I do not want to be seen as cutting up a kid who has worked hard, but today has put me over the edge. Jake cannot get open for a shot against good athletes (and that's who we're going to be seeing from here on), plays average defense, and does not create anything for his teammates on offense. He is playing SHOOTING guard, for God's sake. Mayo or Dawson should play - both of them SHOT today. I give Jake credit, he was a walk-on, he busted his ass, but he's at a level of competition that's beyond him.
When we run an offense for Jake he gets his shots, no matter how athletic the other team is. It was pretty clear our game plan was to beat them up down low. I remember one specific play for Jake and he got his shot, only problem is it was late in the game and he had no rhythm. You can't blame a guy when the game plan doesn't have him involved.
The coach is the one who determines who plays and to what extent. This is Buzz's loss. At the end of regulation our 2 guard had not even taken a shot and our PG had 5 points. No disrespect to these guys but we have not and cannot win with this tandem getting the minutes they do.
I second that.
Is it Buzz's fault for not drawing up plays for him? I guess that could be the case, but that also points to Jake being one-dimensional.
He plays his heart out but it doesn't help when he's really a second/third-tier player against first-tier players.
Jake can't take his man off the dribble, defend elite and bigger guards, and make his own shot.
So he has to play with his head. Which is fine but it's not going to overcome his inadequate athletic ability.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 25, 2014, 04:10:39 PM
When we run an offense for Jake he gets his shots, no matter how athletic the other team is. It was pretty clear our game plan was to beat them up down low. I remember one specific play for Jake and he got his shot, only problem is it was late in the game and he had no rhythm. You can't blame a guy when the game plan doesn't have him involved.
Agreed 100%. Teams game plan to not let Jake have any space whatsoever, if they play hime that way it opens up lots of space for everyone else. In exchange Jake won't get a look unless they screw up there game plan, or we specifically run a play to free him.
As you note, we did that once all game.
I counted at least 3 50/50 balls he just watched, and Lord only knows how many times someone moved him out of position to get a rebound.
I'd like to see us scrap the offensive sets that involve CO or DG receiving the ball at the top of the key for some double screens designed to get Jake open for some threes.
Its Buzz Williams loss....
Hes gotta eat that one.... Ran nothing for Jake...
and played him and our starting pg world class defender for 74 minutes... and got a ground breaking 6 points....
0-2 in half an hour of action says it all. One was a 3-pt brick, and I can't even remember the other one.
BUZZ MIGHT AS WELL GO WITH HIS BEST PLAYERS...
AND TRY TO WIN THE BIG EAST TOURNAMENT....
Thats the last chance we have... This season is going up in Flames
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on January 25, 2014, 04:12:35 PM
I second that.
Is it Buzz's fault for not drawing up plays for him? I guess that could be the case, but that also points to Jake being one-dimensional.
He plays his heart out but it doesn't help when he's really a second/third-tier player against first-tier players.
Jake can't take his man off the dribble, defend elite and bigger guards, and make his own shot.
So he has to play with his head. Which is fine but it's not going to overcome his inadequate athletic ability.
You guys are rough. We weren't running plays for Jake because our inside guys were getting single coverage so we were concentrating on getting the ball to them. It's not like you can run one screen and get Jake open. You've really got to use two screeners and I think Buzz would just rather we pound the ball inside.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 25, 2014, 04:19:15 PM
You guys are rough. We weren't running plays for Jake because our inside guys were getting single coverage so we were concentrating on getting the ball to them. It's not like you can run one screen and get Jake open. You've really got to use two screeners and I think Buzz would just rather we pound the ball inside.
But here's the problem I have with this: you SHOULDN'T HAVE to run plays for a starter like Jake.
IF you have to, it's because he's ONE-DIMENSIONAL. He can't shoot it on the bounce. He can't make his own shot. He can't drive it past his defender.
Those traits are NOT starter traits. But the fact he IS a starter says a lot about this team and Buzz.
CT, that's your usually perceptive observation. But just like a football team needs a balance to the running game and passing attack, a hoops team needs to be able to play in and out. With the two guards currently eating the bulk of the minutes, we ain't got much out.
Jake Who? Guy was a ghost today. Can't play him with Derrick. Funny how Jake plays much better with Dawson at the helm - how can a guy be so effective against another team with good backcourt - Georgetown - not even show up in the box score in 30 minutes today against Nova???
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on January 25, 2014, 04:22:57 PM
But here's the problem I have with this: you SHOULDN'T HAVE to run plays for a starter like Jake.
IF you have to, it's because he's ONE-DIMENSIONAL. He can't shoot it on the bounce. He can't make his own shot. He can't drive it past his defender.
Those traits are NOT starter traits. But the fact he IS a starter says a lot about this team and Buzz.
No argument from me. He does occupy an opposition defender at all times, though. At least that helps make room for others. That is a contribution of a sort.
Quote from: mileskishnish72 on January 25, 2014, 04:24:25 PM
CT, that's your usually perceptive observation. But just like a football team needs a balance to the running game and passing attack, a hoops team needs to be able to play in and out. With the two guards currently eating the bulk of the minutes, we ain't got much out.
Agreed.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 25, 2014, 04:26:11 PM
No argument from me. He does occupy an opposition defender at all times, though. At least that helps make room for others. That is a contribution of a sort.
That's pittance.
JJJ can "occupy" a defender.
Deonte can "occupy" a defender.
Flood can "occupy" a defender.
NOT A STARTER.
Time to look forward to the future and get the next crop of kids significant minutes.
Or else lose them.
I predict two transfers at the end of the year: JJJ and Dawson.
We are in sad shape if that justify's a guy being a starter.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 25, 2014, 04:19:15 PM
You guys are rough. We weren't running plays for Jake because our inside guys were getting single coverage so we were concentrating on getting the ball to them. It's not like you can run one screen and get Jake open. You've really got to use two screeners and I think Buzz would just rather we pound the ball inside.
Haha.
Quote from: Superfan on January 25, 2014, 04:31:47 PM
We are in sad shape if that justify's a guy being a starter.
To be clear, I don't think that justifies making him a starter. He's a classic off the bench shooter who can catch a defense off guard. The other thing is that the guy who is chasing him on D doesn't have to be a particularly good defender, just diligent.
Combine him with Derrick, and it is possible, if you are so inclined, to use your best perimeter defender as a one man disruptive zone within a man-to-man defense.
lots of grumbling on Buzz's choice of lineup on the way out of the Bradley....
Quote from: Nevada233 on January 25, 2014, 04:14:49 PM
Its Buzz Williams loss....
Hes gotta eat that one.... Ran nothing for Jake...
and played him and our starting pg world class defender for 74 minutes... and got a ground breaking 6 points....
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 25, 2014, 04:10:39 PM
When we run an offense for Jake he gets his shots, no matter how athletic the other team is. It was pretty clear our game plan was to beat them up down low. I remember one specific play for Jake and he got his shot, only problem is it was late in the game and he had no rhythm. You can't blame a guy when the game plan doesn't have him involved.
If Jake isn't part of the offensive game plan, can anyone justify playing him? He's slow footed, defensively challenged against quicker players who can drive, can't get his own shots because he goes soft around his picks and honestly takes playing time away from better players.
On the other hand, he's a swell guy who works hard in practice and is a senior. i'd like to think this year is over and with 4 seniors starting along with a subpar PG, we'd be better served getting more playing time for our returning players.
Who lost his man on that last play of regulation? Definitely a screw up.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on January 25, 2014, 04:22:57 PM
But here's the problem I have with this: you SHOULDN'T HAVE to run plays for a starter like Jake.
IF you have to, it's because he's ONE-DIMENSIONAL. He can't shoot it on the bounce. He can't make his own shot. He can't drive it past his defender.
Those traits are NOT starter traits. But the fact he IS a starter says a lot about this team and Buzz.
Agree 100%. I doubt he starts on ANY other BE team.
Quote from: 77ncaachamps on January 25, 2014, 04:29:56 PM
That's pittance.
JJJ can "occupy" a defender.
Deonte can "occupy" a defender.
Flood can "occupy" a defender.
NOT A STARTER.
Time to look forward to the future and get the next crop of kids significant minutes.
Or else lose them.
I predict two transfers at the end of the year: JJJ and Dawson.
yeah... Ive seen enought to know... one of them can get quality minutes... elsewhere....
Quote from: Nevada233 on January 25, 2014, 05:47:19 PM
yeah... Ive seen enought to know... one of them can get quality minutes... elsewhere....
Dawson stays. JJJ, who knows.
The Good news is Jake is gone next year. The minutes he got today was ridiculous along with the sorry ass point guard Wilson... we will never win anything with that combo...
Just stop, please. Jake was the best defender again today, and got more respect from Villanova on defense than any of our other players. To his credit, he also didn't force anything. The problem is - unlike most other teams in college basketball - MU sets no screens in the course of it's regular offense, so we don't get ANYONE open for an outside shot. If we ran Villanova's offense, Jake would have had 20.
Quote from: WarriorFan on January 25, 2014, 08:18:53 PM
Just stop, please. Jake was the best defender again today, and got more respect from Villanova on defense than any of our other players. To his credit, he also didn't force anything. The problem is - unlike most other teams in college basketball - MU sets no screens in the course of it's regular offense, so we don't get ANYONE open for an outside shot. If we ran Villanova's offense, Jake would have had 20.
What rose colored glasses r u looking thru - he got burned time and time again. Jake couldn't find a single shot the entire day and when he did they bricked us into a LOSS...
Quote from: WarriorFan on January 25, 2014, 08:18:53 PM
Just stop, please. Jake was the best defender again today, and got more respect from Villanova on defense than any of our other players. To his credit, he also didn't force anything. The problem is - unlike most other teams in college basketball - MU sets no screens in the course of it's regular offense, so we don't get ANYONE open for an outside shot. If we ran Villanova's offense, Jake would have had 20.
Are you Jake?? That could be the only rationale behind this post.
Quote from: MU86NC on January 25, 2014, 08:25:56 PM
What rose colored glasses r u looking thru - he got burned time and time again. Jake couldn't find a single shot the entire day and when he did they bricked us into a LOSS...
Did you just say Jake's 2 misses caused us to lose? Ok...
Wow....on Tuesday Scoopers were commenting that Jake was one of the best players we had this year (including at least one on this thread)
One overtime loss to a top 10 team later....he's the worst and should never sniff the floor.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 25, 2014, 08:55:06 PM
Wow....on Tuesday Scoopers were commenting that Jake was one of the best players we had this year (including at least one on this thread)
One overtime loss to a top 10 team later....he's the worst and should never sniff the floor.
Yeah...what was the difference? In one game he's actually playing with a PG that can play the position how it's supposed to be played.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 08:58:30 PM
Yeah...what was the difference? In one game he's actually playing with a PG that can play the position how it's supposed to be played.
Ners,
Most of us have jumped on the bandwagon. We want to see more Dawson. You've won. Find a new topic. At least talk about a few other issues because this team has a bunch of them. From what I can see (didn't get to watch the game) defense seemed to be a much bigger issue than offense this game.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 08:58:30 PM
Yeah...what was the difference? In one game he's actually playing with a PG that can play the position how it's supposed to be played.
So Dawson is a better point guard for Jake but Derrick is a better point guard for Davante and Todd? Really that simple, huh?
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 25, 2014, 09:34:27 PM
Ners,
Most of us have jumped on the bandwagon. We want to see more Dawson. You've won. Find a new topic. At least talk about a few other issues because this team has a bunch of them. From what I can see (didn't get to watch the game) defense seemed to be a much bigger issue than offense this game.
I probably won't drop the topic until I see either: A) Us winning basketball games with Derrick getting 30+ at the point, or B) Until Buzz finally decides to make the decision that is beyond painfully obvious to virtually everyone.
Our offense basically was Mayo creating all kinds of looks on his own, and Davante being the brilliant player that he is..and some nice play by Steve Taylor, who then got his minutes limited in the 2nd half!
Quote from: Lennys Tap on January 25, 2014, 09:42:57 PM
So Dawson is a better point guard for Jake but Derrick is a better point guard for Davante and Todd? Really that simple, huh?
Uh No - Derrick has been credited with an assist on I believe now 15 of Davante's FG's for the entire year...which is ridiculous. Davante backed his guy down repeatedly over and over and over today...it wasn't Derrick driving and dishing a la Junior Cadougan used to do getting DG easy looks. Nor did Derrick get Todd any GOOD looks today - that was all Todd using his gifted offensive skills...
Many here have said Davante and Todd have been disappointments this year - because people are frustrated with our losing...and some want to look for scapegoats other than the real culprit...you of course are in that some faction.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 08:58:30 PM
Yeah...what was the difference? In one game he's actually playing with a PG that can play the position how it's supposed to be played.
I think the zone might have had something to do with it too...
Jake...sucks
Quote from: WarriorFan on January 25, 2014, 08:18:53 PM
Just stop, please. Jake was the best defender again today, and got more respect from Villanova on defense than any of our other players. To his credit, he also didn't force anything. The problem is - unlike most other teams in college basketball - MU sets no screens in the course of it's regular offense, so we don't get ANYONE open for an outside shot. If we ran Villanova's offense, Jake would have had 20.
Villanova's guards torched us, but Jake (and, according to many, Derrick) are stout defensive players.
Given that those two combined for 65 minutes (and contributed 6 whole points), something doesn't seem right with this assertion.
Villanova runs Villanova's offense and believe me, Jake wouldn't be playing for that team. Like pretty much every other high major, Villanova has a handful of guards far better than Jake Thomas.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 09:47:58 PM
Uh No - Derrick has been credited with an assist on I believe now 15 of Davante's FG's for the entire year...which is ridiculous. Davante backed his guy down repeatedly over and over and over today...it wasn't Derrick driving and dishing a la Junior Cadougan used to do getting DG easy looks. Nor did Derrick get Todd any GOOD looks today - that was all Todd using his gifted offensive skills...
Many here have said Davante and Todd have been disappointments this year - because people are frustrated with our losing...and some want to look for scapegoats other than the real culprit...you of course are in that some faction.
The people that have said that Gardner has been a disappointment/regressed this year are delusional and know nothing about basketball.
Quote from: DaCoach on January 25, 2014, 05:18:54 PM
If Jake isn't part of the offensive game plan, can anyone justify playing him? He's slow footed, defensively challenged against quicker players who can drive, can't get his own shots because he goes soft around his picks and honestly takes playing time away from better players.
On the other hand, he's a swell guy who works hard in practice and is a senior. i'd like to think this year is over and with 4 seniors starting along with a subpar PG, we'd be better served getting more playing time for our returning players.
I totally see your point on why play the guy if he's not in the game plan, except I think the game plan did call for him to be a dedicated decoy for most the game. Instead of running the double screens for him to get him open, he was more out there to spread the floor and leave space for Davante and Steve to dominate the paint. I agree it's tough to see someone out there that isn't doing much, but Jake still played an important role that coach felt gave us the best chance to win the game.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 26, 2014, 07:38:50 AM
I totally see your point on why play the guy if he's not in the game plan, except I think the game plan did call for him to be a dedicated decoy for most the game. Instead of running the double screens for him to get him open, he was more out there to spread the floor and leave space for Davante and Steve to dominate the paint. I agree it's tough to see someone out there that isn't doing much, but Jake still played an important role that coach felt gave us the best chance to win the game.
Dedicated decoy? If that was Buzz game plan it would been the most bizarre plan ever devised. While I agree that the reality of Jake's presence on the court might lead one to believe his only asset is that of a spacer, the fact that our starting guards pose the most inept offense in the Big East, our record attests to the failure to succeed. It makes me wonder who Buzz is recruiting now for the future decoy.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 25, 2014, 09:34:27 PM
Ners,
Most of us have jumped on the bandwagon. We want to see more Dawson. You've won. Find a new topic. At least talk about a few other issues because this team has a bunch of them. From what I can see (didn't get to watch the game) defense seemed to be a much bigger issue than offense this game.
Agreed about defense. Which is actually the hilarious part.
People point to Dawson, Deonte, JJJ, Steve being poor on D as a reason they don't play more.
Our "d specialists" are letting 94 points occur.
Quote from: g0lden3agle on January 26, 2014, 07:38:50 AM
I totally see your point on why play the guy if he's not in the game plan, except I think the game plan did call for him to be a dedicated decoy for most the game. Instead of running the double screens for him to get him open, he was more out there to spread the floor and leave space for Davante and Steve to dominate the paint. I agree it's tough to see someone out there that isn't doing much, but Jake still played an important role that coach felt gave us the best chance to win the game.
This. If Gardner is working inside and not being doubled, and Jake forces a defender to be within arm's length at all times, why wouldn't Buzz want Jake in the game all the time?
Quote from: willie warrior on January 26, 2014, 07:10:00 AM
The people that have said that Gardner has been a disappointment/regressed this year are delusional and know nothing about basketball.
People that say Jake is useless and wouldn't play for a D2 team are delusional. There are two players on MU that teams design their whole defensive strategy against, Jake and Gardner.
Yesterday, Nova decided they would let Gardner get his and focus on shutting Jake down. That led to 29 pts 13 rebounds for Gardner, but Jake being shut down. Other teams, focused on Gardner and let Jake partially run free. Jake scores big in those games.
The difference is on offense when they game plan to stop Gardner (zone with Georgetown), we redesign our offense to help Gardner out (move him to the high post). When teams try to shut down Jake, we let them have that and feed it into the post to take advantage of what they give us. Not Jakes fault, we are playing the right way.
If the number 4 team in the nation designs their entire defensive strategy to shut you down (Jake), you are clearly a high D1 talent. When the team still manages to take the number 4 team in the nation to overtime, that makes Jake a high D1 talent on a good basketball team....just one that struggles with consistency.
Whole defensive strategy was to shut down Jake. #4 team in the country scared of a Marquette walk-on, a Division 2 level caliber player. Wow, that is comical.
Quote from: PE8983 on January 26, 2014, 09:08:34 PM
Whole defensive strategy was to shut down Jake. #4 team in the country scared of a Marquette walk-on, a Division 2 level caliber player. Wow, that is comical.
Nah. Nova simply kept someone in front of him. Jake has taken 2 (!) shots inside the arc in BE play. Not his fault. But, itis what it is.
Jake would be draining the threes were he on Butler , Creighton or Nova
Quote from: PE8983 on January 26, 2014, 09:08:34 PM
Whole defensive strategy was to shut down Jake. #4 team in the country scared of a Marquette walk-on, a Division 2 level caliber player. Wow, that is comical.
Whole defensive strategy was a bit of an exaggeration. But he is one of only 2 players on our team that teams gameplan for. Nova made sure that he was never left alone, no help off him, stay in his pocket the entire time.
You don't do that for a non high D1 talent.
A high D1 talent who plays 30 minutes as a SG would find a way to at least score 1 point... Come on.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 04:24:37 PM
Jake Who? Guy was a ghost today. Can't play him with Derrick. Funny how Jake plays much better with Dawson at the helm - how can a guy be so effective against another team with good backcourt - Georgetown - not even show up in the box score in 30 minutes today against Nova???
Hmmm 5 of the 6 games that Jake was in double figures had Derrick Wilson as PG for the majority of the game. His second lowest double figure game was with Dawson as PG. So how exactly does playing with Dawson make Thomas better?
You throw out comments as fact but nothing supports them.
In the GU game Dawson had 4 assists. I don't know how those four assists get spread around to Davante, Thomas and every other player Dawson has made better.
Another fast fact for you, in the GT game the team had two four minute stretches without a basket with Dawson at point in the first half.
You have set Dawson's expectations so high I don't know if he can reach them and when he doesn't you will blame Buzz. Maybe you should temper them with reality for once.
Quote from: CTWarrior on January 25, 2014, 04:41:11 PM
To be clear, I don't think that justifies making him a starter. He's a classic off the bench shooter who can catch a defense off guard. The other thing is that the guy who is chasing him on D doesn't have to be a particularly good defender, just diligent.
1) the WHY is he a starter?
2) sure he can be diligent as a defender, but he got torched for 20 while putting up...zilch.
No offense should be built around him.
If that's so, then this offense is sad sad sad.
Jake is a poor, poor man's Gerry McNamara.
Jake's has earned his scholarship and I appreciate his dedication to this program. But he's gone next year. Time to give the eaglets some significant growing minutes.
Time to push them out of the nest.
Quote from: Ners on January 25, 2014, 09:47:58 PM
Uh No - Derrick has been credited with an assist on I believe now 15 of Davante's FG's for the entire year...which is ridiculous. Davante backed his guy down repeatedly over and over and over today...it wasn't Derrick driving and dishing a la Junior Cadougan used to do getting DG easy looks. Nor did Derrick get Todd any GOOD looks today - that was all Todd using his gifted offensive skills...
I will add onto the my previous post that Davante had 29 points with Derrick Wilson as PG. Wilson had 7 assists most were to Gardner. If Wilson is so stifling of Davante how did he get 29points. Another inconvenient truth to your narrative.
Quote from: BallBoy on January 26, 2014, 11:51:19 PM
I will add onto the my previous post that Davante had 29 points with Derrick Wilson as PG. Wilson had 7 assists most were to Gardner. If Wilson is so stifling of Davante how did he get 29points. Another inconvenient truth to your narrative.
If you remember the game, most of Davante's points came after he got the ball 10 or 15 feet from the post and he gradually backed his man in as Villanova flat refused to double-team the post.
Had the game been on the road, the player who passed to Gardner likely would not have been credited with assists on those plays -- and that would have been correct, because the passes did not directly lead to baskets. But home scoring is often the equivalent of home cookin' -- not just at MU but all around the country.
Another Derrick assist came when he handed the ball to Mayo, who dribbled into the deep corner and hit that ridiculous 3.
I'm not ripping Derrick here, I'm just addressing your post. (Though, for the sake of honesty, I'll admit that I don't think Derrick is a high-major PG.)
Quote from: BallBoy on January 26, 2014, 11:51:19 PM
I will add onto the my previous post that Davante had 29 points with Derrick Wilson as PG. Wilson had 7 assists most were to Gardner. If Wilson is so stifling of Davante how did he get 29points. Another inconvenient truth to your narrative.
Liar, liar, pants on fire!
Quote from: BallBoy on January 26, 2014, 11:51:19 PM
I will add onto the my previous post that Davante had 29 points with Derrick Wilson as PG. Wilson had 7 assists most were to Gardner. If Wilson is so stifling of Davante how did he get 29points. Another inconvenient truth to your narrative.
You and I tend to fall on the same "side" of this debate or at least see things the same way. However, according to the play by play on espn.com, Derrick's assists break down like this:
REGULATION
- Chris for dunk. Good post-entry pass (thought Derrick couldn't do this) to Chris
- Steve for layup. Don't remember this play but must have been another interior pass which derrick cannot do
- Jamil for layup. same comment as for steve
- Jamil for jumper
- Todd Mayo layup
- Todd Mayo 3-pointer
OT
- Gardner for jumper
So in regulation, 4 out of 6 assists were for layups/dunks to four different guys. I don't remember the particulars for some of them, but as is usually the case, the bashers are making up their own facts (Derrick's assists are BS, Gardner backed his guy down and did all the work, etc., etc.). Total fantasy made up by a bunch of frustrated fans looking for someone to blame.
BTW, 6-9 of Gardners buckets were credited an assist, mostly by Jamil.
I agree that Derrick isn't great. I would like to see him split time with John Dawson. But, he's not as bad as most here make him out to be. A simple review of the facts tells you that.
Quote from: ATL MU Warrior on January 27, 2014, 07:14:36 AM
You and I tend to fall on the same "side" of this debate or at least see things the same way. However, according to the play by play on espn.com, Derrick's assists break down like this:
I agree that Derrick isn't great. I would like to see him split time with John Dawson. But, he's not as bad as most here make him out to be. A simple review of the facts tells you that.
I stand corrected. I was trying to go off of memory which is the first mistake.
I am in agreement with your second comment as well.
People complaining about Jake and D Wil's defense, Nova averages 81 ppg. They held them to 77 in regulation. So in a bad defensive game, they held them to 4 under their average. The FROSH would have given up 80/90 points IMHO
You forget the guards they were guarding (Bell, Hilliard, & Arcidiacono) scored around 60 of the 77 pts and their defense had nothing to do with VU missing 5 of 7 FTs in the last 1:11 in regulation. D. Wilson's great defense also allowed VU to go the length of the court in 5 seconds and score at the end of regulation (which should have counted). IMHO their defense was less than adequate.