ACCT: dook Biorhythms, 7:00 pm Start

[finesse]

You might be right, but I have a hard time believing they wouldn’t give maximum effort in that situation.

Might not be that. They might have been told to wait for specific keys to react in certain ways. I don't know that that is what they did but I'd expect a whole lot of if/then situations there. Doesn't mean they existed and doesn't mean they read things right. Being active just to be active merely looks better.

 

[duluoz]

I wonder why he hasn’t learned that you have to give a shooter space to land, if he doesn’t know that.

I’m sure you’d love to pin that on HD, but the fact remains that some kids are just more coachable than others. And some are just naturally more mature and have a better understanding of the game than others.

Have you watched Caleb Love over at Zona? After two years, he’s the same exact player and person he was at Carolina. Coaches only have so much influence over what players do on the court, contrary to what you are constantly trying to argue. Especially in this climate, coaching under the specter of players bolting to the portal at the first sign of adversity or any treatment that’s not with kid-gloves.

 

[hedge]

I have never been a fan of the offense.

You've never been a Carolina fan either, you're just a fan of winning and that's not at all the same thing. No big deal, there are plenty more like you out there. I'm sure you have no idea what I'm talking about and I'm glad...

 

[Centerpiece]

8 bubble teams. Pick 4, or rank them.

Based on NET ranking, and in no particular order: 42, 44, 47 and 36.
I know UNC is #36 and will admit I was biased in this choice... but I think their look on this paper is better than the other teams - except maybe 42, 44 and 47.

You can tell which teams are from the SEC based on all of those Quad 1 games

In my choices I zeroed in on SOS, OCSOS, Over all record, NET ranking, and Quad W/Ls

I also looked at Away record and Neutral court records.

I can see the committee giving the not to #44 over us. #42 looks ok but those 2 losses to Q3 teams is not a good look. Sort of offsets the gaudy 25 wins. No other team on the list as 2 Q3 losses.

ETA the loss to Stanford (the Q3 loss for UNC) may be the ONE thing that keeps them out - if it's not all about the Q1 games

 

[SnoopRob]

You might be right, but I have a hard time believing they wouldn’t give maximum effort in that situation.

I think it's less intentional lack of maximum effort and more a lack of understanding/instruction of why full-out effort is necessary.

Even if RJ was option 1, 2, and 3 with everyone else as a secondary option, you would want players to be going as hard as they can without being reckless just to try to sell the action we're running. We obviously didn't do that yesterday on the last play.

 

[Centerpiece]

I will add #41 looks ok too... in terms of Q1 and SOS and OCSOS but... can a 17-15 team get in without winning their conference tournament? I don't know.

 

[SnoopRob]

8 bubble teams. Pick 4, or rank them.

Going left to right, I'd certainly be for teams 1, 4,& 5 (and likely in that order, although I'd not quibble between 1 & 4).

I'd likely give the last slot to team 3, but you could probably talk me into team 7 instead.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I’m sure you’d love to pin that on HD, but the fact remains that some kids are just more coachable than others. And some are just naturally more mature and have a better understanding of the game than others.

Have you watched Caleb Love over at Zona? After two years, he’s the same exact player and person he was at Carolina. Coaches only have so much influence over what players do on the court, contrary to what you are constantly trying to argue. Especially in this climate, coaching under the specter of players bolting to the portal at the first sign of adversity or any treatment that’s not with kid-gloves.

I think there’s a difference between coaching them vs explaining the rules. I think it was that EC just closed out too far, and that he knows the rule.

 

[stankeylegjones]

I think it's less intentional lack of maximum effort and more a lack of understanding/instruction of why full-out effort is necessary.

Even if RJ was option 1, 2, and 3 with everyone else as a secondary option, you would want players to be going as hard as they can without being reckless just to try to sell the action we're running. We obviously didn't do that yesterday on the last play.

Those two clearly were just watching the play after their initial actions, seemingly because they were expecting RJ to get the ball. If they were told of additional actions to perform if RJ didn’t get the ball then I believe they would have also done them. I think VAL did the same, but when RJ didn’t get it he decided to try to make a play.

 

[SnoopRob]

I think there’s a difference between coaching them vs explaining the rules. I think it was that EC just closed out too far, and that he knows the rule.

My take on Cadeau is that he repeatedly tries to make a big play rather than making the simple, correct play.

It shows up on offense when he goes for the spectacular pass when a simple pass would get the same outcome or going for the spectacular pass that has a low likelihood of success.

It shows up on defense when he gets a little too close to the guy he's guarding or reaches in going for a steal when he would be better served just playing good positional defense.

(He also seems to be a beat slow on defense and often trying to catch up to the play a bit, but I'm not sure what's causing that. He's athletic enough that it should be that as the problem, but it seems to be a consistent issue.)

 

[farce©]

(He also seems to be a beat slow on defense and often trying to catch up to the play a bit, but I'm not sure what's causing that. He's athletic enough that it should be that as the problem, but it seems to be a consistent issue.)

I suspect he’s just not an instinctive defender so he’s thinking rather than just reacting to the situation, making him a step slow to get there.

 

[SnoopRob]

Those two clearly were just watching the play after their initial actions, seemingly because they were expecting RJ to get the ball. If they were told of additional actions to perform if RJ didn’t get the ball then I believe they would have also done them. I think VAL did the same, but when RJ didn’t get it he decided to try to make a play.

Yeah, neither EC nor Drake were really involved nor going hard after the initial actions. But we should have wanted them to be going hard even if they were just running in circles trying to attract attention. I have no idea why they weren't going harder.

But in many ways, it's the same issue we have with our basic offensive motion. Often we aren't moving terrible quickly or making hard cuts, which is what leads us to the periods where we just pound the leather off the ball. I'm confident the plays aren't designed to be run that way, but I have no idea why we consistently do so.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Yeah, neither EC nor Drake were really involved nor going hard after the initial actions. But we should have wanted them to be going hard even if they were just running in circles trying to attract attention. I have no idea why they weren't going harder.

But in many ways, it's the same issue we have with our basic offensive motion. Often we aren't moving terrible quickly or making hard cuts, which is what leads us to the periods where we just pound the leather off the ball. I'm confident the plays aren't designed to be run that way, but I have no idea why we consistently do so.

I agree with both of your points.

 

[SnoopRob]

I suspect he’s just not an instinctive defender so he’s thinking rather than just reacting to the situation, making him a step slow to get there.

On the whole, I agree. That is the simplest answer.

 

[superrific]

It shows up on offense when he goes for the spectacular pass when a simple pass would get the same outcome or going for the spectacular pass that has a low likelihood of success.

Seems to me that describes a lot of highly rated pass-first point guards. They get it in their heads that "passing is what I do," and so to be a star, they try to make passes that nobody else would be able to complete. Unfortunately, they often don't complete them.

I don't think it's an accident that Lawson was one of the best A:TO guys in history, IIRC. He rarely made terrible passes or tried to force it. He didn't need to. He could always provide value from scoring.

 

[duluoz]

I think there’s a difference between coaching them vs explaining the rules. I think it was that EC just closed out too far, and that he knows the rule.

Of course he knows the rule. But he still acted like he didn’t do anything wrong. Go back to the play and you’ll see him going toward the bench acting confused as to how he could’ve been whistled, like a petulant child. And Sullivan literally said “You have to give him a place to land.” Alexander called it out word for word in the broadcast.

I don’t even know what point you’re trying to make. My point is that he’s a too-emotional and over-reactive player who usually knows the right things to do, but too often isn’t in control of his temperament enough to do them. That equates to low basketball IQ way too often for a PG or star player.

And that single boneheaded foul impacted the game more broadly than the lane violation. Even if no single play is what cost them the game, which I generally agree with.

 

[stankeylegjones]

Of course he knows the rule. But he still acted like he didn’t do anything wrong. Go back to the play and you’ll see him going toward the bench acting confused as to how he could’ve been whistled, like a petulant child. And Sullivan literally said “You have to give him a place to land.” Alexander called it out word for word in the broadcast.

I don’t even know what point you’re trying to make. My point is that he’s a too-emotional and over-reactive player who usually knows the right things to do, but too often isn’t in control of his temperament enough to do them. That equates to low basketball IQ way too often for a PG or star player.

And that single boneheaded foul impacted the game more broadly than the lane violation. Even if no single play is what cost them the game, which I generally agree with.

He definitely can get caught up in the moment, for sure.

 

[BluHevn]

You've never been a Carolina fan either, you're just a fan of winning and that's not at all the same thing. No big deal, there are plenty more like you out there. I'm sure you have no idea what I'm talking about and I'm glad...

 

[BillOfRights]

Based on NET ranking, and in no particular order: 42, 44, 47 and 36.
I know UNC is #36 and will admit I was biased in this choice... but I think their look on this paper is better than the other teams - except maybe 42, 44 and 47.

You can tell which teams are from the SEC based on all of those Quad 1 games

In my choices I zeroed in on SOS, OCSOS, Over all record, NET ranking, and Quad W/Ls

I also looked at Away record and Neutral court records.

I can see the committee giving the not to #44 over us. #42 looks ok but those 2 losses to Q3 teams is not a good look. Sort of offsets the gaudy 25 wins. No other team on the list as 2 Q3 losses.

ETA the loss to Stanford (the Q3 loss for UNC) may be the ONE thing that keeps them out - if it's not all about the Q1 games

Your initial choices are Carolina, and the other 4 (these 3 plus your edit) are alphabetically New Mexico, Ohio St, Oklahoma, and Vandy.

Carolina is 1-12 in Q1, but that is only one data point. #41 is 3-4 in Q2, their efficiency-based metrics are worse than Carolina, and their wins-based metrics are worse, too. #42 has 2 Q3 losses, as you noted, their efficiency metrics are worse, and they didn't play a schedule as tough. #44 has 2 losses outside of Q1 and their efficiency metrics are worse - their ORtg is identical to Carolina's, but their DRtg is worse, if you can imagine that. #47 has a pathetic OOC SOS, 3 losses outside of Q1, and worse offensive and defensive efficiency metrics.

 

[BillOfRights]

Going left to right, I'd certainly be for teams 1, 4,& 5 (and likely in that order, although I'd not quibble between 1 & 4).

I'd likely give the last slot to team 3, but you could probably talk me into team 7 instead.

You chose Carolina, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and either Ohio St or Vandy.