GDT: Battle for the Bronze Butt

[davidnark]

A couple of GDT's back Nark suggested Bartley be the starting point guard. I now very much agree. Him and Gillman can be something down the line.

There was a stretch in the 2nd half during which I believe we went about 10 minutes without a field goal. During this stretch, there were three consecutive offensive sets where McBroom had the ball on offense and missed the cutter or open man who would have had an easy look. In all 3 possessions, we effectively didn't get a shot off. Admittedly, he only had a second or two to pick up the open man or cutter, but this should be elementary for a point guard at this level. After Bartley subbed in for McBroom at point, we started moving the ball on offense and finding the open cutter (typically Tanner during this stretch).

I still think McBroom has value and should play a lot because he is our best offensive shooter. However, I would try to limit him to a true shooting guard roll where he is touching the ball off of screens, not trying to create offense with the ball. He, Ash, and Roby should be in a battle for minutes at the shooting guard spot.

I would start Bartley at point and try to give him as many minutes as possible because he is the only player who has the handles to run the point and excels at keeping his head up and finding the open guy. Reynolds should be his sole backup at point. It may be rough at times this year, but it cannot be worse than what we have seen and in a year or two it will pay huge dividends.

[MB73]

I just don't get it. With a young an inexperienced team that is a chance to coach them up. He called one time out and that was with less than 30 seconds left. No teaching opportunity before that?

Good title for your autobiography.

Please show us the statistical correlation between the number of time outs called and victories.

Did Coach Wooden write a book citing the advantages of number of time outs called?

What do you know about this?

I think some coaches do not want to stop the flow of the game, it is a strategic approach that some prefer.

How many things are you going to nit pick away to take shots at Crews? Does he eat his peas, one at a time?

[Cowboy]

How many things are you going to nit pick away to take shots at Crews? Does he eat his peas, one at a time?

-not sure but i have been told he eats a Snickers with a knife and fork

[bonwich]

Looks like you are in the minority opinion on this one as both Crews and more importantly RAMMER praised Maning as the player of the game.

Yeah, but Rammer/producer did NOT include Ash's late layup as one of the "plays of the game"; clearly their judgment was impeded as much as those refs'. (Maybe everyone's analytical and observation capabilities were affected by the 6 p.m. start. )

[SluSignGuy]

There was a stretch in the 2nd half during which I believe we went about 10 minutes without a field goal. During this stretch, there were three consecutive offensive sets where McBroom had the ball on offense and missed the cutter or open man who would have had an easy look. In all 3 possessions, we effectively didn't get a shot off. Admittedly, he only had a second or two to pick up the open man or cutter, but this should be elementary for a point guard at this level. After Bartley subbed in for McBroom at point, we started moving the ball on offense and finding the open cutter (typically Tanner during this stretch).

I still think McBroom has value and should play a lot because he is our best offensive shooter. However, I would try to limit him to a true shooting guard roll where he is touching the ball off of screens, not trying to create offense with the ball. He, Ash, and Roby should be in a battle for minutes at the shooting guard spot.

I would start Bartley at point and try to give him as many minutes as possible because he is the only player who has the handles to run the point and excels at keeping his head up and finding the open guy. Reynolds should be his sole backup at point. It may be rough at times this year, but it cannot be worse than what we have seen and in a year or two it will pay huge dividends.

I was actually surprised at how little McBroom played yesterday. I am not quite sure I want him coming off the bench yet, but I think he would be a very good option at a 1/2 with Bartley being the 1. This season is absolutely about learning, so let Bartley learn. I have also been very impressed by Gillman's court vision. Bartley and Gillman both made mistakes last night, but I see a lot of potential with both of them.

A large problem for this team seems to be fundamental positioning. Too many times, there is at least one player who doesn't quite seem to know where to be on defense. And the lack of boxing out has driven me nuts from Game 1. These are fixable problems. While there is a lot of doom and gloom amongst fans, we have a talented group of kids. They just need coaching.

[moytoy12]

While there is a lot of doom and gloom amongst fans, we have a talented group of kids. They just need coaching.

Steve is clearly a part of the anti-Crews group.

[SluSignGuy]

Steve is clearly a part of the anti-Crews group.

I will admit I was not a fan of the Crews hire. His lack of past success scared me. It, however, is very tough to argue against 2 NCAA 2nd round appearances and his recruiting classes. He has very much exceeded my expectations in recruiting so far. However, I want to see evidence of player development and coaching. I can think of few instances where was I very impressed by Crews coaching outside of the NC State game, and that makes it hard to tell how much credit Crews deserves for the last two years versus how much the players were continuing lessons of Majerus. I really do think he has brought in some talented players - and I have no idea what is going on in sideline discussions or practices - but I am nervous though that SLU will be like GW under Hobbs where the teams have talent but little direction. It, however, is very early, and I will be happy with moderate progression this year, but next year, we should be in a position to be in a post season tournament. Otherwise, I think it will become very hard for Crews to continue good recruiting.

I think there is actually a fairly large "anti-Crews" group. They have just been quiet on the board. For example, I always have been vocal about my Crews qualms off the board but less so on. I think with the teams recent stumbles, it becomes easier to vocalize dissent against Crews. This is not fully fair because this is the youngest Billiken team we will ever see. I think most of the Anti-Crews-Crew (the ACC) is willing to give this team some time to figure themselves out, and we will happily be proven wrong. No one wants the Billikens to fail, and I think Chris May has made a number of good hires. I just still need convincing for Crews.

[almaman]

I will admit I was not a fan of the Crews hire. His lack of past success scared me. It, however, is very tough to argue against 2 NCAA 2nd round appearances and his recruiting classes. He has very much exceeded my expectations in recruiting so far. However, I want to see evidence of player development and coaching. I can think of few instances where was I very impressed by Crews coaching outside of the NC State game, and that makes it hard to tell how much credit Crews deserves for the last two years versus how much the players were continuing lessons of Majerus. I really do think he has brought in some talented players - and I have no idea what is going on in sideline discussions or practices - but I am nervous though that SLU will be like GW under Hobbs where the teams have talent but little direction. It, however, is very early, and I will be happy with moderate progression this year, but next year, we should be in a position to be in a post season tournament. Otherwise, I think it will become very hard for Crews to continue good recruiting.

I think there is actually a fairly large "anti-Crews" group. They have just been quiet on the board. For example, I always have been vocal about my Crews qualms off the board but less so on. I think with the teams recent stumbles, it becomes easier to vocalize dissent against Crews. This is not fully fair because this is the youngest Billiken team we will ever see. I think most of the Anti-Crews-Crew (the ACC) is willing to give this team some time to figure themselves out, and we will happily be proven wrong. No one wants the Billikens to fail, and I think Chris May has made a number of good hires. I just still need convincing for Crews.

I don't think he will coach past 65 for his own reasons so unless we end up like the 5-23 team which i guess nowadays would be more like 6-25 I can't see any way we should not let him ride out this year's incoming 6 pack through graduation.