from a coach who was all style and no substance to a coach who actually had game plans (i.e. a certain amount of paint touches, don't offensive rebound against certain teams who like fast break) and made some good in game adjustments (Acker on McAlarney, Wes on Gody are two that come to mind when thinking of ND, plus calling plays for Jimmy at the end of the game when many coaches would have gone to Lazar just because he is the captain) that we forgot to evaluate if Buzz could improve. I agree that he probably will continue to get better. I think Buzz is an excellent in game and strategy coach though. I am really not sure what more he can do sometimes that we should be blaming games on him.
Maybe there is more to the momentum ending time outs than I am seeing. But I thought we got good shots tonight but did not convert. We missed some loose balls and we got called for fouls on defense. We lost to a good team (though I think we are better 9 out of 10 nights) on the road.
I look at this game as one of the thirty games we will play this year and this was the one where very few calls went our way and the basket had a lid on it in the second half. It is no fun that we lost, but it is not an indictment on Buzz as a bad coach.
Buzz is a great recruiter and motivator, and I'll agree that he's a good pregame strategist, but he doesn't seem to have answers when other teams change the questions. Against both ND and UL I think he waited too long for the timeout. In an away game, you can't let the crowd dictate momentum when you're in control. I don't think Louisville comes back if he takes the TO one possession earlier. Tonight ND had all the time in the world, but it might have slowed their momentum and allowed us to be closer in the final minute. He also seems bad at quick-scripting an inbounds play. Honestly, our best end-of-half scenario is probably "Dwight, get 5-7 feet behind the three-point line so your man won't come out to defend, then swish a high-arcing prayer that even Steve Novak wouldn't have had the balls to try. My guess is it'd be more effective than our current 15-seconds left plays.
I love Buzz and think he can be great for us, but I think there's a big difference between pregame planning and excellent motivation, which can carry you through a great first half, and being a great in-game coach, which can carry you across the finish line with the lead intact.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 22, 2011, 11:28:34 PM
Honestly, our best end-of-half scenario is probably "Dwight, get 5-7 feet behind the three-point line so your man won't come out to defend, then swish a high-arcing prayer that even Steve Novak wouldn't have had the balls to try. My guess is it'd be more effective than our current 15-seconds left plays.
Agree. I have thought this as well. At least he won't go crazy out of control and fall or something.
Maybe Buzz should rent Hoosiers and master the picket fence play so that we can all be happy he called a set play.
Players need to execute. Buycks is a good one on one player. He gets put in the position to make plays. The best shot he gets is a long three. Oh well. That is our reality this year. A coach can't script a game. I am not sure what people are expecting Buzz to do.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 22, 2011, 10:19:06 PM
I think most of us thought that. Most of us thought Jones and Blue would both be reliable off the bench for a combined 12-20 mpg. Blue alone looked like he'd give that for awhile, but not so much lately. I think people also expected Erik Williams and Junior Cadougan to make big jumps; that still hasn't happened with Williams while Cadougan has provided spotty (but improving) minutes. And we expected a healthy Fulce to be able to contribute solid minutes and rebounding (which is finally happening).
Bottom line, the optimist saw this as a team that could go ten deep, possibly even deeper when we first saw flashes from Davante Gardner early in the season. But as the season has gone on, our depth has shrunk rather than grown. It's unfortunate, but the way the game goes sometimes :-\
maybe it isn't the depth--maybe it is coaching decisions on rotations, etc.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 23, 2011, 07:12:39 AMmaybe it isn't the depth--maybe it is coaching decisions on rotations, etc.
I know you have a mancrush on Davante Gardner, but have you seen anything from Williams to indicate he deserves more playing time? Has Blue provided anything of late to show that he deserves more than 8-12 minutes a game? How about Mellow?
Maybe they deserve a chance, but do we really think Williams can replicate what he did against PVAMU and Centenary when he's playing Notre Dame and Louisville? Jamail Jones was fine against Centenary, but struggled against Mississippi Valley State the next game when he got more minutes. How will that translate to Big East play? And while Blue is still getting about the same amount of minutes, his production has noticeably dropped off since conference play started. Beforehand, he went for double figures in 5 of 6 games, since then he's only done it once, against lowly DePaul.
I have a lot of faith in Buycks, DJO, Butler, and Crowder. Cadougan has clearly been earning his minutes with improved play while Fulce is an excellent spark plug off the bench. And I know you disagree, but I definitely feel Otule is our best big man, not just because of the number he puts up (or doesn't) but because his defensive presence and ability to redirect or change shots, while also providing our best box out to help others get boards even when he doesn't get them himself. So that's a rotation of 7, with Blue getting additional time because we need minutes and he's the best defender on the bench.
My question is what does Buzz do to improve these rotations? Who (outside of your mancrush) has proven they deserve to be on the floor?
I don't have a man crush on gardner, just like you do not have a mancrush on Buycks. Touche.
Gardner can do better than Otule, but he does not even get a chance--other than 30 seconds every third game. Otule plays 13 to 20 minutes, gets a bunch of fouls and is a non factor. What is that proving? We then end up with Crowder and Fulce plating the post, where they are no match for the other bigs in BEast. Play Gardner for 15 minutes a game and let him learn. Just as I said that Cadougan should be getting more minutes, now he is and is producing. Just as I said from day 1 on Crowder. You do not have to believe me, but until Gardner gets that 15 minutes a game for several games to build his confidence, none of us really know--do we?
Then, if Gardner proves such a huge liability-which is what most of the Gardner critics have already made up their mind on--perhaps another direction can be taken.
It is not like Otule is doing anything. Start Otule, give him his 15 minutes and use Gardner for the other 15 to 20. That is how he will develop.
I would rather see more of Fulce taking Otule's minutes rather than Gardner. But I have no problem with only playing 7-8 guys. That is the norm for most teams and our four best players are significantly better than the rest.
Quote from: willie warrior on January 23, 2011, 09:55:09 AM
I don't have a man crush on gardner, just like you do not have a mancrush on Buycks. Touche.
Gardner can do better than Otule, but he does not even get a chance--other than 30 seconds every third game. Otule plays 13 to 20 minutes, gets a bunch of fouls and is a non factor. What is that proving? We then end up with Crowder and Fulce plating the post, where they are no match for the other bigs in BEast. Play Gardner for 15 minutes a game and let him learn. Just as I said that Cadougan should be getting more minutes, now he is and is producing. Just as I said from day 1 on Crowder. You do not have to believe me, but until Gardner gets that 15 minutes a game for several games to build his confidence, none of us really know--do we?
Then, if Gardner proves such a huge liability-which is what most of the Gardner critics have already made up their mind on--perhaps another direction can be taken.
It is not like Otule is doing anything. Start Otule, give him his 15 minutes and use Gardner for the other 15 to 20. That is how he will develop.
You say you don't have a mancrush on Gardner, yet when I specifically disregard him in my argument, you spend the entire post talking about Gardner. I talked about the rotation in regards to other players that there is no bias for or against. Yet you couldn't do that. Sorry, willie, but that's a mancrush.
And there's nothing wrong with a good mancrush. Though I don't have a mancrush on any Warrior at the moment, haven't since Wes graduated. It's close on Buycks, but he's not consistent enough for me to really be crushing on him.
As far as Gardner, personally, I haven't seen enough from him in his brief recent stints to see why he deserves it. I know that you would probably say "how can he prove anything when he's not on the court" but when I see him get out there for one minute and give up two ole baskets, it's hard to justify giving him more time. I fully believe he'll be a very good player for us, but I'm not sure Big East time is when we want to experiment with that. With Cadougan, it was forced because of the injury to Buycks. If Gardner does get a big opportunity, I hope he makes the best of it, but in his small opportunities, I don't think he has.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 24, 2011, 06:26:58 AM
You say you don't have a mancrush on Gardner, yet when I specifically disregard him in my argument, you spend the entire post talking about Gardner. I talked about the rotation in regards to other players that there is no bias for or against. Yet you couldn't do that. Sorry, willie, but that's a mancrush.
And there's nothing wrong with a good mancrush. Though I don't have a mancrush on any Warrior at the moment, haven't since Wes graduated. It's close on Buycks, but he's not consistent enough for me to really be crushing on him.
As far as Gardner, personally, I haven't seen enough from him in his brief recent stints to see why he deserves it. I know that you would probably say "how can he prove anything when he's not on the court" but when I see him get out there for one minute and give up two ole baskets, it's hard to justify giving him more time. I fully believe he'll be a very good player for us, but I'm not sure Big East time is when we want to experiment with that. With Cadougan, it was forced because of the injury to Buycks. If Gardner does get a big opportunity, I hope he makes the best of it, but in his small opportunities, I don't think he has.
I guess if you read the post then you would understand that I am saying that Gardner is who I would put into the rotation. Williams is not getting the job done and Jones is not going to play before Fulce, Blue or any of the others in the current rotation.
I have not seen Gardner give up two baskets in a minute. I have seen Williams, and most of the other MU players do it on occasion. Gardner plays 30 seconds about every third game, so he is not giving up two baskets in a minute. He is not getting any opportunity--and IMO performs as well as Otule.
When Gardner has been put into the rotation since BE play has begun, it has been a disaster. Furthermore, Buzz sees things in practice that we do not see. There are reasons that he isn't playing. He hasn't earned the right to play either in practice or during the games.
You say that he should play 15 minutes a game to "let him learn." What program does this? Who puts in a freshman, who is 10th on the bench, to "let him learn" in close conference games? You learn in practice. You prove yourself in practice. Obviously Ox isn't doing that right now.