Bear Down Wildcats

Pac12 POTW

97cats wrote: Mon Dec 06, 2021 2:42 pmPac12 POTW

Only his first this year? He’s not meeting expectations

97cats wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:31 pm reminds me so much of Gilbert Arenas -

Jordan and Bryant had more similar height and weight (6'6, 210). I mean I know that's a long ways off but the way he was getting off the court Saturday reminded me of those two.

Bordercat wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:42 am

97cats wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:31 pm reminds me so much of Gilbert Arenas -

Jordan and Bryant had more similar height and weight (6'6, 210). I mean I know that's a long ways off but the way he was getting off the court Saturday reminded me of those two.

He’s been reminding me of Kawhi.

Beachcat97 wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:51 am

Bordercat wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:42 am

97cats wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:31 pm reminds me so much of Gilbert Arenas -

Jordan and Bryant had more similar height and weight (6'6, 210). I mean I know that's a long ways off but the way he was getting off the court Saturday reminded me of those two.

He’s been reminding me of Kawhi.

Kawhi 6'7 225

Bordercat wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 3:52 pm

Beachcat97 wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:51 am

Bordercat wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:42 am

97cats wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:31 pm reminds me so much of Gilbert Arenas -

Jordan and Bryant had more similar height and weight (6'6, 210). I mean I know that's a long ways off but the way he was getting off the court Saturday reminded me of those two.

He’s been reminding me of Kawhi.

Kawhi 6'7 225

So Ben’s a little smaller, but his skill set feels similar to me.

Beachcat97 wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:51 am

Bordercat wrote: Tue Dec 07, 2021 6:42 am

97cats wrote: Mon Jan 25, 2021 8:31 pm reminds me so much of Gilbert Arenas -

Jordan and Bryant had more similar height and weight (6'6, 210). I mean I know that's a long ways off but the way he was getting off the court Saturday reminded me of those two.

He’s been reminding me of Kawhi.

So, ceiling of top ten player of all time, floor of constant allstar.

This guy has that MJ-esque jumping ability where he looks like he's floating out there.

35mins - 24pts - 10-16fg - 2-6(3pt) - 2-3ft - 10rbs - 5a - 0blk - 0st - 1to

Big game Benn

97cats wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 9:52 pm 35mins - 24pts - 10-16fg - 2-6(3pt) - 2-3ft - 10rbs - 5a - 0blk - 0st - 1to

A thing of beauty.

Looks absolutely effortless.

34.3 Bird Score. KenPom MVP - his 3rd of the season and 2nd in a row.

‘Best Thing I Saw Today’

I knew Benn was good, but he’s taking things to a level I didn’t anticipate. Can’t see how he’s not in the all-American conversation, provided he keeps this up. Has anyone else in the Pac been this good through these first 8 to 10 games?

did you know Benedict Mathurin turned 19 in June of this year.

Dude eats zone defenses for breakfast.

Someday this will be said:

“This dude reminds me of Benn”

97cats wrote: Wed Dec 08, 2021 10:44 pm did you know Benedict Mathurin turned 19 in June of this year.

It's one of the reasons I figure he's an NBA lottery pick. He has the age of a one and done, but the experience and growth of a soph.

I posted this when he was "struggling."

"As I said, I'm not overly concerned, he just needs to figure out how to get better shots and see some fall."

I stand by that. The tools are there, he can and will make the shots. He just started the year in a small slump, but that happens. He'll be good.

starting to believe my own bullshit -

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

97cats wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:08 pm if everyone returns (Miller included) the future is bright.

Mathurin is a beast - he has All-American type talent next season.

NCAA is the key.

97cats wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 1:10 pm starting to believe my own bullshit -

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

97cats wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:08 pm if everyone returns (Miller included) the future is bright.

Mathurin is a beast - he has All-American type talent next season.

NCAA is the key.

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 5:17 pm

97cats wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 1:10 pm starting to believe my own bullshit -

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

97cats wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:08 pm if everyone returns (Miller included) the future is bright.

Mathurin is a beast - he has All-American type talent next season.

NCAA is the key.

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

I don't think we can/should overlook one of the biggest changes - Akinjo left; he was a Miller-tytpe PG, and he hasn't been missed in the slightest - in fact, I believe we'd be having "issues" if he were still here.

pc in NM wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:30 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 5:17 pm

97cats wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 1:10 pm starting to believe my own bullshit -

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

97cats wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:08 pm if everyone returns (Miller included) the future is bright.

Mathurin is a beast - he has All-American type talent next season.

NCAA is the key.

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

I don't think we can/should overlook one of the biggest changes - Akinjo left; he was a Miller-tytpe PG, and he hasn't been missed in the slightest - in fact, I believe we'd be having "issues" if he were still here.

I disagree a bit. At Baylor, Akinjo has had a reduced usage rate and has been very good in defensive metrics. His to% is a little high, but he's been a solid distributor, not ball dominant and good on D for an undefeated top ten team.

In short, I think he could have been the same here and it's unfair to say he was addition by subtraction. How we'd look if it was Akinjo paired with Kerr, Terry and Mathurin vs say Kier (the most likely guy we wouldn't have brought in) I think we would be as good or better.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:54 am

pc in NM wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:30 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 5:17 pm

97cats wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 1:10 pm starting to believe my own bullshit -

97cats wrote: Tue Dec 15, 2020 1:19 pm 51.9% - 83.3% - 41.4%

solid first five games - i suspect those numbers wont maintain.

however, if they do, they are all Pac12 first team and All-American consideration like numbers.

who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

97cats wrote: Mon Feb 01, 2021 8:08 pm if everyone returns (Miller included) the future is bright.

Mathurin is a beast - he has All-American type talent next season.

NCAA is the key.

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

I don't think we can/should overlook one of the biggest changes - Akinjo left; he was a Miller-tytpe PG, and he hasn't been missed in the slightest - in fact, I believe we'd be having "issues" if he were still here.

I disagree a bit. At Baylor, Akinjo has had a reduced usage rate and has been very good in defensive metrics. His to% is a little high, but he's been a solid distributor, not ball dominant and good on D for an undefeated top ten team.

In short, I think he could have been the same here and it's unfair to say he was addition by subtraction. How we'd look if it was Akinjo paired with Kerr, Terry and Mathurin vs say Kier (the most likely guy we wouldn't have brought in) I think we would be as good or better.

The question is what effect moving Kerr off the ball or to the bench would be.

The bigger question is what any of that has to do with Benn Mathurin.

I like Kerr 1000x better at PG versus off the ball.

And who knows who would be better running the show Kerr or Akinjo? On this years team with the new system all results right now point to Kerr better fit, especially as he doesn't have to be a scorer unlike last year where we needed Akinjo's 20 points a night to have a chance.

This year's team is so better balanced from an offensive standpoint with the bench also being big contributors so far. It's like night and day imo.

Chicat wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:19 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:54 am

pc in NM wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:30 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 5:17 pm

97cats wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 1:10 pm starting to believe my own bullshit -



who knew Miller would be so perfectly replaced - deserves a huge assist for the players tho, and TL for keeping them

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

I don't think we can/should overlook one of the biggest changes - Akinjo left; he was a Miller-tytpe PG, and he hasn't been missed in the slightest - in fact, I believe we'd be having "issues" if he were still here.

I disagree a bit. At Baylor, Akinjo has had a reduced usage rate and has been very good in defensive metrics. His to% is a little high, but he's been a solid distributor, not ball dominant and good on D for an undefeated top ten team.

In short, I think he could have been the same here and it's unfair to say he was addition by subtraction. How we'd look if it was Akinjo paired with Kerr, Terry and Mathurin vs say Kier (the most likely guy we wouldn't have brought in) I think we would be as good or better.

The question is what effect moving Kerr off the ball or to the bench would be.

The bigger question is what any of that has to do with Benn Mathurin.

I think Miller was looking to play a 2 pg system for a few years after the (largely) failed PJC as leader time.

In 18-19 it was going to be Quinerly and BWill until Book brought everything crashing down. In 19-20, it was going to be Nico and Brandon Williams until BWill's knee failed him. In 20-21 it was going to be Akinjo and Kerr until the NCAA boned us.

It's a move I always liked and I was bummed to see it never truly have a chance to play out. In 19-20 particularly, I think we would have been very significantly better...for what that is worth in a season the tourney was cancelled.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:41 am

Chicat wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:19 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:54 am

pc in NM wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 9:30 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Thu Dec 09, 2021 5:17 pm

Props for this post. If Miller doesn't get the right guys and develop them to be ready for this year we don't see this.

If Lloyd doesn't retain guys, see their potential and get them to take the next step, we don't see this.

I don't know how it would have worked out had it been either Miller or Lloyd on their own, but I do know it worked well with both of them.

I don't think we can/should overlook one of the biggest changes - Akinjo left; he was a Miller-tytpe PG, and he hasn't been missed in the slightest - in fact, I believe we'd be having "issues" if he were still here.

I disagree a bit. At Baylor, Akinjo has had a reduced usage rate and has been very good in defensive metrics. His to% is a little high, but he's been a solid distributor, not ball dominant and good on D for an undefeated top ten team.

In short, I think he could have been the same here and it's unfair to say he was addition by subtraction. How we'd look if it was Akinjo paired with Kerr, Terry and Mathurin vs say Kier (the most likely guy we wouldn't have brought in) I think we would be as good or better.

The question is what effect moving Kerr off the ball or to the bench would be.

The bigger question is what any of that has to do with Benn Mathurin.

I think Miller was looking to play a 2 pg system for a few years after the (largely) failed PJC as leader time.

In 18-19 it was going to be Quinerly and BWill until Book brought everything crashing down. In 19-20, it was going to be Nico and Brandon Williams until BWill's knee failed him. In 20-21 it was going to be Akinjo and Kerr until the NCAA boned us.

It's a move I always liked and I was bummed to see it never truly have a chance to play out. In 19-20 particularly, I think we would have been very significantly better...for what that is worth in a season the tourney was cancelled.

I always called bull on the sell of a 2 PG system. It was a mirage, mainly because I never thought the system could support it. Unless you want to call the PJC/Trier duo a 2 PG system.

In my mind, Miller ALWAYS needed that go-to, off the bounce, scoring threat to help prop up his system. Obviously, if he had a guy like DWill, that works too, because Miller loves running sets for easy duck ins, post ups, big-big screens, ect.

TucsonClip wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 11:26 am

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:41 am

Chicat wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 10:19 am The question is what effect moving Kerr off the ball or to the bench would be.

The bigger question is what any of that has to do with Benn Mathurin.

I think Miller was looking to play a 2 pg system for a few years after the (largely) failed PJC as leader time.

In 18-19 it was going to be Quinerly and BWill until Book brought everything crashing down. In 19-20, it was going to be Nico and Brandon Williams until BWill's knee failed him. In 20-21 it was going to be Akinjo and Kerr until the NCAA boned us.

It's a move I always liked and I was bummed to see it never truly have a chance to play out. In 19-20 particularly, I think we would have been very significantly better...for what that is worth in a season the tourney was cancelled.

I always called bull on the sell of a 2 PG system. It was a mirage, mainly because I never thought the system could support it. Unless you want to call the PJC/Trier duo a 2 PG system.

In my mind, Miller ALWAYS needed that go-to, off the bounce, scoring threat to help prop up his system. Obviously, if he had a guy like DWill, that works too, because Miller loves running sets for easy duck ins, post ups, big-big screens, ect.

I was always particularly excited about the Nico/BWill pairing because I thought the system could have supported it. Miller ran dribble handoffs and I think both of those guys would have thrived together with dribble handoffs.

The problem we had was a dribble handoff for Nico involved Josh Green or Dylan Smith instead and the D didn't have to honor Green to shoot or Dylan to drive.

There would have been a level of managing division of labor, but both Nico and BWill were off the bounce scoring threats and I'd hoped it wpuld lead to a bit of sharing the lead role in P+R action, mixing in some dribble handoff and then getting Zeke in the DWill style actions you talk about.

It's easiest for me to talk about that because we actually got to see both guys in an Arizona uniform, as opposed to Quinerly. I was optimistic for Akinjo and Kerr but Kerr was at such a disadvantage with the suspension, he wound up being largely one dimensional last year.

Not enough creativity or pace, IMO, to support two "PGs". This current system and staff could support it though. Just how I see it. Yes, Miller ran a lot of DHOs, but most of it was for show and to create ball movement in an offense that was consistently attacking into crowds of defenders. Thats why Miller's best teams had the size to make you pay at the rim and on the glass.

TucsonClip wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 2:29 pm Not enough creativity or pace, IMO, to support two "PGs". This current system and staff could support it though. Just how I see it. Yes, Miller ran a lot of DHOs, but most of it was for show and to create ball movement in an offense that was consistently attacking into crowds of defenders. Thats why Miller's best teams had the size to make you pay at the rim and on the glass.

I think I might respectfully disagree. It's a personal thing, maybe, but the 14-15, 16-17 and 17-18 Miller teams (which I'd vote for as the best 3 offenses of his era) were all top 15 in points per possession.

14-15 and 16-17 didn't get a ton of points from size and at the rim, IMO. Lauri was the best big guy scorer and he was perimeter first. 17-18 was more the pound it team, although Trier had a tremendously efficient year.

Pace is a valid point, Miller's teams were never too high in possessions per game. I think some of the rest winds up being a bit of a chicken or egg argument. Was a dribble handoff action with Nico, Dylan Smith and Max Hazzard not dynamic due to scheme and pace or due to personnel?

I'll say it's not impossible it was scheme or pace but that's why I'd have liked to see Miller not be thwarted by the FBI or injuries. Then we could actually opine on the court. I was just never as down on Miller's offenses as some because there were consistently national championship level efficiency #'s.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 3:52 pm
I'll say it's not impossible it was scheme or pace but that's why I'd have liked to see Miller not be thwarted by the FBI or injuries. Then we could actually opine on the court. I was just never as down on Miller's offenses as some because there were consistently national championship level efficiency #'s.

Wisconsin blowout, Wichita St blowout, Xavier collapse, Buffalo blowout imo was a worrying sign in consecutive years. To me it hurt, because before that I thought even if Arizona lost (Ohio St, UConn, Wisconsin etc), Miller would never get dominated or blown out. I know several fans who kind quit after Xavier (the following FBI year the whole year didn't help) and that sentiment wasn't that rare, a ton of fans I saw (message boards, irl, social medial etc) kinda lost passion after that.

Only 1 of these years did the FBI come into play (Buffalo year). All of these consecutive bow outs showed that Miller didn't or couldn't adjust in the moment even though they were repeatedly exploiting a or multiple weaknesses. But most importantly that no matter what efficiency says how strong Arizona was, that Miller's teams weren't good enough offensively to go far.

Nothing proves that more than when the packline defense regressed from the 14-15 teams. Once Miller didn't have a several 5*s staying 3-4 years and plug in a NBA level transfer and a couple of top 3 overall 1nDs the defense wasn't the same and the offense couldn't carry any of those post TJ teams far, no matter how efficient they were. If you can't run a top line defense unless you have multiple 5*s out there idk why you're running that packline system.

Efficiency is tricky because it doesn't tell the whole truth of what you need to have NC caliber offense. This year's teams for instance is lower ranked offensively than defensively and yet they look miles better offensively than most of Miller's teams, which were a slog even with super high adjo efficient teams. A lot of it can't be measured by analytics, because this year's offense looks so much more cohesive. So does the defense tbh, other than the '14 team imo because they try to deny possessions and scoring rather than making it hard to score (packline).

Another thing.

People like to clown on Lloyd's recruiting so far but imo Miller was losing some shine there for a while. Remember the TJ Leaf year? Leaf is the only commitment for the longest time and no one else in the horizon. Suddenly he decommits but they get Lauri who coaches think is better and.... no one else for a while. Then suddenly 3 5*s commit late in the recruiting season, should be red flags looking back tbh, first because Arizona swoops in late and secondly the quality of the players because why aren't the big programs touching any of these players. Then after no real discussion of Ayton and his recruitment, he commits, throw out another red flag there.

If Nico hadn't been so loyal to Miller, that recruiting year would have been a disaster. Miller recruiting strategy didn't really changed because he would still have been recruiting those 5*s if he could, he HAD to go overseas and go after lower ranked kids.

In a way it's better for the Miller defenders that he was let go in the way he was because it gives them bitter prosecution complex. Whereas in reality if the admin didn't do that to Miller the AD would have to eventually move on from him because he wasn't getting it done, a slightly better Turgeon in a worse conference. As soon as the conference got some better coaches they started to beat Miller.

They moved on before the school and everyone had to see that reality, that you eventually needed a change.

RondaeShimmy wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 5:03 pm In a way it's better for the Miller defenders that he was let go in the way he was because it gives them bitter prosecution complex. Whereas in reality if the admin didn't do that to Miller the AD would have to eventually move on from him because he wasn't getting it done, a slightly better Turgeon in a worse conference. As soon as the conference got some better coaches they started to beat Miller.

You sounded semi-coherent before we got here.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 3:52 pm
I think I might respectfully disagree. It's a personal thing, maybe, but the 14-15, 16-17 and 17-18 Miller teams (which I'd vote for as the best 3 offenses of his era) were all top 15 in points per possession.

14-15 and 16-17 didn't get a ton of points from size and at the rim, IMO. Lauri was the best big guy scorer and he was perimeter first. 17-18 was more the pound it team, although Trier had a tremendously efficient year.

Pace is a valid point, Miller's teams were never too high in possessions per game. I think some of the rest winds up being a bit of a chicken or egg argument. Was a dribble handoff action with Nico, Dylan Smith and Max Hazzard not dynamic due to scheme and pace or due to personnel?

I'll say it's not impossible it was scheme or pace but that's why I'd have liked to see Miller not be thwarted by the FBI or injuries. Then we could actually opine on the court. I was just never as down on Miller's offenses as some because there were consistently national championship level efficiency #'s.

14-15: 19th in adjusted efficiency, 75th in eFG% and 28th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (28-O/16-D) and took 45% of our shots 10 feet and in, 35% at the rim.

16-17: 22nd in adjusted efficiency, 36th in eFG% and 31th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (31-O/12-D) and took 44% of our shots 10 feet and in, 34% at the rim.

17-18: 21st in adjusted efficiency, 46th in eFG% and 53th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (53-O/45-D) and took 42% of our shots 10 feet and in, 34% at the rim.

All those teams come out rather similar statistically, and they also all had a few other things in common. They were all good to very good 3P% shooting teams, but were nearly dead last each year in 3Pr (300+). They werent making a lot of threes, they were scoring at the rim, and they were getting to the line.

So when you try to factor a two PG system into those numbers, my mental computer spits out its RAM. Miller won scoring at the rim, getting to the line, and rebounding/defending, no matter the efficiency numbers. Thats part of the reason why my eyeballs peeled each week, watching our offense. I am all for efficiency and dominating the four factors of basketball. Thats how you win games, and Miller won a shit ton of them, but I never bought the idea of him being able to run a 2 PG system. If those dudes are going to live at the rim/line. Sure. But thats extremely unlikely.

RondaeShimmy, I won't quote you, just for length.

Wisconsin 2 wasn't a blowout, in fact, they had the best shooting statistical half in NCAA tournament history, made .667% of their threes and we lost by 7.

Wichita and Buffalo were bad losses and fair criticism, although the 17-18 season was odd in having such crazy outside distractions with ESPN, Miller getting suspended, etc.

I disagree on D. The 2019-20 team was 14th nationally in AdjD. More to the point, yes, talent like Rondae and AG helps you play better D. That's like saying Lloyd's D would be worse without Koloko. It's true, but talented players improve coaches. If Lloyd was coaching Kirk Walters, he might not be 8-0, but that's not a slam on Lloyd.

I would disagree effiiciency doesn't matter. I believe it was 97 who posted a few years back the stat that being top 20 in KenPom AdjD and AdjO both correlated to 9 of 10 of the last national champs. The efficiency correlation is much tighter than pace. I mean, look at your top pace teams this year:

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... s-per-game

Here's efficiency:

https://www.teamrankings.com/ncaa-baske ... efficiency

Which group of teams is better? I'd put all my $ on efficiency.

Miller's recruiting...he had only two classes outside top 10 as a coach. Heck, this conversation is occurring in a thread about a borderline top 100 Miller recruit who is now a lottery pick.

Arizona is currently in the 20/20 adjusted efficiency club fwiw while still being weighed down by heavily relying on last years data.

I don't see how this same crop of players (give Miller credit for that) is as good defensively in the packline. Koloko out 30+ from the basket hedging, Kriisa having to stay in front of players and not having Koloko down low, wings not going for steals and rebounds etc etc. So they're better defensively (currently #7) which is actually better than the offense (#18+/-) which to the eye is dramatically better. So you have a way better defense without Miller while the offense is way better, it's not a surprise Arizona is beating the hell out of teams. Completely demoralizing them

Basketball isn't hard and Tommy is playing to the personnel strengths, while under Miller it would no doubt have been square peg in round hole. Recruiting doesn't matter if you don't know how to use play them up to their strengths.

I say efficiency doesn't tell the whole story because Miller had teams that were higher ranked in both offense and defense that didn't look as good or as dominant as this years team does (so far) under Lloyd.

I honestly wish the '14 and '15 teams played like this, they'd be unstoppable. Could've ran/played Kaminsky off the floor.

RondaeShimmy wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 6:07 pm Arizona is currently in the 20/20 adjusted efficiency club fwiw while still being weighed down by heavily relying on last years data.

I don't see how this same crop of players (give Miller credit for that) is as good defensively in the packline. Koloko out 30+ from the basket hedging, Kriisa having to stay in front of players and not having Koloko down low, wings not going for steals and rebounds etc etc. So they're better defensively (currently #7) which is actually better than the offense (#18+/-) which to the eye is dramatically better. So you have a way better defense without Miller while the offense is way better, it's not a surprise Arizona is beating the hell out of teams. Completely demoralizing them

Basketball isn't hard and Tommy is playing to the personnel strengths, while under Miller it would no doubt have been square peg in round hole. Recruiting doesn't matter if you don't know how to use play them up to their strengths.

I say efficiency doesn't tell the whole story because Miller had teams that were higher ranked in both offense and defense that didn't look as good or as dominant as this years team does (so far) under Lloyd.

I honestly wish the '14 and '15 teams played like this, they'd be unstoppable. Could've ran/played Kaminsky off the floor.

We were actually better in AdjO last year (15th vs 18th this year) so it's not dragging us down, it's actually elevating us into the top 20 when we wouldn't otherwise be. That's sort of my point on style and eye test. The things that look good can deceive.

Defense jumping significantly is correct. As a first point, I don't exactly see how it's Miller vs Lloyd here. The flip side of schemes is that Miller recruited all the difference makers and you're sort of disregarding they might have learned a lot about college D under Miller.

That said, Lloyd retained talented guys who were desirable and his schemes have worked, so it's not a shot at him. The major point I'd make in response is that there's a highly hypothetical aspect to all of this.

Coaching is three things. Recruiting, developing and X's and O's. Lloyd has showed out well in X's and O's, and it's probably promising in development. Your approach sort of disregards any development under Miller and the fact Miller recruited all the contributors.

Perhaps the truth is that both Miller and Lloyd are good and this year is because of both of them combined. Maybe packline would have improved with experience, maybe not. We do know what Miller and Lloyd produced together and I don't get a need to take away from either.

TucsonClip wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 5:12 pm

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 3:52 pm
I think I might respectfully disagree. It's a personal thing, maybe, but the 14-15, 16-17 and 17-18 Miller teams (which I'd vote for as the best 3 offenses of his era) were all top 15 in points per possession.

14-15 and 16-17 didn't get a ton of points from size and at the rim, IMO. Lauri was the best big guy scorer and he was perimeter first. 17-18 was more the pound it team, although Trier had a tremendously efficient year.

Pace is a valid point, Miller's teams were never too high in possessions per game. I think some of the rest winds up being a bit of a chicken or egg argument. Was a dribble handoff action with Nico, Dylan Smith and Max Hazzard not dynamic due to scheme and pace or due to personnel?

I'll say it's not impossible it was scheme or pace but that's why I'd have liked to see Miller not be thwarted by the FBI or injuries. Then we could actually opine on the court. I was just never as down on Miller's offenses as some because there were consistently national championship level efficiency #'s.

14-15: 19th in adjusted efficiency, 75th in eFG% and 28th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (28-O/16-D) and took 45% of our shots 10 feet and in, 35% at the rim.

16-17: 22nd in adjusted efficiency, 36th in eFG% and 31th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (31-O/12-D) and took 44% of our shots 10 feet and in, 34% at the rim.

17-18: 21st in adjusted efficiency, 46th in eFG% and 53th in OREB%. We dominated on the glass on both ends of the floor (53-O/45-D) and took 42% of our shots 10 feet and in, 34% at the rim.

All those teams come out rather similar statistically, and they also all had a few other things in common. They were all good to very good 3P% shooting teams, but were nearly dead last each year in 3Pr (300+). They werent making a lot of threes, they were scoring at the rim, and they were getting to the line.

So when you try to factor a two PG system into those numbers, my mental computer spits out its RAM. Miller won scoring at the rim, getting to the line, and rebounding/defending, no matter the efficiency numbers. Thats part of the reason why my eyeballs peeled each week, watching our offense. I am all for efficiency and dominating the four factors of basketball. Thats how you win games, and Miller won a shit ton of them, but I never bought the idea of him being able to run a 2 PG system. If those dudes are going to live at the rim/line. Sure. But thats extremely unlikely.

My counter (and I appreciate reasonable discussion and you're always a very smart basketball mind) would be that 17-18 was the only one of those years in which even close to half the points came from big guys with about 32 ppg from Ayton and Ristic.

I may be a bit of a dinosaur, but I love shots at the rim, unless you're Dylan Smith. To me, having a high % of points come from the backcourt and a corresponding high % at the rim isn't necessarily a reason to think 2 PG's wouldn't work.

Every one of those years, 2 of the top 3 freethrow attemptors (word?) was a perimeter player. Every one of those years, the #1 ft attemptor was a perimeter player.

I do agree Miller's offense was not the modern, 3 centric type we think of. That said, I am potentially a dinosaur but it doesn't make it bad or not conducive to PG's. TJ is an example, not at all 3 centric, but a good PG.

Appreciate the discussion today. Have a good weekend.

RondaeShimmy wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 6:07 pm Arizona is currently in the 20/20 adjusted efficiency club fwiw while still being weighed down by heavily relying on last years data.

I don't see how this same crop of players (give Miller credit for that) is as good defensively in the packline. Koloko out 30+ from the basket hedging, Kriisa having to stay in front of players and not having Koloko down low, wings not going for steals and rebounds etc etc. So they're better defensively (currently #7) which is actually better than the offense (#18+/-) which to the eye is dramatically better. So you have a way better defense without Miller while the offense is way better, it's not a surprise Arizona is beating the hell out of teams. Completely demoralizing them

Basketball isn't hard and Tommy is playing to the personnel strengths, while under Miller it would no doubt have been square peg in round hole. Recruiting doesn't matter if you don't know how to use play them up to their strengths.

I say efficiency doesn't tell the whole story because Miller had teams that were higher ranked in both offense and defense that didn't look as good or as dominant as this years team does (so far) under Lloyd.

I honestly wish the '14 and '15 teams played like this, they'd be unstoppable. Could've ran/played Kaminsky off the floor.

For context you are talking about 30 win teams which I think you are really discounting that achievement. Look at the books and tell me how many 30 win seasons Az. has.

Spaceman Spiff wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 7:07 pm

RondaeShimmy wrote: Fri Dec 10, 2021 6:07 pm Arizona is currently in the 20/20 adjusted efficiency club fwiw while still being weighed down by heavily relying on last years data.

I don't see how this same crop of players (give Miller credit for that) is as good defensively in the packline. Koloko out 30+ from the basket hedging, Kriisa having to stay in front of players and not having Koloko down low, wings not going for steals and rebounds etc etc. So they're better defensively (currently #7) which is actually better than the offense (#18+/-) which to the eye is dramatically better. So you have a way better defense without Miller while the offense is way better, it's not a surprise Arizona is beating the hell out of teams. Completely demoralizing them

Basketball isn't hard and Tommy is playing to the personnel strengths, while under Miller it would no doubt have been square peg in round hole. Recruiting doesn't matter if you don't know how to use play them up to their strengths.

I say efficiency doesn't tell the whole story because Miller had teams that were higher ranked in both offense and defense that didn't look as good or as dominant as this years team does (so far) under Lloyd.

I honestly wish the '14 and '15 teams played like this, they'd be unstoppable. Could've ran/played Kaminsky off the floor.

We were actually better in AdjO last year (15th vs 18th this year) so it's not dragging us down, it's actually elevating us into the top 20 when we wouldn't otherwise be. That's sort of my point on style and eye test. The things that look good can deceive.

We're only 18th in AdjO on KenPom right now because his preseason ratings are still heavily baked in (and they will be until late January). T-Rank has us #5 in AdjO and #4 in AdjD when you remove the preseason ratings from the equation. It will be very interesting to see how our numbers change as the schedule gets tougher going into January.

30 points. Is that good?

10/16, 5/8 3's, 5/6 fts, 7 rebs, 1 asst, 5 to, played 39 mins

He is Sean Elliot reincarnated.

39mins - 30pts - 10-17fg - 5-8(3pt) - 5-6ft - 7rbs - 1a - 0blk - 1st - 5to

WTF....cut down on those fn TO's. LOL.

He looks effortless and that is what is so remarkable. He looks like he has figured out where to get points in this offense. Great player and hope the success continues.

Cool as a cucumber too. I knew he was going to nail those free throws.

Kerr looked pretty chill at the line late in the game too.

Odd that I have more confidence in Ballo making FTs than Zu.

Dude never gets tired and absolutely carried us in the first half.