#666653 - 02/28/11 12:55 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: Knucklebustersonly]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 02/14/06
Posts: 2533
Loc: Elma
|
It doesn't really count as "piss poor offensive schemes" when they had open look, after open look, after open look, and failed to sink the shots. If they had, we'd have been up by 20 at halftime, and everyone would be saying what a great offensive performance they had, again. It does, because as a coach do you continue to let your players take outside shots if they aren't falling? How about attack the hoop or push the ball down low to your bigs and look for higher percentage shots? Much better option than continuing to look for shots that aren't falling. romar gives no offensive direction to his players They could not take the ball inside because Ken Bone, and everyone else in the world knows that MBA is a pussy. He puts on the mean face, but when he plays physical opponents (regardless of their athleticism) he gets cowed. In the run and gun he is a good asset at forward. N'dai is a good piece, but his skill set and game knowledge is really rough still. If the outside shots aren't falling, UW cannot rely on their forwards to create offence when the D is physical. I am still a Romar fan. He has brought winning philosophy to UW. It is nice to have a consistently good squad to watch.
_________________________
WDFW - Turning outdoorsmen into golfers since 1994.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#666659 - 02/28/11 01:03 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: ]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/07/06
Posts: 2527
Loc: WA
|
I watched a few layouts that refused to go down as well ... I prefer to call it a poor shooting night, not bad coaching myself.
If Bone is such a great coach why are the coogs in 6th place?
Then keep taking it inside to the bigs or drive/attack and shoot higher percentage shots. Not only that but you can draw fouls and get to the line. Sure as hell don't agree with throwing up 28 3balls when they aren't falling. Wsu wasn't any better offensively but they worked it inside, drew fouls and made free throws. They made 17 more than uw did. That's the game right there Your definition of a poor offensive night for uw is what I call a one dimensional offensive team
Edited by Knucklebustersonly (02/28/11 01:06 PM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#666660 - 02/28/11 01:04 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: Rocket Red]
|
Dick Nipples
Registered: 03/08/99
Posts: 27838
Loc: Seattle, Washington USA
|
MBA is either good, or awful...and he was awful last night. N'Daye sure is hell isn't a scoring threat...he scored two straight buckets and it was the highlight of his career as an offensive player.
We have shooters, and we have two guards who drive the lane and dish it to them...when we shoot, we win. Unfortunately none of our shooters were hitting, they all had bad days.
Fish on...
Todd
_________________________
Team Flying Super Ditch Pickle
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#666678 - 02/28/11 01:53 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: ]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 01/13/07
Posts: 3359
Loc: Pasco Bulldog country
|
Told the wife after the game, "I'm taking tomorrow off from work, I'm observing the COUG Sabbath..." I wish I'd been there last night for joining in on the Clay Thompson chants "ONE MORE YEAR! ONE MORE YEAR! ONE MORE YEAR!" Gives me goose bumps just thinking about it. GO COUGS!!! Mf
_________________________
Born again with IRON MAIDEN!
"Go hard, today Can't worry the past, coz that yesterday". GO COUGS!!!
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#666686 - 02/28/11 02:56 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: ]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/07/06
Posts: 2527
Loc: WA
|
After MBA missed his 5th or 6th piss poor turn around shot romar had him on the sidelines and was ripping him for not positioning better. One sided? Maybe, but you dont stay #2 or #3 in the nation for scoring because your offense is crappy. Basing that kind of opinion off one game is ... one sided. These numbers reflect a completely different tune. POINTS PER GAME 85.4 2nd OVERALL REBOUNDS PER GAME 39.7 12th OVERALL ASSISTS PER GAME 17.7 4th OVERALL FIELD GOAL PCT .478 15th OVERALL Poorly coached? Not hardly Come on Chucky, don't get delusional on me. Stats are relative to who you've put them up against. As the case with the Huskies, they are playing in a mediocre Pac 10 and haven't really faired all that well all things considered... If you look at the Huskies season, sure they've put up points, but the stats are inflated cause they've played sh!tty teams. They don't have one good nonconference W, have only one good win against AZ at home and have struggled in a bad Pac 10. Put the Huskies in a stronger basketball conference and you won't get such inflated numbers because they aren't playing a bunch of cupcake teams all year.. Stats are nice if thats what your into. At the end of the day, the record is the most important and that is what teams and coaches are graded on... Stats are nice if you can win to back them up, but they don't mean $hit when you can't defend your home court over the cougs
Edited by Knucklebustersonly (02/28/11 02:59 PM)
|
Top
|
|
|
|
#666692 - 02/28/11 03:03 PM
Re: Cougs, pups II
[Re: ]
|
River Nutrients
Registered: 03/07/06
Posts: 2527
Loc: WA
|
At the end of the day, the record is the most important and that is what teams and coaches are graded on... And that we shall agree on. Perfect example is St. Johns, also 19-9 but ranked 15th because of their 3 big wins ... even though they have a handful of ugly losses ... St Johns I don't understand. They figure out how to beat a few great teams but still have some losses that make you wonder how the efff they can be so inconsistent.
|
Top
|
|
|
|
|
1 registered (Krijack),
936
Guests and
3
Spiders online. |
Key:
Admin,
Global Mod,
Mod
|
|
11499 Members
17 Forums
72936 Topics
825156 Posts
Max Online: 3937 @ 07/19/24 03:28 AM
|
|
|