Bear Down Wildcats

EVCat wrote:

scumdevils86 wrote:How many final 4s and championships have Kansas, Duke and Kentucky had since 2002...

How many have Michigan State, Georgia Tech, Syracuse, Georgetown, UCLA and....fuck, Florida? Had since this staff was assembled?

How many Final Fours has Kentucky won this week?

I know this staff came in to a dumpster fire and got to the 4th game in the tournament 3 times in 5 years. But the Final Four...that marketing strategy.

What the hell is a Final Four without a title? A loss in the 5th or 6th game.

This obsession with that one more game, at the exclusion of all the times we lost in the first game in the "glory years" is head spinning. No one said we were Duke. Or Kentucky. But we are in the ballgame with everyone else.

+1

+2

So this thread is about this year's team.

I think we need to see how the remaining league games play out and if we can somehow better gel on defense this team has enough offensive firepower to reach the Final Four. Ayton is unstoppable force and we should continue to ride him big time and see where it takes us.

Looking at the total landscape if we can stay away from Villanova and Purdue in our bracket this team has as good as chance as any to win 4 games in March.

Agree with EvCat. We are in the ballgame with everyone else just about ever year and don't think this year is any different.

This team has enough offensive firepower in its starting 5. After that, offensive production has been pretty dismal. Someone on the bench better start stepping up because we can't rely on 5 players to score. Actually, 4 solid scorers and PJC, who is hot and cold.

What gets lost a lot is that there's usually outliers in FF performance. South Catolina made the Final Four and they were in the 90's in AdjO last year.

Being in the top 20 in both AdjO and AdjD is definitely good, but it's possible to be too fixated and miss how often Final Four teams don't meet that profile.

One bench player usually has a decent showing each game. but we don't know which one will show up for that particular game.
I really liked that Miller gave everyone a shot against WSU. I'd like to see that continue with the bench players on scholi, even if we miss beating the spread, but not enough to lose.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:What gets lost a lot is that there's usually outliers in FF performance. South Catolina made the Final Four and they were in the 90's in AdjO last year.

Being in the top 20 in both AdjO and AdjD is definitely good, but it's possible to be too fixated and miss how often Final Four teams don't meet that profile.

I rather be a team with bad numbers who makes the final four than a team with good numbers who doesn't

Spaceman Spiff wrote:What gets lost a lot is that there's usually outliers in FF performance. South Catolina made the Final Four and they were in the 90's in AdjO last year.

Being in the top 20 in both AdjO and AdjD is definitely good, but it's possible to be too fixated and miss how often Final Four teams don't meet that profile.

I used to be big on projecting future success and match ups based on stats. Where you really start to notice how overblown AdjO and AdjD are is when you try picking your bracket based on statistical rankings. Ken Pomeroy himself has been ahead of the game in seeing the limitations of the numbers. I kind of feel like the culture of coaches and fans is correcting the overly enthusiastic embrace of those stats.

Longhorned wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:What gets lost a lot is that there's usually outliers in FF performance. South Catolina made the Final Four and they were in the 90's in AdjO last year.

Being in the top 20 in both AdjO and AdjD is definitely good, but it's possible to be too fixated and miss how often Final Four teams don't meet that profile.

I used to be big on projecting future success and match ups based on stats. Where you really start to notice how overblown AdjO and AdjD are is when you try picking your bracket based on statistical rankings. Ken Pomeroy himself has been ahead of the game in seeing the limitations of the numbers. I kind of feel like the culture of coaches and fans is correcting the overly enthusiastic embrace of those stats.

They are helpful in evaluating probabilities. My thought is that there isn't a tournament where probabilities matter less than the NCAA tourney. Between the youth of players and the one and done format, it's a breeding ground for defying the odds.

We've seen it happen to us a few times.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:What gets lost a lot is that there's usually outliers in FF performance. South Catolina made the Final Four and they were in the 90's in AdjO last year.

Being in the top 20 in both AdjO and AdjD is definitely good, but it's possible to be too fixated and miss how often Final Four teams don't meet that profile.

Well yeah George Mason made a final four. Those Kenpom numbers that you have to have are for the national champion not final four teams.

We can still reach a final four but don't have a good enough Kenpom d right now to win it.

BBQ wildcat wrote:This team has enough offensive firepower in its starting 5. After that, offensive production has been pretty dismal. Someone on the bench better start stepping up because we can't rely on 5 players to score. Actually, 4 solid scorers and PJC, who is hot and cold.

Here is where I differ from some. Outside of foul trouble, which is less likely in NCAAs than PAC, I am fine with 5 guys playing huge minutes in a game that has 8 TV time outs that last 3 minutes, 8 more full time outs, 2 30 second time outs, and a halftime, with only 40 minutes of play. Not to always throw back to the guy, but Wooden played 5, maybe 6 sometimes.

Bench play, if you got it, is great, but it is overrated IMO. You need a big man to spell, and Ira plays well enough in small stretches, as does Pinder...you find which one is on. And at wing/guard, either Smith or Randolph will give you minutes. If PJC is in trouble, slide Trier over to Point, bring in a wing.

The only thing that will beat us, unless we play Duke, Michigan State, Purdue...the very elite...is us. Do we hold the pack line? This defense as taught makes the talk about needing to zone so fkn stupid to me. It is virtually a zone...a sagging man to man...and has all the help principles you want, and restricts penetration if done properly. Look at Virginia. The main differences are man switch/stay decisions, we can rebound, and we have a man assignment, but you get some of the things you want out of a zone (not the scared, "we are not good enough" zone of a team that sucks...the things you want from a zone when you are actually good) like a lack of pure iso one on one, and the big face up blocked shot. The help should...SHOULD...keep players from having to rim protect. Look at Virginia. We need to PLAY the packline, keep screen action away from the weak side, tell PJC to stay home on screen work to his side and switch or fight...I'd rather the guy turn a corner on Ayton than PJC step away from a shooter...and we can be elite.

This drive down the middle stuff, tho...no excuse for that in a pack line. Ayton has picked up his blocks by letting guys get a step on him and then cleaning them up...a lot of his blocks are of that variety, not straight help blocks or face up (though that is happening). A pack line played properly shouldn't have a lot of blocked shots...it should have a lot of in your face contests.

We seem to get a little better every week. We have our moments...and the refs gave us quite a moment last weekend. But we are getting better, while no one else outside of Duke, Virginia and Purdue seem all that fired up about consistently being great. We have won, what, 18 of 19? Those losses in Bahamas, while inexcusable, happened to some pretty good teams, no? Purdue, SMU, NC St? Yeah, they were shitfests...let's not pretend we had a chance outside the big comeback vs was it Purdue? A lot of that is fuzzy. But that showed life, and we have properly hammered a pretty mediocre PAC (ASU hasn't...remember when they were #1 (in their heads) and #3 in the polls? They are 4-6 in conference).

So...why not us? I think we are figuring out how to ride Ayton, with Trier and Alkins providing huge scoring as well. But we now know Ayton is the key. And he has improved like 2 years in this season.

I am going to San Antonio no matter what. I committed before the season. Did the same thing in 2014 when we were 20-0...so I will be at my 4th Final Four no matter what.

I think this team CAN be there. Respect the process...I think some of these kids are getting what could be. They just have to play defense for 30, not even 40, like they did in stretches against Stanford and Utah.

Take the under tonight. A guy told me Arizona is winning by 2-5 depending on whether Washington makes their last 3-pointer.

Heard one of the bracketology sites has us at a 4 seed in San diego
With Duke, ks, tenn

Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

Definitely

There was a stretch near end where rawle shot two threes and Trier one.
Three empty possessions in a row without ball going down low.

I thought we attacked zone really well tonight. A lot of shots didn't go in during first half.

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

If they haven't learned after 24 games they won't learn the rest of the way. It's just absolutely impossible seeing this team winning more than 2 games in the tournament.

Postmaster wrote:There was a stretch near end where rawle shot two threes and Trier one.
Three empty possessions in a row without ball going down low.

I thought we attacked zone really well tonight. A lot of shots didn't go in during first half.

Yep. We had a chance to get some separation and rushed those shots. If they go in, great. But Alkins did not have a hot hand. Should've kept going inside. Against a zone I don't like taking early threes until you get the defense moving out of position and then at least you've got a shot at the offensive glass.

ASUHATER! wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

If they haven't learned after 24 games they won't learn the rest of the way. It's just absolutely impossible seeing this team winning more than 2 games in the tournament.

It's hard to tell how far Arizona will get in the tournament. However with the way the season is going I believe Arizona has as good a chance as just about anyone of making a deep run. Even in a loss I'm glad the Cats got to play against a zone like Washington plays. And they handled it much better than most teams have. I was glad to see the Cats come back from a deficit also. A lot of people like yourself are giving up way too easily. I believe Arizona can and will reach their first Final Four under CSM. Tonight's loss is what convinced me as odd as that may sound to someone as pessimistic as you.

ASUHATER! wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

If they haven't learned after 24 games they won't learn the rest of the way. It's just absolutely impossible seeing this team winning more than 2 games in the tournament.

Really? Really? We've won every close game since the Bahamas except tonight. We grinded out an OT win at UNLV. Grinded out a win vs. A&M. And went down to the final minutes at Utah, vs. Oregon, ASU, Colorado and Utah again. ALL VICTORIES. All of which was without Alkins. Winning on the road every single night isn't easy. Arizona got zero calls the entire game. All of the whistles favored UW and Dickerson. It's tough to play uphill because one bad play leads to another bad call and then maybe a few missed easy shots. And before you know it, you're down double digits. Bad teams fold like a taco. Arizona stormed back. Couldn't get any calls and watch Washington bank in two three pointers and make two more three pointers after we blocked their shot and the shot clock was about to expire. You've convinced me before but you don't know anything about basketball.

zonagrad wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

If they haven't learned after 24 games they won't learn the rest of the way. It's just absolutely impossible seeing this team winning more than 2 games in the tournament.

Really? Really? We've won every close game since the Bahamas except tonight. We grinded out an OT win at UNLV. Grinded out a win vs. A&M. And went down to the final minutes at Utah, vs. Oregon, ASU, Colorado and Utah again. ALL VICTORIES. All of which was without Alkins. Winning on the road every single night isn't easy. Arizona got zero calls the entire game. All of the whistles favored UW and Dickerson. It's tough to play uphill because one bad play leads to another bad call and then maybe a few missed easy shots. And before you know it, you're down double digits. Bad teams fold like a taco. Arizona stormed back. Couldn't get any calls and watch Washington bank in two three pointers and make two more three pointers after we blocked their shot and the shot clock was about to expire. You've convinced me before but you don't know anything about basketball.

UNLV/Oregon/Utah/Colorado will not even make the tournament. Grinding out wins against non-tournament teams is hardly a predictor of NCAA tourney success.

Yeah as weird as it sounds, tonight actually gave me more confidence this team can make a run. They attacked the zone well, missed a bunch of bunnies from 15, and a couple dudes for Wash played out of their minds.

However, the one concerning thing is we don’t have a killer instinct. We have the potential to play lock down D, but it only comes in spurts.

dmjcat wrote:

zonagrad wrote:

ASUHATER! wrote:

rgdeuce wrote:Did their last three field goals all come off tipped loose balls? And three banked shots. Team has to learn how to play hard for all 40.

If they haven't learned after 24 games they won't learn the rest of the way. It's just absolutely impossible seeing this team winning more than 2 games in the tournament.

Really? Really? We've won every close game since the Bahamas except tonight. We grinded out an OT win at UNLV. Grinded out a win vs. A&M. And went down to the final minutes at Utah, vs. Oregon, ASU, Colorado and Utah again. ALL VICTORIES. All of which was without Alkins. Winning on the road every single night isn't easy. Arizona got zero calls the entire game. All of the whistles favored UW and Dickerson. It's tough to play uphill because one bad play leads to another bad call and then maybe a few missed easy shots. And before you know it, you're down double digits. Bad teams fold like a taco. Arizona stormed back. Couldn't get any calls and watch Washington bank in two three pointers and make two more three pointers after we blocked their shot and the shot clock was about to expire. You've convinced me before but you don't know anything about basketball.

UNLV/Oregon/Utah/Colorado will not even make the tournament. Grinding out wins against non-tournament teams is hardly a predictor of NCAA tourney success.

I'm sorry we're not blowing teams out by 20 points every night. Few teams are. We're 19-5. Our two losses have been on the road by a three points. I won't even acknowledge the games in the Bahamas when Alkins was out and Dylan Smith and Brandon Randolph were starting and Alex Barcello was getting 20 minutes. We're not remotely the same team.

We can play with any team in the country right now. And tonight was a growing moment in my eyes because we played against a style we rarely see but could stonewall us in a tournament setting. We picked apart UW's zone in the second half and got great looks. We didn't shoot it great from deep. I'm upset we lost as always but not discouraged.

the UW loss doesnt change where I think this team's ceiling is. Elite Eight.

I think we'll make it there too.

Defense in the first half was pure garbage. Everyone got beat off the dribble, no coverage behind, no help at the rim. Nobody to blame but ourselves.

Missed it initially - knew the outcome but wanted to watch the 2nd half. Pretty impressed how easily we f'ed their zone up. I haven't watched really any of the pups games this year so not sure if it's a solid D or what, but we were carving it up. Lots of great drives and dishes and the ristic/ayton combo was working nicely. Honestly, just some shit luck combined with a few lackadaisical plays on D...and of course some shit calls. Prob the most positive buzzer beater L the team could prob ask for. Feeling good about where the teams at going home against the LA teams.

TucsonClip wrote:Defense in the first half was pure garbage. Everyone got beat off the dribble, no coverage behind, no help at the rim. Nobody to blame but ourselves.

and no hustle all game. Cats got beat to every loose ball.

Again, no help from the second team. 6 points from the scrubs.

Recall back to the second half When we got the lead for the first time and UW called a timeout. In the subsequent minutes, UW went on an 8-0 lead to go back up 7. I'd probably be right in guessing that more than half of us saw that coming.

This team reminds me of the 2008 NBA champion Celtics in the way they just sleepwalk through 80% of a game and win because of the dominance and ease in the other 20.

Merkin wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:Defense in the first half was pure garbage. Everyone got beat off the dribble, no coverage behind, no help at the rim. Nobody to blame but ourselves.

and no hustle all game. Cats got beat to every loose ball.

Again, no help from the second team. 6 points from the scrubs.

I still believe, injury or no injury, that Rawle is more effective for us off the bench than as a starter until he proves otherwise.

So start Smith? Akot?

Merkin wrote:

TucsonClip wrote:Defense in the first half was pure garbage. Everyone got beat off the dribble, no coverage behind, no help at the rim. Nobody to blame but ourselves.

and no hustle all game. Cats got beat to every loose ball.

Again, no help from the second team. 6 points from the scrubs.

While shooting 60 percent from field. Yeah really stunk up the joint

It would be nice is Heeke implemented a no tweeting policy after games, especially losses

PHXCATS wrote:

It would be nice is Heeke implemented a no tweeting policy after games, especially losses

84Cat wrote:

PHXCATS wrote:

It would be nice is Heeke implemented a no tweeting policy after games, especially losses

He's not wrong.

Merkin wrote: Again, no help from the second team. 6 points from the scrubs.

I feel like I'm the only one who thinks the lack of bench production is the biggest problem with this team. Heck even a solid sixth man averaging 10-12 points a game would be huge, that's a 7 pt win yesterday.

We usually get 0-6 points off the bench and just makes games closer than it should.

That's not even factoring in fatigue.

RondaeShimmy wrote:

Merkin wrote: Again, no help from the second team. 6 points from the scrubs.

I feel like I'm the only one who thinks the lack of bench production is the biggest problem with this team. Heck even a solid sixth man averaging 10-12 points a game would be huge, that's a 7 pt win yesterday.

We usually get 0-6 points off the bench and just makes games closer than it should.

That's not even factoring in fatigue.

I totally agree and have posted the same. I just can not see how this team can make a deep run in the tournament with virtually no bench help. Even getting 10 from all the scrubs combined, would have meant a win.

We can win against anyone with little bench help as long as all the starters are holding up their end. Our loss vs Colorado, Ristic could not hit anything... he makes a couple of his automatic shots we win easily. Same goes for last night with Rawle. He hits his normal %, we win.

Alieberman wrote:We can win against anyone with little bench help as long as all the starters are holding up their end. Our loss vs Colorado, Ristic could not hit anything... he makes a couple of his automatic shots we win easily. Same goes for last night with Rawle. He hits his normal %, we win.

Now imagine if we had 12-14 points from the bench, we win both games by what, 12-15+ pts even if the starters are struggling or missing shots.

Instead of close losses or wins.

Alieberman wrote:We can win against anyone with little bench help as long as all the starters are holding up their end. Our loss vs Colorado, Ristic could not hit anything... he makes a couple of his automatic shots we win easily. Same goes for last night with Rawle. He hits his normal %, we win.

Arizona lost that game in so many ways. To win, all that was needed was for one thing go differently.

- Play defense earlier than 16:41 left in the second half

or

- PJC comes to play instead waiting until after he gets benched for several minutes

or

- Equal Washington's effort on broken plays

or

- Make unguarded shots in the high post

or

- Rawle isn't the most ice cold he's ever been or ever will be

or

- Washington benefiting several time from broken plays made by good Arizona defense

or

- Washington banking three pointers

or

- The officials calling six phantom fouls (3 on Ayton, 2 on Ristic, 1 on Alkins) that bailed out Washington possessions and put Ayton in trouble

If just any one of those hadn't been the case, I don't see how Arizona loses that game. And all of them were needed for Washington to win, and in the fashion they did.

I don't think we need bench scoring per se.
IMO we need the bench guys to come in and not commit TOs and play solid D.
The bench guys look lost and out of control. Some of that is adapting to the system.
Some of it relates to the hockey-like mass substitutions.
I think he put in lee, smith and Randolph at same time.

With Trier, Ayton, Ristic , and alkins we don't really have a lot of shots to give to the bench guys

One thing about the bench that irks me is that Miller has this propensity, especially after the first media timeout, to insert 3 bench players into the game all at once, which has never brought upon positive results, yet this is done every game. I can see 2 guys in at once, but 3? Every game this occurs and it baffles me to no end. It either ends up killing any offensive spark the starters provided early in the game or it digs us a bigger hole. Once again this is done EVERY GAME.

At this point I'm ready for March. This team will either put together for 40 when its do or die or play nonchalant for 20 minutes and the result that comes with it.

That's what I meant by "hockey-like".

To me, that much change at once causes confusion on assignments.

I actually thought our bench gave some decent minutes yesterday. I realize the scoring isn't there, but there's a lot of effort and hustle on the defensive end, particularly from Akot, Randolph and Pinder. Randolph has been playing better and I do think he will be an impact player for us eventually. Maybe it can happen in March. Dylan Smith is up and down but I don't really have any moments where he touches the ball and I cringe like several bench players of the past.

Seems like the bench plays it safe. Goes in for little minutes. Hustle, play defense, board, take an open shot if you have it. It's not like we got guys shooting 1-10 off the bench. It's just that we don't need them to be taking the shots.

We scored 47 points in the second half. On the road. Against a zone defense. Offense wasn't our problem. We shredded UW's zone. Look at the stat line from Ayton and Ristic.

Our problem remains on defense. Until we tighten up, we are going to be in a lot of close games. The question is, can we tighten up?

Postmaster wrote:That's what I meant by "hockey-like".

To me, that much change at once causes confusion on assignments.

Yes. I'm not a fan of whole sale lineup changes. I'd trust Randolph on the floor more when he's playing with the other starters. His chances of success are higher.

zonagrad wrote:We scored 47 points in the second half. On the road. Against a zone defense. Offense wasn't our problem. We shredded UW's zone. Look at the stat line from Ayton and Ristic.

Our problem remains on defense. Until we tighten up, we are going to be in a lot of close games. The question is, can we tighten up?

This x100

This week is so huge for us. We need to sweep both the LA schools at McKale. BTFD and get it done Team.

Bangkok Wildcat wrote:This week is so huge for us. We need to sweep both the LA schools at McKale. BTFD and get it done Team.

UCLA & USC are both teams that, when hot, can make shots. But neither team is outstanding defensively. Especially UCLA. Both are athletic. The only way we struggle to score is if we settle for bad shots and take too many 3's. But even if we score the ball well, both games are going to be a challenge unless we defend better. We let Oregon, Colorado & Utah all hang with us at McKale because of less than dominant defense. We're playing with fire and relying too much on our strong offense. I'm hoping that the UW loss was a lesson for us that we can't rely on offense to win games.

Hate to beat a dead horse, but I keep going back to our point guard position as the most troublesome. I don't mind PJC's limited offensive game. In fact, with Trier, Ayton & Ristic, we don't need a point guard hunting shots anyway. Trier is having a phenomenal season. The guy is hitting 54% of his shots. He's been super efficient. And you can't say enough about the offensive production of both Ayton & Ristic.

Scoring points is not our problem. Getting good looks for Trier, Ayton & Ristic is not our problem. Hell, if Alkins just didn't take any shots other than layups against UW, we probably win the game.

So it's ok for us to have limited offensive production from Alkins & PJC. But we can't have marginal defensive production from those positions. Because as good as Trier is on offense, he just doesn't have it on defense. I don't know if it's effort or commitment to playing D, but it certainly isn't there for 40 minutes. With Ristic, he's just physically limited. And Ayton has been terrific but putting too much defensive responsibility on his shoulders exposes him to foul trouble. Which is why the least productive offensive players on the court MUST BE our most productive defensive players.

I'd like to see Miller change his substitution patterns so that whoever is on the court with Ayton, Trier & Ristic is all about defense. Nothing else really matters other than creating havoc for opposing players. We saw glimpses of PJC turning up the intensity on D vs. UW when he was digging into the post and forcing turnovers and forcing ball pressure. Randolph & Akot have the physical tools. I could care less if they don't provide any bench scoring. Don't need it. We need players to embrace their role as defense first. Our big 3 will take care of the points.

The upside potential of this team has to come on the defensive side. Can we really expect our starting group to put up more points? No question we could use some help from our bench on both sides of the ball. The question I have is how much potential do we have to improve defensively. When I see 3 starters go for 20 each and we lose the game you've got problems.