Solid performance from Karnowski tonight

[HoosierPal]

17 minutes ago, Taj79 said:

Back in CUSA, I had a chance to sneak down to press row and watch Lousiville and UAB play in the Birmignham-hosted CUSA tournament.  Front row.  My gawd those guys were huge!  A court 94 feet by 50 feet was too SMALL!  And there were no Kennedy Meeks or Przemek Karnownskis out there.  I thin Louisville's biggest guy went 6'9".  And skinny like the usual UofL jumping jack.  AND STILL NO ROOM.  A job I would never want -- you can't get it right. 

 

I sat front row at Chaifetz once, and I agree with you 100%.  Add to the size issue the speed of the game.  It is a near impossible game to officiate.  We all have the benefit of replay and slow mo, which makes it ridiculously easy to second guess a call.   That being said, the one thing you can ask if for consistency.  Last night, that was in question.

I've umped baseball and I was horrible.  It is almost second nature to give a make up call, but you can't do that.

[almaman]

13 hours ago, cheeseman said:

I agree - that is one of my pet peeves about players who don't use it and miss bunnies.  The square on the backboard is there for a reason - hit and the ball goes in the hoop.

does seem when they do use the bank shot higher success results than with the parade of feeble 2-4 ft shots we've had to witness last 3 years.

[almaman]

12 hours ago, Pistol said:

This Tournament was a really disappointing one overall. The officiating was poor from start to finish. There was as little first-round excitement as I can ever recall (although the second round was a big improvement). The deck was stacked in favor of the BCS conferences, yet again. Most close games ended on misses and turnovers instead of buzzer beaters, a reflection of what felt like overall poor shot selection in the final minutes. The final game challenged the 2011 and 2008 finals in sheer ugliness, and ended with a blueblood 1-seed winning it all, a result that just doesn't hold much interest unless you're a fan of that team.

 

12 hours ago, RiseAndGrind said:

I don't know how anyone can say skill levels have dropped off.

Indeed. same for football.

[3star_recruit]

Individual skill level is up.  Basketball IQ is down.  It's why less athletic bigs from overseas can come to American colleges and have so much success.  It's why most guards in college struggle to get their teams good shots in a halfcourt set.

[DoctorB]

Well -- maybe we are splitting hairs; because I think we are failing to agree upon the premise of my statements:  just to clarify, athletic abilities are off the charts compared to the past, no doubt.  And those are measurable, more or less.  Players are just bigger, stronger, faster, better leapers, etc. 

But 3-star, when you say, "Individual skill level is up.  Basketball IQ is down." it goes against my idea of skills, which are learned behaviors through intensive practice and discipline.  i.e. Basketball IQ is a skill, and you agree it's down.  So someone please explain to me:  what skills, precisely, are up??  Genuine question.  I hpe the answer is not bench press or vertical leap: those are not skills!

Pistol;  you are right, I don't have time to "back it up" with any numbers -- mainly because these are generally immeasurable things.  It's like trying to quantify reading and writing skills.  Believe me, multiple choice testing does only a very vague job of doing that.  So what numbers could I draw on, to measure Basketball IQ, or seeing the court, or shot selection??  Along with other "skills," in my view.  Can we at least try to distinguish these 2 things??  Yes, basketball "talent" and "athleticism" are just off the charts & through the roof.  But skills??  I am not buying it, and you all should think harder about my objections to it.  More generally; progress and improvement in any field of endeavor are not always chronological:  it may be that some of you are operating under the illusion that naturally, things have simply (magically) improved.  [see: contemporary American politics and media, e.g.]  Also, for the person who suggested I actually go back and watch those games from the 70s or 80s: I doubt if I am the one who needs to go back and view them.  I was there...  So I may be in a better position to recognize the emperor's new clothes! 

Meanwhile, so much hemming and hawing, sturm und drang, about what a lousy final game it was, and overall, how mangy and sickening the inner machinations of the industry have become.  Dirty dealings, record transfers, and coaches reporting that half their players don't even appear to like playing basketball.  And the NCAA laughing all the way to the bank with another billion dollar profit over the past month or so.  Hmmmm....

I may be wrong, I'm happy to admit that; and we all can certainly disagree, and I appreciate the challenges by many of you, to my position.  I've thought about it, and I've tried to locate the points of difference, above.  But for those wanting stats to "back it up," most of the important arguments in our lives do not depend on stats.  I should quote Mark Twain on this subject, but instead I'm on to other things this morning.

[brianstl]

Aren't overall shooting percentages and three point shooting percentages in college still near historically low levels?  I know they have come up some over the last few seasons.  But just four seasons ago the overall shooting percentage was at a 50 year low and the 3 point percentage was at an all time low.  I think shooting is a skill and a pretty important one.

[3star_recruit]

There have never been as many tall players who handle the ball like guards as there are today. There have never been so many tall players with three point range as there are today. There are so many players capable of making difficult shots as they are today. But since they don't understand that basketball is fundamentally a team game, they make the game much harder than it has to be. They seem to be more interested in demonstrating mad skillz than making simple winning basketball plays. Why waste 7 seconds on dribbling displays when a simple head fake is enough to get your man off balance?

Kids today have problem seeing the total game. Most of them are incapable of seeing three moves ahead. They're wasting a lot of mental and physical energy playing hero ball. I don't think this is a skill problem. It's a philosophy problem. If you look at our roster, we've clearly upgraded our athleticism and skill level. The next step is to get these guys to make smart decisions with the basketball. That's the difference between us being simply upper half of the A10 next year and top 3.

[Old guy]

In other words, the current basketball players are more into themselves than into the team, more into looking good themselves, than into winning the game. Is this the philosophy change you are talking about 3 star?

[3star_recruit]

Kids still want to win. But they want to do it as five individuals instead of sacrificing part of their individuality to get good shots.

[Taj79]

Couple of issues for me ....

Kids only go to college because they have to.  Harry Giles to Duke.  Tatum to Duke.  Fox to Kentucky.  Ball to UCLA.  Fultz to Washington.  Porter to Mizzou.  Harry Giles will not get drafted higher because of his body of work at Duke this year.  They do it because its a free year at a college of their choice to kill time to meet the NBA-induced age rule.  Colleges like Kentucky, Duke, UNC and yes, even ol' Saint Louis U. will take then for that year because ,well, that the NBA-induced age rule.  My former NBA team of choice has had Jrue Holliday, Jalil Okafor, Joel Embide, and now Ben Simmons and they still suck.  But the kids are getting their money.  That's the system and the rules as laid out by the NBA and embraced by the NCAA.  Kids will do what kids got to do.  Carmelo gets what he gets regardless of the fact he hasn't won squat since he was 18 years old.  Wilt was driven by the fact he couldn't seem to beat Russell. 

Skill?  I don't know that they have suffered only because I am in no position to say so.  But the advent and availability of multiple 24-hour sports channels now makes kids want to be on them.  And sensational still sells.  You posterize a fellow athlete, you are more likely there than swishing a 20 foot shot.  So now you've got kids looking for ways of the sensational sell.  And if the NBA dunk contest wasn't enough, let' s do it at the high school MickeyD game as well.  And at the college final four too.  The entire society is a "look at me" kind of thing reinforced as it is fleeting by the ten-second sound bite.  Who posterized who on Monday's Top 10 on Sportscenter?  I don't know and don't recall but if you are there, you know it. Until tomorrow.  When the 24-hour sports news cycle resets. 

Same thing with the guys getting to the endzone or jogging back down the court pointing their thumbs at their name on the back of the jersey.  Say my name.  Look at me.  Guys like Paterno and Belicheck and Saban, given weeks to prepare a team for battle could and would do so with great success.  A bunch of hard-nosed crackers from central PA could take down the mighty Miami Hurricanes with such prep.  And did. Its not so much the team sports game it was when we were kids.  Its evolved into high stakes entertainment and with that comes payouts and everybody wants their piece.   So hell yeah its all about the individual now.  Danny and the Miracles would just be "Danny" now. 

I think the talent level today and the athletic skills level today has long shot past those of the 70's and 80s.  You watched when Dr. J played because no one --- except Dominque and Thompson and Hawkins -- could pull that off every night.  Now, there is a kid on every college team at every level that can entertain as such.  And the purses and prizes are bigger.  The winner's share of a Super Bowl is chump change nowadays.  The players today are no more a reflection of the current society.  We reap what is sown.  Love it or leave it.  I've left the NBA, NHL and MLB behind.  The NFL is a detour from my fall Sunday afternoons on the couch.  The only "jerseys" in my collection read "Saint Louis" on them. 

However, if you want them to play the game right, then you get a game like Monday's clunker.  You get 44 fouls, horrible shooting percentages, and the like.  If you don't like it or care, go to bed.  I did.  Gonzaga up three at half. 

A philosophy problem.  Well stated.  Well coined.