I sat with an old high school friend who played low D1 ball, but who I would qualify as an "ESPN" bball fan-- knowledgable, but not fan of either program, more of a fan of basketball but with little knowledge of either team. Some of his observations I found interesting:
- We were only a few rows back, so we could hear a lot. He was blown away by the lack of fire by MU, almost devoid of emotion. No leadership on the court at all.
- Couldn't understand how a D1 point guard wouldn't take/make a jumper just a step back from a free throw
- Commented that Gasser plays good D, but know way a "shooter" (Jake) doesn't get off shots. Couldn't understand how MU didn't have better options.
- Commented that the "Cyclops" cheer/taunting by the student section when Otule was shooting free throws was so classless for a fan base that thinks so highly of themselves.
- Thought MU should always run offense through Jamil and big guys, no other options -- thought Jamil should shoot more
- Thought Jamil would get a shot at NBA -- better chance than Blue
- UW was beatable on this day, but MU played "stupid" -- how Gardner was matched up with Dekker a handful of times was ridiculous
- Thought Jake looked like a walk-on just in there to pass
- Said UW has a great "team" concept going, but that Jackson is such an un-BO player and will cost them down the line because he is selfish
Quote from: Freeport Warrior on December 08, 2013, 01:14:58 PM
I sat with an old high school friend who played low D1 ball, but who I would qualify as an "ESPN" bball fan-- knowledgable, but not fan of either program, more of a fan of basketball but with little knowledge of either team. Some of his observations I found interesting:
- We were only a few rows back, so we could hear a lot. He was blown away by the lack of fire by MU, almost devoid of emotion. No leadership on the court at all.
- Couldn't understand how a D1 point guard wouldn't take/make a jumper just a step back from a free throw
- Commented that Gasser plays good D, but know way a "shooter" (Jake) doesn't get off shots. Couldn't understand how MU didn't have better options.
- Commented that the "Cyclops" cheer/taunting by the student section when Otule was shooting free throws was so classless for a fan base that thinks so highly of themselves.
- Thought MU should always run offense through Jamil and big guys, no other options -- thought Jamil should shoot more
- Thought Jamil would get a shot at NBA -- better chance than Blue
- UW was beatable on this day, but MU played "stupid" -- how Gardner was matched up with Dekker a handful of times was ridiculous
- Thought Jake looked like a walk-on just in there to pass
- Said UW has a great "team" concept going, but that Jackson is such an un-BO player and will cost them down the line because he is selfish
I believe I said something similar last week being only two rows behind the MU bench in Anaheim. There was a bit of pop at the end of the SDSU game, but not as much as I expected or the love for fellow player I saw with some of the other teams in the past (when Matthews, McNeal, Jae, etc were cheering on their guys).
I actually felt like Jae was trying like crazy to get open but there was a Badger in his grill all game. Now, part of that is because Jake lacks the athleticism to get open, but I honestly didn't feel like he avoided taking shots...he didn't have many opportunities to take any.
I agree this team has chemistry issues, not just related to Mayo. Lack of OKGs.
One of the problems Jake has is that he is the only real three point threat on the team, which makes it easy for a team to key on him. Much different than the UW team who starts 5 three point shooters, so you cannot key on any one player. Jake was never left open in UW game.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 01:30:51 PM
I actually felt like Jake was trying like crazy to get open but there was a Badger in his grill all game. Now, part of that is because Jake lacks the athleticism to get open, but I honestly didn't feel like he avoided taking shots...he didn't have many opportunities to take any.
I don't know about that. Many, many times it was as if Jake pre-determined he was going to quickly pass each time he got the ball. We teach kids early to "fake a pass, make a pass" and Jake was playing "hot potato" without even sniffing the idea of facing up, putting it on the floor or even looking to shoot. I don't mind Jake when he's shooting, but when he's not even looking to score, he has little value IMO.
Quote from: bilsu on December 08, 2013, 01:36:05 PM
One of the problems Jake has is that he is the only real three point threat on the team, which makes it easy for a team to key on him. Much different than the UW team who starts 5 three point shooters, so you cannot key on any one player. Jake was never left open in UW game.
If you ask me, Jamil and Todd are more of 3 point threats against any average to above average Division 1 basketball team. Too bad Todd can't stay on the court. Jake's biggest problem is that he can't do anything but shoot the ball. The defense doesn't have to worry about Jake pump faking and going by them and making something happen. Jake went by his defender once or twice and ended up just picking up the ball in the paint not knowing what to do. The only thing the defense has to do when Jake gets the ball is get into his chest and get a hand up. After that, nothing good is going to happen.
They were chanting "cyclops?" Wow. Shame on them. Seriously.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on December 08, 2013, 01:41:00 PM
They were chanting "cyclops?" Wow. Shame on them. Seriously.
It was during one of the first free throw attempts by Otule when he wasn't facing the student section. It was really loud at first, then tapered out. I don't recall them doing it again, but it reminded me of the PLO chant at Kerr chant back at AZ. Like you said, classless.
Quote from: ElDonBDon on December 08, 2013, 01:41:00 PM
They were chanting "cyclops?" Wow. Shame on them. Seriously.
This never would have happened if Donna Shalala were still in Madison dispensing her curiously potent brand of political correctness
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQIl_gh_9FjtJb80Dtfx5HejwC_-DSgjcVH82B7_2SqduuKg4Hz)
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 01:30:51 PM
I actually felt like Jae was trying like crazy to get open but there was a Badger in his grill all game. Now, part of that is because Jake lacks the athleticism to get open, but I honestly didn't feel like he avoided taking shots...he didn't have many opportunities to take any.
Not part of it, all of it.
Quote from: keefe on December 08, 2013, 01:51:06 PM
This never would have happened if Donna Shalala were still in Madison dispensing her curiously potent brand of political correctness
(https://encrypted-tbn2.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcQIl_gh_9FjtJb80Dtfx5HejwC_-DSgjcVH82B7_2SqduuKg4Hz)
Is that Ben Stiller's dad?
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 01:30:51 PM
I actually felt like Jae was trying like crazy to get open but there was a Badger in his grill all game.
Oh, if only typos could talk ... and if only Jake was 1/20th the player Jae was!
Quote from: bilsu on December 08, 2013, 01:36:05 PM
One of the problems Jake has is that he is the only real three point threat on the team, which makes it easy for a team to key on him. Much different than the UW team who starts 5 three point shooters, so you cannot key on any one player. Jake was never left open in UW game.
Jamil Wilson is a better three point option than Thomas. JT is a D-2 player.
Davante made more 3 point shots than our guards.
We were outhussled in Madison just like at the Honda center
Quote from: elephantraker on December 08, 2013, 03:06:54 PM
Davante made more 3 point shots than our guards.
We were outhussled in Madison just like at the Honda center
Agreed. That is my biggest worry. The only players who seemed to want to fight to win were Jamil and Deonte. The rest seemed indifferent.
Quote from: elephantraker on December 08, 2013, 03:06:54 PM
Davante made more 3 point shots than our guards.
We were outhussled in Madison just like at the Honda center
We were not outhustled. They had like 7 crazy long rebounds that went right too them. We had a guy who took a dive on the floor headfirst (Burton) after one of those crazy hops that went directly too a badger. If you ask me sometimes we hustle to much and put ourselves out of a bunch of plays.
If the Badgers miss two more three pointers we we win this game and somehow than we would have not been outhustled? apparently you can only be outhustled if you lose.
Dont be mad for the wrong thing. Be mad that we did not win, not because we were Outhustled. It is almost as bad as someone saying "They wanted it more"
Long shots result in long rebounds. That has nothing to with hustle or lack thereof. we generally were beaten to spots and late in reacting to movement. Opposition had more movement and quickness not only this game but the previous one. Also happened to be mentioned to me by a former member of this program.
Quote from: Freeport Warrior on December 08, 2013, 01:14:58 PM
I sat with an old high school friend who played low D1 ball, but who I would qualify as an "ESPN" bball fan-- knowledgable, but not fan of either program, more of a fan of basketball but with little knowledge of either team. Some of his observations I found interesting:
- We were only a few rows back, so we could hear a lot. He was blown away by the lack of fire by MU, almost devoid of emotion. No leadership on the court at all.
- Couldn't understand how a D1 point guard wouldn't take/make a jumper just a step back from a free throw
- Commented that Gasser plays good D, but know way a "shooter" (Jake) doesn't get off shots. Couldn't understand how MU didn't have better options.
- Commented that the "Cyclops" cheer/taunting by the student section when Otule was shooting free throws was so classless for a fan base that thinks so highly of themselves.
- Thought MU should always run offense through Jamil and big guys, no other options -- thought Jamil should shoot more
- Thought Jamil would get a shot at NBA -- better chance than Blue
- UW was beatable on this day, but MU played "stupid" -- how Gardner was matched up with Dekker a handful of times was ridiculous
- Thought Jake looked like a walk-on just in there to pass
- Said UW has a great "team" concept going, but that Jackson is such an un-BO player and will cost them down the line because he is selfish
People keep referring to a point guard - We don't have one period!!!!!!!!!
Jake does get open coming off of screens, but...... see previous sentence.
Quote from: KenoshaWarrior on December 08, 2013, 04:29:57 PM
We were not outhustled. They had like 7 crazy long rebounds that went right too them. We had a guy who took a dive on the floor headfirst (Burton) after one of those crazy hops that went directly too a badger. If you ask me sometimes we hustle to much and put ourselves out of a bunch of plays.
If the Badgers miss two more three pointers we we win this game and somehow than we would have not been outhustled? apparently you can only be outhustled if you lose.
Dont be mad for the wrong thing. Be mad that we did not win, not because we were Outhustled. It is almost as bad as someone saying "They wanted it more"
Disagree. We were out hustled more than a few times. They were fired up and it showed in their effort.
They might have been energized by a home crowd but they had the lead the whole game so of course they were going to have tons of energy.
We were on the floor diving for loose ball. Just didnt come up with those balls.
Back to the top as you say "ESPN" bball fan-- knowledgable we don't take ESPN, we take FS1 or CBS. ;)
I agree with the leader thing. It needs to be Jamil. Trouble is, he is too nice of a guy. If you ever meet him, he's a great guy. I spent 20+ minutes with him last spring. Enjoyed every minute of it.
Someone has to get him ticked off. Really ticked off. Yesterday was the first time I've seen him play live. He was the best athlete on the floor. By a long shot. Dude has NBA skills. Too bad he chooses to waste them.
If Jamil gets it figured out...the leadership thing, this team will be dangerous.
Quote from: 79Warrior on December 08, 2013, 02:51:39 PM
Jamil Wilson is a better three point option than Thomas. JT is a D-2 player.
I gave JT the benefit of the doubt but he doesn't belong in the starting rotation of a Big East team.
He's there because our PG can't shoot.
Two guards playing essentially one position.
That causes STRESS on a team.
We were outhustled, too many times UW going after ball while we stayed on back of our heels. Maybe not game deciding but not a plus.
I think J Will became the leader yesterday. Looked like he said ENOUGH and was putting it out there. That's my hope anyway. Not sure DG is the leader type, not really sure J Will is either, but I saw some flashes of it. Your team big fella, seize it. Show these guys how to win and more importantly, how to never quit.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 08, 2013, 05:15:48 PM
I agree with the leader thing. It needs to be Jamil. Trouble is, he is too nice of a guy. If you ever meet him, he's a great guy. I spent 20+ minutes with him last spring. Enjoyed every minute of it.
Someone has to get him ticked off. Really ticked off. Yesterday was the first time I've seen him play live. He was the best athlete on the floor. By a long shot. Dude has NBA skills. Too bad he chooses to waste them.
If Jamil gets it figured out...the leadership thing, this team will be dangerous.
I dunno. Tim Duncan -- a.k.a. "The Big Easy" -- very good leader. Wayne Gretzky, one of the great guys in sports, very good leader. Joe Montana, a sweetheart, not a bad leader. Derek Jeter, never has a bad thing to say, good leader. I could go on
One need not be a jerk to be a good leader.
Quote from: MU82 on December 08, 2013, 05:29:46 PM
I dunno. Tim Duncan -- a.k.a. "The Big Easy" -- very good leader. Wayne Gretzky, one of the great guys in sports, very good leader. Joe Montana, a sweetheart, not a bad leader. Derek Jeter, never has a bad thing to say, good leader. I could go on
One need not be a jerk to be a good leader.
Never met those guys, so I can't argue your points.
Just know Jamil has the ability to do it. He just has to want to.
Quote from: real chili 83 on December 08, 2013, 05:37:57 PM
Never met those guys, so I can't argue your points.
Just know Jamil has the ability to do it. He just has to want to.
I agree with you. A nice guy can want to lead -- and can lead very effectively. Those traits are not mutually exclusive.
They got completely outworked yesterday. They lost just about every 50-50 ball, which helped UW keep them at arms length. Not to mention the lazy closeouts and rotations.
They don't get how hard they have to play to overcome their deficiencies yet.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 08, 2013, 01:51:50 PM
Not part of it, all of it.
Which begs the question why don't we do more to get him open. It's hard for me to believe some of the guys over the years like Alford, etc, were any more athletic, but maybe they were. Those teams would set double, triple staggered screens if they had to get those shooters open.
That's what has frustrated me. No effort to shed guys off our one legitimate three point shooter. Yet other teams put shots from above the arc seemingly at will
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 09:05:20 PM
Which begs the question why don't we do more to get him open. It's hard for me to believe some of the guys over the years like Alford, etc, were any more athletic, but maybe they were. Those teams would set double, triple staggered screens if they had to get those shooters open.
Alford was way more athletic. He could get his own shot and spent a lot of time at the free throw like. Jake is much more like Steve Novak athletically. Problem is he's 6'3" not 6'10" and only a good shooter not a great one. Why would a team with as good shooters (J Wilson, Mayo) and much better scorers (everyone on the team but Derrick and Dylan Flood) be running triple screens for A guy who shoots in the low 30s?
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 08, 2013, 09:21:20 PM
Alford was way more athletic. He could get his own shot and spent a lot of time at the free throw like. Jake is much more like Steve Novak athletically. Problem is he's 6'3" not 6'10" and only a good shooter not a great one. Why would a team with as good shooters (J Wilson, Mayo) and much better scorers (everyone on the team but Derrick and Dylan Flood) be running triple screens for A guy who shoots in the low 30s?
Exactly. Alford was the best player on a championship team. Novak was one of the best shooters in basketball history. You make springing them the major part of your offense.
Jake Thomas is ... well ... not Steve Alford or Steve Novak.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 08, 2013, 09:21:20 PM
Alford was way more athletic. He could get his own shot and spent a lot of time at the free throw like. Jake is much more like Steve Novak athletically. Problem is he's 6'3" not 6'10" and only a good shooter not a great one. Why would a team with as good shooters (J Wilson, Mayo) and much better scorers (everyone on the team but Derrick and Dylan Flood) be running triple screens for A guy who shoots in the low 30s?
And why waste the effort on a triple-screen when the PG doesn't know how to get him the ball anyway?
Quote from: MU82 on December 08, 2013, 10:17:37 PM
Exactly. Alford was the best player on a championship team. Novak was one of the best shooters in basketball history. You make springing them the major part of your offense.
Jake Thomas is ... well ... not Steve Alford or Steve Novak.
To be clear, I'm not saying Jake Thomas is Alford or Novak. I'm asking the question why we don't seem to run many screens for the guy. As for Alford creating his own shot, I guess my memory is fuzzy because I don't remember it that way. I don't remember it that way in RMK's basketball theory class either, I remember the words that he was slow as a donkey but he worked his butt off and they played smart basketball to clear him for some open shots. Who knows the memory can be fuzzy, I just don't remember it.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 05:27:29 PM
I think J Will became the leader yesterday. Looked like he said ENOUGH and was putting it out there. That's my hope anyway. Not sure DG is the leader type, not really sure J Will is either, but I saw some flashes of it. Your team big fella, seize it. Show these guys how to win and more importantly, how to never quit.
I sure hope so, but I feel like Jamil has shown this tenacity in end-of-game situations before (see Davidson) when their back is against the wall, but doesn't carry over the intensity to the next game. Seems like he often gets going late in games--and unfortunately this season often too late in the game--but struggles to bring the passion for the whole 40 minutes. Need to see that fervor all game long for him to really be a leader.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 11:50:53 PM
To be clear, I'm not saying Jake Thomas is Alford or Novak. I'm asking the question why we don't seem to run many screens for the guy. As for Alford creating his own shot, I guess my memory is fuzzy because I don't remember it that way. I don't remember it that way in RMK's basketball theory class either, I remember the words that he was slow as a donkey but he worked his butt off and they played smart basketball to clear him for some open shots. Who knows the memory can be fuzzy, I just don't remember it.
[/quote
Alford got more screens than all the cabins in the Rhinelander woods. He was a great (college) player who had a great coach who got him the looks he needed to shoot or create. Jake could do the same but he's not good enough to center our offense on him, so he needs to pick his spots.
The big difference I noted is that Bo's players all catch and shot fake and then pass or create. our guys just catch and pass. No threat.
More screens... more shot fakes = more 3's.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 11:50:53 PM
To be clear, I'm not saying Jake Thomas is Alford or Novak. I'm asking the question why we don't seem to run many screens for the guy. As for Alford creating his own shot, I guess my memory is fuzzy because I don't remember it that way. I don't remember it that way in RMK's basketball theory class either, I remember the words that he was slow as a donkey but he worked his butt off and they played smart basketball to clear him for some open shots. Who knows the memory can be fuzzy, I just don't remember it.
Buzz does not run screans for three point shooters. Under Buzz's offense when the guard gets the ball he is expected to drive or pass inside. Jake is what he is, but he is probably playing on the wrong team for him to be successful.
Quote from: bilsu on December 09, 2013, 11:53:04 AM
Buzz does not run screans for three point shooters. Under Buzz's offense when the guard gets the ball he is expected to drive or pass inside. Jake is what he is, but he is probably playing on the wrong team for him to be successful.
Not true at all. Buzz has run plenty sets for Jake to get 3s this season.
Quote from: bilsu on December 09, 2013, 11:53:04 AM
Buzz does not run screans for three point shooters. Under Buzz's offense when the guard gets the ball he is expected to drive or pass inside. Jake is what he is, but he is probably playing on the wrong team for him to be successful.
Disagree, most of the wing action is down screens from the 4 and 5 to free Jake or another shooter.
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 08, 2013, 11:50:53 PM
To be clear, I'm not saying Jake Thomas is Alford or Novak. I'm asking the question why we don't seem to run many screens for the guy. As for Alford creating his own shot, I guess my memory is fuzzy because I don't remember it that way. I don't remember it that way in RMK's basketball theory class either, I remember the words that he was slow as a donkey but he worked his butt off and they played smart basketball to clear him for some open shots. Who knows the memory can be fuzzy, I just don't remember it.
In his senior year (the only year he played with a 3 point line) Alford shot 180 free throws and 60+% of his field goal attempts were inside the arc. His junior year he was 1st team AA with no 3 point line. So, yes, your memory is fuzzy. On an unrelated topic, you took "Basketball Theory" in graduate school? No Horton Roe music courses available at IU :)
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 09, 2013, 01:23:18 PM
In his senior year (the only year he played with a 3 point line) Alford shot 180 free throws and 60+% of his field goal attempts were inside the arc. His junior year he was 1st team AA with no 3 point line. So, yes, your memory is fuzzy. On an unrelated topic, you took "Basketball Theory" in graduate school? No Horton Roe music courses available at IU :)
Didn't take the class, was an observer since I was in grad school.
Looks like other people here have the same fuzzy memory I did, and apparently Coach Knight did as well as he used to talk about how they would need to run Steve off multiple screens to get him open because he was too slow. Down screens, cross screens, slip screens, back screens, etc.
One of many blurbs, this from the NY Times....helping to keep my memory not so fuzzy.
I think UNLV said it well in the NCAA tournament in 1987 Final Four. ''Steve Alford's tough because the entire team is designed to set picks and screens,'' said Mark Wade, the Rebels' guard who was assigned to Alford for much of the game. ''We knew what to expect,'' Wade added. ''In practice we ran through the picks. But in practice the guy setting the pick could be your friend. Out here it was a lot more intense. Tonight, they were looking for me.'' ''It's like trying to get through an offensive line,'' Wade said. ''Everytime you turn around, somebody's setting a pick on you, and the whole offense is geared for getting Steve open and they do a good job of it.''
After the game, Alford said: ''My teammates did an awfully good job of screening for me and having the ball in good position for me. My job is to be in constant movement and read the screen and read the defensive man and be able to knock the jump shot in, and fortunately today a lot of those things happened.''
I'd also suggest picking up a book called "Playing for Knight: My six seasons with Coach Knight". Written by a guy named Steve Alford. ;)
Knight had guys who's job it was to set screens and play defense. His motion offense at IU was predicated on off-the-ball movement and screens. He could also run sets specifically to get shooters open, witness Todd Leary against Duke in the '92 semi-final. Who? Look it up. IU was way down, Knight sent in a guy with one job, to make 3's. They started running him off of double screens and he started raining. Knight's IU teams in the late 70's, 80's and through the mid 90's were some of my favorites to watch. Then his crankiness started repelling recruits.
Another thing about IU under Knight. They didn't have a zone offense. He was so confident and comfortable with his motion offense that he thought he could beat zones with it. His track record shows that he was right. He also wasn't afraid to go small and have 6'2 guys guarding 6'9 guys. He sincerely believed that proper technique and help principles out of his man-to-man would be enough to offset the size differential.
Quote from: tower912 on December 09, 2013, 01:41:37 PM
Knight had guys who's job it was to set screens and play defense. His motion offense at IU was predicated on off-the-ball movement and screens. He could also run sets specifically to get shooters open, witness Todd Leary against Duke in the '92 semi-final. Who? Look it up. IU was way down, Knight sent in a guy with one job, to make 3's. They started running him off of double screens and he started raining. Knight's IU teams in the late 70's, 80's and through the mid 90's were some of my favorites to watch. Then his crankiness started repelling recruits.
Another thing about IU under Knight. They didn't have a zone offense. He was so confident and comfortable with his motion offense that he thought he could beat zones with it. His track record shows that he was right. He also wasn't afraid to go small and have 6'2 guys guarding 6'9 guys. He sincerely believed that proper technique and help principles out of his man-to-man would be enough to offset the size differential.
Correct
Quote from: ChicosBailBonds on December 09, 2013, 01:35:27 PM
Didn't take the class, was an observer since I was in grad school.
Looks like other people here have the same fuzzy memory I did, and apparently Coach Knight did as well as he used to talk about how they would need to run Steve off multiple screens to get him open because he was too slow. Down screens, cross screens, slip screens, back screens, etc.
One of many blurbs, this from the NY Times....helping to keep my memory not so fuzzy.
I think UNLV said it well in the NCAA tournament in 1987 Final Four. ''Steve Alford's tough because the entire team is designed to set picks and screens,'' said Mark Wade, the Rebels' guard who was assigned to Alford for much of the game. ''We knew what to expect,'' Wade added. ''In practice we ran through the picks. But in practice the guy setting the pick could be your friend. Out here it was a lot more intense. Tonight, they were looking for me.'' ''It's like trying to get through an offensive line,'' Wade said. ''Everytime you turn around, somebody's setting a pick on you, and the whole offense is geared for getting Steve open and they do a good job of it.''
After the game, Alford said: ''My teammates did an awfully good job of screening for me and having the ball in good position for me. My job is to be in constant movement and read the screen and read the defensive man and be able to knock the jump shot in, and fortunately today a lot of those things happened.''
I'd also suggest picking up a book called "Playing for Knight: My six seasons with Coach Knight". Written by a guy named Steve Alford. ;)
So how does a slow guy who does nothing but run around screens and shoot 3s shoot 60% of his shots from inside the arc and shoot 180 free throws?
As for reading a book written by Steve Alford, I hope you're kidding.
Would have to agree that we were outhustled - loose balls, OOB plays,etc.
keefer, please don't include photos like the one above without appropriate warnings.
Quote from: Lennys Tap on December 09, 2013, 02:49:57 PM
So how does a slow guy who does nothing but run around screens and shoot 3s shoot 60% of his shots from inside the arc and shoot 180 free throws?
Playing with guards like Keith Smart and Ricky Callaway helps. It helps even more when you can put the ball on the floor and you have a Knight-coached team that was as good as any at setting screens both for the ball handler and off-ball.
Quote from: brandx on December 08, 2013, 10:25:15 PM
And why waste the effort on a triple-screen when the PG doesn't know how to get him the ball anyway?
Plus, he can't do much with the ball when a defender swings to him.
Ever see him blow by anyone? If you did, it was rare. And it may have been in a Coyotes' uni.
Quote from: bilsu on December 09, 2013, 11:53:04 AM
Buzz does not run screans for three point shooters. Under Buzz's offense when the guard gets the ball he is expected to drive or pass inside. Jake is what he is, but he is probably playing on the wrong team for him to be successful.
I see what you did there.