jagtrader
Century (over 100 posts)
Posts: 121
|
Post by jagtrader on Jan 7, 2010 9:28:32 GMT -5
The shot chart linked earlier in this thread is amazing. Hoyas got 16 dunks or layups and Marquette got 2. Hoyas still lost despite the free throws essentially being a wash with turnovers and rebounds being close. That's a flukey way to lose. Give Marquette credit for shooting really well. All those jumpers weren't wide open.
|
|
lurkerhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by lurkerhoya on Jan 7, 2010 9:34:35 GMT -5
I liked: - Holding an opponent under 40% FG - Wright's 7 assists - Greg's 66% FG
I Didn't like: -MU shooting almost 50% from 3 -Greg only taking 6 shots
Those were my big data points. What seemed to be a positive to me was that no one offensively forced anything. Greg took what he could, which wasn't much, and didn't jack up shots or turn it over. Ditto with CW.
Perimeter defense needs some work since we will play more games against teams that will run a perimeter offense. With the new 3-point line, if you got guys who can knock down those shots, it can effectively spread a defense over the course of the game. Granted, MU didn't take advantage of it, but plenty of other teams will (SU, Nova). Other than that, I can't complain too much. We lost to a pretty good team that shot the lights out. You go back to practice, work on matching up that 40% from the field with the deep-ball and we'll win more than our share.
|
|
theexorcist
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,506
|
Post by theexorcist on Jan 7, 2010 9:36:03 GMT -5
I don't want to go through 14 pages, so my quick thoughts.
1. Hey, Blackfinn, way to sell yourself as a gamewatch destination when you have FOUR BLEEPING TABLES reserved for Georgetown fans. I got there forty minutes early and didn't get a seat. Nice to see lots of screens and have the audio, but, really, fix that. On the bright side, nice atmosphere.
2. One of the scrolling signs at half court said "Go Cheese." I love Wisconsin.
3. Big East is a marathon, not a sprint, every road game is a difficult one, Marquette needed this more than the Hoyas did, if you crush someone in the paint you usually win, UConn is a big test.
4. With all the above said, I'd like to bring up the idea of Kama Sutra shots.
Kama Sutra shots were a staple of JTIII's first year. The Hoyas would hold the ball until three seconds remained, then launch these horribly off-balance last-gasp efforts with their bodies contorted like a pretzel.
They regrettably seem to have made a comeback at this game. I'm glad that GU fought to the last possession, but that next-to-last shot by Austin had Kama Sutra shot written all over it. Frustrating way to end.
EDIT - Oh, and I'm sorry if I sound like I'm in a bad mood, but for the forty minutes I was waiting, my two TV options were either a) a Villanova lovefest on MASN or b) a Syracuse-Memphis game at Syracuse.
Oh, and there were about seven Big East commercials that played up the six OT game between Syracuse and UConn. And the Big East commercials featured players from ND, Syracuse, Villanova, and West Virginia talking about how their opponents were great people.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Jan 7, 2010 9:36:18 GMT -5
Well, it's probably not worth starting a whole thread on it, but I honestly dont think our 3 point defense was that bad last night. It's understandable to think that because our 3pt defense has been an achilles heel this year and Marquette killed us from 3, we therefore played bad defense, but I disagree.
One, the problem wasnt switches and rotations. That certainly happened a couple of times, but that is not why Cubillan hit 6 pointers. He hit 6 3-pointers because Marq passed the ball well, found him, and he shot out of his mind, like Big Dog mentioned. That's going to happen every once in a while. 10-12 times a game, a decent shooting guard will find himself open for a 3. Most of the time, said player will miss or pass up the shot. Last night, Marquette hit about 8 of those 10-12 occasions.
I dont mean to give him short shrift, but if Cubillan is such a good shooter then why didnt Marquette run a single play for him? It was a point even the announcers picked up on. Why didnt he shoot more than 7 shots all night?
Let's face it, Cubillan is a decent player who stepped up when our defense was designed to shut off Hayward. It would be akin to Jason going off for 18 points in a BE game. It is certainly possible, but you clearly arent going to design your defense around his 3-point shooting.
People say, "well, why didnt we adjust?" Again, Cubillan took 7 shots all night!
I am very comfortable with the way we play interior defense, and I do recognize that we struggle on switches and rotations for 3s, but I dont have much problem with the way we played D last night.
In fact, through 3 BE games, I am very happy with what I see from this team.
|
|
Big Dog
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 3,912
|
Post by Big Dog on Jan 7, 2010 9:37:35 GMT -5
I thought our last play would have worked better if we had taken a timeout and drawn up a screen and roll as 1st option and then had freeman drive as 2nd option. The true last play of course was Chris's 3. There were 7 seconds left there. His making that wasn't out of the question. What of the decision not to hold the ball for the last shot when he had it down one? I was a little surprised by that.
|
|
NCHoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,927
|
Post by NCHoya on Jan 7, 2010 9:41:59 GMT -5
Well, it's probably not worth starting a whole thread on it, but I honestly dont think our 3 point defense was that bad last night. It's understandable to think that because our 3pt defense has been an achilles heel this year and Marquette killed us from 3, we therefore played bad defense, but I disagree. One, the problem wasnt switches and rotations. That certainly happened a couple of times, but that is not why Cubillan hit 6 pointers. He hit 6 3-pointers because Marq passed the ball well, found him, and he shot out of his mind, like Big Dog mentioned. That's going to happen every once in a while. 10-12 times a game, a decent shooting guard will find himself open for a 3. Most of the time, said player will miss or pass up the shot. Last night, Marquette hit about 8 of those 10-12 occasions. I dont mean to give him short shrift, but if Cubillan is such a good shooter then why didnt Marquette run a single play for him? It was a point even the announcers picked up on. Why didnt he shoot more than 7 shots all night? Let's face it, Cubillan is a decent player who stepped up when our defense was designed to shut off Hayward. It would be akin to Jason going off for 18 points in a BE game. It is certainly possible, but you clearly arent going to design your defense around his 3-point shooting. People say, "well, why didnt we adjust?" Again, Cubillan took 7 shots all night! I am very comfortable with the way we play interior defense, and I do recognize that we struggle on switches and rotations for 3s, but I dont have much problem with the way we played D last night. In fact, through 3 BE games, I am very happy with what I see from this team. Good point. I think some are over-emphasizing that our defense somehow caused MU to shoot a high% from 3. Sometimes sh*t just happens, a guy like Cubillan has a career night against us and there is really no way to defend it. He really is not someone you gameplan for but had a huge game for them on 7 shots. MU is a solid team and there is no reason to call this a bad loss, especially since we played a pretty decent game. Sometimes we are just going to lose on an individual night.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,652
|
Post by guru on Jan 7, 2010 9:45:31 GMT -5
Well, it's probably not worth starting a whole thread on it, but I honestly dont think our 3 point defense was that bad last night. It's understandable to think that because our 3pt defense has been an achilles heel this year and Marquette killed us from 3, we therefore played bad defense, but I disagree. One, the problem wasnt switches and rotations. That certainly happened a couple of times, but that is not why Cubillan hit 6 pointers. He hit 6 3-pointers because Marq passed the ball well, found him, and he shot out of his mind, like Big Dog mentioned. That's going to happen every once in a while. 10-12 times a game, a decent shooting guard will find himself open for a 3. Most of the time, said player will miss or pass up the shot. Last night, Marquette hit about 8 of those 10-12 occasions. I dont mean to give him short shrift, but if Cubillan is such a good shooter then why didnt Marquette run a single play for him? It was a point even the announcers picked up on. Why didnt he shoot more than 7 shots all night? Let's face it, Cubillan is a decent player who stepped up when our defense was designed to shut off Hayward. It would be akin to Jason going off for 18 points in a BE game. It is certainly possible, but you clearly arent going to design your defense around his 3-point shooting. People say, "well, why didnt we adjust?" Again, Cubillan took 7 shots all night! I am very comfortable with the way we play interior defense, and I do recognize that we struggle on switches and rotations for 3s, but I dont have much problem with the way we played D last night. In fact, through 3 BE games, I am very happy with what I see from this team. I didn't mind Austin's shot - he had been getting to the bucket all game. On this one some MU player finally stepped in and he ended up taking an awkward shot, but last night he was the guy I wanted with the ball at the end. The 3 pointer by Wright at the very end is a different story. There were 7.5 seconds left on the clock when we took possession - that's an eternity. Disappointing that all we got was a heave that airballed. Was that Wright's only shot of the second half, by the way? After incredible end game karma from 2006-2008, the basketball gods seem to be evening the score on us these last 2 seasons. This has gone from a strength in JT3's teams to a glaring weakness.
|
|
calhoya
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 4,381
|
Post by calhoya on Jan 7, 2010 9:50:28 GMT -5
No complaints about the game. I thought the Hoyas played a good game and Marquette played a good game. Add homecourt as a factor--not the refs-- and you get the final differential. For those who complain about the system--including me-- it was running smoothly last night. Two gripes: Monroe really has to be a bigger factor--getting stripped of the ball and missing close shots is just not going to move him into the lottery (maybe a good thing for us); and I cannot believe that JTIII plans to play with a 6 man rotation all yeaer. There is no way this team can hold up throughout the BE season without meaningful minutes off the bench. Somehow and someway he has got to get some contributions from Sims Vee and Jerelle.
|
|
guru
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,652
|
Post by guru on Jan 7, 2010 9:52:07 GMT -5
I can't find a video of the ODU game right now, but IIRC both of our losses have had a rebound yanked out of Greg's hands in the final minute that turned into two huge points. That ball has to be his. For those of you convinced that Marquette will never shoot like that again, they went 7/12 from three versus Xavier and 10/16 against West Virginia. Their eFG of 50% is almost exactly their average against major-conference competition this year (seven games 49.5%). They had been taking 31.3% of their shots from three, which would be about 17 3PA for a 54 FGA game. They took 26. Do you think this is for no reason? Or perhaps that this was part of their gameplan and that the vast majority of these shots were uncontested. They went a mind-bogglingly terrible 9/28 from 2. Lazar Hayward went 4/16 and jacked up 7 threes. We did a good job of clogging the lane and a terrible job of defending the perimeter. It needs work. It was the timing of the 3 point makes though that killed us. Everytime we would creep back close or tied, some kid would launch a 3 bomb that gutted us again. I give the hoyas credit for coming up off the mat so many times. I'd like to see MU's second half 3 point shooting percentage too. That was when it really seemed ridiculous. But that's a good team. No shame in the loss. UConn looms large now. A win Saturday completely erases the bad tase from this loss, and then some.
|
|
The Stig
Diamond Hoya (over 2500 posts)
Posts: 2,844
|
Post by The Stig on Jan 7, 2010 9:54:19 GMT -5
I think a lot of Marquette's 3s early on were due to bad defense. But after the first 10 minutes or so I thought we were defending the 3 pretty well, but they just kept making them.
|
|
TBird41
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
"Roy! I Love All 7'2" of you Roy!"
Posts: 8,740
|
Post by TBird41 on Jan 7, 2010 9:54:33 GMT -5
I thought our last play would have worked better if we had taken a timeout and drawn up a screen and roll as 1st option and then had freeman drive as 2nd option. The true last play of course was Chris's 3. There were 7 seconds left there. His making that wasn't out of the question. What of the decision not to hold the ball for the last shot when he had it down one? I was a little surprised by that. My guess on that was that the plan was to hold the ball unless an opening / opportunity presented itself. Austin thought he had an opening and could get to the rim but misread it.
|
|
hoyajoker07
Century (over 100 posts)
"This league deserves a better class of basketball"
Posts: 140
|
Post by hoyajoker07 on Jan 7, 2010 9:57:49 GMT -5
I too think we played an OK game against a team that was on fire. If I was going to look for the points for the win, I think I'd find them in the following places.
1) Entry pass layup by CW - I promised to stop hating on Chris's overall game and I'm hoping this doesn't qualify, but I think that's one play where you gotta finish. The defense was asleep on the pass.
2) Hayward getting that rebound over Greg. I know it's difficult to say what we would have done after that play, but after #1, I just need a coupla points. Come on, bud.
But again, overall, I thought we played well. I was so happy to watch JV pick them apart after the frustration of the first few minutes. Also, Austin had a great game and while it didn't go in, nor was it the prettiest shot, I too wanted the ball in his hands for that second to last shot. He also did a great job of diluting Cubillan's effect from a momentum perspective. At least once and maybe twice he answered with a three immediately.
|
|
GUJook97
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 5,445
|
Post by GUJook97 on Jan 7, 2010 9:58:32 GMT -5
But that's a good team. No shame in the loss. UConn looms large now. A win Saturday completely erases the bad tase from this loss, and then some.
Yeah, and in the similar vein, a lot of the positives about last night will be eradicated if we lay an egg against UConn and Seton Hall.
|
|
lurkerhoya
Golden Hoya (over 1000 posts)
Posts: 1,182
|
Post by lurkerhoya on Jan 7, 2010 10:04:22 GMT -5
Some days you're the pigeon, some days you're the statue. That's what yesterday felt like.
|
|
sleepy
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
Posts: 6,079
|
Post by sleepy on Jan 7, 2010 10:14:55 GMT -5
nc hoya i have to stongly disagree. outside of buyzks three from the corner virtually all the threes made where wide open. when i think it was hayward makes one off an out of bounds play by sliding to the elbow extendeded and they run the exact same play 2 mins later and we still allow a wide open shot there is a problem. When it takes 35 minutes of play to adjust to the 3 its a problem.
Sure they shot lights out but we knew going in that they had 3 strong 3 point shooters who knew cublian is going 6/6. but we didnt adjust. the fact that our on ball perimeter defenders are so laterally challenged forcing so much help is distressing but do we really need all 4 defenders off the ball moving to help. yes our rotation were a little better in the second half it didnt look like a total chinese fire drill with the closeout to the shooter coming from the weak side. I really would like to them get back to playing more of the matchup zone but that exposes Monroe to more foul trouble in the middle. so much for trade offs. What is really distressing to me is that Clark despite his speed is at best an average on ball defender and is continually being abused on penetration.
|
|
SSHoya
Blue & Gray (over 10,000 posts)
"Forget it Jake, it's Chinatown."
Posts: 19,141
|
Post by SSHoya on Jan 7, 2010 10:20:28 GMT -5
Object to the phrase, "chinese fire drill."
-- Jeremy Lin
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 7, 2010 10:31:15 GMT -5
Can't really agree. Hollis may not have been a liability, but I saw alot of tentative play. with a couple of contributions. We need more from our sixth man - those of the starters who had lesser contributions have done more in many games, butthe bench - including Hollis - has not. They need to step it up, to give us a spark, and not just some neutral minutes. Fine, but the my point was the starters didn't play any better. If they had we win the game. Instead of tenative play from the starters I saw some wreckless and sloppy play, and some more contributions which is probably worse. You can't expect the bench to bring it if the starters can't get it done. Thats not to say the starters overall played BAD, just that there was little to no difference when we brought someone in off the bench over anyone not named Austin Freeman,and Julian on offense But its just my opinion. In fact, one of the hopes for any bench is that they can"bring it" on nights when some of the starters are off, to give a spark and contribute some points, boards, etc. I never said that Hollis had a bad game, just that we need much more from the bench if we are going to survive the long, hard season with battles virtually every night.
|
|
hoyainspirit
Platinum Hoya (over 5000 posts)
When life puts that voodoo on me, music is my gris-gris.
Posts: 8,398
|
Post by hoyainspirit on Jan 7, 2010 10:46:34 GMT -5
Bummed we lost, but only so bummed. Winning on the road is tough in the BE. At the end of the game, we had a chance, on the road, against a team that had suffered close losses against two tough opponents.
It's only three games in, yet I'm happy that we don't lose games down the stretch, as we did last year. No quit in this team. They play with more confidence than the group last year, and are in it 'till the end. Fun to watch.
|
|
DanMcQ
Moderator
Posts: 31,996
|
Post by DanMcQ on Jan 7, 2010 11:13:04 GMT -5
From Liz Clarke's game article:
|
|
|
Post by FrazierFanatic on Jan 7, 2010 11:21:01 GMT -5
No offense to Austin but most of the 3's were pretty wide open.We did not close out too well, and our constant switching on every screen left us one pass behind most of the night.
|
|