MUScoop
MUScoop => Hangin' at the Al => Topic started by: MU82 on March 17, 2013, 07:47:42 PM
-
I live in the Charlotte area and have seen Davidson a lot. Here's my scouting report.
Strengths:
Very experienced. Well coached. Brooks is a 6-7 forward who is very good on the low post; plays bigger than his size and is very tough and skilled; lots of people think he's an NBA player. Cohen is a 6-10 inside-outside threat who definitely will get a long look from NBA. They have several good to very good 3-point shooters, including Cohen, who likely will take MU center outside often. They have nice size at every position, even guard. They make their FTs.
Weaknesses:
Not unathletic but not super athletic, either -- kind of like a teamful of Locketts. When they hit 3s they are a threat against anybody but they have long cold stretches and they definitely need to make 3s to beat top opponents. They do not put much pressure on the ball and really aren't a great defensive team at all. As talented as Brooks and Cohen are, they disappear sometimes in games -- or at least can be taken out of games by good defensive teams.
My take:
Marquette is the only team I've seen more than Davidson this season, so I have a pretty good feel for both. With our guys being 3 seeds, I'm not thrilled that we have to play such an experienced team that has such a huge edge on us in 3-point shooting and that will not be the least bit intimidated by us. Yes, they have a few bad losses, but they also played Duke, New Mexico and Gonzaga well. (Tied with Duke at halftime; tied with Zags well into 2H; tied with NM until final minutes.)
If I weren't a Marquette fan, I'd be tempted to pick this as one of my first-round upsets. I think we'll be able to run on them and wear them down with our bigs, and I think both Junior and Vander should be able to get to the rim. If we take care of the ball and defend 3s reasonably well, we can win by double-digits. But very few things have gone ideally for the Warriors this season, so I think this will be closer than it has to be.
Marquette 81, Davidson 74.
-
Excellent report added to the mostly inane discussion this evening. Sounds like a team we've seen a bit these last few seasons in the NCAA Tournament and fared well against even with the nerves prior to tipoff.
One question I have is do you see Marquette scoring well even though they've struggled to reach 70 for the last six weeks and have been plagued by poor starts that often result in 25 point or less halves?
-
I live in the Charlotte area and have seen Davidson a lot. Here's my scouting report:
My take:
Marquette is the only team I've seen more than Davidson this season, so I have a pretty good feel for both. With our guys being 3 seeds, I'm not thrilled that we have to play such an experienced team that has such a huge edge on us in 3-point shooting and that will not be the least bit intimidated by us. Yes, they have a few bad losses, but they also played Duke, New Mexico and Gonzaga well. (Tied with Duke at halftime; tied with Zags well into 2H; tied with NM until final minutes.)
Marquette 81, Davidson 74.
Let's remember this when we are in half time game thread panic mode.
-
Honestly think we can score 81 on them?
-
Jeeez, is there a single team in the entire tournament that people here would be happy to face?
Every year, I'm amazed at how nervous and freaked out everyone gets.
-
Jeeez, is there a single team in the entire tournament that people here would be happy to face?
Every year, I'm amazed at how nervous and freaked out everyone gets.
Indiana
-
Ok, now that's funny!
-
Thanks for the thorough scouting report!
-
Honestly think we can score 81 on them?
They're 103rd in defensive eff per Pomeroy (SHU/USF range)
-
Thanks MU82. Be interesting when they face another Top 25 program in MU. Not saying that their early games against the likes of Duke and Gonzaga aren't interesting but certainly those teams were considering them to be buy game cupcake material. I suppose it is like playing a solid Norfolk State team last year in our pre-season tourney. Like always, we simply need to be ready.
-
Honestly think we can score 81 on them?
Davidson normally is not a slow-it-down team. They are willing and able to shoot early 3s, and Brooks will attack the rim. I think we will have some run-outs against them and I think that if we are feeding the post well Davante can get a good share of FTs. I don't love our defensive matchups against them because we often lose 3-point shooters and we sometimes get lazy on the defensive boards, but I really like our offense against their D. If Junior takes care of the ball and attacks, and if Vander is in control, hitting his midrange jumper and taking it to the hole (as he has for most of the season), Davidson will have a very hard time defending them, not to mention Gardner and Jamil.
-
They do not put much pressure on the ball and really aren't a great defensive team at all.
Thanks for the report, and this comforts me a lot. We might give up too many 3s to them (making it closer than we as fans would like), but we're a pretty tough team to stop too.
They're 103rd in defensive eff per Pomeroy (SHU/USF range)
And similarly, we pounded SHU & USF on the road, but Davidson is a better offensive team, so I expect a good game, but a win.
-
Jeeez, is there a single team in the entire tournament that people here would be happy to face?
Every year, I'm amazed at how nervous and freaked out everyone gets.
I tend to do the same thing as you think about the game more and more. Then I remember that we are a 3 seed for a reason and won a share of the Big East. A team like Davidson shouldn't worry us.
-
I tend to do the same thing as you think about the game more and more. Then I remember that we are a 3 seed for a reason and won a share of the Big East. A team like Davidson shouldn't worry us.
And a team like Holy Cross shouldn't have worried a decidedly superior 2003 Marquette team that also was a 3 seed for a reason.
I believe we'll win, but Davidson is better than most 14s most years.
-
Davidson normally is not a slow-it-down team.
It looks like tempo-wise, they (65.2 possessions/40m, #205) are about the same as us (64.9/40, #217), per KenPom.
But, our offensive efficiency (113.4 per 100 possessions, #17) and defensive efficiency (93.3, #50) are much better than theirs (AdjO:110.4, #40/AdjD: 96.8, #110).
-
Zone them, attack their 3 pt shooters.
-
There was a lot of similar worry about BYU...older team, shoots threes...then we simply overwhelmed them with athleticism. They haven't played much against players like MU has. I think this will be close for awhile but we will pull away in the second half and win by about 12-15.
-
I really like our offense against their D. If Junior takes care of the ball and attacks, and if Vander is in control, hitting his midrange jumper and taking it to the hole (as he has for most of the season), Davidson will have a very hard time defending them, not to mention Gardner and Jamil.
According to ESPN's Bracket Projection, it sounds like (1) they don't have much depth in the frontcourt and (2) they primarily play man-to-man defense. If that's the case, sounds like we might be able to attack the paint and if we can draw some fouls on their bigs (Cohen and Brooks), we might be able to neutralize their top scorers. Is that about right?
There's also these from ESPN:
How you beat them: The Wildcats can fall victim to size in the post and quickness at guard.
Bad stat: Turnover percentage D
Davidson doesn't force a high rate of turnovers, ranking in the bottom half of the nation in this category. For a team looking to pull an upset, that could prove to be problematic.
These both seem to play into our hands.
-
According to ESPN's Bracket Projection, it sounds like (1) they don't have much depth in the frontcourt and (2) they primarily play man-to-man defense. If that's the case, sounds like we might be able to attack the paint and if we can draw some fouls on their bigs (Cohen and Brooks), we might be able to neutralize their top scorers. Is that about right?
There's also these from ESPN:
These both seem to play into our hands.
Agree on all of that.
Do a reasonably good job defending the 3 + on O, attack the basket and don't settle for crappy shots = W.
-
Brooks is a 6-7 forward who is very good on the low post; plays bigger than his size and is very tough and skilled; lots of people think he's an NBA player. Cohen is a 6-10 inside-outside threat who definitely will get a long look from NBA.
Do you think we put Jamil/Steve/Juan on Cohen to stay with him and limit him on the outside, and then let our centers guard Brooks? Or, better to go zone and just be real aggressive on the perimeter?
-
Our Achilles heel is turnovers. That shouldn't be an issue with Davidson. Another plus should be our ability to penetrate. Looks like a double digit W. Then we get a chance to pay back Butler. Sweet 16 again.
-
Our Achilles heel is turnovers. That shouldn't be an issue with Davidson.
Shouldn't have been against ND, either.
-
Agree on all of that.
Do a reasonably good job defending the 3 + on O, attack the basket and don't settle for crappy shots = W.
Looking into it a little further, looks like Cohen can be foul-prone: fouled out of 5 games, had 4 fouls in 10 other games. And, at 6-10 235, he's going to have trouble banging with Otule and Gardner. Brooks isn't too much better--2 foul outs, 4 fouls in 10 games as well. Both fouled out against Gonzaga. I think if we can get into these guys with Gardner and Otule early, as well as lots of slashing with the guards, we can take control of the paint and really reduce them to a one-dimensional team.
-
As long as Curry isn't allowed another game of eligibility Quette takes this one.....hopefully getting another shot at Rotnei and his Dawgs
-
I don't think we're freaking out. This was a great analysis and any team can beat any team. Remember when #3 seed Louisville went down to Faried and Morehead State? Davidson poses some real threats and if they exploit our weaknesses and play well it could be a loss. I expect the win but you can never look past it.
-
Looking into it a little further, looks like Cohen can be foul-prone: fouled out of 5 games, had 4 fouls in 10 other games. And, at 6-10 235, he's going to have trouble banging with Otule and Gardner. Brooks isn't too much better--2 foul outs, 4 fouls in 10 games as well. Both fouled out against Gonzaga. I think if we can get into these guys with Gardner and Otule early, as well as lots of slashing with the guards, we can take control of the paint and really reduce them to a one-dimensional team.
Excellent point that underscores Davidson's lack of defensive ability. We definitely can shoot lots of FTs in this one. Hopefully, it's one of our good FT shooting games.
-
Do you think we put Jamil/Steve/Juan on Cohen to stay with him and limit him on the outside, and then let our centers guard Brooks? Or, better to go zone and just be real aggressive on the perimeter?
IMO you don't zone this team at least at first. I question if they have guards that can break down our defense and get them into their offense. Like last year against BYU, which is a team that I recall had a similar scouting report, our quickness on the perimeter meant we were constantly breaking down their defense and caused them trouble setting up their offense.
If they have a guard that can break down our defense like Grant did last week, they could be in trouble.
-
Yeah, our strength is penetration.
-
IMO you don't zone this team at least at first. I question if they have guards that can break down our defense and get them into their offense. Like last year against BYU, which is a team that I recall had a similar scouting report, our quickness on the perimeter meant we were constantly breaking down their defense and caused them trouble setting up their offense.
If they have a guard that can break down our defense like Grant did last week, they could be in trouble.
They will have three good 3-pt shooters on the floor at most times, so we leave them open at our peril. Cochran and Mann are especially deadly, but Czerapowicz, Cohen and Mann all can get hot, too. So yes, ball pressure and daring them to beat us on the dribble should work pretty well. If our defenders are undisciplined and wander away from the guys standing on the perimeter -- a la Connaughton last week -- we can really get burned. There is no reason to leave a guy like Cochran wide open. It's not as if he's going to blaze past his defender. Any of our 3/4s -- Jamil, Taylor, Anderson -- can get into Cohen, too. Will they do so without fouling? That's a question.
-
They will have three good 3-pt shooters on the floor at most times, so we leave them open at our peril. Cochran and Mann are especially deadly, but Czerapowicz, Cohen and Mann all can get hot, too. So yes, ball pressure and daring them to beat us on the dribble should work pretty well. If our defenders are undisciplined and wander away from the guys standing on the perimeter -- a la Connaughton last week -- we can really get burned. There is no reason to leave a guy like Cochran wide open. It's not as if he's going to blaze past his defender. Any of our 3/4s -- Jamil, Taylor, Anderson -- can get into Cohen, too. Will they do so without fouling? That's a question.
OK, this is good. The reason that Connaughton was able to be open so much is because ND kept running pick and rolls to get Grant marching down the lane. If they can defend that well and keep their guards up top (the anti-paint touches approach to defense) then MU should be fine.
-
Yeah, our strength is penetration.
QFE
-
They will have three good 3-pt shooters on the floor at most times, so we leave them open at our peril. Cochran and Mann are especially deadly, but Czerapowicz, Cohen and Mann all can get hot, too.
You've got Mann listed twice here--did you mean someone else?
And, isn't Mann injured? In the other thread I mentioned that it looked like he got a concussion in January and hasn't played since, but I'm having trouble finding any info about it. Their message board seems to have a policy (replete with lots of bullying and public shaming if you try to question it) of not discussing injuries--at all. So, there are a few oblique references to Mann and his status, but having trouble finding anything concrete.
I bring it up because it seems like he was their other decent big in the nonconference, averaging about 20 mins off the bench. Seems like they lost a lot of frontcourt depth without him.
-
You've got Mann listed twice here--did you mean someone else?
And, isn't Mann injured? In the other thread I mentioned that it looked like he got a concussion in January and hasn't played since, but I'm having trouble finding any info about it. Their message board seems to have a policy (replete with lots of bullying and public shaming if you try to question it) of not discussing injuries--at all. So, there are a few oblique references to Mann and his status, but having trouble finding anything concrete.
I bring it up because it seems like he was their other decent big in the nonconference, averaging about 20 mins off the bench. Seems like they lost a lot of frontcourt depth without him.
Brain fart ... I mean to say Kuhlman.
They miss Mann. He has been out for quite a while. He supposedly was making progress and there was talk he might be able to play in the conference tourney but he didn't. If he can come back and be as good as he usually is, it would help them a lot because he is talented.
-
I live in the Charlotte area and have seen Davidson a lot. Here's my scouting report.
Strengths:
Very experienced. Well coached. Brooks is a 6-7 forward who is very good on the low post; plays bigger than his size and is very tough and skilled; lots of people think he's an NBA player. Cohen is a 6-10 inside-outside threat who definitely will get a long look from NBA. They have several good to very good 3-point shooters, including Cohen, who likely will take MU center outside often. They have nice size at every position, even guard. They make their FTs.
Weaknesses:
Not unathletic but not super athletic, either -- kind of like a teamful of Locketts. When they hit 3s they are a threat against anybody but they have long cold stretches and they definitely need to make 3s to beat top opponents. They do not put much pressure on the ball and really aren't a great defensive team at all. As talented as Brooks and Cohen are, they disappear sometimes in games -- or at least can be taken out of games by good defensive teams.
My take:
Marquette is the only team I've seen more than Davidson this season, so I have a pretty good feel for both. With our guys being 3 seeds, I'm not thrilled that we have to play such an experienced team that has such a huge edge on us in 3-point shooting and that will not be the least bit intimidated by us. Yes, they have a few bad losses, but they also played Duke, New Mexico and Gonzaga well. (Tied with Duke at halftime; tied with Zags well into 2H; tied with NM until final minutes.)
If I weren't a Marquette fan, I'd be tempted to pick this as one of my first-round upsets. I think we'll be able to run on them and wear them down with our bigs, and I think both Junior and Vander should be able to get to the rim. If we take care of the ball and defend 3s reasonably well, we can win by double-digits. But very few things have gone ideally for the Warriors this season, so I think this will be closer than it has to be.
Marquette 81, Davidson 74.
I don't see 81, do see tough win in a close game.
-
Brain fart ... I mean to say Kuhlman.
They miss Mann. He has been out for quite a while. He supposedly was making progress and there was talk he might be able to play in the conference tourney but he didn't. If he can come back and be as good as he usually is, it would help them a lot because he is talented.
I saw that because I was looking to see how they played in non-conference against teams with decent bigs, and saw his name pop up a lot. Its a little tough for us to compare how they played UNM, Gonzaga, Duke, etc., because it seems like he was a significant part of their game plan before (also interesting to note that he was just as foul prone as the other two in most of those games).
Do you know if there was anyone that they played in conference after Mann went down that had dominant bigs for a comparison? I don't really know much about the rest of the Southern Conference. Just wondering if they tryed to match up, play small against them, etc. and how their two bigs fared in those games.