Bear Down Wildcats

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

EVCat wrote:Duke could use Trent right now.

Which is the point. They lose depth every year. They just haven't had to tap into it like we have the last two years.

Lose talent, recruit and reload. We do it like Duke does, this year our ability to recruit and reload got gutted.

It's snowing in Tucson this morning. It's an apt metaphor for how this season is.

My mom is in Oro valley with her brother, that is great that you all get to have some snow, after this weekend the snow in parts of my yard will be up to my roof. Can't wait to send the kids sledding off the roof down the ramp. Enjoy it.

U.P. Zona Fan wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

EVCat wrote:Duke could use Trent right now.

Which is the point. They lose depth every year. They just haven't had to tap into it like we have the last two years.

Lose talent, recruit and reload. We do it like Duke does, this year our ability to recruit and reload got gutted.

It's snowing in Tucson this morning. It's an apt metaphor for how this season is.

My mom is in Oro valley with her brother, that is great that you all get to have some snow, after this weekend the snow in parts of my yard will be up to my roof. Can't wait to send the kids sledding off the roof down the ramp. Enjoy it.

Today was fun. In Tucson, there's a citywide freakout/party with snow. I got to go on the roof of my building at work and throw snowballs, and I work in a fairly serious environment.

It was the longest daytime snow I've ever seen in Tucson. Stay safe in the deeper stuff.

I am proud to lead off your sig, too.

I would like to see SM take the rest of year to do some work on his game.
Try some new stuff, nothing drastic.
Try some zone for a segment instead of 2 minutes.
Try pressing just to work on it. Try some different plays.

dovecanyoncat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:That's the thing. Even if we lose, these games are very valuable for Lee, DD and Barcello. They may not be our stars next year, but learning how to play on this level is severely underrated.

That's why at this point of this season I don't care about a W unless singularly it predicates player development or extends our season in order to do the same. Lee, AB and DD won't be our head and shoulders next year but they will be our torso and core. This is good therapy for me but I tell myself it is good for Miller as well. Isn't this the mission that founded the love most coaches have for the game? As a fan it liberates me not to value our record over our development. Maybe Coach lets himself (remember) think that way as well. With all the crap that's going on, the man deserves some sanctuary: no better place to find it than in the source.

Lol Sean Miller really is Nick Nolte in Blue Chips. Going back to the courts at the end helping kids because that’s what he got in it for.

Would love to see BWill get some spot minutes in the next couple home games. It sounded like he was working his way back and that he would play in Vegas but tough to knock off the rust just like that. Maybe give him 10-12 minutes a game in McKale and sit him on the road

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

U.P. Zona Fan wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

EVCat wrote:Duke could use Trent right now.

Which is the point. They lose depth every year. They just haven't had to tap into it like we have the last two years.

Lose talent, recruit and reload. We do it like Duke does, this year our ability to recruit and reload got gutted.

It's snowing in Tucson this morning. It's an apt metaphor for how this season is.

My mom is in Oro valley with her brother, that is great that you all get to have some snow, after this weekend the snow in parts of my yard will be up to my roof. Can't wait to send the kids sledding off the roof down the ramp. Enjoy it.

Today was fun. In Tucson, there's a citywide freakout/party with snow. I got to go on the roof of my building at work and throw snowballs, and I work in a fairly serious environment.

It was the longest daytime snow I've ever seen in Tucson. Stay safe in the deeper stuff.

I am proud to lead off your sig, too.

I have to keep the sig til red blue, but I think I'll keep it so that when we make the final four next year I can use it as leverage to get r&f's sig.

Got to McKale for the first game I've been to in a bit this year.

It was nice to see us still playing with some fight. BWill being back was a fun extra. Ira made some big shots down the stretch. I was a little disappointed to see the student section half full, but I guess we're not great this year.

It did remind me that college basketball is fun.

19 game streak against Stanford stays intact despite a mediocre season. Nice to see.

good win good homestand

Really need at least a split in Oregon.

I went down to see the team and I was pleased to see BWill back. I thought the team played hard and they were crisp. I felt the coaches did a great job with the game plan and the execution. They had some new wrinkles and it produced some nice looks.

It was disappointing to see the lack of students at the game on a Sunday night. Lots of tickets on stub hub for as low as $6. Hoping we can find a way to split then win a big one on Senior day.

azcat49 wrote:I went down to see the team and I was pleased to see BWill back. I thought the team played hard and they were crisp. I felt the coaches did a great job with the game plan and the execution. They had some new wrinkles and it produced some nice looks.

It was disappointing to see the lack of students at the game on a Sunday night. Lots of tickets on stub hub for as low as $6. Hoping we can find a way to split then win a big one on Senior day.

I'll say this too, if we hadn't shot poorly in the first half, especially from 3, we'd have romped. The execution was fine and we got open looks, but it wasn't until they fell in the second half that we actually separated.

Ira has turned into a really nice player.

SabinoDrifter wrote:Ira has turned into a really nice player.

He was our best player last night. He still gets lost on D occasionally, but he plays hard, has learned how to finish and brings a shot of energy.

If he can continue improving his team D and nail down his faceup J, I am very excited for two more years of him.

How was the game last night?

I listened in the radio and it sounded like we have a solid second half. It how did we look?

CalStateTempe wrote:How was the game last night?

I listened in the radio and it sounded like we have a solid second half. It how did we look?

We were good. Protected the ball, played good D. If we'd made shots, we would have won by 25-30. We struggled missing open shots for a while (shocker, I know) but pulled away when they fell.

It was the best we've looked since beating OSU without Chase, IMO. The commitment to D stood out. Even when Stanford scored, we frequently made them work for 20-25 seconds. There wasn't much easy they got.

Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

CalStateTempe wrote:Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

Sorry to spam the board, but other than the shooting slumps, my two biggest nitpicks:

Dylan Smith physically cannot finish a drive. I have never seen a player worse at finishing when going to the rim. I just root for a foul.

Coleman makes a few WTF decisions for a 5th year senior. I don't hate him, but a few times he'd go 1 on 3 vs a mostly set Stanford transition D. That is not a great call for a small guy.

But overall, game was a really positive one.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

Sorry to spam the board, but other than the shooting slumps, my two biggest nitpicks:

Dylan Smith physically cannot finish a drive. I have never seen a player worse at finishing when going to the rim. I just root for a foul.

Coleman makes a few WTF decisions for a 5th year senior. I don't hate him, but a few times he'd go 1 on 3 vs a mostly set Stanford transition D. That is not a great call for a small guy.

But overall, game was a really positive one.

Coleman was 4-13 shooting, Smith 1 for 9.

That's some pretty poor shooting to state the obvious.

Merkin wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

Sorry to spam the board, but other than the shooting slumps, my two biggest nitpicks:

Dylan Smith physically cannot finish a drive. I have never seen a player worse at finishing when going to the rim. I just root for a foul.

Coleman makes a few WTF decisions for a 5th year senior. I don't hate him, but a few times he'd go 1 on 3 vs a mostly set Stanford transition D. That is not a great call for a small guy.

But overall, game was a really positive one.

Coleman was 4-13 shooting, Smith 1 for 9.

That's some pretty poor shooting to state the obvious.

Smith had one drive where the seas just parted and he was wide open. He almost threw the ball over the backboard.

I don't think he should drive. Any drive of his is a lower percentage than just about any other shot we get.

Edit: I don't ding Coleman a ton. He took a half ending 30.foot runner and 3 late clock bailout shots. Take those away and you get a much nicer %.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

Sorry to spam the board, but other than the shooting slumps, my two biggest nitpicks:

Dylan Smith physically cannot finish a drive. I have never seen a player worse at finishing when going to the rim. I just root for a foul.

Coleman makes a few WTF decisions for a 5th year senior. I don't hate him, but a few times he'd go 1 on 3 vs a mostly set Stanford transition D. That is not a great call for a small guy.

But overall, game was a really positive one.

Coleman was 4-13 shooting, Smith 1 for 9.

That's some pretty poor shooting to state the obvious.

Smith had one drive where the seas just parted and he was wide open. He almost threw the ball over the backboard.

I don't think he should drive. Any drive of his is a lower percentage than just about any other shot we get.

Edit: I don't ding Coleman a ton. He took a half ending 30.foot runner and 3 late clock bailout shots. Take those away and you get a much nicer %.

I remember this drive. He hesitated and looked like he was waiting to get blocked. If he had any confidence he would have had a wide open dunk

The poor offense has just been a theme this year. Feels like the only way we'd have even the slightest chance in Vegas is if our shooting heats up significantly. Unlikely but possible. One beauty of college hoops is how a team who had an otherwise down year can catch fire and storm the dance.

Beachcat97 wrote:The poor offense has just been a theme this year. Feels like the only way we'd have even the slightest chance in Vegas is if our shooting heats up significantly. Unlikely but possible. One beauty of college hoops is how a team who had an otherwise down year can catch fire and storm the dance.

This is semantics, but it's much more poor shooting than poor offense. We got a number of clean looks last night and missed a high percentage.

We run our offense fine most of the time. It's getting the shots down that makes the big difference. We get things rolling just fine.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Merkin wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

CalStateTempe wrote:Thanks dude.

That’s how it came across on local radio.

Sorry to spam the board, but other than the shooting slumps, my two biggest nitpicks:

Dylan Smith physically cannot finish a drive. I have never seen a player worse at finishing when going to the rim. I just root for a foul.

Coleman makes a few WTF decisions for a 5th year senior. I don't hate him, but a few times he'd go 1 on 3 vs a mostly set Stanford transition D. That is not a great call for a small guy.

But overall, game was a really positive one.

Coleman was 4-13 shooting, Smith 1 for 9.

That's some pretty poor shooting to state the obvious.

Smith had one drive where the seas just parted and he was wide open. He almost threw the ball over the backboard.

I don't think he should drive. Any drive of his is a lower percentage than just about any other shot we get.

Edit: I don't ding Coleman a ton. He took a half ending 30.foot runner and 3 late clock bailout shots. Take those away and you get a much nicer %.

Spiff I mean this 100% sincerely, thank you for pointing this out. Merk I am not hating on you here but I hate it when people only look at stats. You have to dig deeper like Spiff did.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:The poor offense has just been a theme this year. Feels like the only way we'd have even the slightest chance in Vegas is if our shooting heats up significantly. Unlikely but possible. One beauty of college hoops is how a team who had an otherwise down year can catch fire and storm the dance.

This is semantics, but it's much more poor shooting than poor offense. We got a number of clean looks last night and missed a high percentage.

We run our offense fine most of the time. It's getting the shots down that makes the big difference. We get things rolling just fine.

I'm not seeing how poor shooting and poor offense are different, but okay. Can a team shoot horribly and still succeed offensively? Maybe, but probably only if their defense is quite good. If you hold the other team to 54 points, you're going to be competitive most of the time.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:The poor offense has just been a theme this year. Feels like the only way we'd have even the slightest chance in Vegas is if our shooting heats up significantly. Unlikely but possible. One beauty of college hoops is how a team who had an otherwise down year can catch fire and storm the dance.

This is semantics, but it's much more poor shooting than poor offense. We got a number of clean looks last night and missed a high percentage.

We run our offense fine most of the time. It's getting the shots down that makes the big difference. We get things rolling just fine.

I'm not seeing how poor shooting and poor offense are different, but okay. Can a team shoot horribly and still succeed offensively? Maybe, but probably only if their defense is quite good. If you hold the other team to 54 points, you're going to be competitive most of the time.

For me, I would say Poor Offense is somewhat poor shooting but more so not getting good shots off, poor movement with and without the ball, poor passing, lots of turnovers and not smart basketball.

Poor shooting is just that, poor shooting, missing open shots

Dylan Smith is hot garbage - stats, eyeball, earshot, etc.

the end

97cats wrote:Dylan Smith is hot garbage - stats, eyeball, earshot, etc.

the end

Incredibly bad. Why is he even out there? Do you think he's gone next year?
Also, curious about your take on Barcello. Is he earning himself more of a role next year? Or is he still an odd man out? I really wish they would run more plays to get him some open 3s. He's been much better knocking them down lately. I've been surprising myself by yelling at him to shoot more often.

Smith is out there because he keeps in front of his man on defense. That's it.

At this point, the only thing I'm rooting for with Dylan Smith is a graduate transfer.

Beachcat97 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

Beachcat97 wrote:The poor offense has just been a theme this year. Feels like the only way we'd have even the slightest chance in Vegas is if our shooting heats up significantly. Unlikely but possible. One beauty of college hoops is how a team who had an otherwise down year can catch fire and storm the dance.

This is semantics, but it's much more poor shooting than poor offense. We got a number of clean looks last night and missed a high percentage.

We run our offense fine most of the time. It's getting the shots down that makes the big difference. We get things rolling just fine.

I'm not seeing how poor shooting and poor offense are different, but okay. Can a team shoot horribly and still succeed offensively? Maybe, but probably only if their defense is quite good. If you hold the other team to 54 points, you're going to be competitive most of the time.

Poor offense is getting bad shots. If 50% of your shots are contested 3's, you have poor offense.

Poor shooting is just missing shots. If you get 100% uncontested layups and miss 75% of them, you had good offense and poor shooting.

Oftentimes, poor offense leads to contested shots, which means a bad shooting percentage. That blurs the line, but good offense, poor shooting is more easily recognizable.

We've done that a fair amount. If you get 20 open looks from 3 and make 4, that's this season's textbook good offense, poor shooting game.

I heard Miller yelling at all the players last night to run faster. I'm pretty sure that was the key to the win.

One thing I've noticed with Coleman is he tries to initiate the offense way too high between the circles and just kills the spacing.

sirhamsalot wrote:I heard Miller yelling at all the players last night to run faster. I'm pretty sure that was the key to the win.

SabinoDrifter wrote:One thing I've noticed with Coleman is he tries to initiate the offense way too high between the circles and just kills the spacing.

Brandon Williams is a much better point guard. He actually sets up the offense and gives guys some great looks. B-will's instincts are pretty impressive. Coleman is so up and down. It seems like he drives to the bucket in situations where it looks like the defense is giving him a shot or a pass. And he shoots when there are people open. I dont know. Doubt it's lack of effort with him...he's just not an above average PG on most nights.

Coleman or PJC? Who do you guys take if you had the option?

sirhamsalot wrote:I heard Miller yelling at all the players last night to run faster. I'm pretty sure that was the key to the win.

*Italian Chef’s Kiss*

billk78 wrote:

SabinoDrifter wrote:One thing I've noticed with Coleman is he tries to initiate the offense way too high between the circles and just kills the spacing.

Brandon Williams is a much better point guard. He actually sets up the offense and gives guys some great looks. B-will's instincts are pretty impressive. Coleman is so up and down. It seems like he drives to the bucket in situations where it looks like the defense is giving him a shot or a pass. And he shoots when there are people open. I dont know. Doubt it's lack of effort with him...he's just not an above average PG on most nights.

Williams really impresses me with his maturity and instincts. He made a couple beautiful reads against Stanford. He also understands spacing better than Coleman, even as a freshman.

Coleman has a habit of barreling into a few defenders in transition. You can get away with it when you're LeBron James and you can freight train through people, but that ain't Coleman.

My favorite Williams play vs Stanford, he had a high pick and roll where Stanford's back line dropped to help early. He immediately recognized it and whipped a pass off the dribble to a wide open Randolph spotted up in the corner for 3. That was high level recognition, and the sort of IQ thing you can't teach. A player either can make that read or not.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

billk78 wrote:

SabinoDrifter wrote:One thing I've noticed with Coleman is he tries to initiate the offense way too high between the circles and just kills the spacing.

Brandon Williams is a much better point guard. He actually sets up the offense and gives guys some great looks. B-will's instincts are pretty impressive. Coleman is so up and down. It seems like he drives to the bucket in situations where it looks like the defense is giving him a shot or a pass. And he shoots when there are people open. I dont know. Doubt it's lack of effort with him...he's just not an above average PG on most nights.

Williams really impresses me with his maturity and instincts. He made a couple beautiful reads against Stanford. He also understands spacing better than Coleman, even as a freshman.

Coleman has a habit of barreling into a few defenders in transition. You can get away with it when you're LeBron James and you can freight train through people, but that ain't Coleman.

My favorite Williams play vs Stanford, he had a high pick and roll where Stanford's back line dropped to help early. He immediately recognized it and whipped a pass off the dribble to a wide open Randolph spotted up in the corner for 3. That was high level recognition, and the sort of IQ thing you can't teach. A player either can make that read or not.

Absolutely 100% agree.
One thing I'd like to see even more from him is driving to the basket. There were one or two instances in the Stanford game where he drove, was able to use his body to get space between him and the defender, and draw a foul or get off a good shot.

You could certainly tell Randolph was glad to have him out there.

billk78 wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:

billk78 wrote:

SabinoDrifter wrote:One thing I've noticed with Coleman is he tries to initiate the offense way too high between the circles and just kills the spacing.

Brandon Williams is a much better point guard. He actually sets up the offense and gives guys some great looks. B-will's instincts are pretty impressive. Coleman is so up and down. It seems like he drives to the bucket in situations where it looks like the defense is giving him a shot or a pass. And he shoots when there are people open. I dont know. Doubt it's lack of effort with him...he's just not an above average PG on most nights.

Williams really impresses me with his maturity and instincts. He made a couple beautiful reads against Stanford. He also understands spacing better than Coleman, even as a freshman.

Coleman has a habit of barreling into a few defenders in transition. You can get away with it when you're LeBron James and you can freight train through people, but that ain't Coleman.

My favorite Williams play vs Stanford, he had a high pick and roll where Stanford's back line dropped to help early. He immediately recognized it and whipped a pass off the dribble to a wide open Randolph spotted up in the corner for 3. That was high level recognition, and the sort of IQ thing you can't teach. A player either can make that read or not.

Absolutely 100% agree.
One thing I'd like to see even more from him is driving to the basket. There were one or two instances in the Stanford game where he drove, was able to use his body to get space between him and the defender, and draw a foul or get off a good shot.

I sort of give him a pass on a little passivity with Stanford. It was his first game back, and I can understand not wanting to get out of control.

One thing I love abiut the idea of BWill and Nico together is that neither forces it and they both play within themselves very naturally.

billk78 wrote:Coleman or PJC? Who do you guys take if you had the option?

Oh and Phelps still not officially fired?

Jefe wrote:

billk78 wrote:Coleman or PJC? Who do you guys take if you had the option?

Coleman. Not even close.

zonagrad wrote:

Jefe wrote:

billk78 wrote:Coleman or PJC? Who do you guys take if you had the option?

Coleman. Not even close.

Same here, although both were pressed into positions they weren't meant or qualified for.

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Poor offense is getting bad shots. If 50% of your shots are contested 3's, you have poor offense.

Poor shooting is just missing shots. If you get 100% uncontested layups and miss 75% of them, you had good offense and poor shooting.

Oftentimes, poor offense leads to contested shots, which means a bad shooting percentage. That blurs the line, but good offense, poor shooting is more easily recognizable.

We've done that a fair amount. If you get 20 open looks from 3 and make 4, that's this season's textbook good offense, poor shooting game.

And it's not as if we can pivot to a different strength...one could say "if you are missing open jump shots, drive to the basket, feed the post".

But we have zero "drive to the basket" finishers, and outside of Chase, our post game is incredibly suspect.

And we have terrible finishers in transition.

So...when you don't have finishers, don't have one-on-one players who can get their own buckets, have limited post play, and have a bunch of players who are supposed to be shooters but can't seem to make open shots...what do you pivot to?

We need Nico Mannion maybe more than any player in this class (and, yes, I understand how good Josh Green is). A point guard who is good in transition, can shoot, but more importantly is big enough to get the ball to teammates in traffic and can create his own shot if the play breaks down/defense lets up?

That is exactly what we are lacking this year. A guy who is gonna get a good look by himself...and burn you if you overplay him.

EVCat wrote:

Spaceman Spiff wrote:
Poor offense is getting bad shots. If 50% of your shots are contested 3's, you have poor offense.

Poor shooting is just missing shots. If you get 100% uncontested layups and miss 75% of them, you had good offense and poor shooting.

Oftentimes, poor offense leads to contested shots, which means a bad shooting percentage. That blurs the line, but good offense, poor shooting is more easily recognizable.

We've done that a fair amount. If you get 20 open looks from 3 and make 4, that's this season's textbook good offense, poor shooting game.

And it's not as if we can pivot to a different strength...one could say "if you are missing open jump shots, drive to the basket, feed the post".

But we have zero "drive to the basket" finishers, and outside of Chase, our post game is incredibly suspect.

And we have terrible finishers in transition.

So...when you don't have finishers, don't have one-on-one players who can get their own buckets, have limited post play, and have a bunch of players who are supposed to be shooters but can't seem to make open shots...what do you pivot to?

We need Nico Mannion maybe more than any player in this class (and, yes, I understand how good Josh Green is). A point guard who is good in transition, can shoot, but more importantly is big enough to get the ball to teammates in traffic and can create his own shot if the play breaks down/defense lets up?

That is exactly what we are lacking this year. A guy who is gonna get a good look by himself...and burn you if you overplay him.

Yeah, that's why I differentiate the concepts. You can execute the **** out of your offense and get wide open looks every time. That is good offense.

You still have to make the open looks, though. If you don't, it can be a one game problem or a longer term issue. We are stuck in the chronic issue place.

Sure, sometimes the answer is creating shots that are easier, i.e., layups instead of threes. Against a major opponent, though, there's a limit to it. Sooner or later you have to be able to take what the D gives you and beat them with it.

Williams is our best shot creator and Jeter our best finisher. It's not a huge coincidence that our production fell off when they went down. You can only scheme so effectively.

Jefe wrote:Oh and Phelps still not officially fired?

People with brains took over. His contract runs out over the summer.

lol when your Bennett ball offense doesn't work with lotto picks like Ayton, Lauri-legend, Trier, Stanley, and Gordon, maybe - just maybe - its your system and not the players

The way we fought tonight and the way we won this game has the chance of pulling this team together and maybe even making a run in Vegas.

I would not have said that would be possible a week ago.

Go Cats!

Alieberman wrote:The way we fought tonight and the way we won this game has the chance of pulling this team together and maybe even making a run in Vegas.

I would not have said that would be possible a week ago.

Go Cats!

A run in Vegas is entirely possible.........the P12 stinks.

I would like to see us get a 7 seed with Stanford and 2 out of OSU/asu/Utah on our side of the bracket.

Teams I don't want on our side of the bracket: USC/UCLA/Oregon