MUScoop

MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: Bling on March 15, 2013, 11:23:38 AM

Title: inexcusable
Post by: Bling on March 15, 2013, 11:23:38 AM
After Pat Connaughton goes 6/8 from three against Rutgers and we allow him to go 6/10 from downtown last night. 

We really had to try to limit his 3pt looks after his hot shooting performance and we did exactly the opposite.  Frustrating.  Miserable miserable miserable effort and overall inexcusable to let him keep firing away like he did.

Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: NavinRJohnson on March 15, 2013, 11:24:46 AM
Thanks for bringing this up. Hasn't been discussed at all in the last 12 hours.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: hairy worthen on March 15, 2013, 11:27:29 AM
Quote from: Bling on March 15, 2013, 11:23:38 AM
After Pat Connaughton goes 6/8 from three against Rutgers and we allow him to go 6/10 from downtown last night. 

We really had to try to limit his 3pt looks after his hot shooting performance and we did exactly the opposite.  Frustrating.  Miserable miserable miserable effort and overall inexcusable to let him keep firing away like he did.



So if it is inexcusable, what do you suggest be done. Fire Buzz? Suspend players?, Tar and feather them? Do you think they actually purposely left the guy open for the 3 so the could lose and go home?
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: Tugg Speedman on March 15, 2013, 11:35:39 AM
Quote from: hairyworthen on March 15, 2013, 11:27:29 AM
So if it is inexcusable, what do you suggest be done. Fire Buzz? Suspend players?, Tar and feather them? Do you think they actually purposely left the guy open for the 3 so the could lose and go home?

+1

Your comment that Connaughton shooting was "inexcusable" suggests his good shooting is entirely our fault and has nothing to do with the way Connaughton performed.

So, did Connaughton have anything to do with this?  Or is he the first player in college basketball history that is automatically a 75% thee-point shooter unless we blanket him?

Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: ATWizJr on March 15, 2013, 11:41:34 AM
Quote from: hairyworthen on March 15, 2013, 11:27:29 AM
So if it is inexcusable, what do you suggest be done. Fire Buzz? Suspend players?, Tar and feather them? Do you think they actually purposely left the guy open for the 3 so the could lose and go home?
Learn from it, I'd say.  they apparently didn't adjust after the Rutgers game.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: LAZER on March 15, 2013, 11:45:40 AM
Quote from: ATWizJr on March 15, 2013, 11:41:34 AM
  Learn from it, I'd say.  they apparently didn't adjust after the Rutgers game.

Agreed, they did a poor job of planning for him.  He had a ton of wide open looks.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: ATWizJr on March 15, 2013, 12:20:48 PM
I'm pretty sure that with Buzz's attention to detail, that a pretty comprehensive scouting job on ND was done prior to last night's game.  Cannot understand how Connaughton was not recognized as a significant threat and game planned for.  Just my opinion.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: chapman on March 15, 2013, 12:24:54 PM
Quote from: ATWizJr on March 15, 2013, 12:20:48 PM
I'm pretty sure that with Buzz's attention to detail, that a pretty comprehensive scouting job on ND was done prior to last night's game.  Cannot understand how Connaughton was not recognized as a significant threat and game planned for.  Just my opinion.

Agree.  When we were trying to throw Anderson on him it just appeared desperate.  Not sure if it was poorly manning Connaughton or more likely not preventing the easy penetration 6 seconds into the shot clock that gave them 29 seconds to work it to a shooter, but something broke down.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: Skatastrophy on March 15, 2013, 01:50:01 PM
Quote from: LAZER on March 15, 2013, 11:45:40 AM
Agreed, they did a poor job of planning for him.  He had a ton of wide open looks.

Every 3 point shooter all season had wide open looks.  This isn't a new problem for us.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: leever on March 15, 2013, 02:42:37 PM
Quote from: hairyworthen on March 15, 2013, 11:27:29 AM
So if it is inexcusable, what do you suggest be done.

Execution.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: JustinLewisFanClubPres on March 15, 2013, 06:27:39 PM
Quote from: leever on March 15, 2013, 02:42:37 PM
Execution.

Of a defensive game plan?  Or the 3 point shooters that are getting open looks?
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: 4everwarriors on March 15, 2013, 06:41:26 PM
Positively, someone shoulda kicked him hard in the baby maker after the third basket.
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: hairy worthen on March 15, 2013, 06:46:04 PM
Quote from: 4everwarriors on March 15, 2013, 06:41:26 PM
Positively, someone shoulda kicked him hard in the baby maker after the third basket.

You mean the baby delivering portal
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: bilsu on March 15, 2013, 06:54:32 PM
Quote from: Bling on March 15, 2013, 11:23:38 AM
After Pat Connaughton goes 6/8 from three against Rutgers and we allow him to go 6/10 from downtown last night. 

We really had to try to limit his 3pt looks after his hot shooting performance and we did exactly the opposite.  Frustrating.  Miserable miserable miserable effort and overall inexcusable to let him keep firing away like he did.


Last night did make me wonder what Jake Thomas would do, if he got so many wide open looks?
Title: Re: inexcusable
Post by: Sunbelt15 on March 15, 2013, 09:05:26 PM
Quote from: bilsu on March 15, 2013, 06:54:32 PM
Last night did make me wonder what Jake Thomas would do, if he got so many wide open looks?

I don't know but our back up point, Wilson, is giving is nothing. We need to run Junior like a race horse. He puts pressure on defenses. A tired Junior is better than a fresh D. Wilson right now. I'm so desperate for one more guard to step up, I'll be willing to play Jamal Ferguson at point. Don't hate me. How many points did Wilson average in high school his senior year? Look to score dude.
EhPortal 1.39.9 © 2025, WebDev