We need a slow, poor ball handling, no D, spot up shooter!!!!!!!!!!!!!

[MR.HAYWARD]

From the Scott Christopherson thread....

He would help this team, especially when teams start playing zone on us (which they will do in spades). - Chicos

"especially when teams start palying zone on us" - perfect statement that shows chicos has no idea of what he is even watching, completely BBAll ignorant.  Ahh, chico's we have faced zone probably 75% of the time this year and pretty much 100% of the time tha last two games.  But when teams start zoning us we will miss SC  

Someone who actaully knows anything about the game would prefer players that can not only shoot but can attack the zone off the bounce ala DJO and Buycks.  Oh being athletic defenders that can handle the ball never hurt either.  

We have shot 53% from 3 the last 2 games and have averaged over 90 pts agame and have 5 guys knocking them down at a high rate against teams that played exclusively zone... but we need SC.    

does anyone remeber how effective our offense was against zones When we had SC and the 8 years before that?

[lab_warrior]

I'd also like to reiterate, that NO, SC WOULD NOT BE THE BEST SHOOTER ON THIS TEAM.  I doubt the kid would be like 3rd-4th best behind Butler and Cubes right now. 
Also, I'm thinking DJO might be one of the better shooters we've had in a while.  Very nice form.

[MR.HAYWARD]

DJO is shooting 47% from 3, not bad for a guy who missed amonth and really only hit full speed a week ago.  Cubi went 3-4 last night would love to see him get his stroke back.  Our 3 point shooting #'s are really good and that is still all drug down by Lazar being only 2-13 from 3, i have full confidence his numbers will rise.

[CTWarrior]

DJO is shooting 47% from 3, not bad for a guy who missed amonth and really only hit full speed a week ago.  Cubi went 3-4 last night would love to see him get his stroke back.  Our 3 point shooting #'s are really good and that is still all drug down by Lazar being only 2-13 from 3, i have full confidence his numbers will rise.

Our guys can knock them down if they get the looks.  The issue with this team will be whether or not we can generate the requisite penetration and interior threats to get the open looks from 3.

As for SC, last I checked they play basketball on both ends of the floor.  Given our lack of size and our pressure man to man defensive philosophy, it is of paramount importance that we have quickness everywhere on the floor.  SC's liabilties on D would more than offset his contributions on O.  For his sake, I hope he becomes a star at Iowa State.  It is the right place for him.

[GGGG]

OK, OK....

I am willing to concede that I *may* have been wrong.   

[NCMUFan]

Hayward it's obvious two of your greatest motivations to posts is:  1.  Attack Chico's posts, 2. Let us all know how Crean is failing.  I guess we all have passions in life.

[MR.HAYWARD]

Our guys can knock them down if they get the looks.  The issue with this team will be whether or not we can generate the requisite penetration and interior threats to get the open looks from 3.

As for SC, last I checked they play basketball on both ends of the floor.  Given our lack of size and our pressure man to man defensive philosophy, it is of paramount importance that we have quickness everywhere on the floor.  SC's liabilties on D would more than offset his contributions on O.  For his sake, I hope he becomes a star at Iowa State.  It is the right place for him.

CTWarrior I 100% agree with you but OMG!!!   what will we do when we finally see a zone!!!  .  Coming from the guy who was telling everyone what channel the games have been on.  So he cant say he was not watching.   What will we do when we see a zone ...the season might go up in smoke.  Our only hope is in Ames  

[MR.HAYWARD]

Hayward it's obvious two of your greatest motivations to posts is:  1.  Attack Chico's posts, 2. Let us all know how Crean is failing.  I guess we all have passions in life.

on the contrary...

1. i have over the years learned not to argue with short people.

2. in the spirit of the season and per the mods request...nary a mention of the thankfully departed.  i am celebrating what we do have, not lamenting addition by subtraction of talentless former members of the program departed to points SE and SW of Milwaukee.

[Bob "Big Daddy" Wild]

Success against cupcake zones does not guarantee success against BE zones we may see.

[tower912]

There may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone?    Or the Louisville zone?    But I have been pleased with the ball movement we have shown through 4 games of nearly exclusively zone.    I am under the impression that Xavier is a m2m team.   I want to see our man offense against a decent team.   

[ChicosBailBonds]

From the Scott Christopherson thread....

He would help this team, especially when teams start playing zone on us (which they will do in spades). - Chicos

"especially when teams start palying zone on us" - perfect statement that shows chicos has no idea of what he is even watching, completely BBAll ignorant.  Ahh, chico's we have faced zone probably 75% of the time this year and pretty much 100% of the time tha last two games.  But when teams start zoning us we will miss SC  

Someone who actaully knows anything about the game would prefer players that can not only shoot but can attack the zone off the bounce ala DJO and Buycks.  Oh being athletic defenders that can handle the ball never hurt either.  

We have shot 53% from 3 the last 2 games and have averaged over 90 pts agame and have 5 guys knocking them down at a high rate against teams that played exclusively zone... but we need SC.    

does anyone remeber how effective our offense was against zones When we had SC and the 8 years before that?

LOL.  If you think the defenses we faced this year are indicative of anything we will face when we actually start playing someone, you're crazy.  These "zone" defenses we have faced are a joke.  Wide open 3 pointers all day long.

Our strength of schedule as of this morning....345th out of 347.  I'm shocked we aren't dead last, but Michigan and South Carolina State are actually worse.

His D has improved considerably as well. 

[Pakuni]

LOL.  If you think the defenses we faced this year are indicative of anything we will face when we actually start playing someone, you're crazy.  These "zone" defenses we have faced are a joke.  Wide open 3 pointers all day long.

Our strength of schedule as of this morning....345th out of 347.  I'm shocked we aren't dead last, but Michigan and South Carolina State are actually worse.

His D has improved considerably as well. 

I'm not sure what exactly you want.
When given open looks, the guys are knocking them down.  I'm not going to hold it against them that they're getting open looks.
Will getting open looks be as easy against Big East competition? I suspect answer is 'no.'
So the question, then, isn't whether this team can knock down 3s - they're proving they can - but can they do it without such wide open looks and/or can they get such open looks against better opponents?
I fail to see how Scott Christopherson changes, much less answers, this question. Christopherson isn't the type of player who's going to create his own shots, at least against Big East-type competition. So he, essentially, would need teammates to create open looks for him. Except MU, it seems, already has guys who can knock down open shots when teammates create them and those guys are lesser liabilities in other parts of the game.

And upon what are you basing the comment that his 'D' improved "considerably?" Comments from Iowa State fans? The cyclones big wins over Tennessee State and Mississippi Valley State? Odd how MU's play vs cupcakes offers such little insight, but Iowa State's play against cupcakes is so telling.

[MR.HAYWARD]

well said becuase we all know if you knock down 60% against South Dakota it aint nothing,  But if you knock down 60% of your threes against some other nobody in Ames it means something entirely different.   

[texaswarrior74]

There may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone?

Look at what the Syracuse zone did to UNC. Does anyone not believe that UNC is not a longer, more athletic team with a deeper bench than MU?

We are in for an interesting season at the very least. Otule going down is going to hurt; hopefully EW can elevate his game and pick up some of the slack so that at least we'll have a little depth so that we aren't playing the same 6 guys all night long.

Go MU!

[Lennys Tap]

There may be a slight difference between the Grambling zone and say, I don't know, maybe the Syracuse zone?    Or the Louisville zone?    But I have been pleased with the ball movement we have shown through 4 games of nearly exclusively zone.    I am under the impression that Xavier is a m2m team.   I want to see our man offense against a decent team.   
[/quote/]

Agree that the Louisville and Syracuse zones are much tougher to crack, but at least beginning last year we had an effective plan to attack zones in general. Even with great perimeter shooters (Novak, Diener and to a lesser extent Chapman) you can't break a zone by merely passing the ball around the perimeter. Thank God many of our opponents stubbornly stuck to their "preferred" defense and played man in the TC era. MU won a lot of games because of it.

[Lennys Tap]

I'm not sure what exactly you want.
When given open looks, the guys are knocking them down.  I'm not going to hold it against them that they're getting open looks.
Will getting open looks be as easy against Big East competition? I suspect answer is 'no.'
So the question, then, isn't whether this team can knock down 3s - they're proving they can - but can they do it without such wide open looks and/or can they get such open looks against better opponents?
I fail to see how Scott Christopherson changes, much less answers, this question. Christopherson isn't the type of player who's going to create his own shots, at least against Big East-type competition. So he, essentially, would need teammates to create open looks for him. Except MU, it seems, already has guys who can knock down open shots when teammates create them and those guys are lesser liabilities in other parts of the game.

And upon what are you basing the comment that his 'D' improved "considerably?" Comments from Iowa State fans? The cyclones big wins over Tennessee State and Mississippi Valley State? Odd how MU's play vs cupcakes offers such little insight, but Iowa State's play against cupcakes is so telling.

+1000

[TomW1365]

I agree with everything that has to do with collapsing zone d's with athletic "slashers" to create shots for others.  
I also believe that men don't usually menstruate, rainy days are wetter than sunny days, and alcohol is intoxicating .  

[Pago Warrior]

This Hayward v Chico's lovefest would be comical if it wasn't so tiring...

I do find it ironic that this thread was started by Hayward in a very chico-esque fashion; digging up old posts to try to discredit it when new situations arises that help discredit it.  Usually that's a chico's move which I'll credit him for at least doing so in a coherent manner.

In this particular case, I gotta (gulp) agree with Hayward's premise.  Pakuni crystallized the point perfectly when suggesting that both ours and ISU's schedules thus far aren't that much different - both have been rather easy.

So far our guys have been hitting the open looks they're getting.  They'll get fewer open looks against better teams.  Even assuming CS would make marginally more of those open looks, DJO/Buycks/Ack/Cubi all are significantly better on D making them more valuable than what a CS would have been able to contribute.  Furthermore, DJO and Buycks have the ability to create making them all the more valuable.

[ChicosBailBonds]

I'm taking his defensive improvement from remarks from McDermott, his coach.  It's funny how many people bag on ISU, I have a feeling you'll see that they will be pretty good this year, better than Marquette most likely.

They started three sophomores and a freshman last year...all four are back plus they add folks like Scott off the bench.  This is a team that will be fighting for a NCAA berth this season, yet a really sharp poster here thinks they are going to be terrible (all while he calls most other posters ignorant of basketball).  You have to wonder what he really knows (not you Pakuni)

[Golden Avalanche]

I would love to have a kid like Thomas from South Dakota. Someone who is a specialist plain and simple but able to drain 28-footers like nothing.

Early indications are nice but still think our guys may trend more toward the streaky side then reliable from deep. That said, a shooter in the mold of Thomas, Christopherson, or Rotnei Clarke would get on the floor.

[CTWarrior]

I'm taking his defensive improvement from remarks from McDermott, his coach.  It's funny how many people bag on ISU, I have a feeling you'll see that they will be pretty good this year, better than Marquette most likely.

They started three sophomores and a freshman last year...all four are back plus they add folks like Scott off the bench.  This is a team that will be fighting for a NCAA berth this season, yet a really sharp poster here thinks they are going to be terrible (all while he calls most other posters ignorant of basketball).  You have to wonder what he really knows (not you Pakuni)

Who is bagging on ISU?  It is not bagging on ISU to mention they've played a crappy schedule, too.

I don't question that in the right system Christopherson would be a fine addition to a BCS conference basketball team.  I just don't think we're the right fit for him, because we are all about pressure man to man and if he can't keep in front of his man we don't have the kind of interior size you need to protect him.  So I think quickness/athleticism on the exterior is of the utmost importance to this MU team.  Now I'm the first to admit I haven't seen SC in 2 years, so he may be better at everything, but I cannot imagine he has gained enough quickness to compare with the guards we put on the floor. 

His transfer is one of the good ones for everyone involved.  He's in a better situation for him and we were able to find other capable guards who better fit our style.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Who is bagging on ISU?  It is not bagging on ISU to mention they've played a crappy schedule, too.

I don't question that in the right system Christopherson would be a fine addition to a BCS conference basketball team.  I just don't think we're the right fit for him, because we are all about pressure man to man and if he can't keep in front of his man we don't have the kind of interior size you need to protect him.  So I think quickness/athleticism on the exterior is of the utmost importance to this MU team.  Now I'm the first to admit I haven't seen SC in 2 years, so he may be better at everything, but I cannot imagine he has gained enough quickness to compare with the guards we put on the floor.  

Hayward and others have said ISU is a lower level Big 12 team.  That's one person.  He basically believes SC couldn't play at MU, was not a good recruit because someone he despises recruited him and he's basically a mid major recruit that could only play at a bigger school that was at the bottom of a conference (i.e. ISU, NW, etc).  

I agree, he doesn't have the quickness of our guards, but let's slow down here for a second folks.  There are other skills on the basketball court.  Travis Diener was not overly quick and certainly Steve Novak wasn't. But they did other things well.  Sometimes it's about simply getting open, playing smart basketball, moving without the ball, using your screens and if you can bury that shot, that's huge.  

There is a great emphasis on having tremendous athletes, that makes sense.  However, I also like having tremendous basketball players on a roster also, there is a difference.  DJ was a great athlete, not a great basketball player.  Steve Novak was a great basketball player, not a great athlete. 

[CTWarrior]

I agree, he doesn't have the quickness of our guards, but let's slow down here for a second folks.  There are other skills on the basketball court.  Travis Diener was not overly quick and certainly Steve Novak wasn't.  But they didn't other things.  Sometimes it's about simply getting open, playing smart basketball, moving without the ball, using your screens but if you can bury that shot, that's huge. 

Again, of course there are other skills.  But let's not compare SC to Novak, an NBA talent who at 6-9 could be hidden down low on D and Diener, another NBA player.  Besides, Diener had skills (court vision, ball handling, average quickness) that SC doesn't, not to mention interior help in Merritt, Sanders, Grimm, Jackson, etc. if he was beaten on D.  Again, a spot up shooter is great, but now when you have to give up a penetrator (who after all, helps get people the open 3 point looks in the first place)/plus defender to get him on the floor.

[ChicosBailBonds]

Again, of course there are other skills.  But let's not compare SC to Novak, an NBA talent who at 6-9 could be hidden down low on D and Diener, another NBA player.  Besides, Diener had skills (court vision, ball handling, average quickness) that SC doesn't, not to mention interior help in Merritt, Sanders, Grimm, Jackson, etc. if he was beaten on D.  Again, a spot up shooter is great, but now when you have to give up a penetrator (who after all, helps get people the open 3 point looks in the first place)/plus defender to get him on the floor.

Fair enough, but I think there is a way to accomplish both.  I love how ISU is using SC right now. They have slashers that penetrate and can kick it out.  SC is also not just simply roaming around the 3 point line, but he's also taking the midrange shot and going to the hoop.

He's currently hitting 65% of his 3 pointers (11 for 17), granted against poor competition.  We'll see how he does the rest of the year, but I'd love that kind of production coming off the bench to stretch a zone or give a team a different look.  Smart kid, love his grit.

[Daniel]

We can put 5 guys on the floor who could hit 3's - this is one of the better 3 point shooting teams we have had.  But we have to see if we can do it with tougher competition, if our guars can penetrate and dish, etc.