kmbilliken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 What really hurt us at Rhode Island was their zone defense. I've wondered all year why other teams didn't play more zone defense against us because it always gives us more trouble than man to man. Rick is a good coach and needs to come up with an answer or we may be seeing predominantly zones the rest of the way after Saturday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 What really hurt us at Rhode Island was their zone defense. I've wondered all year why other teams didn't play more zone defense against us because it always gives us more trouble than man to man. Rick is a good coach and needs to come up with an answer or we may be seeing predominantly zones the rest of the way after Saturday. He did. You beat a zone by moving the ball quickly to get in fron of or in the pockets of the zoned for open shots. By looking at the box score we just didn't make enough shots. Just needed one or two more makes and no one is p!ssing in their pants today. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 He did. You beat a zone by moving the ball quickly to get in fron of or in the pockets of the zoned for open shots. By looking at the box score we just didn't make enough shots. Just needed one or two more makes and no one is p!ssing in their pants today. Or Jett making his layups or jumpers. His jumpers were wide open and his layups were mostly uncontested. He was also accountable for 3 of the team's 6 turnovers, including 2 on back-to-back possessions. Just a bad game all-around for Jett. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Or Jett making his layups or jumpers. His jumpers were wide open and his layups were mostly uncontested. He was also accountable for 3 of the team's 6 turnovers, including 2 on back-to-back possessions. Just a bad game all-around for Jett. I was thinking the same thing this morning. A key player had a really tough game--JJ and Kyle C shot the ball poorly as well. The rest of the team did not shoot great so we lost. It shows how fragile even good teams are at this time of year if their key players do not play well. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Or Jett making his layups or jumpers. His jumpers were wide open and his layups were mostly uncontested. He was also accountable for 3 of the team's 6 turnovers, including 2 on back-to-back possessions. Just a bad game all-around for Jett. Agreed. I will say, he still plays solid D even when he is off on the other end. Was JJ in there on the last possession? I'd like to see JJ on the best dribble-drive guy that the other team has. I've been surprised at how much KM has been beaten off the dribble this year (although, he played the last play fairly well) as well DE. That foreign kid ate DE's lunch yesterday. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Easy to beat your man when you take a step or two extra Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moytoy12 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Easy to beat your man when you take a step or two extra the refs weren't great, but come on. Our guys and coaches cost us the game, not the refs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBall Fan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 He did. You beat a zone by moving the ball quickly to get in fron of or in the pockets of the zoned for open shots. By looking at the box score we just didn't make enough shots. Just needed one or two more makes and no one is p!ssing in their pants today. I agree Roy. We moved the ball crisply yesterday and got open looks but just didn't make enough of them. RI did a pretty good job of bunching the post and not allowing clean entry passes or any room to maneuver when we did get it inside. We had enough open looks to win the game but just didn't get it done yesterday. The one thing we didn't have was any of our guards getting to the basket like they always do. JJ missed all 7 shots including the layups he had and correct me if I am wrong, but I do not remember KM or MM getting to the basket at all yesterday. They are usually good for at least a layup or two per game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jbizzle09 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I agree Roy. We moved the ball crisply yesterday and got open looks but just didn't make enough of them. RI did a pretty good job of bunching the post and not allowing clean entry passes or any room to maneuver when we did get it inside. We had enough open looks to win the game but just didn't get it done yesterday. The one thing we didn't have was any of our guards getting to the basket like they always do. JJ missed all 7 shots including the layups he had and correct me if I am wrong, but I do not remember KM or MM getting to the basket at all yesterday. They are usually good for at least a layup or two per game. KM had 8 FG attempts. 7 were treys and the other one was just inside the three-point line, when he got an and 1. MM had 10 FG attempts, 8 from beyond the arc. His other two attempts were a missed layup early in the game and the missed jumper at the free throw line at the very end to tie. KM, in particular, never even tried to penetrate the defense. He seemed content with sitting on the perimeter and shooting from long distance. He didn't attempt a shot in the last 7 minutes. As I said in another thread, it seemed more to me like the team was just disinterested and thought they didn't need to play with intensity to win this game. It just seemed like they knew they were so much better than URI that going at 50% should still be enough to win. I guess they found out what happens when you do that and the other team plays hard the entire time. I suspect we won't see that same effort Tuesday night against X. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BBall Fan Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 KM had 8 FG attempts. 7 were treys and the other one was just inside the three-point line, when he got an and 1. MM had 10 FG attempts, 8 from beyond the arc. His other two attempts were a missed layup early in the game and the missed humper at the free throw line at the very end to tie. KM, in particular, never even tried to penetrate the defense. He seemed content with sitting on the perimeter and shooting from long distance. He didn't attempt a shot in the last 7 minutes. As I said in another thread, it seemed more to me like the team was just disinterested and thought they didn't need to play with intensity to win this game. It just seemed like they knew they were so much better than URI that going at 50% should still be enough to win. I guess they found out what happens when you do that and the other team plays hard the entire time. I suspect we won't see that same effort Tuesday night against X. Exactly......It was like we expected someone else to make a shot and RI to fold like a tent. First time all year that I have really gotten mad about a game. I was so upset with the effort that I was yelling at the TV. I think wife and kids were scared cause I don't usually get that riled up when watching on the tube. At the Fetz is a different story but at home, I try and keep my cool. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
BillikenFriar Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I was sitting behindn the SLU bench and twice following missed shots, Majerus said "we couldn't ask for a better shot.". The ball movement was quite good but we missed a lot of open shots late. I think the foul trouble also made us tentative on defense and URI was ale to get easier shots than we would normally expect. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I thought SLU relied too much on the 3 against the URI zone. The 3's kept SLU ahead almost the whole game, but the 3's stopped falling at crunch time. There is more to beating a zone than jacking up 3 pointers at shot clock expiration. I've posted this before and it may be a broken record by now: But as a former amateur CYO coach and mere mortal fan, I wish SLU had a zone defense as an alternative in its defensive arsenal to pull out against teams like URI yesterday, and earlier in the road game at UMass. URI was 1-10 on 3's. The generation above me would say that URI "couldn't hit the broad side of a barn." Its whole offense was clear out, dribble drive penetration. It started beating SLU off the dribble for layups and got to the free throw line, and hit mid-range shots. I thought yesterday's game not only cried out, but frankly screamed from 3,000 miles away, for a zone defense. SLU's man to man defense simply doesn't have Willie Reed, the shot blocker, for the last line of defense when SLU gets beaten off the dribble. Now when SLU gets beaten off the dribble, in these bad games, the result is an opponent basket, and/or a SLU foul. There's no way to sugar coat this bad loss. It sticks out like a sore thumb. As of early this morning, URI's RPI was 250. SLU had a double digit lead yesterday, but wasn't hustling, was getting beaten by URI offensive rebounds, was stagnant on offense, and at the end was running the infamous shot clock expiration offense. There's a difference between working for a good shot and running the shot clock expiration. The 2 guys with whom I was watching, one a Cal Bears supporter, the other a Domer from ND and Cal Dad, both thought SLU should have tried a 2 for 1 when SLU had the ball tied with 58 seconds left, as opposed to milking the shot clock, and jacking up a desperation 3 from 35 feet at shot clock expiration. I was surprised that Coach Majerus didn't call a timeout. The SLU offense was not in synch the last 2:38, when SLU failed to score, turning a 62-58 lead into a 64-62 loss. Quality control: How about a zone defense, not as the base defense, but as the alternative against certain teams? Seriously. I realize it may be too late, but how hard can it be to have a zone as a change of pace? It's not that hard to teach it, even on short notice. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 Yesterday's bad loss notwithstanding, I think SLU at this point is still in the NCAA Tournament. The problem is that non-BCS schools wear targets and a loss like yesterday gives fodder to the doubters who are looking for any type of evidence to exclude a non-BCS to place some pretender BCS school. There are still BCS pretenders that would not be in per the RPI: 57 Oregon (The O will get in, count on it.); 63 Miss. State; 68 LSU; 69 Ole Miss; 71 NC State; 72 Illinois (but even BCS gerrymandering probably can't overcome the Illini's late season total collapse); 73 Arizona; 75 Cincinnati. I think at least 3 from that list are going to get in. Also, right now I think 2 will get in from the Colonial: 59 VCU and 66 Drexel, one with the automatic bid, the other with an at large. So that's 4 variances from the RPI, meaning 4 that would be in will be out. The A-10 right now would have 4 in, but 51 St. Joe's and 52 Xavier are the 4th and 3rd teams in, and I see one of them not making the NCAA, maybe both. But first and foremost is SLU, and we now could very much use a SLU win over Xavier on Tuesday night at Chaifetz Arena. SLU by the numbers as of earlier this morning: RPI 36 (a drop of 13 from 23); 23rd of 37 at larges (a drop from the 13th of 37 at larges), Top 50: 1-2; 51-100: 5-2; 101-125: 4-1; 126-200: 4-0; 201 and above: 7-1; D-2 1-0. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bizziken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I was sitting behindn the SLU bench and twice following missed shots, Majerus said "we couldn't ask for a better shot.". The ball movement was quite good but we missed a lot of open shots late. I think the foul trouble also made us tentative on defense and URI was ale to get easier shots than we would normally expect. Exactly...we were getting great opportunities...When we started to go cold from the outside, I kept waiting for one of the guards to drive to the damn hoop on a few of those 'open shots'...off of the ball reversals the zone rotation was often late and our guards should have exploited that by getting their butts to the hoop instead of shooting bombs... Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I realize a problem with a zone defense is defensive rebounding. But SLU got killed on the boards yesterday anyway, 44-33. SLU allowed too many URI offensive rebounds, even with SLU playing its trademark man to man. Also, SLU plays basically the same motion offense and the same man to man defense. The opponents know what SLU is going to do on both ends. I think a few additions to the bases are in order. And the esteemed Jim Baron, a guy under fire to say the least, played that East Coast zone. Baron, whose URI team has now won 4 in a row against SLU, said SLU played so well against a man to man, that he figured a zone might work better. Tom Pecora's Fordham team played zone against SLU last week. But SLU worked the ball better and hustled much better against Fordham. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showthebill Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 A few things. SLU has a very good game plan against the zone. Many times throughout the season teams have tried playing one against us only for us to kill it. While watching the game though the biggest thing I took away from the game was a lack of offensive intensity. That does not fall on the shoulders of Rick. People keep saying why weren't plays run against the zone, but the key to breaking a zone is more of progression and placement on the floor rather than a specific play. SLU has always had good ball movement and continued to against Rhode Island, but some days you can tell the guys have that intensity factor and sometimes they don't. It was clear the effort wasn't there against LMU and it was very similar in this game too. Overall, the loss falls on the shoulders of the captains because they should've kept pushing the tempo a little bit and attack the zone more. I know for a fact Majerus did not just say pass the ball around the arc until the shot clock expires. However, after 30-35 minutes of yelling at the guys there's not a whole lot more you can say in the last 5 minutes. The players needed to step up and they didn't. In the future I would love for teams to zone us because I think it plays to our greatest strength which is having bigs who can shoot. As is often said teams live and die by the three, but if we get to the tourney and end up playing a high seed in the second round we better all hope they try and zone us. Those teams will definitely outplay us in a man-to-man but if they flash zone then I like our chances in hitting threes for one game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Bay Area Billiken Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 A few things. SLU has a very good game plan against the zone. Many times throughout the season teams have tried playing one against us only for us to kill it. While watching the game though the biggest thing I took away from the game was a lack of offensive intensity. That does not fall on the shoulders of Rick. People keep saying why weren't plays run against the zone, but the key to breaking a zone is more of progression and placement on the floor rather than a specific play. SLU has always had good ball movement and continued to against Rhode Island, but some days you can tell the guys have that intensity factor and sometimes they don't. It was clear the effort wasn't there against LMU and it was very similar in this game too. Overall, the loss falls on the shoulders of the captains because they should've kept pushing the tempo a little bit and attack the zone more. I know for a fact Majerus did not just say pass the ball around the arc until the shot clock expires. However, after 30-35 minutes of yelling at the guys there's not a whole lot more you can say in the last 5 minutes. The players needed to step up and they didn't. In the future I would love for teams to zone us because I think it plays to our greatest strength which is having bigs who can shoot. As is often said teams live and die by the three, but if we get to the tourney and end up playing a high seed in the second round we better all hope they try and zone us. Those teams will definitely outplay us in a man-to-man but if they flash zone then I like our chances in hitting threes for one game. I can't disagree. I said it at the time yesterday- SLU was playing like it did out here against LMU. Except LMU is a far better opponent than URI. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billboy1 Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 the refs weren't great, but come on. Our guys and coaches cost us the game, not the refs. To miss one or two calls is one thing but to consistently allow a team to get away with it is absurd. If one of our guards took an additional step or two they could have beat their man too Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
showthebill Posted February 26, 2012 Share Posted February 26, 2012 I can't disagree. I said it at the time yesterday- SLU was playing like it did out here against LMU. Except LMU is a far better opponent than URI. True, but LMU really exerted themselves at the end whereas we kind of just handed RI several opportunities to take the W from us. Taking that into consideration I think it was a very similar game. I'm a little baffled as to why our players were so sluggish... X game? NCAA tourney hopes? week of no games? Not really sure what to pin it onto Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Cowboy Posted February 27, 2012 Share Posted February 27, 2012 To miss one or two calls is one thing but to consistently allow a team to get away with it is absurd. If one of our guards took an additional step or two they could have beat their man too -do you post any comments other than the refs suck? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.