The best part of the game was not seeing Juan Anderson until the last few minutes of the game. This might wake him up or Buzz has realized he needs more than hustle from another player.
The next move is sitting Jake. If you watch the game closely, the Villanova players were told not to leave him, do not help out which is the reason Villanova got so many easy 3 looks as MU
does play help D. Buzz should have seen that and realized Jake is not getting open today, which he did not. It is to bad Deonte Burton has not learned that once he gets the ball, he has
to shot no matter how bad the shot is, and he does get stuck in bad situations, then Buzz seats him. Deonte learn from that.
The best news is that Steve Taylor is now on board and showed he can play, it is to bad he lost December, he just needs to play more minutes. He also has to go up stronger, gets a little lazy
it seems on his release. Has to get tougher, next year he should be fine with Fisher and Pierce.
Finally, Derrick just is not good enough, defensively or offensively. Every good team this year has eaten him alive. Could not even defend the last play, was not quick enough or fast enough
to get in front of the offensive player. Time for Buzz to rethink the rest of the year. The only way MU can go to the tournament is win the Big East tourney. This week Bryce Cotton, another
tough little guard that will eat MU up. Will Buzz realize he needs to make a change?
I don't think Buzz will make any changes. All hope I had for him seeing the light this year faded after today. I really thought after Dawson's performance against Gtown, he would get a really fair shot at some decent playing time. Buzz seems so stubborn this year and his ego is getting the best of him. Hopefully a trip to the NIT will bring him back to earth...that's if we get in, not a given.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 25, 2014, 11:25:59 PM
The best part of the game was not seeing Juan Anderson until the last few minutes of the game. This might wake him up or Buzz has realized he needs more than hustle from another player.
The next move is sitting Jake. If you watch the game closely, the Villanova players were told not to leave him, do not help out which is the reason Villanova got so many easy 3 looks as MU
does play help D. Buzz should have seen that and realized Jake is not getting open today, which he did not. It is to bad Deonte Burton has not learned that once he gets the ball, he has
to shot no matter how bad the shot is, and he does get stuck in bad situations, then Buzz seats him. Deonte learn from that.
The best news is that Steve Taylor is now on board and showed he can play, it is to bad he lost December, he just needs to play more minutes. He also has to go up stronger, gets a little lazy
it seems on his release. Has to get tougher, next year he should be fine with Fisher and Pierce.
Finally, Derrick just is not good enough, defensively or offensively. Every good team this year has eaten him alive. Could not even defend the last play, was not quick enough or fast enough
to get in front of the offensive player. Time for Buzz to rethink the rest of the year. The only way MU can go to the tournament is win the Big East tourney. This week Bryce Cotton, another
tough little guard that will eat MU up. Will Buzz realize he needs to make a change?
Juan: Agree
Jake: Couldn't agree less. You can't take your only three point threat off the floor
Derrick: Buzz thinks he's the best option. And even his pundits agree that he is better defensively then Dawson. Defense was the problem against Nova, not offense. We wouldn't have sniffed OT if Dawson was in the game IMHO
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 25, 2014, 11:25:59 PM
The best part of the game was not seeing Juan Anderson until the last few minutes of the game. This might wake him up or Buzz has realized he needs more than hustle from another player.
The next move is sitting Jake. If you watch the game closely, the Villanova players were told not to leave him, do not help out which is the reason Villanova got so many easy 3 looks as MU
does play help D. Buzz should have seen that and realized Jake is not getting open today, which he did not. It is to bad Deonte Burton has not learned that once he gets the ball, he has
to shot no matter how bad the shot is, and he does get stuck in bad situations, then Buzz seats him. Deonte learn from that.
The best news is that Steve Taylor is now on board and showed he can play, it is to bad he lost December, he just needs to play more minutes. He also has to go up stronger, gets a little lazy
it seems on his release. Has to get tougher, next year he should be fine with Fisher and Pierce.
Finally, Derrick just is not good enough, defensively or offensively. Every good team this year has eaten him alive. Could not even defend the last play, was not quick enough or fast enough
to get in front of the offensive player. Time for Buzz to rethink the rest of the year. The only way MU can go to the tournament is win the Big East tourney. This week Bryce Cotton, another
tough little guard that will eat MU up. Will Buzz realize he needs to make a change?
Buzz saw that Nova was playing tight on Jake and understood how much that opened things up for Gardner in the post.
Quote from: TAMU Eagle on January 27, 2014, 09:03:23 AM
Juan: Agree
Jake: Couldn't agree less. You can't take your only three point threat off the floor
Derrick: Buzz thinks he's the best option. And even his pundits agree that he is better defensively then Dawson. Defense was the problem against Nova, not offense. We wouldn't have sniffed OT if Dawson was in the game IMHO
TAMU, I agree with you on the defensive angle, but in OT Derrick wasn't guarding Arch, Mayo was. And once OT started to get away from them they needed shooters as the defense wasn't holding up. I agree with Derrick getting them to OT, but Dawson should have played a couple of minutes in OT.
Quote from: mu03eng on January 27, 2014, 09:14:14 AM
TAMU, I agree with you on the defensive angle, but in OT Derrick wasn't guarding Arch, Mayo was. And once OT started to get away from them they needed shooters as the defense wasn't holding up. I agree with Derrick getting them to OT, but Dawson should have played a couple of minutes in OT.
How about switching to a zone so they would not get lay-up after lay-up??
sooo...ur saying that after them burying threes and having alineup of 4 to 5 guards at all times that includeds dead eye snipers like bell, hillard, chennault, and arcidiacono, coupled with the fact that we couldnt get a defensive rebound all day long.....we should then switch to a zone??
these are the post that usually have me staying away from the boards after a loss. They are so incomprehensibly dumb that i feel dumber for reading them. Unfortunately our coaching staff and the best thing to happen to Mu coaching since 1964 also reads them
River Rat, in the long run playing zone you will find out that shots are finally missed, they are not going to shot 60% from 3 land, yes, they were good 3 point shooters, yes we did not get
many or any long rebounds during the game, but back door lay-ups and lay-ups are much easier to make. The last play was a perfect example how bad MU's defense was, Derrick could not
even stay in front of Chenault, rather have him jack up a 3 then giving him a lay-up which he got and Taylor was in the box. Dumb, I do not think so, dumb for not trying something different.
I think I have seen enough ball over 60 years to see what is going on, on the floor. Remember, or maybe you are to young, the reason MU beat NC in the 1977 finals was Al realizing he could
not defend NC man to man with a bad defensive player, Bernard Toone on the floor, went to a zone and stopped them.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 27, 2014, 10:37:12 AM
River Rat, in the long run playing zone you will find out that shots are finally missed, they are not going to shot 60% from 3 land, yes, they were good 3 point shooters, yes we did not get
many or any long rebounds during the game, but back door lay-ups and lay-ups are much easier to make. The last play was a perfect example how bad MU's defense was, Derrick could not
even stay in front of Chenault, rather have him jack up a 3 then giving him a lay-up which he got and Taylor was in the box. Dumb, I do not think so, dumb for not trying something different.
I think I have seen enough ball over 60 years to see what is going on, on the floor. Remember, or maybe you are to young, the reason MU beat NC in the 1977 finals was Al realizing he could
not defend NC man to man with a bad defensive player, Bernard Toone on the floor, went to a zone and stopped them.
How many 3's did UNC make in that game?
Quote from: MerrittsMustache on January 27, 2014, 10:43:48 AM
How many 3's did UNC make in that game?
Bingo. Comparing the 70's to now with the way the game has changed.... foolish.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 27, 2014, 10:37:12 AM
River Rat, in the long run playing zone you will find out that shots are finally missed, they are not going to shot 60% from 3 land, yes, they were good 3 point shooters, yes we did not get
many or any long rebounds during the game, but back door lay-ups and lay-ups are much easier to make. The last play was a perfect example how bad MU's defense was, Derrick could not
even stay in front of Chenault, rather have him jack up a 3 then giving him a lay-up which he got and Taylor was in the box. Dumb, I do not think so, dumb for not trying something different.
I think I have seen enough ball over 60 years to see what is going on, on the floor. Remember, or maybe you are to young, the reason MU beat NC in the 1977 finals was Al realizing he could
not defend NC man to man with a bad defensive player, Bernard Toone on the floor, went to a zone and stopped them.
Anyone else read Hoopster's post in an Old Tyme voice and staying 'STOP' everytime he starts a new line? Just like a telegram.
You got it figured, I just ramble, stop. ramble, stop. The point on the NC game, is MU could not stop them from going to the basket, just what I wanted Buzz to do against Ryan, who
was having no problem going to the hoop.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 27, 2014, 10:37:12 AM
River Rat, in the long run playing zone you will find out that shots are finally missed, they are not going to shot 60% from 3 land, yes, they were good 3 point shooters, yes we did not get
The last play was a perfect example how bad MU's defense was, Derrick could not even stay in front of Chenault, rather have him jack up a 3 then giving him a lay-up which he got and Taylor was in the box. Dumb,
It is hard to say whether a zone would have been effective but it couldn't have been more ineffective than our man-to-man. The book tells you to play man against a team like Nova so I can see why we didn't switch. The way to beat a zone is to attack the middle or shoot over it until they have to stop using it.
As a side note, the zone is why I believe Dawson was effective against GU. In games where we see more zone, I believe Dawson't PT should increase.
As it relates to the final play, I don't think a zone or even just packing in the man-to-man would have changed the outcome. It is very hard to stay in front of your man when they are at full speed and you are trying to get going. If we had been closer to the basket, I would be more worried that we would have fouled or Taylor would not have had the time to get into position. I also think we needed to move Wilson into the back court to force them to pick up the ball. 5 seconds is an long time to defend on a last second shot.
Wilson did not take a good angle but I am glad that he didn't try to make up for it but getting in front of the defender as he would have fouled him.
Quote from: BallBoy on January 27, 2014, 08:28:15 PM
It is hard to say whether a zone would have been effective but it couldn't have been more ineffective than our man-to-man. The book tells you to play man against a team like Nova so I can see why we didn't switch. The way to beat a zone is to attack the middle or shoot over it until they have to stop using it.
As a side note, the zone is why I believe Dawson was effective against GU. In games where we see more zone, I believe Dawson't PT should increase.
As it relates to the final play, I don't think a zone or even just packing in the man-to-man would have changed the outcome. It is very hard to stay in front of your man when they are at full speed and you are trying to get going. If we had been closer to the basket, I would be more worried that we would have fouled or Taylor would not have had the time to get into position. I also think we needed to move Wilson into the back court to force them to pick up the ball. 5 seconds is an long time to defend on a last second shot.
Wilson did not take a good angle but I am glad that he didn't try to make up for it but getting in front of the defender as he would have fouled him.
Should have gone back to a 2-3 zone and confused him enough to just have him shot an outside shot, he got a fricken' layup.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 27, 2014, 11:26:10 PM
Should have gone back to a 2-3 zone and confused him enough to just have him shot an outside shot, he got a fricken' layup.
In my opinion, I don't think confusion would be the outcome. You have 5 seconds so you are going to the basket until someone stops you, fouls you or you score. If you asked him right after the game he probably couldn't tell you the defense. It isn't a normal offensive possession where you study the defense to figure out how to attack it. You either score, get fouled, or in this case get a charge.
If he had actually executed a pull up jumper, which is what you are proposing, then he wouldn't have had a charge. He should have pulled up at about 6 feet right as Taylor was setting up to take the charge. He got greedy so a pull up would have avoided the charge and likely scored at that distance.
Personally, the more I think about it the less likely I would play the zone. Also it is less likely that I play back and pack the lane. If I am the player with the ball and there are two defenders close to the hoop, I try to split them and draw the foul. As a defender it is harder to react with more players in that space. Both players can't take a charge so the confusion would just as likely be on defense as the two players tried to decide who would get into position.
At the end of the day the defense set was correct but some slight flaws in execution.
Quote from: BCHoopster on January 27, 2014, 10:37:12 AM
River Rat, in the long run playing zone you will find out that shots are finally missed, they are not going to shot 60% from 3 land, yes, they were good 3 point shooters, yes we did not get
many or any long rebounds during the game, but back door lay-ups and lay-ups are much easier to make. The last play was a perfect example how bad MU's defense was, Derevenrick could not
stay in front of Chenault, rather have him jack up a 3 then giving him a lay-up which he got and Taylor was in the box. Dumb, I do not think so, dumb for not trying something different.
I think I have seen enough ball over 60 years to see what is going on, on the floor. Remember, or maybe you are to young, the reason MU beat NC in the 1977 finals was Al realizing he could
not defend NC man to man with a bad defensive player, Bernard Toone on the floor, went to a zone and stopped them.
Chenault was able to drive to basket at end of regulation, because we could not take a chance on fouling him in a tied game.