TheChosenOne Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 This seems needlessly pessimistic. Dayton is a top 20 RPI team who was averaging 70 points a game and we held them to 61 on their own court. Some of that was them missing open threes, but some of it was also pretty good defense. Well, we are a bad team, so call it what you want. I never said we didn't play solid defense, I just said that the game likely would have been out of hand early had Dayton made a decent percentage of their wide open 3s. That would have been based on our offense being absolutely pathetic. Had we not shot the 3 ball well in the 1st half, it would have been even uglier. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Well, we are a bad team, so call it what you want. I never said we didn't play solid defense, I just said that the game likely would have been out of hand early had Dayton made a decent percentage of their wide open 3s. That would have been based on our offense being absolutely pathetic. Had we not shot the 3 ball well in the 1st half, it would have been even uglier. If they made all their shots and if we made none of ours the score would have been even worse. They didn't make theirs we made ours, what's the point? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 If they made all their shots and if we made none of ours the score would have been even worse. They didn't make theirs we made ours, what's the point? That is not really what I am saying nor do I really have a point. I saw some posters saying that had we only shot decent from the free throw line the game would have gone down to the wire. Alternatively, had Dayton made a decent % of their wide open 3s (which I would assume they typically do as they appear to be capable shooters) in the 1st half, the game would have been a blowout early. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 The defense wasn't bad, but it had more to do with forcing a slower game pace on them. Dayton has played much, much more uptempo this season than what we saw yesterday. As the first half wound down, it was nearly silent in the building as we chipped away at their lead by stopping transition and forcing them to burn shot clock. They went on a couple runs in the second half that looked more like their style this season. Points in transition, getting forwards alone under the basket. That's kind of the problem I have with trying to control the game from a pacing standpoint. It's nearly impossible to sustain for 40 minutes. Totally agree. It reminded me a lot of the Louisville tournament game last year, for all the reasons you describe. But you don't have to control the tempo for a full 40 minutes in order to win. A team like Dayton is going to go on a run like the one we saw in the middle of the second half. Unfortunately our offense was bad, which meant we didn't have a lead before they went on their run and we had no hope of keeping up once they did. Again, a lot like Louisville last year. But for the first 30 minutes, we were in the Dayton game, and unlike the GW game you can't chalk it up to us getting lucky and shooting over our heads. So it seems needlessly pessimistic to me to call it "a pretty terrible effort from start to finish." Seems like trying to have it both ways to point out how bad the team is this year and then also call the effort terrible in a game like that. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Well, we are a bad team, so call it what you want. I never said we didn't play solid defense, I just said that the game likely would have been out of hand early had Dayton made a decent percentage of their wide open 3s. That would have been based on our offense being absolutely pathetic. Had we not shot the 3 ball well in the 1st half, it would have been even uglier. Shot it well for a few minutes in the first half. We didn't score at all for the first 6 minutes of the half, so to cut the lead to 5 at the half and then tie the game early in the 2nd seems like a pretty good effort after that start. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Shot it well for a few minutes in the first half. We didn't score at all for the first 6 minutes of the half, so to cut the lead to 5 at the half and then tie the game early in the 2nd seems like a pretty good effort after that start. Totally agree. It reminded me a lot of the Louisville tournament game last year, for all the reasons you describe. But you don't have to control the tempo for a full 40 minutes in order to win. A team like Dayton is going to go on a run like the one we saw in the middle of the second half. Unfortunately our offense was bad, which meant we didn't have a lead before they went on their run and we had no hope of keeping up once they did. Again, a lot like Louisville last year. But for the first 30 minutes, we were in the Dayton game, and unlike the GW game you can't chalk it up to us getting lucky and shooting over our heads. So it seems needlessly pessimistic to me to call it "a pretty terrible effort from start to finish." Seems like trying to have it both ways to point out how bad the team is this year and then also call the effort terrible in a game like that. It doesn't really matter what you want to call it. I thought we played well defensively (while fortunate they missed a number of wide open 3s) and horrible on offense. I don't get your last sentence, but I don't really care. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 That is not really what I am saying nor do I really have a point. I saw some posters saying that had we only shot decent from the free throw line the game would have gone down to the wire. Alternatively, had Dayton made a decent % of their wide open 3s (which I would assume they typically do as they appear to be capable shooters) in the 1st half, the game would have been a blowout early. No doubt. What if's are silly, but I'd agree with you. On the other hand since they did miss, had you done what most teams over the age of 10 can do, the game might have been closer. I doubt us making 5-7 more free throws though would have changed the outcome Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 It doesn't really matter what you want to call it. I thought we played well defensively (while fortunate they missed a number of wide open 3s) and horrible on offense. I don't get your last sentence, but I don't really care. It means I don't really get what you mean by "terrible effort" when a bad team loses to a very good team on their own court. When the final result is what everyone expected I would chalk the outcome up to talent/ability more than effort. But I suppose I don't really care that much either. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 It means I don't really get what you mean by "terrible effort" when a bad team loses to a very good team on their own court. When the final result is what everyone expected I would chalk the outcome up to talent more than effort. But I suppose I don't really care that much either. Sorry for being overly negative and using the term terrible as opposed to unbalanced and that was not how I meant to use the term effort. So to clarify, I thought we played terrible offensively, solid defensively, and the effort level was fine. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TheChosenOne Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 No doubt. What if's are silly, but I'd agree with you. On the other hand since they did miss, had you done what most teams over the age of 10 can do, the game might have been closer. I doubt us making 5-7 more free throws though would have changed the outcome I was just presenting the counter argument, but it was unnecessary and came across as piling on. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 TheChosenOne is correct; Dayton missing a number of wide open 3's in the first half was hugely beneficial. Every time the crowd seemed ready to get into it, they'd miss again. They left a lot of points on the table in the first half. Credit to our defense and control of the pace for keeping us in it, but that fact can't be denied. Our FT shooting was obviously poor but we haven't been able to count on it all season and made less of a difference in terms of raw points than their poor perimeter shooting. Most of those misses were uncontested. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 A few of the looks in the first half were wide open, but not nearly as many as our defense has typically allowed this season. And the missed free throws were just embarrassing. They weren't the reason we lost, or why it became a blowout late. I never thought the Dayton fans were all that into it, except for when Sibert and Pollard went on that run late in the second half. The ones near me did have a lot of fun talking trash on Jolly all day, though. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Both the missed open threes by Dayton and missed FTs by SLU were factors. Neither were the lone factor in this loss. Having been at the game, though, I will say that had UD made even just one or two of those open looks in the first half, it would've been a much different game. The blood loss would've started much earlier for us. Our control of the pace combined with their sluggish offense for most of the first half really kept us in it, and kept the arena quiet. The thing that scares me about this team is that there's nothing they do particularly well. Even our worst teams have had specialties - 3 point defense, low turnover rates, things like that. This team, even though it will end up with a better record than Soderberg's 2004-2005 squad or Majerus' 2010-2011 team, is just well below average to very poor in every measurable category. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 The fact that we only shot 15 free throws was a bigger factor than the fact that we only made 5. If we made our usual 63%, we still would've lost by 12. But only 15 attempts puts that game among the lowest of the season. Part of that was Dayton being scared to foul with a short bench, but 15 vs. 33 is an awful big hole to dig out of, no matter how many of them you actually make. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pistol Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 We shot 7 FTs against George Washington in a close game in which our offense actually looked decent. The refs let a lot of contact go in the UD game early on, a lot of bumping on rebounds. But I don't think the officiating overall was slanted, and certainly not even close to as bad as it was in the GW game. I also don't think UD's lack of fouling had to do with their short bench. They just didn't need to foul, playing with a lead and against one of the worst offensive teams they'll see all season. Our inside game was totally ineffective. Yarbrough was quieted. We stayed in it early by hitting some threes, and that dried up. The lack of FTAs is on our offense, not on officiating. But when you shoot a worse % from the stripe than from the three-point line, what difference would more attempts make, anyway? (In fact, we were *very* close to being worse from inside the perimeter and from the FT line than from three, which would be a super weird and possibly unprecedented stat that Tom Timmermann would have to look into.) Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hsmith19 Posted January 19, 2015 Share Posted January 19, 2015 Never said it was about officiating. We gave them way more free throws than they gave us. That played a much bigger role than us shooting 5-15 rather than our average of 9-15. Those extra four made FT wouldn't have changed the complexion of the game. Like I said, it was just embarrassing. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kmbilliken Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Going forward, does every team look at this blue print and say let's collapse on Yarborough and make the rest of the team beat us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 One thing that's missing in the conversation about what could have been. We can't change Dayton missing open looks, however we can change what we do. So when an oponent has a bad game due to poor shooting we could have done a few things better and stole a win. We must shoot free throws better. It's no exageration that my 6th grade girls shoot better than that, in fact my 6th was 5-8 Sunday and my 5th was 3-6. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Could not agree more, improved FT scoring would markedly improve our results. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikenboy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Going forward, does every team look at this blue print and say let's collapse on Yarborough and make the rest of the team beat us? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikenboy Posted January 20, 2015 Share Posted January 20, 2015 Won't work all the time! 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.