[QUOTE=NinerAdvocate;143902]Heād be in the same boat without a PG.[/QUOTE]
Iāve liked Baldwin ever since the Louisville game 2 years ago. He was a highly rated recruit for us and has been doing the point guard thing for at least 4 years now. As a senior, he should be kicking some major butt right now.
I didnāt think the PG position would be a weak position for us this year. Part of it has to be physical (bum shoulder) but another part of it has got to be mental.
[QUOTE=HappyCamper49;143802]DA scoring 30 something is talent, Lee scoring 26 is talent, Withers averaging a double double is talent and that is all something that is not apparent right now.[/QUOTE]
Thatās having a good game. Would you call all the players that lit us up recently - talented? Withers has talent, it has just been hibernating lately. The jury is out on DA.
[QUOTE]Give us Abdolliah Jalloh (hey I tried to spell it!) from St. Joeās and we at least split the losses weāve had this year. Weād at lest be 7-2, maybe even 8-1.[/QUOTE]
Iām too tired and sick of bickering with this poster to even begin to point out the absurdity of this statement.
Give us Abdolliah Jalloh (hey I tried to spell it!) from St. Joe's and we at least split the losses we've had this year. We'd at lest be 7-2, maybe even 8-1. And Jalloh is good, but not blue chip. Even a decent lead guard would make a huge difference.
I agree. Our PG plays a quality 2-5 minutes a game. He has the skills to push the tempo, drive the lane and create shots, and he can even hit the open 3. However, he only shows up for a few minutes each game. Mitch has the talent to be the lead guard we need, he just needs to stop sleep walking through the majority of the game.
NA is correct in saying that we would be better off with a PG that creates shots by being agressive. Not one thats idea of playmaking is standing at the top of the key and throwing the ball to each wing (20 feet from the basket) until the wing decides to make a play.
[QUOTE=morningwood;143937]I agree. Our PG plays a quality 2-5 minutes a game. He has the skills to push the tempo, drive the lane and create shots, and he can even hit the open 3. However, he only shows up for a few minutes each game. Mitch has the talent to be the lead guard we need, he just needs to stop sleep walking through the majority of the game.
NA is correct in saying that we would be better off with a PG that creates shots by being agressive. Not one thats idea of playmaking is standing at the top of the key and throwing the ball to each wing (20 feet from the basket) until the wing decides to make a play.[/QUOTE]
I know you guys are buddies now but saying that we would be 8-1 with St. Joes point guard is absurd, even for you.
I know you guys are buddies now but saying that we would be 8-1 with St. Joes point guard is absurd, even for you.
Read my post, I said I agree with NA that we would be better off.
[QUOTE=survivor45;143907]Iāve liked Baldwin ever since the Louisville game 2 years ago. He was a highly rated recruit for us and has been doing the point guard thing for at least 4 years now. As a senior, he should be kicking some major butt right now.
I didnāt think the PG position would be a weak position for us this year. Part of it has to be physical (bum shoulder) but another part of it has got to be mental.[/QUOTE]
How many plays does Mitch make each game. Heās solid for a certainty but heās not a playmaker. In todays college game you need a playmaker at PG. Look at Gonzaga it took a miracle shot to win the other nightā¦why? They are missing their play making PG Ravio. Look at Kentucky. They suck with the exception of one person. Rondo. The PG. They suck and would probably kill us. Thats what a great PG does for your team. Mitch makes maybe 1 play a game if that. His inability to shoot allows team to pack it in on Curt.
[QUOTE=49erFan1;144010] Mitch makes maybe 1 play a game if that. His inability to shoot allows team to pack it in on Curt.[/QUOTE]
He is second on the team in 3pt. shooting trailing Bennett by 1% point and he is 11% points higher than Goldwire.
Are you guys kidding? Mitch is not the problem. And he wasnāt last year when we won 9 in a row while he was hurt.
Anyone who saw the game on Saturday knows that our defense reverted back to its old style of ādont guard the other teams top shooterā and āgive up easy layup after layupā. Mitch and PG play was not the problem. We scored plenty. Defense was the culprit.
And by the way, I love Jalloh, but heās not exactly a true point either.
[QUOTE=49erpi;144018]He is second on the team in 3pt. shooting trailing Bennett by 1% point and he is 11% points higher than Goldwire.[/QUOTE]
He shoots just about all of them wide open.
[QUOTE=49erFan1;144028]He shoots just about all of them wide open.[/QUOTE]
I will disagree with that and point out that you are really reaching now.
[QUOTE=49erpi;144029]I will disagree with that and point out that you are really reaching now.[/QUOTE]
Are you saying that Mitch is a good shooter? I think 99/100 coaches would disagree.
I guess I should clarify. In no ways to I solely blame Mitch for this teams struggles. However I do feel that he is not nearly the great PG that we all believe him to be. He has a phenomenal A/TO ratio, but part of that is decieving because if you look at our post players A/TO ratio all of them are about 1/4. That means they are getting the ball in spots where they shouldnāt be. Heās also shooting 55% from the FT line. However my biggest problem is his defense. Heās been roasted this year by more players than one. Heās averaging less than a steal a game. With his physique he should be able to get at least 2 a game. He needs to be the stopper. Heās supposed to be the quickest guy, how come heās not getting to the loose balls like heās done in years past.
However the rest of the team needs to protect the ball better. If our post guys would not turn the ball over so much, weād be undefeated. Also we need to stop chucking up 3ās (weāre 13th in the nation). So much for inside out.
[QUOTE=49erFan1;144039]Are you saying that Mitch is a good shooter? I think 99/100 coaches would disagree.[/QUOTE]
What Iām āsayingā, or writing, is a fact in response to your quote below:
[QUOTE]His inability to shoot allows team to pack it in on Curt.[/QUOTE]
ā¦and that fact is that he is shooting the 3 at almost 40% which is a close 2nd on the team and that fact just happens to conflict your theory.
[QUOTE]In no ways to I solely blame Mitch for this teams struggles. However I do feel that he is not nearly the great PG that we all believe him to be[/QUOTE]
I donāt recall anyone claining that Mitch is a āgreatā PG. I am just stating that he is a good college PG.
Everyone is ripping him on the offensive side of the floor, wanting him to ādrive to the basketā through a 2-3 zone like some kind of freakin superhero. I am just pointing out that he takes care of the ball, dishes out a fair amount of assists and knocks down the occasional 3 pointer at a good percentage. He is doing what Lutz is asking him to do. Period. That makes him a good college point guard.
Now you addressed his defense and you are the first one to do so because everyone else just wants to watch us on offense. I will agree he has been shaky defensively but no more than anyone else on this team so it would be unfair to single out Mitchās poor defensive effort thus far and blame anything on him.
We are, once again, a pathetic defensive team and that is on the coaching staff. If we could stop anyone we would be 7-2 at worst. We have been lit up by some of the worst teams in the country and some of you are in for a surprise when we actualy play someone in the top 50. It will be a slaughter if our intensity on defense doesnāt pick up and Lutz doesnāt pick one and get good at it.
[QUOTE=49erpi;144051]
Now you addressed his defense and you are the first one to do so because everyone else just wants to watch us on offense. I will agree he has been shaky defensively but no more than anyone else on this team so it would be unfair to single out Mitchās poor defensive effort thus far and blame anything on him.
We are, once again, a pathetic defensive team and that is on the coaching staff. If we could stop anyone we would be 7-2 at worst. We have been lit up by some of the worst teams in the country and some of you are in for a surprise when we actualy play someone in the top 50. It will be a slaughter if our intensity on defense doesnāt pick up and Lutz doesnāt pick one and get good at it.[/QUOTE]
I cant disagree with any of this. Iāll say that our defense is about on par from every other year (terrible). Just, this year, our offense isnāt as good as usual. We also suffer from our always low basketball IQ and poor free throw shooting.
well mitch did all those things that made hime a āsuperheroā early last year, and the year before that, he was a much bigger help to the team back then.
Give us Abdolliah Jalloh (hey I tried to spell it!) from St. Joe's and we at least split the losses we've had this year. We'd at lest be 7-2, maybe even 8-1. And Jalloh is good, but not blue chip. Even a decent lead guard would make a huge difference.
Yeah, but he didnāt hit threes all day in high school, so Lutz wouldnāt even look at him. Thatās the difference between Martelli and Lutz.
[QUOTE=dejavu;144060]well mitch did all those things that made hime a āsuperheroā early last year, and the year before that, he was a much bigger help to the team back then.[/QUOTE]
We didnāt see hardly any 2-3 or 1-3-1 zones last season. What donāt you get about that?
[QUOTE=Mikeninerhunt;144076]Yeah, but he didnāt hit threes all day in high school, so Lutz wouldnāt even look at him. Thatās the difference between Martelli and Lutz.[/QUOTE]
Lutz does favor scoring ālead guardsā over classic pass first points. Thatās one area where I disagree with his philosophy. Donāt get me wrong, the guyās gotta be able to shoot enough to keep a defense honest, but Iād rather have a guy who dribbles the ball with both hands like itās a yo-yo, has incredible court vision and instincts, and can skip pass through a defense to a post player in position.
Even Colson, who we now tend to deify, jacked it up about a dozen times per game. And a lot of his shot choices were questionable.
Mitch is like the opposite player - opposite in that he isnāt a shooting guard at all, and never was in high school (he played the 2 but he was all about his athleticism and getting to the hoop, especially on a break), and unlike Colson, he cant find his big men with the basketball, and wonāt. With his uninspired play recently (he did play hard in the Davidson game), heās becoming a liability on the floor, regardless of whatever stats you want to throw up to dispute it, especially %'s. He could hit 1 damn three in his first game of the season and never shoot it again and some people would defend his shooting ability by saying āheās a 100% 3pt shooterā.
Bottom line is he needs to get his fire and aggressiveness back if he wants to help this team. And he isnāt the only one. Iām just picking on him because heās a SENIOR and he handles the ball more than anyone else.
If you think about it, we go as our seniors go - Mitch and Curtis were awful in the Valpo game, and we lost. I donāt think thatās a coincidence at all.
[QUOTE=49erpi;144051]What Iām āsayingā, or writing, is a fact in response to your quote below:
ā¦and that fact is that he is shooting the 3 at almost 40% which is a close 2nd on the team and that fact just happens to conflict your theory.
I donāt recall anyone claining that Mitch is a āgreatā PG. I am just stating that he is a good college PG.
Everyone is ripping him on the offensive side of the floor, wanting him to ādrive to the basketā through a 2-3 zone like some kind of freakin superhero. I am just pointing out that he takes care of the ball, dishes out a fair amount of assists and knocks down the occasional 3 pointer at a good percentage. He is doing what Lutz is asking him to do. Period. That makes him a good college point guard.
Now you addressed his defense and you are the first one to do so because everyone else just wants to watch us on offense. I will agree he has been shaky defensively but no more than anyone else on this team so it would be unfair to single out Mitchās poor defensive effort thus far and blame anything on him.
We are, once again, a pathetic defensive team and that is on the coaching staff. If we could stop anyone we would be 7-2 at worst. We have been lit up by some of the worst teams in the country and some of you are in for a surprise when we actualy play someone in the top 50. It will be a slaughter if our intensity on defense doesnāt pick up and Lutz doesnāt pick one and get good at it.[/QUOTE]
I think what frustrates me more about Mitchās defense is that he has the tools to be an incredible defender. In fact he was known for solid defense his freshman and sophomore year. However this year heās been the matador and it is killing us. When their PG penetrates, our guards creep in and they get an open 3 or our bigs step up and they get an easy dunk. More than anything else PG penetration has killed us this year and it makes no sense. We have better athletes yet we canāt get a body on any team. That I guess is my biggest frustration. Offensively I would like Mitch to do a little more in terms of playmaking. Heās just a little too content to run the offense. Heās a senior, he should be aggressively finding ways to get us easy buckets. His A/TO ratio is phenomenal, but thats all for naught when you put your teammates in positions where they are forced to make plays.
We need a spark. We need something. This team is as talented offensively as ours from last year. We should be better defensively without Iti and Plavich. We are not. What happened?