Offensive execution

[NotAnAlum]

This team may be 4-0 but if they don't find a way to improve their offensive execution they are a bubble team at best.  That was a BAD Seton Hall team out there tonight.  Yet at the 6 minute mark in the first half with ten turnovers to work with MU was only up one.  Alot was made of Georgetown's zone and how difficult it is to score because they are so long etc etc.  Well prior to Van's 3 at the Buzzer we had scored exactly 3 more in the first half than we scored against G-town and Seton Hall simply isn't very good on offense or defense.  A Good team would have lead by 20 at the half.  This team has talent, we have a whole staff of head coaches, why can't we find something that we can execute well other than just dump it into Davente and hope he can get a basket or a foul.  I can't remember a team that was this painful to watch.



 

[OrangeGreenGolden]

Have you ever watched a Wisconsin Basketball game or the swing offense in general??? That's much more painful.

[MUfan12]

Thought they were much better in the second half, especially in the last 10 minutes. Finally had some purpose to their movement.

[MU82]

It's not just our offense, either. We continue to give up way too many wide-open 3s.

Against good teams that can shoot just a little, the disparity in 3s -- our inability to hit them and the opponent's ability to knock down wide-open looks -- will hurt. It's tough to beat a good team if they have 15 or 18 or 21 more points from the arc than you do.

I'm not totally discouraged just because of this game, though, because even the best teams have cruddy, ugly games sometimes. The key is to find ways to win those, and we did.

[brewcity77]

They did a great job on Edwin, which was my main concern. I felt there was a lot of "make the other guys beat you" in our game tonight.

[DSEEagle]

This team may be 4-0 but if they don't find a way to improve their offensive execution they are a bubble team at best.  That was a BAD Seton Hall team out there tonight.  Yet at the 6 minute mark in the first half with ten turnovers to work with MU was only up one.  Alot was made of Georgetown's zone and how difficult it is to score because they are so long etc etc.  Well prior to Van's 3 at the Buzzer we had scored exactly 3 more in the first half than we scored against G-town and Seton Hall simply isn't very good on offense or defense.  A Good team would have lead by 20 at the half.  This team has talent, we have a whole staff of head coaches, why can't we find something that we can execute well other than just dump it into Davente and hope he can get a basket or a foul.  I can't remember a team that was this painful to watch.



 

Maybe painful...but bubble team at best? Wrong.

[TJ]

Thought they were much better in the second half, especially in the last 10 minutes. Finally had some purpose to their movement.

Certainly not the first 4 minutes of the second half, when they scored 2 frickin points.  I thought the offense was good for a few spurts - Davante led a few scoring spurts and once they had a few possessions in a row that they hit 3's.  Other than that, it was mediocre at best against a bad defensive team.  Oh well, a win is a win.

That being said, the OP is Chicken Little.  This is going to be a tourney team.  They might even win a game or two with the right matchup (think the opposite of all the times where we had a team worthy of the Sweet 16 and found a way to blow it).  That's all I expect for this year, but it's certainly not a bubble team.

[We R Final Four]

It's not just our offense, either. We continue to give up way too many wide-open 3s.

Against good teams that can shoot just a little, the disparity in 3s -- our inability to hit them and the opponent's ability to knock down wide-open looks -- will hurt. It's tough to beat a good team if they have 15 or 18 or 21 more points from the arc than you do.

I'm not totally discouraged just because of this game, though, because even the best teams have cruddy, ugly games sometimes. The key is to find ways to win those, and we did.

Buzz has said the last few post games with Homer something to the effect of....'We are not any good, we are just good at winning.'  

[brewcity77]

Execution of our offense? I'm in favor of it.

[WellsstreetWanderer]

Offensive Execution ?, definitely!

[Golden Avalanche]

They did a great job on Edwin, which was my main concern. I felt there was a lot of "make the other guys beat you" in our game tonight.

It was Edwin's fouls moreso then MU defense that held him in check.

[bilsu]

Buzz talked on the post game, about how the players had to learn to keep moving when Davante gets the ball. Buzz described Davante as a point guard. The team needs to recognize how the defense changes when Davante gets the ball down low. Most teams double him, but some do it as a zone and some do it as a man to man. Buzz said they are working on this in practice. Once they get this the offense should be more effective. We give up open threes, because we chase the ball on defense. That is the risk we take when we do this and that is not going to change.

[Golden Avalanche]

Buzz talked on the post game, about how the players had to learn to keep moving when Davante gets the ball. Buzz described Davante as a point guard. The team needs to recognize how the defense changes when Davante gets the ball down low. Most teams double him, but some do it as a zone and some do it as a man to man. Buzz said they are working on this in practice. Once they get this the offense should be more effective. We give up open threes, because we chase the ball on defense. That is the risk we take when we do this and that is not going to change.

On this point, I was amazed how often last night MU would dump to Gardner and then proceed to lazily run through the lane clogging up Gardner's space to make a move and drawing in a second defender on Gardner even after the double had left him. In essence, MU's other four offensive players did just as a good a job stunting Gardner's chances to make a move as Seton Hall.

[San Diego Warrior]

I actually think there's a problem with missing the entry passes to Gardner.  When they get the ball into the post to Gardner, good things happen.  Vander missed a couple of relatively easy entry passes to Gardner in the game - Gardner gave him an earful on the way down the court. 

But, we do need to have other offensive outlets than just Gardner in order to keep winning. 

[MUfan12]

I actually think there's a problem with missing the entry passes to Gardner.  When they get the ball into the post to Gardner, good things happen.  Vander missed a couple of relatively easy entry passes to Gardner in the game - Gardner gave him an earful on the way down the court. 

This is an issue with all of them. The first instinct is to dribble with no purpose, and it slows everything down. Derrick and Vander are especially guilty of this. Need to keep the ball moving.

[jsglow]

Let's recall that MU has historically not been a low post team.  This year's best way to score involves a low post paint touch followed either by a Gardner move to the hoop or ball movement back out to the perimeter for a good shot.  We had two excellent cuts to the hoop last night in the first half where DG made great assist passes.  We bogged down somewhat in the second half.  As Buzz indicated, the other guys on the floor need to move with a purpose.

Also, I thought Van had a difficult game last night.  Unlike some other recent games, he absolutely had the ability to beat his defender with the ball and penetrate.  For reasons unknown to me, he didn't take advantage of that enough.  Had he done more of that, SH might have faced very serious foul trouble with a very short bench much earlier.  I remember a point in the second half where we simply settled for too many jump shots, including ones early in the shot clock that resulted in quick 3s in transition at the other end.

Lastly, our entry passes to DG simply need to be better.  We need to get the Big Fella the ball where HE wants it.  Too many entries left him in a compromised position.

[NotAnAlum]

That being said, the OP is Chicken Little.  This is going to be a tourney team.  They might even win a game or two with the right matchup (think the opposite of all the times where we had a team worthy of the Sweet 16 and found a way to blow it).  That's all I expect for this year, but it's certainly not a bubble team.

We'll see.  I think some on the board are reading too much into a 4-0 start that with one or two plays could just as easily be 2-2 or 1-3.  Based on the way we are executing a loss to Syr at home is likely and a split of the ND and Pitt rematch also likely.  I can't see any road game that we will win comfortably.  If we end up 9-9 or maybe even if we are 10-8 that's bubble territory given the weakness of the BE this year.

[rawhide]

This team may be 4-0 but if they don't find a way to improve their offensive execution they are a bubble team at best. 

Wow. I disagree.

[brewcity77]

We'll see.  I think some on the board are reading too much into a 4-0 start that with one or two plays could just as easily be 2-2 or 1-3.  Based on the way we are executing a loss to Syr at home is likely and a split of the ND and Pitt rematch also likely.  I can't see any road game that we will win comfortably.  If we end up 9-9 or maybe even if we are 10-8 that's bubble territory given the weakness of the BE this year.

Except the rest of the country is just as weak. If we go 10-8 with 2 likely top-100 RPI non-con wins (Wisconsin and LSU) and just the one bad loss we will be in.

[jsglow]

We'll see.  I think some on the board are reading too much into a 4-0 start that with one or two plays could just as easily be 2-2 or 1-3.

But the point is we're not.  There's exactly 14 conference games left.  We're likely true dogs in 3-4 meaning we're going to be favored or at least a 'push' in as many as 10-11.  Sure we'll lose some where victory seemed probable.  But our start gives us a bit of a cushion.  Look, 8-2 is not an unrealistic expectation following the DePaul game from where we are now (losses at Cincy and Louisville).  That gives us 8 more games where playing below .500 ball (3-5) still notches an 11th conference win.  Win this Saturday and the sky is the limit.

[nyg]

Except the rest of the country is just as weak. If we go 10-8 with 2 likely top-100 RPI non-con wins (Wisconsin and LSU) and just the one bad loss we will be in.

I'll go with that.

But they must tighten up the 3 point defense.  They continue to double down in the lane and the opponent passes back out for a wide open three.  Aggressive defense is one thing, but eventually that is going to cost them a game or two.  

[dgies9156]

Buzz has said the last few post games with Homer something to the effect of....'We are not any good, we are just good at winning.'  

Stop this crap, Buzz. We are good.

As Coach Lombardi once said, "winning isn't everything... it's the ONLY thing."

I don't care if we shoot 5% and stumble over our shoelaces, as long as we WIN!

[starting5]

we could just as easily be 15-1 if 2 shots go in different directions

[MarsupialMadness]

I think we finish with more than 10 wins in the BEast and that puts us well on the other side of the bubble.  Yes, the team still has things to work on, but we're off to a great head start with our 4 wins thus far. 

[Henry Sugar]

Stop this crap, Buzz. We are good.

As Coach Lombardi once said, "winning isn't everything... it's the ONLY thing."

I don't care if we shoot 5% and stumble over our shoelaces, as long as we WIN!

As usual, Buzz's "straight talk" needs to be viewed through the right filter.

In conference play, the team is
#3 at protecting the ball
#2 at defensive rebounding
#1 at getting to the free throw line
#2 at two point percentage
#3 at two point percentage defense

Overall, the team is balanced with the #5 offense and the #7 defense. In fact, there are lots of things the team does well.

However, MU is worst in the conference at three point shooting, and #13 at three point defense. They are #10 at offensive rebounding and #10 at forcing turnovers.