We're keeping every game close with our great D and are just missing some on O.
That extra O is on the bench this year and on the way to town next year.
That extra O is on the bench this year and on the way to town next year.
VT basketball will be awesome soon.
- Thread starter BigDaddyHokie
- Start date
Very impressed with those guys. I know their record stinks but they don't. When they get the talent next year they won't know how to act.
Basketball can be turned around faster than football. A player or two can make a HUGE difference. Imagine how VT would be this season had Finney-Smith and Herrell stuck around. Scary good...
This team may have heart, but some of the turnovers against Syracuse were head-scratchers, especially the backcourt violation with 7 seconds left. I hope this team learns from these heart-breaking losses.
Additionally, since we have so few big guys, they have to limit the ticky-tack fouls. There were some bad reach-in fouls tonight.
Additionally, since we have so few big guys, they have to limit the ticky-tack fouls. There were some bad reach-in fouls tonight.
They put on a clinic most of the game of how to break SU's zone. Buzz is showing that he is going to be a force to deal with when he gets more pieces in place. For now its hard to win games when you have to guard 6'9" players with 6'2" players and the other team shoots 20 more free throws. SIze is going to address a lot of the issues that are causing this teams inability to close out close games.
Definitely size was an issue. We did hustle and do a good job rebounding against them for most of the night, especially on the defensive boards. That was a much improved effort for most of the night. Their defensive pressure at the end of the game of course had a big part in the outcome of the game. Part of that was because they have bigger longer athletes, and part was our young guys panicked. But because of our size we are frequently in mismatch situations. Last night was no different - over the course of the game they shot 29 free throws to our 8 partly because we had to foul bigger players in order to guard them. Down the stretch with both Henry and Pierce fouled out they were able to toss the ball inside over top of us at will and either get an easy basket, offensive rebound, or go to the foul line. We couldn't stop them anymore. This will continue to be a problem every game we play until we go deeper in the front court.
Size is way more than rebounding. If it were just size, Krabbendam would have been All-ACC every year and in the NBA right now. Syracuse's superior size and athleticism factored into those late-game turnovers. It's very hard to defeat the press against an extremely lengthy and aggressive team. Moreover, Syracuse had something like 30 free throws to our 10. That also speaks to size advantage on their part. They used it on dribble penetration and brutalized us with it. Also, defensively Syracuse was in the 1-3-1 for much of the game and it was evident that Buzz had planned for it. On top of that, you don't get to take advantage of size and athleticism to the same extent when you're in zone. Not sure why Boeheim didn't press earlier.
At any rate, I've been very impressed with the improved game over this recent stretch and I have also been extremely impressed with the offensive sets and general design Buzz has laid out. We need more pure scorers, though, and I think with a few recruiting classes we'll have that with him.
^Yep, we're on the same page Heaks, good analysis. I think I heard a comment that Syracuse only played a limited number of players (7?) which could explain why he didn't go to the full court press earlier. Usually you can find that information on the basketball-schedule page that you can click the score for the boxscore information, but it doesn't look like this site is doing a good job of keeping that information updated.
We were up 13 with around 6 minutes left. We lost because we turned the ball over time and time again down the stretch, giving them easy baskets and eliminating our chances to score and add to the lead. Our lack of size might have been a factor in previous games, but there is no way to blame size on this one. The free throw difference is irrelevant because, to repeat, we were ahead by 13 with about 6 minutes left, and they had already shot way more free throws than we had at that point.
To recap their comeback, a steal and layup by Patterson, a 6'2" guard, pulled them within 11. Then Cooney, a 6'4" guard, made 2 free throws to pull them within 9. Then, a steal and free throws by Joseph, a 6'3" guard, pulled them within 7. After we scored, Joseph made a free throw to pull them within 8.
We then followed all of this up with 6 more turnovers in the final four minutes. Size? Sure, maybe their size helped them a little when forcing these, but most teams do not use size to beat a press. They use good gurads who can handle the ball and beat the pressure. What good would size have done for us the last 4 minutes? Do we really want forwards and centers trying to beat full court pressure? Usually, most teams remove size late and put in more guards to handle traps and pressure when they have a big lead like. So, sure, give credit to Syracuse for their size, but it makes no sense to blame the fact we lost a late13 point because we do not have enough size when it was backcourt turnover after turnover that doomed us.
Dude, you're clueless enough as it is when it comes to football, but you are embarrassingly bad when it comes to basketball. Nothing you've said here refutes what jolly or I have said -- you're just arbitrarily imputing value to whatever fits your narrative. No-one said we needed a recap of the final 3 minutes, and a Joseph or Cooney are null and void when you have a generously 5'10" Adam Smith out there alternating 1 and 2, with 3 other guards and a wing player. It still means size discrepancy and it made
The free throw disparity is not irrelevant, because it strengthens the argument that they had a size advantage. I'm not sure why you think this means nothing because we were up. We also had 3 players foul out because of it, and had several more on the verge of fouling out. For a team as thin as ours, that is hugely impacting.
Turnovers happen due to size in the fullcourt press exactly because it is difficult to dribble through and around length and athleticism -- both of which Syracuse has in spades and especially compared to us. Syracuse's 5 on average were 6'6" 1/2 and 210 pounds, against our 6'3" 1/2 and about 200 pounds. That's a significant difference whether you are willing to admit it or not. And it's incredibly stupid to think that going from a relatively soft zone (1-3-1) to a stifling, and aggressive one (the fullcourt press) is not going to allow that size to be even more advantageous.
We've given you about 5 examples of how Syracuse's height mattered and you've countered with nothing more than, "Well, I disagree, because [arbitrarily decides causal factors with no supporting argument]." Weak stuff. Every once and a while you should just admit when you're wrong to look like less of a tool. Have some humility for once.
I don't know how to do it, but if I could, I would post a clip from the SU game of one real good example where we have no players over 6'5" in the game and it shows Syracuse gently lobbing the ball over top of our defenders to an SU 6'9" player for an easy lay in. Like taking candy from a baby. I could also show him a clip of a player trying to inbound a pass over top of a much larger player, or a clip of a full court press from another game where the team being pressed has size and they break the press by a combination of inbounding to a 6'9" instead of a 6'2" player so he can't be trapped as easily in a double team and have a better line of sight for an outlet pass to a ball handler who has broken free. Maybe Kank would understand that if he could see it again on video replay but like I said, I don't know how to make one, I'm not that advanced in my software usage. Perhaps if someone who does know how and also understands the game can fix a clip up for Kank like that, it might help him understand that size is more than just the final stats for rebounds. It has a great deal to do with pretty much every facet of the game Kank, and if you don't have size against another team that does it causes you to have to play differently. That's one of the big reasons even in little league basketball they have the bigger kids play In a different league than the smaller kids.
I think they panicked. They are young ,they are still getting use to each other as a team with a new coach. I think they are better than they believe they are. If you lose a lot of games you are in til the end then you can also win those games. Give them time,they are alot better then I ever thought they would be this year. I have never been this impressed with a BB team that has such a poor record. Right now they could beat many teams they play.
So what if Syracuse lobbed the ball over us and got an easy lay in. Do you think we are the only team that has ever given up a lay up to Christmas? Even teams with lots of height give up lay ups to guys like Christmas. Do you really think if we had more size, Syracuse would never try to use a guy like Christmas to their advantage against us? By the way, we held Christmas, all 6'9" 250 lbs. of him, to 15 points, and no matter how easy you think things were for them, the bottom line is we were up 13 with 6 minutes left before we started turning the ball over.
You can show me all the clips you want, and I could just as easily counter with plenty of clips of guards, good, solid ball handling guards, that do not panic under pressure and handle a team's press with ease. Yes, I have seen examples where a team will use a guy with size to help on the press, but, as I said earlier, there are plenty of examples of teams who take a few big guys out late and insert another guard or two to handle a team's press. I took a look at VCU Saturday, and Richmond upset them because they had
a 5'10" guard who handled the ball well, and beat VCU's "havoc"
pressure pretty much by himself, and when he wasn't doing it, they had another small guard who did. I don't think I ever heard anyone say that Richmond would have done better against VCU's pressure with more size on the floor, and I don't think anyone will ever say size is the key to handling their pressure. And, VCU, who presses for a full 40 minutes, has a much better press than Syracuse. There is a reason why you will hear over and over again "solid guard play is the key to advancing in the NCAA tourney".
No need for all of your "would understand better" comments. I enjoy debating with you, but I enjoy it better when you don't lower yourself and act like a few classless others on here. Aren't we allowed to just disagree without turning it into something like this last post of yours?
I understand plenty. Yes, size helps in basketball, but so does protecting the basketball, and size is not always the answer for that. I agree that size has been an issue for us in earlier games, but I think you are missing what was obviously the problem for us against Syracuse. I find it amazing that you think more size would have been a cure all for protecting a late 13 point lead when we were the same team with the same height the first 35 minutes of the game, and it was our guards who turned it over late, the same guards that would be handling the ball even if we had more height.
Honestly, I don't know where you are coming up with some of these comments now. All I've said was this loss underscores our need for size and gave examples when you challenged my comment, and even try to illustrate them since I didn't think I was getting any of my points across as you continued to challenge my responses. I've never minimized or told you that you were wrong about any of the other contributing factors you brought up. I never said solid guard play and protecting the ball doesn't matter or that size was a "cure all". But size has been a problem all year, and if we had some we would have been better equipped to protect that lead down the stretch, also for which I have given examples of how, and perhaps have built an even bigger lead than 13, because Syracuse wasn't playing particularly well in that second half. I certainly don't think I said anything that could be construed as classless.
Sounds good, mrjolly. Thanks for clearing that up. I think this article and these comments sum up the loss pretty good:
http://www.roanoke.com/sports/colleges/va_tech/virginia-tech-men-s-basketball-players-say-they-panicked-in/article_52cf8701-64ad-5e30-ae9b-c80624a3f488.html
"We made dumb decisions and were not able to play smart at the most
important point," said Mueller, who had nine points and four turnovers.
"They didn't win because they
were better. They won because we were making stupid decisions - throwing
the ball away, giving them easy possessions."
The Hokies had six turnovers and no baskets in the final four minutes.
"Their pressure, it made us turn
the ball over. We panicked," said Adam Smith, who had 13 points and two
turnovers. "We've just got to stay patient. Those last four minutes,
they sped us up."
"They turned up the pressure, and we started to get rattled," said
Justin Bibbs, who had 19 points and five turnovers. "We need to get
tougher with the ball."
"They made so many mistakes that we had enough opportunities to get back [in the game]," Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim said.
"I don't think age has anything
to do with it," Williams said. "At some point, regardless of your age,
you have to grow up and realize what's the deal."
"We as a team have to start
growing up and maturing in those situations, not let anything take us
out of our rhythm," Mueller said.
http://www.roanoke.com/sports/colleges/va_tech/virginia-tech-men-s-basketball-players-say-they-panicked-in/article_52cf8701-64ad-5e30-ae9b-c80624a3f488.html
"We made dumb decisions and were not able to play smart at the most
important point," said Mueller, who had nine points and four turnovers.
"They didn't win because they
were better. They won because we were making stupid decisions - throwing
the ball away, giving them easy possessions."
The Hokies had six turnovers and no baskets in the final four minutes.
"Their pressure, it made us turn
the ball over. We panicked," said Adam Smith, who had 13 points and two
turnovers. "We've just got to stay patient. Those last four minutes,
they sped us up."
"They turned up the pressure, and we started to get rattled," said
Justin Bibbs, who had 19 points and five turnovers. "We need to get
tougher with the ball."
"They made so many mistakes that we had enough opportunities to get back [in the game]," Syracuse coach Jim Boeheim said.
"I don't think age has anything
to do with it," Williams said. "At some point, regardless of your age,
you have to grow up and realize what's the deal."
"We as a team have to start
growing up and maturing in those situations, not let anything take us
out of our rhythm," Mueller said.
I've seen what I had hoped to see this season - that Buzz's coaching would allow the team to compete rather than getting blown out in ACC play. Its been all I hoped for and more. I decided before the season there was no point to worry about wins this year because we are so outmanned. Next year when we get reinforcements, particularly if we add more front court depth with JUCO players, we'll start winning many of the one possession games we lost this year.
well, the one and done kind of limits them development-wise I would think but having that much talent stocked is pretty crazy....I just hope UVa gets a chance to beat them in the tourney. Gonzaga looks pretty good too. They hung tough with Zona in OT.
#1 UK is not all "one and dones" evident by a 10 man rotation of 1-junior, 5-Sophs and 4-Freshmen. Of the 4 freshmen, only 1 is a lock to "one and done" after this season (Towns). Kentucky hasnt been a true all "one and dones" in several seasons now.
#2 How do you develope a player who scouts have given a 5star rating on their skillset and physical build coming out of High School? While its true they can always improve (fine tune) their game, the window to notice improvement is much smaller than what most 3 and 4stars will be. The "developement" comes not so much in their game but in the form of weightroom and mentally adjusting to being a "team player" and not "the guy" like most were in High School...which might be even tougher to accomplish than developing their skillset. And besides, UK/Cal has sent a few players to the NBA who werent 5stars including Jorts, Miller and soon to be Cauley-Stein.
#2 How do you develope a player who scouts have given a 5star rating on their skillset and physical build coming out of High School? While its true they can always improve (fine tune) their game, the window to notice improvement is much smaller than what most 3 and 4stars will be. The "developement" comes not so much in their game but in the form of weightroom and mentally adjusting to being a "team player" and not "the guy" like most were in High School...which might be even tougher to accomplish than developing their skillset. And besides, UK/Cal has sent a few players to the NBA who werent 5stars including Jorts, Miller and soon to be Cauley-Stein.
I agree...as soon as the NCAA puts a chain and lock on the door at UNC, takes away Coach Ks wins for playing Magette after he recieved money from Pigee, strips Bama of their title for the team using banned performance enhancing deer antler spray, strips Auburn of their title for playing Cam Newton, takes a REAL look at Winston and FSU and then checks out whats really going on with Notre Dame, Syracuse, UCLA, USC, Tennessee and Lane Kiffen. Do all of that and I wouldnt mind one bit for them checking out the "crap" thats going on at UK.
bit of info...who was the NCAA investigator who got UK penalized last time? her name is Sandy Bell. How do you keep your program from committing future infractions? You hire Sandy Bell away from the NCAA...which is just what UK did. Even Coach Cal answers to Sandy Bell...UK will never get caught for violations as long as shes there so dream on.
