Granted we've only played two games vs most likely RPI 250+ teams but it looks like we are going to be very good this year.


My question is, can we be special?

Consider:
We can score from every position
We are deep, long, and athletic
We can play defense (like usual)
There really isn't a weak link on the team position wise
They look bought in
Mick and staff are firmly entrenched
We have a nice mix vets and youngins

My all accounts, we are very good

Two things come to mind when I think of being special and what may keep us from that:

1. Consistent free throw shooting, (will kill you in the ncaa tourney)

2. As of right now, I'm not sure we have that one player that can take over a game vs elite teams. This team is loaded with very good players but there is no Kenyon Martin, or Danny Fortson or Nick Van Exel. When you look at a lot of final four teams, and especially national title contenders its sees like they all have that one guy that when the going gets rough (and it will in the ncaa tourney at some point) they have the one guy that can carry them and I mean vs elite opponents.


Do we have 'that guy' that can emerge?
If not, do we need that guy or is a team of very good players enough?


Thoughts?

Cumberland is going to have a huge year and can take over games. Evans can got hot and do so as well. Not worried about that.

(11-14-2017 07:41 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Two things come to mind when I think of being special and what may keep us from that:

1. Consistent free throw shooting, (will kill you in the ncaa tourney)

2. As of right now, I'm not sure we have that one player that can take over a game vs elite teams. This team is loaded with very good players but there is no Kenyon Martin, or Danny Fortson or Nick Van Exel. When you look at a lot of final four teams, and especially national title contenders its sees like they all have that one guy that when the going gets rough (and it will in the ncaa tourney at some point) they have the one guy that can carry them and I mean vs elite opponents.


Do we have 'that guy' that can emerge?
If not, do we need that guy or is a team of very good players enough?


Thoughts?

I agree on #1

On #2 I think that Evans and Cumberland can be that guy. There have been times where both of them seem to have ice in their veins. My only thought is we may have a more complete team than 99% teams in the country. Maybe we won't need that guy because we have a multitude of guys who can heat up and make shots when we need it.

I have not been watching Bearcat basketball as long as many of you. I was 4 when we went to the Final 4. I have vague memories of the late 90's, but I can't recall a team that had as few weaknesses, and as much depth as this squad.

By all appearances so far, I agree with the positives listed here. My concern is the sample size is extremely small and to hear the ESPN commentator on the game coverage last night talking Final Four is getting way ahead of the skis.

If I'm not mistaken, these seniors have one NCAA Tournament victory in their careers to date (Kansas State last season). Historically, which UC freshman in any given season hasn't looked great against the bottom feeders of Division I? And which interior players haven't dominated early season games against vertically challenged squads? The real measuring stick for Brooks and Scott will be their performances against UCLA and Florida next month. Washington's defense has often been lacking against the best of the best and he has a tendency to pick up early fouls and ride the bench in those games. Will the bench bigs be able to deliver defense and scoring in those situations where every basket becomes crucial?

Everyone here wants a conference championship and a deep run in March, myself included. Credit this staff with putting together a terrific December schedule that may be a tournament preview. I just believe it's way too early to forecast conference and postseason success. In six weeks, we'll know a lot more.

The only concerns I have going forward is point guard play in a close game and three point defense against teams like Xavier and Wichita State. Next week things get interesting as the real part of the schedules starts.

Outside of Xavier and Florida, UC should be solid to heavy favorite in every game before conference season starts. UCLA isn't all that great and might not make the tournament this year as they have look of NCAA/NIT bubble team. Miss State is an average SEC team with solid talent. The Cayman Island tournament has some tricky games but none that should trip UC up. The real key is 12-1 or better before conference play. 11-2 has UC playing for a 4 through 6 seed unless the league improves to the point where 16-2 is good enough to earn a protected seed. It would really help if Wichita State dominates non-conference play and Temple, Houston, SMU, UConn, and UCF win enough to get themselves in position for post season play. Right now UCF is injury mess and could easily play themselves out of contention.

Should be a pretty good team, and maybe the best Cronin team. Not sure where that ends up putting us.

Some weaknesses I do see...

1) Scoring in the post... I don't think Washington, Clark, or any of the younger guys are natural post scorers. They tend to score more facing the basket and off of put backs. Not sure how well that will work against a bigger team

2) Sloppy play, sloppy passes... this is something that can hopefully be worked on. Some of these guys try to do too much after they've created a TO or steal.

3) 3 point defense... this has always been an issue with Cronins team. Not sure if it's apart of his strategy or what, but they have a tendency to overbite on defense some times and leave open 3 point shooters

4) falling in love with the 3 ball... I wouldn't mind seeing some more cuts to the basket, Nick can put 5 guys on the court at the same time that can hit a 3, use that to spread the offense, and create more pick and roll situations.

... one other thing I think needs to some how improve (as mentioned by OKIcat), is Washington's defense. He is not a natural shot blocker, so he needs to get away from that. You can be a good defender without being a shot blocker (see Danny Fortson) and that's probably more important at this point.

(11-14-2017 08:27 AM)jarr Wrote:  Should be a pretty good team, and maybe the best Cronin team. Not sure where that ends up putting us.

Some weaknesses I do see...

1) Scoring in the post... I don't think Washington, Clark, or any of the younger guys are natural post scorers. They tend to score more facing the basket and off of put backs. Not sure how well that will work against a bigger team

2) Sloppy play, sloppy passes... this is something that can hopefully be worked on. Some of these guys try to do too much after they've created a TO or steal.

3) 3 point defense... this has always been an issue with Cronins team. Not sure if it's apart of his strategy or what, but they have a tendency to overbite on defense some times and leave open 3 point shooters

4) falling in love with the 3 ball... I wouldn't mind seeing some more cuts to the basket, Nick can put 5 guys on the court at the same time that can hit a 3, use that to spread the offense, and create more pick and roll situations.

Yep, that has been terrible for years, and we saw yesterday that it still hasn't gotten any better. We will struggle against any team that is having a good night behind the arc.

(11-14-2017 08:43 AM)jarr Wrote:  ... one other thing I think needs to some how improve (as mentioned by OKIcat), is Washington's defense. He is not a natural shot blocker, so he needs to get away from that. You can be a good defender without being a shot blocker (see Danny Fortson) and that's probably more important at this point.

I also think Jenifer needs to adjust his defensive style near the basket. He needs to quit trying to draw the charge and go for the quick swipe further out when the ball is low in the dribble. There were multiple plays last night where he went to try and draw the charge and got called for a blocking foul where the big man behind him had an easy block. He needs to go for the swipe and if he misses it get the hell out of the way. He should have 0 fouls within 5 feet of the basket.

Several talking heads on the sports programs have named UC as a dark horse and final four team. I think the team has the potential. I'm glad to see the defense shown yesterday considering we gave up 77 in game 1.

(11-14-2017 08:21 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  By all appearances so far, I agree with the positives listed here. My concern is the sample size is extremely small and to hear the ESPN commentator on the game coverage last night talking Final Four is getting way ahead of the skis.

If I'm not mistaken, these seniors have one NCAA Tournament victory in their careers to date (Kansas State last season). Historically, which UC freshman in any given season hasn't looked great against the bottom feeders of Division I? And which interior players haven't dominated early season games against vertically challenged squads? The real measuring stick for Brooks and Scott will be their performances against UCLA and Florida next month. Washington's defense has often been lacking against the best of the best and he has a tendency to pick up early fouls and ride the bench in those games. Will the bench bigs be able to deliver defense and scoring in those situations where every basket becomes crucial?

Everyone here wants a conference championship and a deep run in March, myself included. Credit this staff with putting together a terrific December schedule that may be a tournament preview. I just believe it's way too early to forecast conference and postseason success. In six weeks, we'll know a lot more.

Agree all this talk of greatness is premature. For example, last year's squad had early season wins over Fairleigh Dickinson 119-68, Texas Southern 96-58, BGSU 85-56, Brown 84-55, etc.

CBB is a very long season. Its not like CFB where every game matters. November games really only serve as a building blocks for your program for later in the season. Even if you get a big win over ranked opponents, all that matters is what you do in March/April. I've been around long enough to see some really good UC teams roll through the competition early in the season only to peak before the tournament.

If we are still doing this come March I'll be ready to call the team very good to special.

I really like what I see so far. Lots of depth, size and athleticism. It's November 14 though.

(11-14-2017 08:21 AM)OKIcat Wrote:  If I'm not mistaken, these seniors have one NCAA Tournament victory in their careers to date (Kansas State last season).

Clark was also there for the victory against Purdue, followed by the hard fought loss to Kentucky. Washington was part of an NC state team that went to a sweet sixteen in 2015 and who went to the round of 32 in 2014.
Still, I think to do prognostications in November is a bit difficult, I think the reason we're given a little bit of an edge, is that we've never had a starting 5 on this level or a bench at that level since Cronin has been her. While they need to prove their mettle still against higher competition, the reality is that our bigs are actually basketball players not just generic athletes and we have a bunch of ball handlers and shooters all over the place. Not a one of our guards looks inept.

I agree with your general sentiment, it's just with that much skill, that much length and that much experience/upperclassmen coming into their prime, I think it would actually be harder for them to be pretty good by season's end than it would be to realize their potential.

(11-14-2017 09:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Agree all this talk of greatness is premature. For example, last year's squad had early season wins over Fairleigh Dickinson 119-68, Texas Southern 96-58, BGSU 85-56, Brown 84-55, etc.

CBB is a very long season. Its not like CFB where every game matters. November games really only serve as a building blocks for your program for later in the season. Even if you get a big win over ranked opponents, all that matters is what you do in March/April. I've been around long enough to see some really good UC teams roll through the competition early in the season only to peak before the tournament.

If we are still doing this come March I'll be ready to call the team very good to special.

Don't want to disagree with your main point.... but when's the last time a Cronin team scored over 100 twice in a season in regulation? Big wins with your starters playing so little is also nice.

(11-14-2017 09:46 AM)ucbrownsfan Wrote:  

(11-14-2017 09:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Agree all this talk of greatness is premature. For example, last year's squad had early season wins over Fairleigh Dickinson 119-68, Texas Southern 96-58, BGSU 85-56, Brown 84-55, etc.

CBB is a very long season. Its not like CFB where every game matters. November games really only serve as a building blocks for your program for later in the season. Even if you get a big win over ranked opponents, all that matters is what you do in March/April. I've been around long enough to see some really good UC teams roll through the competition early in the season only to peak before the tournament.

If we are still doing this come March I'll be ready to call the team very good to special.

Don't want to disagree with your main point.... but when's the last time a Cronin team scored over 100 twice in a season in regulation? Big wins with your starters playing so little is also nice.

I believe we had a back to back 100 point games in 2011-2012.

(11-14-2017 08:24 AM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  The only concerns I have going forward is point guard play in a close game and three point defense against teams like Xavier and Wichita State. Next week things get interesting as the real part of the schedules starts.

Outside of Xavier and Florida, UC should be solid to heavy favorite in every game before conference season starts. UCLA isn't all that great and might not make the tournament this year as they have look of NCAA/NIT bubble team. Miss State is an average SEC team with solid talent. The Cayman Island tournament has some tricky games but none that should trip UC up. The real key is 12-1 or better before conference play. 11-2 has UC playing for a 4 through 6 seed unless the league improves to the point where 16-2 is good enough to earn a protected seed. It would really help if Wichita State dominates non-conference play and Temple, Houston, SMU, UConn, and UCF win enough to get themselves in position for post season play. Right now UCF is injury mess and could easily play themselves out of contention.

I had Florida and UC on side by side yesterday and had nightmares last night of Florida's transfer sharpshooter. In his UF debut, Egor Koulechov had 34 points on 11-17 shooting (6-9 from 3pt), 5 reb, 5 assists, 2 steals. But even more than that, he just looked like the real deal. Should be a great game.

(11-14-2017 07:41 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Two things come to mind when I think of being special and what may keep us from that:

1. Consistent free throw shooting, (will kill you in the ncaa tourney)

2. As of right now, I'm not sure we have that one player that can take over a game vs elite teams. This team is loaded with very good players but there is no Kenyon Martin, or Danny Fortson or Nick Van Exel. When you look at a lot of final four teams, and especially national title contenders its sees like they all have that one guy that when the going gets rough (and it will in the ncaa tourney at some point) they have the one guy that can carry them and I mean vs elite opponents.


Do we have 'that guy' that can emerge?
If not, do we need that guy or is a team of very good players enough?


Thoughts?

Free throw shooting is not going to be an issue for this team. When the rotation tightens you have Evans and Cumberland who will draw a lot of fouls and both of our starting big men can shoot FTs decently. I'd wager we end up in the top half of the league unless Tre and Brooks take a lot of PT away from Kyle. Not sure what kind of shooter Broome will be but he should take a lot of FTs as a penetrating point.

I agree Cumberland is most likely to takeover a game. I think he's less talented than Evans but has the mentality. Broome also has been the man before on a smaller stage. I do think we need to make a point before we start playing loseable games to make sure the game runs through our best players JC, Evans, and Gary. Not that I don't love all the other guys but you want your best players deciding those games.

Fwiw it's not just us gushing over this team. Jay Bilas tweeted today that were final 4 worthy. I know were supposed to be pessimistic as Cincinnati sports fans but its okay to be excited and enjoy this. Lord knows we need it.

(11-14-2017 09:46 AM)ucbrownsfan Wrote:  

(11-14-2017 09:19 AM)CliftonAve Wrote:  Agree all this talk of greatness is premature. For example, last year's squad had early season wins over Fairleigh Dickinson 119-68, Texas Southern 96-58, BGSU 85-56, Brown 84-55, etc.

CBB is a very long season. Its not like CFB where every game matters. November games really only serve as a building blocks for your program for later in the season. Even if you get a big win over ranked opponents, all that matters is what you do in March/April. I've been around long enough to see some really good UC teams roll through the competition early in the season only to peak before the tournament.

If we are still doing this come March I'll be ready to call the team very good to special.

Don't want to disagree with your main point.... but when's the last time a Cronin team scored over 100 twice in a season in regulation? Big wins with your starters playing so little is also nice.

Don't get me wrong, I am really enjoying the W's and 100 point efforts. Big wins is what we should be seeing against schools of these caliber.

Team does look good so far, have been impressed with the improvement of Justin Jennifer, Nas and the young freshmen. Cumberland and Evans are looking like they are going to have monster seasons. Gary Clark is still a problem (as Jon Rothstein would say).

(11-14-2017 07:41 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Two things come to mind when I think of being special and what may keep us from that:

1. Consistent free throw shooting, (will kill you in the ncaa tourney)

2. As of right now, I'm not sure we have that one player that can take over a game vs elite teams. This team is loaded with very good players but there is no Kenyon Martin, or Danny Fortson or Nick Van Exel. When you look at a lot of final four teams, and especially national title contenders its sees like they all have that one guy that when the going gets rough (and it will in the ncaa tourney at some point) they have the one guy that can carry them and I mean vs elite opponents.


Do we have 'that guy' that can emerge?
If not, do we need that guy or is a team of very good players enough?


Thoughts?

Fans get upset about free throw shooting because it looks so easy, but it isn't very important. It seems like it should be, but it's not. Most of the top teams and teams that go deep in the tourney each year are not among the top teams in FT percentage. There are many other things that are much more important to winning, and UC is good at a lot of them.

As for a guy who can take over a game, they have several options, but Cumberland seems like the main one. He showed it in the Crosstown Shootout and in the tourney against UCLA. Evans has taken and hit big shots before too (that 3 to tie against Marshall comes to mind).

We definitely pass the eye test. Athletic, long, fast and can get the ball through the hoop.

We sat right across floor from Mick last night. He was as miserable all game as I have seen him in a long time. I think he knows this is a different team than he has had before and is ratcheting it up.