The unofficial online home for fans of the University of Cincinnati Bearcats. Part of Collegiate Sports Nation (CSN).

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  [quote='DownOnRohs' pid='15605489' dateline='1540478675']Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

Their intelligence and communication was the big key. The fact is Tre Scott is a better athlete than Gary Clark was. At the 5 Brooks/Nsoseme are a major upgrade over Washington and Williams may well be a better athlete than Evans was.

But they don't have the experience. The question is how quickly can they learn and how well will they respond to Cronin's coaching. My guess is the D will start out good, but not great early this season. But will become better throughout the year. Hopefully becoming great at the end of the year or next season.

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

turnovers are likely to be a problem this year on offense. Gary and Kyle were great and protecting the ball. Brooks and Scott are closer to Ellis when it comes to handling the ball. Broome has had issues, Cumberland is mediocre, KW is bad. It could be a serious problem. We could get close to that 2015 team that was 300th in the country in turnover %. Thats gonna drop the overall offense to an 80+ ranking on kenpom.

(10-25-2018 06:12 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

turnovers are likely to be a problem this year on offense. Gary and Kyle were great and protecting the ball. Brooks and Scott are closer to Ellis when it comes to handling the ball. Broome has had issues, Cumberland is mediocre, KW is bad. It could be a serious problem. We could get close to that 2015 team that was 300th in the country in turnover %. Thats gonna drop the overall offense to an 80+ ranking on kenpom.

I'm not sure what you were watching. Kyle's assist to TO ratio was 0.3/1 - worst on the team - he was not great or even good at protecting the ball. In comparison, Gary's was 2.11/1. Scott was 1.5/1 and will likely improve as he gets more playing time. He's a skilled passer.

Cumberland was the best passer on the team last year and likely will be this year as well. He and Broome are both excellent passers, they just need to learn to not take quite as many risks (especially Broome). Jenifer was top 10 in the country in assist to turnover ration last year. KW and Moore will improve as they gain experience.

(10-25-2018 06:39 PM)skyblade Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 06:12 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  turnovers are likely to be a problem this year on offense. Gary and Kyle were great and protecting the ball. Brooks and Scott are closer to Ellis when it comes to handling the ball. Broome has had issues, Cumberland is mediocre, KW is bad. It could be a serious problem. We could get close to that 2015 team that was 300th in the country in turnover %. Thats gonna drop the overall offense to an 80+ ranking on kenpom.

I'm not sure what you were watching. Kyle's assist to TO ratio was 0.3/1 - worst on the team - he was not great or even good at protecting the ball. In comparison, Gary's was 2.11/1. Scott was 1.5/1 and will likely improve as he gets more playing time. He's a skilled passer.

Cumberland was the best passer on the team last year and likely will be this year as well. He and Broome are both excellent passers, they just need to learn to not take quite as many risks (especially Broome). Jenifer was top 10 in the country in assist to turnover ration last year. KW and Moore will improve as they gain experience.

assist to TO ratio isn't a good stat to look at for guys that never pass the ball. I didn't say Kyle was a good passer, I said he was good at protecting the ball. Gary had a 10.2 TORate and Kyle's was 14.4. Both very good. Octavius Ellis was 23.2 and 23.8 his 2 years here.


When Kyle got the ball a shot was getting up most of the time, when Gary got it the right play was being made most of the time. We are yet to see what Scott and Brooks can do with 20+ minutes but Brooks has been over 22 TORate in both his seasons and Scott was 19.5 last year. Maybe more PT will allow them to get more comfortable and confident and they'll cut down on silly mistake. Scott only turned the ball over once in March but he also only had 1 assist. We have to see how he handles being an important part of the offense.


Being a great passer doesn't mean you aren't sloppy with the ball. A lot of Jarrons turnovers were mental mistake rather than a lack of talent, but it still has to get cleaned up.

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

Teams that are talented offensively and/or good shooters are a problem for defenses. It has nothing to do with Mick.

(10-26-2018 05:03 AM)GoCats1994 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

Teams that are talented offensively and/or good shooters are a problem for defenses. It has nothing to do with Mick.

I agree. I would much rather play a mid-level power conference teams full of athletes than a spread the floor with shooters team for a high or mid-major level conference in tournament play.

Playing Notre Dame on Sunday is going to a great test for the defense.

Hopefully it comes with experience, but I always feel watching Trevon that he rushes his game once he gets the ball. Nothing wrong with a quick move to the hoop so long as he can finish with a score or drawing the foul. Gary Clark was masterful at that, so Trevon has played against one of the best in practice the past couple of years. I think we're all hoping that Trevon emerges as Justin Jackson did. It will be needed.

According to Jon Rothstein, this is how the Bearcats will score this year.

"Hearing Cincinnati is firmly committed to Cane Broome off the ball and Justin Jenifer at PG. Bearcats need 12-15 PPG from Broome to make 9th straight NCAA Tournament."

(10-26-2018 03:29 PM)crex043 Wrote:  According to Jon Rothstein, this is how the Bearcats will score this year.

"Hearing Cincinnati is firmly committed to Cane Broome off the ball and Justin Jenifer at PG. Bearcats need 12-15 PPG from Broome to make 9th straight NCAA Tournament."

assuming we see

Jenifer
Broome
Cumberland
Scott
Brooks

as the starters. Why would any team not play a high school 5 in the paint zone defense? How can we score on that with that lineup?

Broome and Cumberland aren't going to be able to drive if we have no way of stretching the floor. Its going to be an extremely difficult season for them.

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 09:44 AM)DownOnRohs Wrote:  Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

(10-26-2018 03:52 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 03:29 PM)crex043 Wrote:  According to Jon Rothstein, this is how the Bearcats will score this year.

"Hearing Cincinnati is firmly committed to Cane Broome off the ball and Justin Jenifer at PG. Bearcats need 12-15 PPG from Broome to make 9th straight NCAA Tournament."

assuming we see

Jenifer
Broome
Cumberland
Scott
Brooks

as the starters. Why would any team not play a high school 5 in the paint zone defense? How can we score on that with that lineup?

Broome and Cumberland aren't going to be able to drive if we have no way of stretching the floor. Its going to be an extremely difficult season for them.

Scott will score in the face up game. Cumberland and Broome can make threes. Mick can sub in different guys.

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  [quote='DownOnRohs' pid='15605489' dateline='1540478675']Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

I am a huge UC fan, and I completely agree. I think our defense is often overrated. I’m not convinced by the metrics. The metric have to do with the competition we play. Or did they somehow factor that out? If we had to play Duke or North Carolina etc. I don’t think our defense can match those type of offenses. Or even top 20 offenses.

(10-26-2018 10:32 PM)ZCat Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  [quote='DownOnRohs' pid='15605489' dateline='1540478675']Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

I am a huge UC fan, and I completely agree. I think our defense is often overrated. I’m not convinced by the metrics. The metric have to do with the competition we play. Or did they somehow factor that out? If we had to play Duke or North Carolina etc. I don’t think our defense can match those type of offenses. Or even top 20 offenses.

you shouldn't assume anybody could stop those teams. Virginia gave up 1.09 ppp to UNC in the conference tournament. Michigan gave up 1.18 ppp in the title game vs nova. Those teams were 1 and 3 in adj d on kenpom.


well designed offense with talent is really hard to stop.

(10-26-2018 10:37 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 10:32 PM)ZCat Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  [quote='DownOnRohs' pid='15605489' dateline='1540478675']Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

I am a huge UC fan, and I completely agree. I think our defense is often overrated. I’m not convinced by the metrics. The metric have to do with the competition we play. Or did they somehow factor that out? If we had to play Duke or North Carolina etc. I don’t think our defense can match those type of offenses. Or even top 20 offenses.

you shouldn't assume anybody could stop those teams. Virginia gave up 1.09 ppp to UNC in the conference tournament. Michigan gave up 1.18 ppp in the title game vs nova. Those teams were 1 and 3 in adj d on kenpom.


well designed offense with talent is really hard to stop.

THIS. Been saying the same for years. So tired of Mick ball.

(10-26-2018 10:37 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 10:32 PM)ZCat Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 10:11 AM)RealDeal Wrote:  [quote='DownOnRohs' pid='15605489' dateline='1540478675']Though i think Kilpatrick and Jackson would be the two best players if they were on this year's team, but I do believe the talent on this year's team is a little deeper. I agree that we will have a lot more games in the 60's than we did last year. I'm hoping we can get to 22 wins. That feels like the magic number.

You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

(10-25-2018 09:49 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  The problem is that it is almost impossible for this year's team to reach the level of last year's team on defense. last year was the best defensive team UC has had in my lifetime. I think this year's team needs to be a top ten caliber defense to be a top 25 team. Last year's team was #2 in kenpom adjusted defense, and by the numbers would have been #1 almost every other year. They were magnificent on that end of the floor. The best case scenario for this team, imho, is to be a top ten defense, and statistically not fall off on offense. That would make them a top 15-25 team. While last year's offense was good most the time, statistically they never quite got to the level they should have. I do think this team is capable of being a top 50 type offense. It will have to be more steady than last year's team on that side of the ball to get there, because it certainly doesn't have the offensive skill level and experience of last year's team.

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

I am a huge UC fan, and I completely agree. I think our defense is often overrated. I’m not convinced by the metrics. The metric have to do with the competition we play. Or did they somehow factor that out? If we had to play Duke or North Carolina etc. I don’t think our defense can match those type of offenses. Or even top 20 offenses.

you shouldn't assume anybody could stop those teams. Virginia gave up 1.09 ppp to UNC in the conference tournament. Michigan gave up 1.18 ppp in the title game vs nova. Those teams were 1 and 3 in adj d on kenpom.


well designed offense with talent is really hard to stop.

So in other words, designing your whole team, program, and identity around a defense first mentality is bad idea? Unless you have a whole bunch of monster freaks like the 2015 uk team, its really hard to shut down the good offenses, and even then they eventually ran into Wisconson who had no problem scoring on them.

I'm not denying the importance of playing fundamentally sound, good defense, I'm just saying Mick is delusional to think his teams can win deep in March in the 50s and 60s. He clearly gears his recruiting around this mentality and we continue to get the same results.

(10-27-2018 03:35 AM)jarr Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 10:37 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 10:32 PM)ZCat Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:25 PM)bearcatlawjd2 Wrote:  

(10-25-2018 04:04 PM)jarr Wrote:  You think JJ was a better player than Cumberland is? If that's true it's going to be a long year

Gary and Jacob were the most intelligent versatile defenders I've seen here in a long time; probably since KMart. The way they knew when to switch and the ability to guard multiple positions made the defense unreal.

I do think Tre can be a high level versatile defender, not to Gary's level, but good enough where we don't have a large drop off. Whoever plays the 5 is going to be a dramatic improvement defensively. We're not going to be as good defensively on the wings without Jacob, we don't have an obvious replacement for his defense. I still think that adds up to a top 10 defense. We're obviously taking a step back offensively this year also. My guess is we end up somewhere between a 7-10 seed unless we get unexpected improvement from Moore/Williams or unexpected contributions from newcomers.

I know I'm going to catch some flack for this, but I've felt alot of Cronin's teams are overrated defensively including last years. I believe they are dominant against certain types of teams with certain characteristics. However there are alot of holes that can easily be found in Mick defense that most talented offensive teams and coaches can take advantage of fairly easy. (See Nevada and Xavier).

Which is why i hated the Nevada matchup from the start and hoping for Texas. Mick has not lost a single NCAA tournament game to those high majors teams that don’t have elite players. He has lost every NCAA tournament game to mid-majors with good shooters.

Only Wichita State plays like that style in league play.

I am a huge UC fan, and I completely agree. I think our defense is often overrated. I’m not convinced by the metrics. The metric have to do with the competition we play. Or did they somehow factor that out? If we had to play Duke or North Carolina etc. I don’t think our defense can match those type of offenses. Or even top 20 offenses.

you shouldn't assume anybody could stop those teams. Virginia gave up 1.09 ppp to UNC in the conference tournament. Michigan gave up 1.18 ppp in the title game vs nova. Those teams were 1 and 3 in adj d on kenpom.


well designed offense with talent is really hard to stop.

So in other words, designing your whole team, program, and identity around a defense first mentality is bad idea? Unless you have a whole bunch of monster freaks like the 2015 uk team, its really hard to shut down the good offenses, and even then they eventually ran into Wisconson who had no problem scoring on them.

I'm not denying the importance of playing fundamentally sound, good defense, I'm just saying Mick is delusional to think his teams can win deep in March in the 50s and 60s. He clearly gears his recruiting around this mentality and we continue to get the same results.

There is nothing wrong with being a defense first program. You just also have to be good on offense.


We don't run a good offense. There is no reason in the world for our team to have ranked 49th in offense on kenpom last year. That team was loaded with offensive talent. Its pretty inexcusable.

I'm not sure i believe that our biggest problem on offense is what/how we run it entirely. I think we've struggled(intentionally or unintentionally) to find guys who can create their own shots. Cumberland and Broome are clearly exceptions on the current roster(and likely Johnson), and we've seen some improvement with guys like Clark, Washington and Evans. At this level, execution gets you so much. Really good offensive teams have guys who can take guys off the dribble and make them pay. I'm hoping we see some of this from Fredericks this year as he's an an attack the basket guy. Right now, i'm not encouraged we'll see much of that from the bigs. Hardnett down the road, and maybe Williams this year have potential in that area for sure. Question is how they will hold up at 20 to 25 minutes of play. When you have guys who can create their own shots, you compromise a lot of defenses and create easy buckets for guys who cannot create. That's been an issue.

(10-26-2018 03:52 PM)CallMeSlim Wrote:  

(10-26-2018 03:29 PM)crex043 Wrote:  According to Jon Rothstein, this is how the Bearcats will score this year.

"Hearing Cincinnati is firmly committed to Cane Broome off the ball and Justin Jenifer at PG. Bearcats need 12-15 PPG from Broome to make 9th straight NCAA Tournament."

assuming we see

Jenifer
Broome
Cumberland
Scott
Brooks

as the starters. Why would any team not play a high school 5 in the paint zone defense? How can we score on that with that lineup?

Broome and Cumberland aren't going to be able to drive if we have no way of stretching the floor. Its going to be an extremely difficult season for them.

Good question. One of Mick's better offensive schemes last year was against the zone, though. We ran a play that got Gary the ball at the free throw line, threw Evans and JC out on the wings and let Kyle cut down low. Not sure how we do that this year but I would assume Tre Scott will play a big role either as the Clark facilitator or finishing down low.

(10-27-2018 10:04 AM)dsquare Wrote:  I'm not sure i believe that our biggest problem on offense is what/how we run it entirely. I think we've struggled(intentionally or unintentionally) to find guys who can create their own shots. Cumberland and Broome are clearly exceptions on the current roster(and likely Johnson), and we've seen some improvement with guys like Clark, Washington and Evans. At this level, execution gets you so much. Really good offensive teams have guys who can take guys off the dribble and make them pay. I'm hoping we see some of this from Fredericks this year as he's an an attack the basket guy. Right now, i'm not encouraged we'll see much of that from the bigs. Hardnett down the road, and maybe Williams this year have potential in that area for sure. Question is how they will hold up at 20 to 25 minutes of play. When you have guys who can create their own shots, you compromise a lot of defenses and create easy buckets for guys who cannot create. That's been an issue.

keith will. moxie. he's got it. if he can nail high percentage shots i don't care if he shoots another three. although this overhyped offensive rebounding prowess perpetrated by the likes of me and others could warrant an array of chuckers. they are errand boys who clean up after mistakes and return the ball for a do over. when they're done with the horsing around with the guards, why they get the rebound and just score the dang ball themselves.