(11-10-2017 03:27 PM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  Pretty much what I expected for a first game. Getting out of that place sucks. Was told by someone in the AD that the clowns in Kentucky won't allow a cop at the intersection to direct traffic and control the traffic lights to facilitate people exiting. Will be nice to return to civilization next season.

Directing people through a dangerous traffic situation? That would be silly. It isn't the police's responsibility to keep people safe on the roads.

I thought we looked OK. The traffic is bad enough to make you want to skip going.

(11-10-2017 03:39 PM)TubaCat Wrote:  

(11-10-2017 03:27 PM)JackieTreehorn Wrote:  Pretty much what I expected for a first game. Getting out of that place sucks. Was told by someone in the AD that the clowns in Kentucky won't allow a cop at the intersection to direct traffic and control the traffic lights to facilitate people exiting. Will be nice to return to civilization next season.

Directing people through a dangerous traffic situation? That would be silly. It isn't the police's responsibility to keep people safe on the roads.

As I posted on the other thread US 27 is an interstate highway. I'm not entirely sure if they are allowed to direct traffic at that intersection barring catastrophe.

I admit to being frustrated at times watching the game today.
They passed waaayyy too much and often into near impossible places, rather than looking to score. They shot ill-advised shots, missed freethrows and Cumberland and Evans seemed to look to pass most everything to someone else. I take it as being similar to exhibition. Mick will have to tighten things up a bit, but I'm still steady in my view that this team will be crazy good. The turnovers, the rotations, the general feel of the game for this team will improve. It's a question of how far will their talent take them?

I also saw a lot of shots rim out... I hate those the most. No one to be mad at, it's like God just kicking you in the balls.
I look forward to seeing them play the Catamounts, what adjustments can be made in 3 days. I was thinking I might drive down for that one, as Monday is my Birthday.

I thought I read where we won by 30?

(11-10-2017 10:01 PM)rtaylor Wrote:  I thought I read where we won by 30?

Not to mention we played just about everybody in different substitutions.

First game of the season. They looked pretty sloppy at times, and at least at this point, they don’t seem to have that go to guy. But wow! Everyone on the team is a player! And they all look completely interchangeable. What a great advantage to have against any team. Frosh to seniors, I don't see any glaring weaknesses. They all just need to mesh together. I’m more excited about our prospects than any season since Steve Logan.

Btw....I’m really impressed with all the new players.

(11-10-2017 11:31 PM)payday Wrote:  Btw....I’m really impressed with all the new players.

Ditto. Only listened to the 1st half at lunch (Dan you're the best) but liked what I heard from the whole cast. Can't wait to see this group.

Savannah State was the fastest team in the country last season. One thing that I noticed in the way they played yesterday is that we didn't press at all and let them run the floor.

We didn't try to slow them down on defense and ran the court with them for 40 minutes. I think it's more a long the lines of experimentation. I don't think we're going to allow teams to play that fast against us for the rest of the season.

What scares me is not being able to get inside against a zone defense....

Gary was pretty much Gary, a double-double that seemed so ho-hum.

Evans aggressive on both sides. Made a lot of TOs but you wouldn't have known it since almost as often as not he erased his own mistake going the other way. 19 efficient points.

Cumberland tried to get others involved. Solid outing.

The PG position had its rough stretches, particularly by Broome, but exciting situation nonetheless. Both will continue to push each other and improve.

I like seeing Scott and Williams in at the same time. Both roll up the sleeves and scrap. Williams energy reminds me of a shorter, more skilled version of Tre who makes higher shot percentage. And Ellie especially, as well. I could see any of these guys leading the team in deflections one game this year.

Moore is money - he's a lot more than a one-trick pony. Good all-around game. Active and athletic on D as well.

Great situation with the depth in general, with 11 guys logging 10+ minutes, and getting a lot of positive contributions among those 11 guys.

The defense was a bit leaky for stretches. Of course a team that jacks up a lot of 3s are going to make a few. So those didn't bug me, especially the ones the big man made early LOL! But quite a bit of instances where the guy got into the defense a bit too deep. I think some of that might be attributed to the amount of players being shuttled in and out. It will take time to gel.

I would have liked to see a lot less three attempts on offense. Yeah sure, zone, but UC still bigger. Impose the will a little bit. The amount of 3 attempts dwarfed the amount of FT attempts. Although might not have been too bad a strategy, as poor of a clip that we made FTs were

Real good start though. I was very pleased.

To the comment on the newbies, yes, our ceiling of new recruits seems to keep moving upward. Good job by Mick

(11-11-2017 11:40 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Gary was pretty much Gary, a double-double that seemed so ho-hum.

Evans aggressive on both sides. Made a lot of TOs but you wouldn't have known it since almost as often as not he erased his own mistake going the other way. 19 efficient points.

Cumberland tried to get others involved. Solid outing.

The PG position had its rough stretches, particularly by Broome, but exciting situation nonetheless. Both will continue to push each other and improve.

I like seeing Scott and Williams in at the same time. Both roll up the sleeves and scrap. Williams energy reminds me of a shorter, more skilled version of Tre who makes higher shot percentage. And Ellie especially, as well. I could see any of these guys leading the team in deflections one game this year.

Moore is money - he's a lot more than a one-trick pony. Good all-around game. Active and athletic on D as well.

Great situation with the depth in general, with 11 guys logging 10+ minutes, and getting a lot of positive contributions among those 11 guys.

The defense was a bit leaky for stretches. Of course a team that jacks up a lot of 3s are going to make a few. So those didn't bug me, especially the ones the big man made early LOL! But quite a bit of instances where the guy got into the defense a bit too deep. I think some of that might be attributed to the amount of players being shuttled in and out. It will take time to gel.

I would have liked to see a lot less three attempts on offense. Yeah sure, zone, but UC still bigger. Impose the will a little bit. The amount of 3 attempts dwarfed the amount of FT attempts. Although might not have been too bad a strategy, as poor of a clip that we made FTs were

Real good start though. I was very pleased.

Noiice game summary Beej.



Only one game in against a scrub and we'll see how this continues to play out but I'm most intrigued by the talent, depth and versatility of our guard play. I don't believe it has been this deep in the Mick Cronin era. I realize we need to tighten up some of the ball handling but consider the scoring line yesterday:

Broome 17
Jenifer 15
Cumberland 10
Williams 10
Moore 8

If this goes well as the season cranks along what a luxury come conference and NCAA tourney time...guards, guards, guards.

(11-11-2017 11:48 AM)Fubar Wrote:  To the comment on the newbies, yes, our ceiling of new recruits seems to keep moving upward. Good job by Mick

There has been a noticeable improvement in the talent level in just the last few seasons. Guys like Jermaine Sanders and Shaq Thomas, who played a lot of minutes during their careers, would not get playing time on this team.

(11-11-2017 11:40 AM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Gary was pretty much Gary, a double-double that seemed so ho-hum.

And on that note, congratulations to Clark for joining the 1000 point scorers club. He had 998 going into the game yesterday. Be pretty cool if he could cross the 1000 rebound mark as well this year.

(11-11-2017 12:02 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  Noiice game summary Beej.



Only one game in against a scrub and we'll see how this continues to play out but I'm most intrigued by the talent, depth and versatility of our guard play. I don't believe it has been this deep in the Mick Cronin era. I realize we need to tighten up some of the ball handling but consider the scoring line yesterday:

Broome 17
Jenifer 15
Cumberland 10
Williams 10
Moore 8

If this goes well as the season cranks along what a luxury come conference and NCAA tourney time...guards, guards, guards.

Thanks. Also, I'd be remiss not to point out that I do agree with Mark, that we shouldn't try to hard to go too fast. With that said, Mark needs to be forewarned: that "KenPom" argument isn't going to get you anywhere on this board

(11-11-2017 02:51 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Thanks. Also, I'd be remiss not to point out that I do agree with Mark, that we shouldn't try to hard to go too fast. With that said, Mark needs to be forewarned: that "KenPom" argument isn't going to get you anywhere on this board

What's a KenPom? Is that what Barbie holds?

(11-11-2017 10:57 AM)MercerCo_BearCat Wrote:  Savannah State was the fastest team in the country last season. One thing that I noticed in the way they played yesterday is that we didn't press at all and let them run the floor.

We didn't try to slow them down on defense and ran the court with them for 40 minutes. I think it's more a long the lines of experimentation. I don't think we're going to allow teams to play that fast against us for the rest of the season.

What scares me is not being able to get inside against a zone defense....

They really, really packed in the zone. We were turning down open 3s. We had a few times we got it in, but it was so packed in and we tried to force it. But it did lead to lots of offensive rebounds and I don't see many teams packing it in like that. If so, we have enough shooters and rebounders to make that a really bad idea.

(11-11-2017 03:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(11-11-2017 02:51 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Thanks. Also, I'd be remiss not to point out that I do agree with Mark, that we shouldn't try to hard to go too fast. With that said, Mark needs to be forewarned: that "KenPom" argument isn't going to get you anywhere on this board

What's a KenPom? Is that what Barbie holds?

No, those are Ken's poms.

(11-11-2017 03:05 PM)UCGrad1992 Wrote:  

(11-11-2017 02:51 PM)BJUnklFkr Wrote:  Thanks. Also, I'd be remiss not to point out that I do agree with Mark, that we shouldn't try to hard to go too fast. With that said, Mark needs to be forewarned: that "KenPom" argument isn't going to get you anywhere on this board

What's a KenPom? Is that what Barbie holds?

No....It’s what Ken holds when Barbie’s not around.