Author Topic: Not very effecient (Read 4016 times)

NotAnAlum · « **on:** December 30, 2006, 05:03:24 PM »

Thats the best way I can describe this team. They'll come down one in a while, set up a nice that results in a good look or a dunk down low, then the next couple times down they throw up a wild shot in traffic or drive into a triple team or simply turn the ball over. They make a strong move to get a couple free throws and then miss the free throws. A few years ago Crean said that he taught is teams to "value each possession". Now I realize this is a different team but they seem not to value a possession in the least. Could it be that with such a focus on steals we've gotten so that, aside from a fast break dunks, we're not really that concerned with what we do on offense. I'm really concerned that against better teams who are going to take better care of the ball the game is going to come down to a couple possession and I don't see us turning our into points. I guess we'll know soon enough.

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #1 on:** December 30, 2006, 05:21:45 PM »

Quote from: NotAnAlum on December 30, 2006, 05:03:24 PM

Thats the best way I can describe this team. They'll come down one in a while, set up a nice that results in a good look or a dunk down low, then the next couple times down they throw up a wild shot in traffic or drive into a triple team or simply turn the ball over. They make a strong move to get a couple free throws and then miss the free throws. A few years ago Crean said that he taught is teams to "value each possession". Now I realize this is a different team but they seem not to value a possession in the least. Could it be that with such a focus on steals we've gotten so that, aside from a fast break dunks, we're not really that concerned with what we do on offense. I'm really concerned that against better teams who are going to take better care of the ball the game is going to come down to a couple possession and I don't see us turning our into points. I guess we'll know soon enough.

Shot 50% from the field, 15 assists, 42% from the arc. That's efficient.

In fact, if you take away McNeal's incredibly poor play, they were ULTRA efficient at 61% from the field.

Harrison · « **Reply #2 on:** December 30, 2006, 06:10:38 PM »

In a rare moment I agree with Chicos. Kind of a catch 22, I was disappointed that Wesley had disappeared as of late but delirious with McNeal's reduction in turnovers. Then today Mcneal has what sounded like his worst game of the year. Not only was he 1-9 but he had 6 turnovers and only one steal. He plain hurts the team with those numbers. And Wes goes for a stat stuffing 22 and 9. The team played very efficiently but was scewed by McNeal, and even with him the numbers were pretty good. Boy this team could be really good if we could ever get the 3 amigos to have good games all at once and put together two good haves. Has it happened at any other time this year than the Duke game?

PuertoRicanNightmare · « **Reply #3 on:** December 30, 2006, 06:30:09 PM »

Speaking of Chicos...nice scolding he (aka "Striped Tomato") received on Scout! How dare he link to a site (Cracked Sidewalks) that Coach Rab himself recommended to MU Season Ticket holders in an e-mail!

bma725 · « **Reply #4 on:** December 30, 2006, 06:37:39 PM »

Quote from: Harrison on December 30, 2006, 06:10:38 PM

Has it happened at any other time this year than the Duke game?

It didn't happen in the Duke game. James and McNeal were good, but Matthews was off. Only 2-9 from the field, only 8 points for the game.

It seems, that with this 3 guard offense, if two of them are on one is always going to be off. Its just the nature of how they play the game. To be successful, all three of them need the ball in their hands a lot and need to create oppurtunities individually.

Most 3 guard offenses aren't built that way, because generally it doesn't work when set up with 3 guys that are penetrators/slashers. To be succesful, there's usually have at least 1 one guy that can light it up from beyond the arc and do a lot of work off the ball. That way they can compliment each other and open things up for each other, instead of in some cases holding each other back which can happen you have very similar players.

Harrison · « **Reply #5 on:** December 30, 2006, 07:02:39 PM »

I felt Wesley had a very good game against Duke. Only scored 8 but did many other things including some extremely good defense. and I was alos alluding to it probably being the 2 best halves our team has put together. nevertheless, we need to do better starting on the road at prov. hopefully the team will rise to the challenge that would be a tremendous road win to start the conference season.

mviale · « **Reply #6 on:** December 30, 2006, 07:21:04 PM »

That scout board sounds so enticing.

NYWarrior · « **Reply #7 on:** December 30, 2006, 07:28:44 PM »

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on December 30, 2006, 06:30:09 PM

Speaking of Chicos...nice scolding he (aka "Striped Tomato") received on Scout! How dare he link to a site (Cracked Sidewalks) that Coach Rab himself recommended to MU Season Ticket holders in an e-mail!

Glad you noticed!

Chicos, busted on Scout.

The horror. The horror.

Murffieus · « **Reply #8 on:** December 30, 2006, 07:42:29 PM »

I think Notanalum hit the naik right on the head----there has been too much emphasis on steals and running the break and hurryup offense that the possession is not valued as it has been other years.

Having said that though, I think we'll see a lot more motivation starting next week-----as IMO the team is cupcake weary, having played so many of these meaningless games that they got into a rut!

muhoosier260 · « **Reply #9 on:** December 30, 2006, 09:08:01 PM »

MU went 22-33 from the ft. line, not that this is a new story by any means. 33 free throws!?!?! thats insane, especially compared to savannah state's 5-10 effort.

SoCalwarrior · « **Reply #10 on:** December 30, 2006, 09:12:53 PM »

Mac mentioned early on in the radio broadcast that Savannah State fouled a lot, so MU's gameplan was to attack the basket. James did that especially well the 2nd half.

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #11 on:** December 30, 2006, 10:06:43 PM »

Quote from: PuertoRicanNightmare on December 30, 2006, 06:30:09 PM

Speaking of Chicos...nice scolding he (aka "Striped Tomato") received on Scout! How dare he link to a site (Cracked Sidewalks) that Coach Rab himself recommended to MU Season Ticket holders in an e-mail!

Yeah, isn't that funny. They better get together with Coach Rab immediately so he understands WHO CONTROLS MARQUETTE INFORMATION ON THE WEB so that fans are only going to the certified site.

I was very disappointed today to see that both MUScoop and Crackedsidewalks had a boxscore, recap, photos and everything else up before the other site...I was told for the last few weeks with "tacked" up materials about all the great information you got there for FREE and FIRST.

At any rate, the scolding was rather funny. Apparently it needed it's own thread...not sure why...but by the 5th post they wanted everyone to "move on"....uhm, ok. Then why have a thread at all? H Y P O C R .......

ChicosBailBonds · « **Reply #12 on:** December 30, 2006, 10:11:03 PM »

Incidentally, never ever ever attempt to "not worship at the Favre altar" or you will get the Saddam Hussein treatment over there.

NotAnAlum · « **Reply #13 on:** December 30, 2006, 10:27:16 PM »

beleive me, I was at this game and Savannah was a bad team. I have been at all the buy games this year and this team was just about the worst. Scoring only 69 against these guys is nothing to be pleased with. As others have said Crean was upset during his radio post game. He knows this game looked bad, not what you'd want as a tune up going into a Big East road game. I think he knows at this point the gimmies are over and this team is not where they need to be. They're not going to beat any Big East team on the road playing like this and they will lose close games at home. I hope I'm wrong but I would be at all surprised to be 2-4 after the first 6.

Murffieus · « **Reply #14 on:** December 31, 2006, 11:58:47 AM »

I say we're 4-2 in the next 6 games-----should see a more spirited team similar to against Duke !

SoCalwarrior · « **Reply #15 on:** December 31, 2006, 12:21:21 PM »

Quote from: Murffieus on December 31, 2006, 11:58:47 AM

I say we're 4-2 in the next 6 games-----should see a more spirited team similar to against Duke !

I want the old Murf back. I think you're being too optimistic. If we go 3-3 in the next six, I'm doing cartwheels. We go 4-2 and I'll {insert embarrassing task here}.

Marquette84 · « **Reply #16 on:** December 31, 2006, 06:24:47 PM »

Quote from: SoCalwarrior on December 31, 2006, 12:21:21 PM

I want the old Murf back. I think you're being too optimistic. If we go 3-3 in the next six, I'm doing cartwheels. We go 4-2 and I'll {insert embarrassing task here}.

This is the same old Murff--he's read the tea leaves on the predictions (1-5, 2-4, 3-3).

His MO is to post an overly optimisic "prediction" then call Crean out for "underachiving" those expecatations.

Mark my words--if we go 3-3 he'll post "underachieve" with three exclamation points for each and every cartwheel you turn.

Murffieus · « **Reply #17 on:** December 31, 2006, 09:33:41 PM »

Actually 4-2 is about right-----win over Providence may be without there best player
----win over Syracuse at home----after watching UCONN, there is nor reason why we can't beat them------West Virginia at home should be a W (they lost 5 of their top 6 from last year)-------a loss at Pitt-----but Louisville hasn't shown anything and we should beat them as well even on the road----we've usually played well there.

Now that's 5 wins & 1 loss----but figure an upset on one of the 5 wins above which equals 4-2 !

News:

'23-'24 SOTG Tally

Big East Standings

Recent Posts

Please Register - It's FREE!

Next up: The long cold summer

Author Topic: Not very effecient (Read 4016 times)

PuertoRicanNightmare