Bigs"R"Us
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,641
|
Post by Bigs"R"Us on Jul 21, 2014 9:32:59 GMT -5
When you have superior athletes and talent, you press and run. Increased possessions favor the better team. Weaker teams want to hold the ball and slow the game down. Fewer possessions give them better odds of pulling off an upset.
|
|
|
Post by hoyasaxa2003 on Jul 21, 2014 9:37:50 GMT -5
Jt3 has plans to utilize a full court press a lot this year. It's especially nice to have Bowen back this year for this reason alone. In the past, when people have advocated running the full court press, I have been skeptical because our team simply wasn't athletic or deep enough to do that. This year, that's different because our athleticism is much improved, and it's something we could probably do with some effectiveness. While people always focus on our offense, it actually wasn't that horrible last year, especially when you consider that DSR and Starks were the only two threats we had (and defenses knew that). Our defense, on the contrary, was pretty bad by the end of the season and our fouling was out of control. Given our injection of athleticism, there's no reason our defense should not be substantially improved from last season.
|
|
|
Post by michaelgrahmstylie on Jul 21, 2014 11:06:35 GMT -5
Do people "always focus" on our offense?
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Jul 21, 2014 11:21:03 GMT -5
Do people "always focus" on our offense? This whole conversation started when someone suggested Clarke may not be a good fit for III's system/style of play. So what else were we to focus on when responding? Obviously the initial remark wasn't commenting on Clarke's ability as a defender. Or maybe that was your point all along in that we shouldn't be as focused on what the kid can do offensively but rather if he could bring a defensive intensity to the team.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Jul 21, 2014 16:09:54 GMT -5
I actually did watch plenty of NBA basketball in the 90s and continue to do so now. I know you like to paint yourself as the only NBA expert alive, but you're not. No, not the only NBA expert alive. Just apparently the only one in this two-way discussion between the two of us. Otherwise you would have understood that running the Triangle and getting up and down the court whenever possible weren't mutually exclusive concepts for a basketball team. But, hey, whatever. No doubt. However willing players don't mean that said player has a particular style that fits, but rather a particular attitude that fits. We may be on agreement on this and saying it different ways. I'm not sure. My view is that you seek out talented players and depending on who you get you try to play to their strengths, not to the strengths of any set-in-stone system. especially not in college when you may not have talented kids hanging around that long. Yes, you try to broaden the scope of those players' games and help them refine skills or acquire new ones. But you also put them in a position to let them do what they do best (which presumably is what attracted the coaches to the players in the first place, right?). And THAT is why I would respectfully disagree with the opinion that Clarke wouldn't be a good fit for III. If the kid has talent and drive then you make the necessary adjustment in order to make a more comfortable fit.
|
|
SFHoya99
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 17,736
|
Post by SFHoya99 on Jul 21, 2014 16:23:35 GMT -5
If you think a player is raw but still pretty good, does a lot of the needed all-around things that lead to success, has tremendous athleticism and upside and is killing it in national competition but then worry that he isn't right for a certain "system" then perhaps it is the system that is at fault and needs to be done away with. Great coaches adapt to the players they have and come up with plans to best take advantage of such players rather than have them totally conform to the style of play the coach is most used to. That's my take at least. Some folks don't think Peak is a great fit for III's system either. I pray III is a smarter man than those folks who doubt him because if he has Peak play the same style of ball that some of his previous wings did then, well, he will be wasting a terrific resource. This is your original quote that both yaboynyp and I disagreed with. Nowhere in here is even a hint of "well, yes, you could totally incorporate a player whose strength is fast-breaking into a system like the triangle or motion offense because the two aren't mutually exclusive." No, they aren't mutually exclusive, but let's not pretend that either I nor yaboynyp were saying that the two were mutually exclusive; you're the one who used rhetoric like "then perhaps it is the system...that needs to be done away with" and "I pray III is a smarter man than those folks who doubt him because if he has Peak play the same style of ball that some of his previous wings did then, well, he will be wasting a terrific resource." Both yaboy's (I think) and my point is that the best teams take talent and get them to work together as a team. I wasn't saying we shouldn't pursue someone like Clarke or Peak or whomever, merely that the idea that the system should be tossed is kind of ridiculous considering that teams like the Spurs toss players who refuse to play within the structure that Popovich provides. Of course, Pop changes the system to his talent, but he doesn't he's not a slave to the personnel strategy of just "go find a really top athlete." The reality is that there's a fairly large contingent on here that thinks it's a good coaching strategy to just "roll the ball out there and let them play." It's not, and every top coach will tell you that, and not just for job security. That doesn't mean you don't run or don't press; it doesn't even mean you call constant plays. But it does mean there's some kind of direction and structure.
|
|
MCIGuy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Anyone here? What am I supposed to update?
Posts: 9,419
|
Post by MCIGuy on Jul 21, 2014 17:16:40 GMT -5
If you think a player is raw but still pretty good, does a lot of the needed all-around things that lead to success, has tremendous athleticism and upside and is killing it in national competition but then worry that he isn't right for a certain "system" then perhaps it is the system that is at fault and needs to be done away with. Great coaches adapt to the players they have and come up with plans to best take advantage of such players rather than have them totally conform to the style of play the coach is most used to. That's my take at least. Some folks don't think Peak is a great fit for III's system either. I pray III is a smarter man than those folks who doubt him because if he has Peak play the same style of ball that some of his previous wings did then, well, he will be wasting a terrific resource. This is your original quote that both yaboynyp and I disagreed with. Nowhere in here is even a hint of "well, yes, you could totally incorporate a player whose strength is fast-breaking into a system like the triangle or motion offense because the two aren't mutually exclusive." Why don't you read my followup to YaBoy's response to the comment you have quoted above. That followup of mine was posted before you joined in on the discussion. Maybe you were simply so eager to interject and play watchdog to any slight you sensed coming towards III's offense that you simply missed the larger point I made regarding the Triangle and the Spurs. Go ahead and read it. I'll give you time. God knows you will get the last word in anyway. Oh, good grief. No offense but I never wrote that you said any of that in the first place, Mr. Strawman. When It came to you I only chided you about what I thought was a misperception regarding the Triangle as well as a general lack of knowledge regarding NBA hoops/history. If you want to take me to task for that then so be it. But please don't "pretend" as if my comments argued that you were against the Hoyas pressing or running. No, the reality is that you seem to have this view that anyone who has argued for a faster pace and an arguable better use of the players' physical capabilities was basically asking our guys to run an AND1 offense. That's not the case. An aggressive style of offense and a pressing defense can just as easily be as sophisticated, cerebral and calculating as a more slow, halfcourt, milk the clock approach. End of story. Your reflexive instinct has been and will remain to put down any comment about increasing speed as some sort of juvenile need for highlight reel clips. If that is what you wish to continue to believe then by all means hold on to that for dear life and never let go. Meanwhile I and some other juveniles will continue to hope for the perfect blend of effectiveness in both the halfcourt and the fullcourt, we will hope to see a team that can be just as comfortable pressing on D as they are in playing sharp halfcourt defense. Oh, wait. I can see a response coming from you in which you claim that you are not arguing against this either, that you too wouldn't mind seeing such a blend. And yet you continue to dismiss those of us who ever broach the subject of tweaking the offense and defense to better suit the personnel. I guess only you can approach the subject with complete sincerity and understanding. The rest of us are mere instigators trying to tear III down. The sad thing is that I have mentioned plenty of times that I think III gets it and has already started making those changes, including this past season. I have gotten into disagreements over this with dudes who can't stand III. One sent me an email link to a recent interview with Otto Porter (following a Vegas game) in which Otto was asked about finally making that adjustment from college to the pros. Otto is a friend of the program and really likes III. And yet Otto himself said that in college he was playing a slow style but in the pros he had to play quicker. And then came the kicker....he said playing in the pros was like going back to his high school days when he he had to perform at a quicker pace. Was it a shot at III? Didn't appear to be. Was it an accurate assessment? Not entirely IMO. But there is some truth there. And if a friend of the program, a former star of the program, has that view then surely that is the perception out there. Nonetheless based on what I know feel III is trying to prove people wrong on that front, particularly with some of the recruits he is going after now. So why is that some of the Hoya fans are still hung up on the idea of what player fits III's system (which is what started this discussion in the first place)? Frankly I'm just as tired talking about this as you. My mistake was being too weak to resist challenging the assumption that Clarke wasn't a good fit.
|
|
hoyarooter
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 10,197
|
Post by hoyarooter on Jul 21, 2014 19:12:20 GMT -5
So getting back to Clarke...
37 to unranked is a huge rankings disparity. Isn't that pretty unusual? No idea what to make of that, just commenting.
So what schools have shown the most interest in him, and to what schools has he shown the most interest?
|
|
navio
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 155
|
Post by navio on Aug 14, 2014 13:18:44 GMT -5
14 points, 7 rebounds, 4 steals in the USA East win over China
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 15, 2014 22:29:12 GMT -5
Corey Evans @coreyevans_10 10m Chris Clarke is just not another recruit. Needs to be a HM priority. Plans to cut list next week. Sorry folks.. Some of u missed the boat
I Hope the staff is still in contact, he was very impressive the past few days...
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 17, 2014 12:47:37 GMT -5
hoopsintel.sportswar.com/2014/08/17/nike-global-challenge-day-iii/Top Five Performances
Chris Clarke, 6’6”, SF, Cape Henry (VA), USA East, 2015 The energetic small forward was a monster in an early morning win over Pan Africa. Clark relentlessly attacked the rim and finished with 19 points and four rebounds on 9-10 shooting. Whether it was on the break or off the wing, Clarke continuously put pressure on the defense and got to the rim. When the opponent went to a 2-3 zone, Clarke flashed to the middle, caught the ball, and was at the rim in one hard dribble. While he rarely shoots from outside the paint, Clarke did hit on his only three point attempt in the second half. In the evening session Clarke added 13 points on 5-8 shooting.
|
|
EtomicB
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 14,852
|
Post by EtomicB on Aug 21, 2014 17:22:19 GMT -5
|
|
prhoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 23,259
|
Post by prhoya on Aug 21, 2014 18:00:05 GMT -5
|
|
FrazierFanatic
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
Posts: 15,552
Member is Online
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Aug 21, 2014 21:03:30 GMT -5
Odd list.
|
|
dense
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,004
|
Post by dense on Aug 21, 2014 21:42:44 GMT -5
Go Creighton!!!
|
|