Game #16: @ Massachusetts - Saturday 2:30pm

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

TP, I agree with all of that. Terrell is an option too.

Jarvis is a major option, even if he's not a good shooter yet, because of his ability to find someone open.

He's not a ball hog.

When EC has the ball, the rest stand around, and aren't in good position to rebound either.

I realize things aren't going to change completely overnight, but Dan has to start mixing things up, or more games like yesterday's are likely to happen.

We are WAY too predictable toward the end of games, and everyone knows it.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

I don't mind EC taking the last shot, if someone else creates it for him. To have him with the ball 30-35 feet from the basket, with the ball, and asking him to beat an entire defense by himself, is unrealistic. That's not good basketball.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

78, dead on. Especially since EC is not a great ball handler.

Too many times, he gets stripped, travels, or puts up a bad shot.

The thing is too, nobody else moves to get open when he has it, so even if EC had good court vision, who is he going to pass it to?

The Dude · Unread post by **The Dude** » 9 years ago

I think Terrell would be the guy besides EC that you would try to go to at the end of a game. He has the confidence. Now he just needs to work on the consistency and he could easily be the third big scoring threat on this team by the end of the year (as a Freshman non the less). Plus, he is built like a rock. He's not someone you can knock off the ball very easily.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

Last year against St. Joe's and PC, he didn't even hit the rim with
his last shot.
Definition of insanity is, repeating the same thing over and over,
and expecting a different result.
Not happening.
TP, I think what Rambone was saying is, let Garrett create some open shots
for teammates. He can get into the lane with relative ease and I'm impressed with his
passing, once he gets inside.
EC and that shoulder high dribble is an invitation to take the ball away from him,
which frequently happens.
Terrell also has a better chance of holding on to the ball after getting it,
and if he doesn't make the shot, maybe he gets fouled?

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

I'm super impressed with Jarvis overall, but when you are in an end-game situation, ideally the guy with the ball in his hands is a threat to score.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

We have to have multiple scoring options late in games.

Too often it deteriorates into one-on-one hero ball. Mostly by one guy.

Except in our case, it's ZERO ball.

It's been mentioned on the A10 board, by many others, including other teams' posters.

Our entire offense changes in the last 5 minutes. No more sharing the basketball. Too much standing around, which results in our inability to get crucial defensive rebounds. No more attacking the basket, which is the only way we score anyway.

I would think it's easy coaching against us late in games. Just wait for it...and there it is!

Even crappy X's and O's coaches like Pecora and Kellogg look good against us late in games. It's gotten embarrassing.

The Dude · Unread post by **The Dude** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:78, dead on. Especially since EC is not a great ball handler.

Too many times, he gets stripped, travels, or puts up a bad shot.

The thing is too, nobody else moves to get open when he has it, so even if EC had good court vision, who is he going to pass it to?

YES...EXACTLY. People hardly move at times when EC has the ball as well. They all need to get on the same page. If EC drives to the basket, someone needs to cut back door and another needs to move to the arc where there is a passing lane/gap between players in case he wants to kick it back out. All of these guys need to get a better understanding of one another. I have seen some improvement between EC and Has over the season. Those two guys seem to get one another. I don't know how they play in practice but it may be a good idea for Dan to do some scrimmages that mix up the player combinations and force different guys to work better together (if they don't do that already).
Typically in soccer you see guys standing around when the other players don't know what the guy with the ball is going to do with it. You don't want to make a run one way or another and waste your energy running in a certain direction, only to have to run back again when you don't get the ball, unless you feel the guy with the ball is looking in your direction or you feel some connection/understanding with the person with the ball and with what is about to happen. In my opinion, it would be a good idea for the guys to start talking with one another a little more (if not already) about where they'd like each other to be at certain times on the floor so a nice chemistry and trust starts to build. It's one thing for a coach to tell them, but play can be even better when players really gel with one another and finally figure things out amongst themselves.

Just two days ago I had a kid come up to me in Tootell West when we were playing basketball and said he really appreciated that I always seem to be in the right/open spot for him. Now the point I'm making has nothing to do with me and everything to do with the fact that no matter what sport a person plays, it comes down to trust and having a mental understanding of how each other likes to do things. Movement off of the ball (without the ball) is just as, if not more important than when a person has the ball.
I have faith in Dan and the players. I'm sure they'll continue to get better.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

One thing I'm a little surprised at...no comments yet from Blue Man...

Maybe it's better that he doesn't.....

Tom98 · Unread post by **Tom98** » 9 years ago

First and foremost we need to avoid last minute shots. As "Ramster" mentioned earlier, we have to ride our core starters more. We can't pull them out of the game with early fouls... we don't have VCU's depth. We have depth but not enough talent to have someone like Martin sit 15 minutes of the first half. The last 2 games, Martin has sat extended minutes because of early fouls and we have lost good leads. I would rather see him foul out late in the 2nd half as others have stated. Dan should realize by now that Martin plays at a mature level and knows how to avoid fouls. I don't know what to do about Gil. He just can't avoid getting in foul trouble. He always, I mean always falls for the shot fake and leaves his feet and the offensive player draws the contact. He also usually commits a couple of reach around fouls per game in attempt to try and steal the ball. He has talent as we all know but can't play any type of complete game. Makes a great offensive play then will get 2 bad fouls...then make a great play and then misses 4 free throws. Absolutely bazaar and frustrating. We need him to play to his ability but I'm starting to beleive it just isn't going to happen with him. I still have confidence in this team. We need a shooter and that 5 spot between Gil and Earl needs to be figured out. I would give Gil a couple more games and if he doesn't start to play on a consistent level we have to go with Earl for some extended minutes.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote: Even crappy X's and O's coaches like Pecora and Kellogg look good against us late in games. It's gotten embarrassing.

What part of Kellogg's late game coaching was so impressive? His "have a freshman who averages 2 points a game throw up shots at the end of the shot clock and somehow make them all." There was plenty to be upset about with yesterday's game, there is no need to make up additional stuff just to find more reasons to be mad.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

I'm not saying anything they did was impressive, but in Kellogg's case his team won a close game, which they usually aren't good at this season [without Chaz].

It's what we DIDN'T do that cost us the game.

A blind man could set up their defense against us, once we go to hero ball. Just focus on EC, and you'll win.

BTW, the shots that kid hit were lucky for sure, but we still had plenty of chances to win that game after that.

Once the game became more or less even, our odds of winning dropped dramatically. How many games do we win, when it's a 1 or 2 pt. game, with less than 2 to play? Not many.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

You said Pecora and Kellogg looked good, but also that you're not saying they were impressive. Huh? Also, before the last two games, we had won the previous two in close-and-late situations. The Duquesne win came when we took our first lead (since the very beginning of the game) with about 8 seconds left. We beat Nebraska in OT.

Obviously we have some work to do in those situations, but to make it seem like we just fold up the tents every time is wrong.

ElmCityRhody · Unread post by **ElmCityRhody** » 9 years ago

Completely pissed after that game

CLANG goes another free throw

PRACTICE EFFIN FT'S..

we put ourselves in these situations we shouldn't be in

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

We do practice free throws. So what else do you suggest?

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

I think this team and the staff consistently do things you have to question. Like going into the half they didn't try to go 2 for 1 or really any direction.

We had the lead the whole 1st half and then let them tie the game at the end of it.

Played the 2nd half up 2 most of the game and then let them pull away.

There really is a huge difference a great coach can make. Like Bill Self or one of these guys.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

ALSO as far as their red shirt freshman coming in and killing us(which didn't really matter because the guy he replaced was killing us).

BASKETBALL PLAYERS HIT JUMPSHOTS.

This must be one of the worst shooting teams uri has ever had. For some reason these guys choke at the free throw line. Choke in important moments. Blah blah losing to UMASS sucks.

Shinze88 · Unread post by **Shinze88** » 9 years ago

Curious if anyone has ever heard any reasoning as to why we never play zone defense? Has this come up at any of the Hurley Coaches show? This is really my biggest criticism of our coaching staff. I don't think I've ever seen another Division 1 team who at least doesn't mix in a zone at some point in the game. Our aggressive style of defense often puts us in foul trouble but yet we still dont protect our front court players with a zone. Minnis is often guilty of letting his man blow by him causing one of our bigs to pick up a foul with help defense. It just doesn't make sense to not give teams a different look on defense. I know our defensive statistics are good, but the benefits of zone are not always reflect in the numbers.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Zone is not part of Dan's basketball philosophy. Being a man-to-man team is part of its identity.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Maybe it's because if we played zone it would hurt our aggressiveness on defense?

We did try it some against Kansas, and of course they made everything.

I think it would do more harm than good.

If we had more frontcourt depth, then our man D would be fine.

If's, if's, and more if's........

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 9 years ago

Last year Gil shot 67% on his free throws--this year he is down to 52%. Hard to believe that much of a negative move is possible.
I am not saying that TJ is expected to play a great game every time. Based on his line score yesterday he was almost invisible and there is no way he should be taking the ball up court with 14 seconds left in the game. He is no threat to make a 3 under those circumstances. Having JG take the ball up as quickly as possible would probably cause the defense to move around a little and maybe result in more of an open shot.

eli#10 · Unread post by **eli#10** » 9 years ago

P.S. Other than Gil the team shot 75% which is more than acceptable.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Like I've said before, Dan is going to be forced to make changes to his late game strategy, as to who is playing in crunch time, and who handles the ball.

Some are just not cutting it. Dan's loyalty to his seniors, TJ and Gil, is being tested.

Will be interesting to hear DiSano's take on things. I know he likes Dan, but he's also honest with his observations.

He can't be happy with what he saw, same as us.

It's time to let the team sink or swim with the freshmen.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

Shinze88 wrote:Curious if anyone has ever heard any reasoning as to why we never play zone defense? Has this come up at any of the Hurley Coaches show? This is really my biggest criticism of our coaching staff. I don't think I've ever seen another Division 1 team who at least doesn't mix in a zone at some point in the game. Our aggressive style of defense often puts us in foul trouble but yet we still dont protect our front court players with a zone. Minnis is often guilty of letting his man blow by him causing one of our bigs to pick up a foul with help defense. It just doesn't make sense to not give teams a different look on defense. I know our defensive statistics are good, but the benefits of zone are not always reflect in the numbers.

Defense is pretty much the only positive thing about this team and people continue to want to change it. Baffling.

Give them a different look from the one that is ranked 28th in the country in adjusted defensive efficiency? A different look than the one that is 24th in the country in points against per game?

I know you said you are aware of the numbers, but why change the one thing that's actually working on an every game basis? So we can give them a look that doesn't work instead? I guess then at least people wouldn't be worried about the close losses anymore, because we'd be getting blown out instead.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

I agree with you on that for sure Adam.

Our D keeps us in every game. Now if any semblance of an offense can show up late in games, we might be on to something.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:I agree with you on that for sure Adam.

Our D keeps us in every game. Now if any semblance of an offense can show up late in games, we might be on to something.

Exactly. I get everyone being frustrated and looking for what needs to be fixed. But I am very confident that the defense is not one of those things.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

I think where zone would be helpful is in specific situations where you are protecting a guy in foul trouble or you are specifically trying to limit an offensive rebound opportunity, and on in-bounds plays. It would be crazy for this team to deploy zone for long stretches. They are built to play man-to-man. But it would be good to at least have it in your back pocket for a possession or two when it could benefit you. I believe in situational preparedness and not just stubbornly "doing what you do." That is my philosophy, but I am not the coach.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

TP, it might work by shocking the other team for a minute or two.

What is serious though, is that we seem to react to what the opponent does, far more than making them react to what WE do.

We're on the defensive too much. A few new wrinkles, new looks would help in certain situations.

Especially in terms of late game strategy. Our "strategy" right now consists of, give the ball to EC, and stand around watching him.

That, and having guys in the game late that don't belong in there. We only have a few guys that can score. They need to play the last 5 minutes, come hell or high water.

Shinze88 · Unread post by **Shinze88** » 9 years ago

adam914 wrote:
Shinze88 wrote:Curious if anyone has ever heard any reasoning as to why we never play zone defense? Has this come up at any of the Hurley Coaches show? This is really my biggest criticism of our coaching staff. I don't think I've ever seen another Division 1 team who at least doesn't mix in a zone at some point in the game. Our aggressive style of defense often puts us in foul trouble but yet we still dont protect our front court players with a zone. Minnis is often guilty of letting his man blow by him causing one of our bigs to pick up a foul with help defense. It just doesn't make sense to not give teams a different look on defense. I know our defensive statistics are good, but the benefits of zone are not always reflect in the numbers.
Defense is pretty much the only positive thing about this team and people continue to want to change it. Baffling.

Give them a different look from the one that is ranked 28th in the country in adjusted defensive efficiency? A different look than the one that is 24th in the country in points against per game?

I know you said you are aware of the numbers, but why change the one thing that's actually working on an every game basis? So we can give them a look that doesn't work instead? I guess then at least people wouldn't be worried about the close losses anymore, because we'd be getting blown out instead.

Sorry, I'm not a big fan of statistics, especially on defense. I only need to watch the games to see whats going on. While I think our defense is without a doubt our strength, we've been unable to make stops at crucial times in our losses to GT, Prov, VCU & UMass due to the inability to stop dribble penetration. Is there a defensive stat for how many minutes Gil or Hass has to sit down because of foul trouble due to our guards unable to stop dribble penetration? Is there a stat for how quickly into the half our opponent is shooting 1:1's ? I'm not saying we'd be undefeated if we threw in a zone for a few possessions, but we should at least be capable of showing a zone to poor perimeter teams (like UMass). I haven't seen a college game all year where a team played man the entire game, i'm sure its easier to prepare for a team when you know you'll only see 1 defense.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

TruePoint wrote:I think where zone would be helpful is in specific situations where you are protecting a guy in foul trouble or you are specifically trying to limit an offensive rebound opportunity, and on in-bounds plays. It would be crazy for this team to deploy zone for long stretches. They are built to play man-to-man. But it would be good to at least have it in your back pocket for a possession or two when it could benefit you. I believe in situational preparedness and not just stubbornly "doing what you do." That is my philosophy, but I am not the coach.

See this is interesting to me, because I would use offensive rebounding as a reason to NOT play more zone. With our lack of size, I actually think rebounding would be negatively affected by going zone. In man to man there are clear box out assignments, but that is not the case when in a zone and could lead to rebounding issues for an undersized team. Lalanne had 10 boards yesterday, but he might have had 25 if we played zone in my opinion.

I don't however disagree with at least having it in your back pocket for very very obvious situations. I just think they are very few and far between. Maybe some kind of matchup zone could work more than a straight zone.

You know where I would like to see more of a zone. On a full court press. Maybe the depth issues would be magnified if they did it too much, but I love a trapping 2-2-1 or 1-2-1-1 full court zone press that then drops into a man-to-man.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

Shinze88 wrote: I haven't seen a college game all year where a team played man the entire game, i'm sure its easier to prepare for a team when you know you'll only see 1 defense.

You lost me here for sure, cause I promise you there have been hundreds of them.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

It depends on the situation, right? If the offense is spreading you out and taking your rebounders away from the basket, that would be a place where everyone guarding an area of the floor would help you rebound. I'm definitely not an advocate for playing a ton more zone, so I don't want to argue the point too much.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

It does make sense what you're saying.

Opponents zone us because we can't shoot. We should return the favor to them if they're not good from 3 either.

And it might keep our bigs out of foul trouble more often. Especially since we rely so much on ONE big, Hassan.

It's all very logical. You should ask Dan.

Good luck.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

TruePoint wrote:It depends on the situation, right? If the offense is spreading you out and taking your rebounders away from the basket, that would be a place where everyone guarding an area of the floor would help you rebound. I'm definitely not an advocate for playing a ton more zone, so I don't want to argue the point too much.

Yeah I hear ya, I get you aren't saying we should become Syracuse out there or something, the rebounding point was just what caught my attention because I had already been thinking about that.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

The bottom line in all this [good] discussion, really boils down to the fact that this team, as presently constituted, doesn't have enough quality depth to implement whatever system is best for us.

Defensively, OR offensively, which is even more obvious.

Dan boasted before the season, that we finally had the pieces necessary to play the way he wanted to.

How did that work out for us? Of course, there was one piece we lost, which didn't help, and I won't mention his name.

Did the loss of one player really change things that much?

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

rambone 78 wrote:The bottom line in all this [good] discussion, really boils down to the fact that this team, as presently constituted, doesn't have enough quality depth to implement whatever system is best for us.

Defensively, OR offensively, which is even more obvious.

Dan boasted before the season, that we finally had the pieces necessary to play the way he wanted to.

How did that work out for us? Of course, there was one piece we lost, which didn't help, and I won't mention his name.

Did the loss of one player really change things that much?

Honestly, in the frontcourt, I really think it did. I know that may not be a popular answer, but I do believe it.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

It did if the kid would have been good.

Many conflicting opinions on how good he might have been.

Some think he would have put us in the Dance, this season.

Some think he would played 5 minutes a game, if that.

I think Dan even said that, but supposedly he was good in the scrimmages leading up to the season.

I tend to think somewhere in the middle of all of it. Some more depth at least.

Oh well, time to move on, again......

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

If it makes anyone feel better,
John Wooden and Bob Knight never played zone.

Unread post by **TruePoint** » 9 years ago

Yup. Man-to-man is definitely the traditional, old-school way to play. The game has changed a lot, though. I still think that with our personnel we are designed to play man almost exclusively.

Running Ram · Unread post by **Running Ram** » 9 years ago

Here's what I think about players not moving when EC has the ball with time ticking away, I trust some of us here have been on a team where they are not the "scorer", it happens, I think, to become born out of habit, not spitefully or even maybe not consciously. Players just know who is going to shoot the last shot and that's it, maybe they relax a little and get caught flat-footed/watching or maybe they do tighten up because of the pressure and lack of experience handling the ball in that situation because it doesn't happen as much as it could. Or maybe it is slightly out of spite, like myself in those situations, I'd roll my eyes and think here we go again, of course that was high school, cyo and intramurals, I'd like to think at the D1 level we could see some improvement in this area.

Gonebarongone · Unread post by **Gonebarongone** » 9 years ago

Running Ram wrote:Here's what I think about players not moving when EC has the ball with time ticking away, I trust some of us here have been on a team where they are not the "scorer", it happens, I think, to become born out of habit, not spitefully or even maybe not consciously. Players just know who is going to shoot the last shot and that's it, maybe they relax a little and get caught flat-footed/watching or maybe they do tighten up because of the pressure and lack of experience handling the ball in that situation because it doesn't happen as much as it could. Or maybe it is slightly out of spite, like myself in those situations, I'd roll my eyes and think here we go again, of course that was high school, cyo and intramurals, I'd like to think at the D1 level we could see some improvement in this area.

Well, frankly, that's on the coach if that's true. Although, I don't think it is. What is on this coach is following the epidemic of coaches putting their best player up top and running high ball screens and hoping the alpha dog comes through. I have no problem with EC taking the final shot but it has to come in a better spot. It's so counterintuitive. If this was your best way to score, why aren't you running it all game then? I don't know why coaches do it. Maybe to deflect criticism? "Our best player had the ball in his hands with a chance to win (tie)...coachspeak coachspeak drivel drivel" This is not atypical among coaches. They all do it. Hurley did the same thing with X with (marginally) better results, which is saying something. The funny thing is the increased focus on EC means less on the rest of the guys which should make for better shots. I was watching the end of the BC/Harvard game the other night. BC was down two and Hanlan had the ball with 10-20 seconds left. Hanlan is very much like EC. Harvard thought he was taking the last shot. Christian runs one of the guards (Aaron Brown, ironically, who I thought might come to Rhody last summer) off a weak side screen down to the post because he had a mismatch. Hanlan gave it up to some guy who then made a perfect entry pass for an easy layup. Defense was overplaying so didn't have time to rotate to the two passes. I preface this by saying I have no idea if Christian is a good coach or what he usually does there. But, it was nice to see a coach take advantage of an overplay and a mismatch in a critical spot. I don't blame EC. He is doing exactly what he is told.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

Most teams play zone when defending an out of bounds play under their own basket, because it's hard to keep track of both your man and the ball in that situation, especially when the other team is setting picks on that play. We don't even play zone in those situations.

adam914 · Unread post by **adam914** » 9 years ago

Billyboy78 wrote:Most teams play zone when defending an out of bounds play under their own basket, because it's hard to keep track of both your man and the ball in that situation, especially when the other team is setting picks on that play. We don't even play zone in those situations.

Have we been getting killed on out of bounds plays? I honestly don't remember, but nothing sticks out to me where I remember thinking damn they keep getting us in these out of bounds plays. If it ain't broke...

ramster · Unread post by **ramster** » 9 years ago

Tom98 wrote:First and foremost we need to avoid last minute shots. As "Ramster" mentioned earlier, we have to ride our core starters more. We can't pull them out of the game with early fouls... we don't have VCU's depth. We have depth but not enough talent to have someone like Martin sit 15 minutes of the first half. The last 2 games, Martin has sat extended minutes because of early fouls and we have lost good leads. I would rather see him foul out late in the 2nd half as others have stated. Dan should realize by now that Martin plays at a mature level and knows how to avoid fouls. I don't know what to do about Gil. He just can't avoid getting in foul trouble. He always, I mean always falls for the shot fake and leaves his feet and the offensive player draws the contact. He also usually commits a couple of reach around fouls per game in attempt to try and steal the ball. He has talent as we all know but can't play any type of complete game. Makes a great offensive play then will get 2 bad fouls...then make a great play and then misses 4 free throws. Absolutely bazaar and frustrating. We need him to play to his ability but I'm starting to beleive it just isn't going to happen with him. I still have confidence in this team. We need a shooter and that 5 spot between Gil and Earl needs to be figured out. I would give Gil a couple more games and if he doesn't start to play on a consistent level we have to go with Earl for some extended minutes.

Tom,
At about the 15 minute mark Hurley took out Terrell and Garrett and subbed TJ and Minnis. URI was up 13-7 after having converted their first 6 shots and looking very good - especially noteworthy since we usually get off to not so great starts.
About 15 seconds later Hassan Martin picked up his 2nd foul and Hurley subbed Reischel for him.

Hurley sat out Martin the entire rest of the 1st half - and Martin finished the game with the same 2 fouls. Lot's of potential playing time was left on the table for Martin unfortunately.

As you said, Biruta is a much different player than Martin. Biruta picks up a lot of fouls, many are silly, unnecessary fouls. Watson also picks up fouls at a fast rate but not the silly fouls that Biruta picks up.

In the 2nd half Martin still played tough defense blocking shots, altering shots, holding his position even though UMASS was clearing going at him trying to get him to foul - but he didn't.

Fact is that Martin is not only our best big man by far (and I would not trade him for ANY big man in the Atlantic 10), there is a humongous drop off from Martin to Reischel. Reischel does not block shots, rebound well or defend near as well as Martin. Just the way it is. So the replacement of Martin for Reischel for 15 minutes in the first half was a lost opportunity.

Hurley should go for the kill when he has the chance, no need to play conservatively. So what if Martin fouls out,all of the minutes of the game are important. URI could have had this game not even matter in the last 2 minutes if we had put UMASS away early and our first 5 minutes were our best start of the year.

Martin is too important to this team - we can't afford to have him sit on the bench if we truly want to be in the top 3 of this League.

rodfromcranston · Unread post by **rodfromcranston** » 9 years ago

This was two straight games where Dan went five guard when
Hassan went out.
I'm not a coach, but any of us can see, Reischel can't guard an Esho or
Lalanne. Plus, he can't set picks for shooters.
This was foolhardy, and went against conventional basketball; wisdom.
It was also the turning point in the VCU game.
If Martin goes out, I want to see at least Gil, Watson or Oneykaba,
and never Reischel.
Just a bad move. I hope Dan has learned his lesson, but he seems to have a stubborn
streak in him.
He has three more viable options at the 5, than Reischel and his weak hands.

Billyboy78 · Unread post by **Billyboy78** » 9 years ago

adam914 wrote:
Billyboy78 wrote:Most teams play zone when defending an out of bounds play under their own basket, because it's hard to keep track of both your man and the ball in that situation, especially when the other team is setting picks on that play. We don't even play zone in those situations.
Have we been getting killed on out of bounds plays? I honestly don't remember, but nothing sticks out to me where I remember thinking damn they keep getting us in these out of bounds plays. If it ain't broke...

No, I'm just pointing out that even in situations that most coaches use zone, Dan does not. It's not his style. I agree, the defense has been very good. But I also think it could be used occasionally. I want my best players in the majority of minutes. A zone can be used to let the guards catch their breath and to allow a big to stay in the game when he has a foul situation, besides occasionally giving the other team a different look. I'm just old school, I guess. The game has changed.

Seawrightspostgame · Unread post by **Seawrightspostgame** » 9 years ago

Seriously 5 guards!!!

That is glaring.

The team is in danger of a 3 game slide here.

To me basketball players are too close to the trees and mentally they get in and out of zones of good play or bad.

I think it is the coaches job to keep them playing to their ability and focused on winning.

For what its worth coach K has started to zone in order to hide his guards inability to defend penetration.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Our guards aren't good at defending dribble penetration either. But it continues....

Makes you wonder if we have too many stupid players that don't know how to play a zone. I think it's just that the coach refuses to play one. But I digress.

Our problem, isn't just the last minute or two, where we're holding for a last shot or whatever. Our problems start several minutes before that, when our entire offense goes stagnant all of a sudden.

That why we can't hold a lead. We lose the lead from say, the 5 minute mark to the 2 minute mark, and then once the game is about even, we're toast at the end.

How many games have we won that way lately? Forget the Fordham game, they were even worse than we were. The Duquesne game, we got lucky one of their players couldn't hit a bunny at the very end.

We could be VERY EASILY on a 4 game losing streak, folks. It's not just the last 2 games where we've had problems. Nothing's changed from last year in that regard.

RAM67 · Unread post by **RAM67** » 9 years ago

We could VERY EASILY be on a 4 game win streak. This negativity is getting beyond absurd.

rambone 78 · Unread post by **rambone 78** » 9 years ago

Have you watched the last 5 minutes of our games lately?

We VERY EASILY stink. Stank. Stunk.

Start playing better. Win a few. Then the negativity will stop.