Anyone complaining about the offense at this point

[salim'sheadband]

Without looking at college basketball as a whole is either incredibly myopic or willfully ignorant. I don't care if you complain that we're not scoring 80 points a game, but for Christ's sake, can we stop acting like this is a problem unique to Arizona?

As I look around the country, here are some offensive performances (pun intended) from some allegedly good offensive teams:

Kentucky 58 Providence 38

Louisville 45 Cleveland St. 33

Kentucky 72 Kansas (snort) 40

Kansas 61 Michigan St. 56

Iowa 60 North Carolina 55

Louisville 64 Ohio St. 55 (18 points at the half)

Texas 55 UConn 54

Florida (like every game)

Are all these coaches just that bad at coaching offense? No. This problem is endemic. So complain all you want, but complain about one-and-done, complain about the charge epidemic, complain about the 35-second shot clock, complain about zone defense while you're bitching about Miller's O. Thanks.

[ASUHATER!]

I could now point out 50 games where top 25 teams have no issues putting up 90-100+ on many teams...offense is still an issue without a doubt

[salim'sheadband]

1) On non-putrid teams? No, you can't. You absolutely cannot.

2) You basically missed the point.

[ASUHATER!]

No I didn't. My point is that we struggle to score on even putrid teams almost all of the time. No other top teams really do. It's borderline asinine to say that we don't have offensive issues.

[salim'sheadband]

No I didn't. My point is that we struggle to score on even putrid teams almost all of the time. No other top teams really do. It's borderline asinine to say that we don't have offensive issues.

This is where you missed the point. Find in my post where I said we don't have offensive issues? My point, which again, you missed, is that every "good" team in college basketball has offensive issues.

So for the three putrid teams we've played, 78, 86, and 91 is struggling to score? Okay. Kentucky down at the half against Buffalo and up 5 against Boston University. Texas scoring 63 against UT-Arlington. UConn at home against Bryant. Keep telling yourself it's just us though if it makes you (for some reason) feel better.

[salim'sheadband]

Duke just shot 65% and put on an incredible offensive performance...and scored 80 points. In 2003, there were only 8/32 games where we DIDN'T score 80 points.

And, oh by the way, our offense last year was two points per 100 possessions MORE EFFICIENT than our offense in 2003. Put that in your pipe(s) and smoke it.

[pokinmik]

I'm with ya SHB...

[Puerco]

I don't think Hater cares a whit about efficiency. He likes the big numbers. Doesn't matter if the nature of your defense predicates fewer offensive possessions per game.

[Longhorned]

I don't think Hater cares a whit about efficiency. He likes the big numbers. Doesn't matter if the nature of your defense predicates fewer offensive possessions per game.

I think he's more about the eye test and whipping more mature and more experienced but less talented teams in November from start to finish, rather than just the final 10 minutes. ASUHATER also has a self-hating, favorite-team-inferiority-complex fan thing going on, which I recognize because I have it, too, though not when it comes to Arizona basketball. I think that's borne of watching and rooting for a team that repeatedly comes up short of a Final Four, as opposed to the teams who win it all and, as a result, see their subsequent domination is celebrated along the way by ESPN (Kentucky and Duke in particular). I have that as somebody who grew up on the Phoenix Suns. But like you, Puerco, I relate to Arizona basketball more like Spurs fans who started watching the NBA in the 2000s. Until you've experienced your team repeatedly as a winner, there's this cyclical back-in-forth of team and self being on the short end (why wasn't I born a Lakers fan???).

Gumby did a nice summary recently on why offense across the board isn't what it used to be, and SHB's observations are right in line with that.

[KaibabKat]

Anybody remember the misery index? I think it combined inflation rate with unemployment rate back in the Carter years.

Somebody should do a fun index for college basketball. I suppose it would combine efficiency with pace somehow.

In any case, my old eyes tell me that the fun index is way down for nearly all of CBB - including Arizona.

[Puerco]

Longhorned: Thank you. Now I understand a little better where this is coming from. I still feel that way about the Suns. Screw John Paxson.

Kaibab: I may be perverse, but much like I used to really enjoy watching Arizona Football on defense in the Desert Swarm years, I enjoy watching Sean Miller's teams frustrate an opposing offense. Must have something to do with my own utter inability to score when I'm playing.

[Longhorned]

Yeah the Desert Swarm analogy is good. I think of those early Ben Howland years when, to quote Coach Olson, Arizona "is learning 'D-E-F-E-N-S-E' but still hasn't gotten past the first 'E'." Meanwhile, the Bruins were just bruising us and taking everything out from under our dynamic athleticism, and then marching off to Final Fours. We liked to say that UCLA ground everything into a boring, ugly excuse for basketball, but that was really just to feel better about ourselves. Now that offense generally looks ugly in any case, I like to be the team that makes your offense even uglier.

[Olsondogg]

I will be boarderline asinine and state that this team does not have offensive issues.

Now, the issue I have is people saying that the offense has issues, which is an offensive issue.

[Longhorned]

I will be boarderline asinine and state that this team does not have offensive issues.

Now, the issue I have is people saying that the offense has issues, which is an offensive issue.

I'm going to stand up for defeatism against your complete disregard for human life. Let me tell you something. "We're going to lose this thing!" is on ASUHATER's calling card. His suspicion of Arizona's inferiority runs so deep that, somehow, he labels our opponents as "putrid" and wishes aloud that we could trade a few of Arizona's players for a few on Cal State Northridge. (Don't think we didn't notice that, ASUHATER ). Before you go over the border of borderline asinine, Odogg, consider the increasingly real possibility that Budweiser will make ASUHATER a media sensation, casting him in the role of the guy in anguish on his sofa as his team turns another bad corner. People will see him in line in the Safeway and say, "Look! It's the guy with the bad luck!"

[dirtbags]

Anybody remember the misery index? I think it combined inflation rate with unemployment rate back in the Carter years.

Somebody should do a fun index for college basketball. I suppose it would combine efficiency with pace somehow.

hahaha, this is awesome. eat your heart out, arthur okun.

[salim'sheadband]

All these references to borderline, feels like I'm going to lose my mind.

Just try to understand, I've given all I can with this post guys.

[gumby]

I don't think Hater cares a whit about efficiency. He likes the big numbers. Doesn't matter if the nature of your defense predicates fewer offensive possessions per game.

I think he's more about the eye test and whipping more mature and more experienced but less talented teams in November from start to finish, rather than just the final 10 minutes. ASUHATER also has a self-hating, favorite-team-inferiority-complex fan thing going on, which I recognize because I have it, too, though not when it comes to Arizona basketball. I think that's borne of watching and rooting for a team that repeatedly comes up short of a Final Four, as opposed to the teams who win it all and, as a result, see their subsequent domination is celebrated along the way by ESPN (Kentucky and Duke in particular). I have that as somebody who grew up on the Phoenix Suns. But like you, Puerco, I relate to Arizona basketball more like Spurs fans who started watching the NBA in the 2000s. Until you've experienced your team repeatedly as a winner, there's this cyclical back-in-forth of team and self being on the short end (why wasn't I born a Lakers fan???).

Gumby did a nice summary recently on why offense across the board isn't what it used to be, and SHB's observations are right in line with that.

And I suppose if Gumby jumped off the Empire State Building, you would, too!

But, yeah, I've been saying it. Just didn't make it a distinctive thread, which is where I'll say it from now on. New ideas and new trends take time to sink in, SHB, but you're right.

I liken it to expecting football teams to play defense as effectively as they did before all of these innovative offenses came along. The best defenses today will not put up Desert Swarm numbers. It's a bygone era.

Same with college basketball. in the bygone era, those teams had talented guys who stuck around longer, especially talented Bigs. More talent. More cohesion. Just harder to guard. Plus, more coaches are preaching good defense, including taking away transition buckets. So with less talent and younger players, they slow it down and go for efficiency.

I'm kinda in Kaibab's camp. The games aren't as fun to watch. However, it helps to change expectations of what "good offense" means.

For instance, Duke played outstanding offense against Wisconsin last night. Frighteningly good. So good, in fact, the best guys won't be there next year.

[Longhorned]

Duke looked really good, and offenses do generally look good in March when everyone is watching, and not just the sickos. There are exceptions, but anyone who wants to believe that March offenses always looked good in olden times shouldn't re-watch Arizona v. North Carolina in 1997. There's a reason why that's never on ESPN Classic. Like steaks, today's teams need to age, and games in November are about as ready for consumption as a frozen pizza straight out of the box.

[salim'sheadband]

I don't think Hater cares a whit about efficiency. He likes the big numbers. Doesn't matter if the nature of your defense predicates fewer offensive possessions per game.

I think he's more about the eye test and whipping more mature and more experienced but less talented teams in November from start to finish, rather than just the final 10 minutes. ASUHATER also has a self-hating, favorite-team-inferiority-complex fan thing going on, which I recognize because I have it, too, though not when it comes to Arizona basketball. I think that's borne of watching and rooting for a team that repeatedly comes up short of a Final Four, as opposed to the teams who win it all and, as a result, see their subsequent domination is celebrated along the way by ESPN (Kentucky and Duke in particular). I have that as somebody who grew up on the Phoenix Suns. But like you, Puerco, I relate to Arizona basketball more like Spurs fans who started watching the NBA in the 2000s. Until you've experienced your team repeatedly as a winner, there's this cyclical back-in-forth of team and self being on the short end (why wasn't I born a Lakers fan???).

Gumby did a nice summary recently on why offense across the board isn't what it used to be, and SHB's observations are right in line with that.

And I suppose if Gumby jumped off the Empre State Building, you would, too!

But, yeah, I've been saying it. Just didn't make it a distinctive thread, which is where I'll say it from now on. New ideas and new trends take time to sink in, SHB, but you're right.

I liken it to expecting football teams to play defense as effectively as they did before all of these innovative offenses came along. The best defenses today will not put up Desert Swarm numbers. It's a bygone era.

Same with college basketball. in the bygone era, those teams had talented guys who stuck around longer, especially talented Bigs. More talent. More cohesion. Just harder to guard. Plus, more coaches are preaching good defense, including taking away transition buckets. So with less talent and younger players, they slow it down and go for efficiency.

I'm kinda in Kaibab's camp. The games aren't as fun to watch. However, it helps to change expectations of what "good offense" means.

For instance, Duke played outstanding offense against Wisconsin last night. Frighteningly good. So good, in fact, the best guys won't be there next year.

Yes.

I was shocked last night when I saw that our per-possession offense was more efficient - barely, but more efficient - in 2014 than in 2003, the year we had the insane comeback at Allen Fieldhouse and all the rest.

It's just a different time, and teams scored more but the offenses weren't necessarily better if that makes sense. Hell I was watching some old games with my Dad - 1970 Finals, he was a Knicks guy. The offense was just come down, post, shoot, come down, post, shoot, come down, spot up, shoot. Oscar Robertson had his triple-double but if you normalized LeBron's averages to the amount of possessions they had back then he'd average something like 40-15-15. Possession value has gone way, way, way up, even in the NBA where the offenses are really good (and they are).

I like the idea of a fun index. High-tempo-high-efficiency offenses. I'd start with North Carolina in 2009 and work backwards from there.

[gumby]

Coach Miller reiterating what the smart people here have been saying. What would he do without us?

http://tucson.com/sports/basketball/col ... b8ea2.html

“My experience is when you have the continuity of 120 practices and 35-40 games, and then you come back for a second or third year everything smoothens out,” Miller said. “I think your ability to run quality offensive plays, (with players who are) understanding the game, is at a high level.

Miller said to “just imagine” how college football would be hurt if it had a similar rash of talent leaving after just one or two years, but said turning to a baseball-style rule of requiring players to stay three years if they don’t sign out of high school is not realistic.

But, as he’s said before, Miller does back something that would at least make players stay two years if they don’t sign out of high school.

“From what I understand, at the NBA there’s such a pull to get in at a young age so they can get that second contract,” Miller said, referring to the fact that first-round NBA picks are subject to four years of rookie-scale pay. “But I think an age requirement where they have to be in college to a certain point would probably help their game. I know it would help ours.”

[Bosy Billups]

Love our offense!

I love our offense even more when it comes from a defensive stand.

Which leads to this observation, I have been converted completely.

I think defense is far more exciting, impressive, and interesting than offense.

[UofAlum05]

Are you not entertained yet?