After watching some first round games today, it is obvious that our “Raw Basketball Talent level” is way behind the teams in the big dance. I don’t see how you can blame the problems this year on coaching. Is Coach K all of a sudden a bad coach?? We do have recruiting problems and we have got to getter better players in the door.
[QUOTE=BigTimeNiner;224925]After watching some first round games today, it is obvious that our “Raw Basketball Talent level” is way behind the teams in the big dance. I don’t see how you can blame the problems this year on coaching. Is Coach K all of a sudden a bad coach?? We do have recruiting problems and we have got to getter better players in the door.[/QUOTE]
Is recruiting not a part of coaching? I see your point about the talent level, but its not as if we were completely depleted. Leemire, EJ, and DeAngelo were three solid players that we could have built around. I think people are starting to get upset with Lutz because we seem to have no gameplan… we play no defense, we jack up at least 25 3s a games, we look completely unorganized, we never score out of timeouts, etc. Those are not signs of good coaching no matter what kind of talent you have.
After watching some first round games today, it is obvious that our "Raw Basketball Talent level" is way behind the teams in the big dance. I don't see how you can blame the problems this year on coaching. Is Coach K all of a sudden a bad coach?? We do have recruiting problems and we have got to getter better players in the door.
I see your point about talent level, and no, Coach K is not a bad coach; but he is having a bad coaching year. His team is still packed full of McDonald All-Americans, and they lose every close game, but this is one year out of how many? Please do not compare Bobby to Coach K. I like Bobby a lot, but his style of play will not bring us any further than we have gotten with him (second round of NCAA). Even the years we’ve had great talent, we have gone no where in the tournament, because we live and die by the three. Name one team that has made it far in the tournament that plays like that. Bobby has done a great job for the niners overall, but we need to move on to get to the next level. In my opinion, the individual talent we had on the niners this year was better than most of the lower seeded teams in the NCAA this year. We just play stupid basketball, bottom line.
I was hoping that VCU would have lost that game so that we might of had a chance at hiring their coach if bobby skipped town. They attacked the basket every time down, they won on threes that were mostly wide open due to the fact that they drove to the basket.
Their defense was WAY better last night than any performance I have seen us put on in two years. My wife doesn’t care that much for basketball, but she had fun watching VCU, she even said “this is way better than “[I]oh what do i do? I don’t know lets shoot a 3[/I]”” I am sure bobby is a class guy and a great guy, I know he has done good things for this program, but he can’t adjust his style of play. The people left on this board that support him as a coach are the same ones who are optimistic that he will change his style from comments made from Lutz Live. I hope it does change, but I know it won’t, its been too much of the same for too long for it to change.
I would love to see us play defense half as hard as VCU did last night. We would be playing this weekend if we played defense like VCU. You can make up for alot of short falls on offense with a good defensive team. There is no reason we should not be a good defensive team.
[QUOTE=Max Power;224926]Is recruiting not a part of coaching? I see your point about the talent level, but its not as if we were completely depleted. Leemire, EJ, and DeAngelo were three solid players that we could have built around. I think people are starting to get upset with Lutz because we seem to have no gameplan… we play no defense, we jack up at least 25 3s a games, we look completely unorganized, we never score out of timeouts, etc. Those are not signs of good coaching no matter what kind of talent you have.[/QUOTE]
DOBA, our physical talent is dreadful right now. How people want to give Bobby a pass on that is laughable. You think Calapari is a good game coach? No, he can sell his program wherever he is to kids…same with Huggins.
Big,
You can’t even mention K and Lutz in the same sentence- there are no similarities. Duke went to 9 straight Sweet 16s (according to today’s Observer). 22 wins in the ACC is not close to our 14-17 in the A10.
Watching the games yesterday was disappointing to not see the Niners playing in the NCAA tournament. The teams that played yesterday though and won do something that we didn’t do this year. Play as a team and play smart. We have individual players that are allowed to shoot wherever and whenever without the discipline of an offense.
Comparing Coach K and Lutz is laughable. I wish Lutz had 1/3 of his ability.
[QUOTE=Max Power;224926]Is recruiting not a part of coaching? I see your point about the talent level, but its not as if we were completely depleted. Leemire, EJ, and DeAngelo were three solid players that we could have built around. I think people are starting to get upset with Lutz because we seem to have no gameplan… we play no defense, we jack up at least 25 3s a games, we look completely unorganized, we never score out of timeouts, etc. Those are not signs of good coaching no matter what kind of talent you have.[/QUOTE]
Counterpoint:
[LIST]
[*]A lot of teams this week have jacked up 25+ threes per game. It’s what you do if you’re small. Even the Princeton offense is ultimately about taking a lot of threes in addition to the backdoors.
[*]Do we do things because we dont have coaching or because our players are too small, too slow, and not very coachable?
[/LIST]
I think people like easy scapegoats. I think we have big problems, but I don’t think they’re that simple to diagnose. We need smarter, more coachable players, more size (while retaining speed), better fundamentals for our signees, and a more complete offense and simplified but perfected defense to be more competitive.
I think people like easy scapegoats. I think we have big problems, but I don't think they're that simple to diagnose. We need smarter, more coachable players, more size (while retaining speed), better fundamentals for our signees, and a more complete offense and simplified but perfected defense to be more competitive.
You mean the 5 star recruits at BCS schools? :scared:
[QUOTE=NinerAdvocate;224947]Counterpoint:
[LIST]
[*]A lot of teams this week have jacked up 25+ threes per game. It’s what you do if you’re small. Even the Princeton offense is ultimately about taking a lot of threes in addition to the backdoors.
[*]Do we do things because we dont have coaching or because our players are too small, too slow, and not very coachable?
[/LIST]
I think people like easy scapegoats. I think we have big problems, but I don’t think they’re that simple to diagnose. We need smarter, more coachable players, more size (while retaining speed), better fundamentals for our signees, and a more complete offense and simplified but perfected defense to be more competitive.[/QUOTE]
What in your mind is the Head Coach actually responsible for then?
[QUOTE=NinerFan;224960]What in your mind is the Head Coach actually responsible for then?[/QUOTE]
LOL
I saw this thread title and thought BigTimeNiner had also gone to the NCAA games in Winston yesterday and noticed the Georgetown cheerleaders. :sad: All I can say is Duke has lost their title.
Have you not seen the UNCA cheerleaders…:throwup:
I saw this thread title and thought BigTimeNiner had also gone to the NCAA games in Winston yesterday and noticed the Georgetown cheerleaders. :sad: All I can say is Duke has lost their title.
Davidson was also all about the 3 ball yesterday, that was the only way they were in the game, the great equalizer.
[QUOTE=Savio;224973]Have you not seen the UNCA cheerleaders…:throwup:[/QUOTE]
Let’s just say I think I now know where BDD’s cousins go to school.
[QUOTE=amnesiac;224977]Davidson was also all about the 3 ball yesterday, that was the only way they were in the game, the great equalizer.[/QUOTE]
Exactly and it put us in the NCAA tournament on a consistent basis. If done right, the strategy works well. We had some good players over that span but the talent level was certainly not much better than the competition. It was the system and the right players in the system that made it effective. Hit big shots and make key defensive stops = win games.
Sorensen made some good points about Curry this morning. He’s a very good player (I saw that in the pro-am league), don’t get me wrong, but Davidson’s system and their PG is what makes him special.
its okay to jack up 25+ 3’s in a game if you are making more than 6.9% of them as we did at times (Xavier 2-29), we don’t have the shooters for that.
its like in war trying to fire rockets out of your handgun.
Davidson was also all about the 3 ball yesterday, that was the only way they were in the game, the great equalizer.
Yeah, but it put them out of the game as the second half progressed and their shots stopped falling. That’s where a high dependency on low percentage shots will eventually get you, because just as sure as you will get hot, you will get cold.
Also, talking about Duke, they are not as deep as they used to be and not as talented. Coach K can still coach, and did a good job making this team as competitive as they were. They don’t have that star player anymore that has the killer instinct to make the big plays. What they do do still is play good fundamental defense, run actual sets to get high percentage shots, and not just jack up 3’s. So, it’s not just a difference in talent, but also coaching.
[QUOTE=NinerFan;224960]What in your mind is the Head Coach actually responsible for then?[/QUOTE]
Since you don’t want a serious answer, why ask that question?
Counterpoint: [LIST] [*]A lot of teams this week have jacked up 25+ threes per game. It's what you do if you're small. Even the Princeton offense is ultimately about taking a lot of threes in addition to the backdoors. [*]Do we do things because we dont have coaching or because our players are too small, too slow, and not very coachable?[/LIST]I think people like easy scapegoats. I think we have big problems, but I don't think they're that simple to diagnose. We need smarter, more coachable players, more size (while retaining speed), better fundamentals for our signees, and a more complete offense and simplified but perfected defense to be more competitive.
-
Princeton’s offense is also based on constant motion, precise cuts, and excellent screening (all things we are missing).
-
If we have a team full of uncoachable players, then it’s the coach’s fault that recruited them. If it is a few of the players, then bench them. The problems I see are coming from guys that are starting game after game. So either the coach is afraid to send a message and discipline these guys, or the player is coachable, but is not being taught much more than the product of what we see on the floor.