3-23. Absolutely dreadful.
So it goes sometimes.
Lots of misses on open looks tonight.
Quote from: brewcity77 on December 31, 2014, 07:20:50 PM
Lots of misses on open looks tonight.
Yup. A large number were exactly the kind of looks any team would want. Tonight they clanged.
Horrible. Man, this team needs to find a guy who can knock down a jumper.
Quote from: Groin_pull on December 31, 2014, 07:34:04 PM
Horrible. Man, this team needs to find a guy who can knock down a jumper.
A lot of help is on the way next year as everyone knows, and with experience for many of these guys getting used to prominent roles (namely Duane Wilson), shots will start falling more and more.
Is it a surprise to people that our shooting sucks? It sucked last year, and other than Carlino, we added only two other perimeter guys who are just getting the hang of playing at this level; one of whom is playing only spotty minutes thus far.
Quote from: Groin_pull on December 31, 2014, 07:34:04 PM
Horrible. Man, this team needs to find a guy who can knock down a jumper.
It's supposed to be Carlino, he was a profound disappointment yesterday. No excuse for how bad he played, especially given all the wide open looks he had.
I don't understand why this team sucks so bad still at FT's?! And we have several guys that have been around the block enough that should be stepping up to the line and knocking them down with far more consistency, Taylor Jr. and Juan immediately come to mind. Those two have stunk. Derrick of course is just beyond belief how bad he's been his whole career.
A 61% for the game was every bit as costly as our bad three point shooting and less understandable. I've been hard on JJJ's play, but to his credit, the guy goes to the line and knocks them down consistently.
Why is everyone so shocked that we had a clunker? Or a bad shooting night? Did people forget that this is a team that went 17-15 and missed the NCAA, NIT, and CBI last year, and lost its 4 best offensive weapons from last season? 3 of our 4 upper classmen are 3 of our 4 worst offensive weapons, and our underclassmen aren't 1 and done type talents that can step in and consistently score every game. We knew there would be clunkers and games we wouldn't shoot well. We knew there would be frustrating losses to teams we shouldn't lose to. Yesterday was one of those games. The good news is that we are getting a huge upgrade in talent next year, and the little talent we have on this roster more or less all returns next year and will be a year older, plus has another year after that. This will be a bumpy year, but I'm not sure why anybody is surprised by this news.
Enjoy the peaks, and the next few years we will be back to what we have been used to in recent years.
I think the frustration and anger come more from the collapse than anything else. That, and there is a difference between not being very good and going 3-21.
Given that any intelligent coach -- or even Purnell -- will double-team or triple-team Fischer from here on in, we will have trouble winning any time we don't knock down 3s.
I do think we will have games in which Duane, Carlino, Juan and JJJ will hit some 3s and we will win -- maybe even pull off an upset or two. And we also will have some more like this one where we can't hit a 3 and we will lose.
It's just who this team will be.
Either knock down the 3's or slash to the basket when receiving the pass out of the double team. Carlino settled for 3's. He missed them, but they were wide open. Get Duane or JJJ the ball there with that much space and let them use their slashing abilities to get to the rack.
Quote from: connie on January 01, 2015, 01:22:54 PM
I think the frustration and anger come more from the collapse than anything else. That, and there is a difference between not being very good and going 3-21.
The collapse is part of it, I think it's equally (if not more) that it's DePaul. Since the Big East went to an 18 game schedule in 2009, DePaul was 10-98 in league play. They hadn't had a winning Big East record since January 2008. This is the worst team in high-major basketball. In this span, every other team has had at least one season with 6+ conference wins, which is double the number of wins DePaul had in their best conference seasons over the past 6 seasons.
Making it worse, they are our biggest "rival" in the league. Geographically, historically, DePaul is it. So while the collapse hurts, I think it's who the collapse came to. Honestly, this loss for me is 1,000 times worse than Nebraska-Omaha. Hell, I'd rather lose to the last-place team in the SWAC than lose to DePaul.
The problem is MU did not have to shoot threes in this game. DePaul defense is not that good. Could have driven to the rim, score and/or get fouled. But MU launched 21 plus two in desperation at the end. Why? Who knows.
IIRC, one of Carlino's first attempts of the night - maybe his first? was a 26-foot try with tons of time on the shot clock.
I'm OK with allowing guys to take shots if it's a reasonably OK shot.. but.. man. Need to cherish the value of a possession.
From my seats on the floor, the rims had a ton of give. It looked unusual. Now I'm not saying there was foul play, but maybe on another court some of those clanking shots get the bounce that gets the ball in rather than out. Truly, that's the way the ball bounces sometimes.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on January 01, 2015, 06:13:37 PM
From my seats on the floor, the rims had a ton of give. It looked unusual. Now I'm not saying there was foul play, but maybe on another court some of those clanking shots get the bounce that gets the ball in rather than out. Truly, that's the way the ball bounces sometimes.
j
Didn't both teams shoot at both baskets? Nothing to see here, folks.
Quote from: wadesworld on January 01, 2015, 12:56:08 PM
Did people forget that this is a team that went 17-15 and missed the NCAA, NIT, and CBI last year?
I will respectfully remind my astute colleague that we did NOT miss the CBI, simply declined to be considered for an invitation. We were a stone cold lock for the CBI last year. Done deal. Process respected.
BTW, what is the CBI again? Is it one of those procedural crime dramas? I would have liked to see the boys showcase their acting chops. Thanks a lot Mike Broeker.
I mean, they could have met Elisabeth Shue for crying out loud.
Quote from: MUFC9295 on January 01, 2015, 06:13:37 PM
From my seats on the floor, the rims had a ton of give. It looked unusual. Now I'm not saying there was foul play, but maybe on another court some of those clanking shots get the bounce that gets the ball in rather than out. Truly, that's the way the ball bounces sometimes.
I agree, I posted in the game thread about how the rims seem odd every time we play at Depaul. Although, as Lenny mentions, both teams are shooting at the same rims, so in the end it is all equal for both teams. But I do think it affects the shooting percentage from both the field and the line, which were down for us in this game.
In the end though, Depaul put the ball in the same hoops more effectively than us. We settled for open 3's (good looks) a little more than we should have. We went on the road and lost to a team we should have beaten. They'll learn and build from this.
Not as an excuse, because there is no excuse for blowing that lead and losing to DePaul, but did anyone else at the game besides me notice that when MU had the ball, the advertising around the arena between the lower and upper seats would flash very brightly and change sponsors? And when DePaul had the ball, it was a Bud Light as that didn't flash? They also play with the lights differently when we shoot FTs v. when they shot them.
But how we coughed up that lead is beyond me.
Quote from: brewcity77 on January 01, 2015, 04:26:13 PM
The collapse is part of it, I think it's equally (if not more) that it's DePaul.
That certainly adds some sauce to the heaping mound of displeasure the game served up. Also, seeing so many tv shots of Pernell "in the huddle" as if he were imparting the wisdom of the ancients almost made me lose my lunch. I am trying to keep things in perspective and not ride the scoop wave of elation/despair, but this loss hurt bad.
Quote from: connie on January 02, 2015, 09:38:29 AM
That certainly adds some sauce to the heaping mound of displeasure the game served up. Also, seeing so many tv shots of Pernell "in the huddle" as if he were imparting the wisdom of the ancients almost made me lose my lunch. I am trying to keep things in perspective and not ride the scoop wave of elation/despair, but this loss hurt bad.
Honestly, I'd have been less upset if it was anyone else. Creighton, Xavier, Seton Hall, Providence, I could get over that. Just tough when it's a rival that is so traditionally bad.
Quote from: Daniel on January 01, 2015, 04:31:38 PM
The problem is MU did not have to shoot threes in this game. DePaul defense is not that good. Could have driven to the rim, score and/or get fouled. But MU launched 21 plus two in desperation at the end. Why? Who knows.
This. MU was getting the basket at will, but instead of continuing the layup drill we decided to launch threes, and continue to do so (Carlino, JJJ) even when they weren't falling.
Tired legs. More JJJ (though he fired up dumb 3's, too) and some Cohen, please.