Billikan Posted December 4, 2004 Share Posted December 4, 2004 it is incredibly frustrating to watch us cough up another lead and lose at the end. Make no mistake, this Hawaii team has a number of talented players and we defended them very well. We showed moments of excellence on the offensive end but missed layups or missed open three pointers always seemed to break our backs. We actually had a 14-0 run in the second half and missed wide open shots and at least one lay up during that streak. Tom F. played hard but he reminds me of a football player that just ended his football season and has come out for basketball. His touch on the short shots is amazingly bad. Last year I thought he was the best we had seen in years finishing in the paint. I cannot figure out what has happened and Brad must be tearing his hair out. Ian alos missed a couple but I expect more from Tom because he is a senior. Polk had an up and down game but I see a maturation in his game and he will do nothing but get better. He is terrific in pushing the ball down the floor. IO had a fantastic game on the boards--16 rebounds against a very tall and athletic front line is quite a feat. Boy do I wish that his last shot had gone in. I know this may sound stupid but when we are on our game I think we can play with almost anyone. If we could hit 50% of our shots we could beat almost anyone. But our margin for error is very thin and we need to have everyone step up and play a little better. Let's hope the team does not get so negative that they quit on each other. It sounds like the team we are playing on Tuesday is very good as well. We really, really need a win to help the psyche of our team. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 "If we could hit 50% of our shots...." Well, only THREE teams in division I averaged 50% plus fg% on offense all of last year. And if you go back past few years...51.9% I believe is the highest any team has had in field goal percentage offense as a team. Oklahoma St. average just under 52% last year and went 31-4. What you are suggesting isn't going to happen overall over the whole season. SLU does need to knock down easy shots and open looks. SLU has only attempted a combined 20 free throw's their last two games, both at home. HOME games!!!! ONLY TWENTY Free throw attempts. When you do not shoot well, waste time getting into the offense, and do not create fouls and free throw situations, you are not going to score many points. It will be a long season for SLU. High school teams can put up 50 points a game in less minutes played than this. SLU does not have the talent to beat almost anyone as you suggest. I would disagree with that statement. Sure on any given day a great team can get upset, but SLU right now couldn't challenge an elite team. Frericks is a banger, who in the past couldn't control his emotions imo at times. He is not an offensive low post player. He is a rebounder. SLU is not getting any wing or low post scoring, and it is due to lack of athletes and lack of skilled offensive basketball players. Frericks is a nice banger, Polk will do fine a in a year or two, Bryant is a good player. SLU needs two more good recruiting classes. Tough sell to students or avg fan to watch a team that cannot score 70 points with regularity. It is only Soderberg's 3rd year, so he is getting patience from me. But as I have said before, the two things concerning about him coming to STL, were recruiting, and scoring points. He will finally get a couple of kids in one class next year. But needs to follow that one up with a solid class, a lot of pressure there. As I have said before, I do not expect much from Polk until end of his frosh year and into his Soph year. If anyone expects him to come in and be a major factor this year, that is unrealistic. And yes UWM is a lot like SIU, a nice solid team for next week. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Billikan Posted December 5, 2004 Author Share Posted December 5, 2004 I have not checked the stats but I would think that very few teams average 70 points against even decent competion. They might aveerage taht because of blowouts because of cupcake slaughters but I have watched a lot of games in the last few weeks and very few have been high scoring and many were just like our game today. Did you see the Purdue game last night? I guess what I should have said is 50% of our layups and 50% of our wide open shots where there is no defender within 5 feet. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
courtside Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 My point was ....50% is higher than it sounds. It is oversimplifying to say if SLU would just hit wide open looks they could play with anybody on a regular basis. That is all I am saying. Scoring 70 points with some regularity is actually what I said...that is different than getting it each time out and different from saying "averaging".... Teams that are successful ...the really good teams...which obviously we know SLU isn't this season.....but the goal would be to have a team that can win in the 50's or 90's......a team that usually plays in the 60's or higher, using 70 as a solid mark. Perhaops one could say MORE talented players hit those shots, turn it over less, get to the line more....etc.... I would agree if SLU would have a better record so far if they could have knocked down more decent looks. Yes, and Memphis has the superior athletes to get those steals and easy baskets. SLU has developed a pattern of not scoring over a period of time...especially concerning are games against non-elite teams on neutral courts or at home. Sure teams will play games in the 50's from time to time...no doubt about it....but not most nights. Not the good ones. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 not that we shouldnt have won, but hawaii is a nice team. i would kill for a sensley on our team. while it seemed we were holding him down, down the stretch he just took over and willed the win imo. he is an nba player imo. they had much better inside players than us and the one guard with the cornrows was a nice player that dwayne had fits trying to guard and he made the offensive end miserable for both dwayne and anthony. it was nice to see newborne get more time. anyone figure on clarke being end of the bench no time? one thing i noticed especially in the first half. the billikens sure stand around a lot on offense. reggie seemed to be doing all he could to get open, but the rest just would seem to take breaks and stand around. a number of times i could hear brad yelling "move!!!" pretty frustrating day. i was going to drive to kentucky to see the marshall county shootout after the game, but was so depressed i just came home instead. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 today, the refs just swallowed the whistle. it was pretty ridiculous imo the amount of banging they let go, however it was both ways. that old white haired ref always seems to steal money by not calling much of anything. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 I liked the way the refs called the game. It was old school. Certainly Tom Frericks was hacked on several of his missed shots close in but the bottom line is we have to make more of those attempts in the paint. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 old school? old school would have been the days the refs actually called fouls. if you want to call it playground or nba i might swallow that. but i hate that basketball has become nothing more than rugby. call the fouls and change the game back to the days of no hand checking, or pulling or pushing. that is old school. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 My my Roy, are not we grumpy? Old school is an amorphous term. That is the way I learned to play the game so I call it "old school". I like when the refs are consistent and these were. I also think all the no calls benefited us more than Hawaii. Just looked at our rebounding advantage. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 it didnt benefit us when polk got fouled and we had to start all over. two more fouls and polk is at the line to shoot a one and one and win the game. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Mobile-iken Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 "anyone figure on clarke being end of the bench no time?" Good question Roy...Anyone know what the hell is up with Clarke? Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 >it didnt benefit us when polk got fouled and we had to start >all over. two more fouls and polk is at the line to shoot a >one and one and win the game. We got a wide open shot from 12 feet and missed it. We lost the game through our play, not the refs. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
billiken_roy Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 i went back at my previous postss since yesterday afternoon to see where i said "the refs lost the game". i didnt see any such statement anywhere. did i infer that i didnt think the refs called a good game? yes. did i say that had we been in the one and one by the time of polk's getting fouled we had a chance to win the game? yes. but i didnt blame the refs. i have been preaching for about 5 years now that i hate the no harm no foul trend of reffing. i only point out that yesterday imo that no harm trend didnt assist the billikens. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
3star_recruit Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 Without those four thousand rebounds we got, some of which we got by fouling and not being called for it, we never would have been in the game to begin with. We might have scored 12 points in the first half. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 I'm with Roy on this one ... I hte the current state of officiating ... Call the game as the rules are written. What are they baseball umps, bigger than the game allowing their own personal interpretation to rule the day. There has never been a game in the history of college basketball to go through 20 minuites of play and only have 10 fouls committed by both teams. In the game against ORU ... ORU had only 2 fouls with less than 5 minutes left, than committed 7 or 8 in the last 5 minutes. That is ridiculous. Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
slufanskip Posted December 5, 2004 Share Posted December 5, 2004 It depends on how many fouls they got without being called wouldn't it. You assume we were the only one to get points off non called fouls. I don't think Roy is saying and either am I ... that then refs called a biased game, just that he doesn't like the physical wrestling match the game has turned into .... I agree Official Billikens.com sponsor of H. Waldman Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jjray Posted December 6, 2004 Share Posted December 6, 2004 >i went back at my previous postss since yesterday afternoon >to see where i said "the refs lost the game". You said in prior post: "it didnt benefit us when polk got fouled and we had to start all over (on our last possession). two more fouls and polk is at the line to shoot a one and one and win the game." The words imply that we would have won the game had the refs called it differently (of course, Polk has to make the free throws). I thought the opposite: the loose officiating helped us to the huge rebounding advantage. I understand if you are a purist and wish tight enforcement of the rules out of principle. I'm not so principled. Reading posts below, it appears you have support. 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.