Jump to content
Fantasy Football - Footballguys Forums

Short Corner

Members
  • Posts

    10,852
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Short Corner

  1. A lot of things going on there. It followed a TO and the possession was on the opposite end of the floor. They already had a strategy for fouling at the end of the game (notice Hardaway slapping his wrist above his head) ie who to foul, who not to foul. You usually assume you are already there when practicing this scenario and communicating that across the floor in a loud venue is extremely difficult. You only have a couple seconds to get it right the first time.
  2. That really needs to be corrected...it's poorly officiated but the calls that matter...the plays that matter...all seem to go L'Ville's way.And who gets the foul called on matters a lot as well. L'Ville bench player picking up a bs foul versus MIchigan starter getting a bs foul isn't quite equal in bad officiating. Dude we get it. But Louisville has twice as many fouls as Michigan. You probably wouldn't be happy if they had 4 times as many. The game has been poorly officiated but it really has gone both ways. Perhaps it has gone a bit more to Louisville but bad calls are never equal especially when you come into a game with an agenda such as your posts for the past week. Michigan isn't going to lose b/c of officiating. You admit that more have gone L'Ville's way...game is four points with :14.1 seconds remaining...but somehow Michigan isn't going to lose b/c of officiating? Honestly, if you went through every game that was within 2-4 points, you could say the team loses b/c of officiating. So if you are going to do that, then I'd hope you'd keep it consistent. They are going to lose b/c they turned the ball over 13 times, missed 7 free throws and gave up 15 offensive rebounds. L'Ville allowed to play as physical as they want wouldn't have anything to do with those turnovers or rebounds? It's a trade off for the 12 extra fouls they took
  3. 3 by the guy that scored. Seriously though, do you guys play in skirts?
  4. Not with the lousy calls. Lousiville is getting practically everything called their way. Well... except for the 11 fouls called on them this half so far. 19-10 for the game, but they are getting every call.
  5. The women's final is tomorrow, but I would guess that that game is to physical for you too. You're joking right? L'Ville is able to reach in and stop most penetration with a body by slamming into guys. It's too physical if they allow guys to get away with that much on defense.Look at the last couple of possessions of that Wichita State game...L'Ville grabbed the player, threw him to the ground while hooking his one arm...then karate chopped the kid in the face with the other. Refs called a DOUBLE FOUL and it changed the possession arrow which screwed Wichita again with the quickest tie-up call in history.I like a physical game...I'm a big guy that'll bang with the best of them...but it can't be to one team's advantage so much. Refs allow L'Ville players to pillage all up and down the court. Multiple times you have posted complaining that Louisville gets away with reaching. Sorry to break it to you chief, but reaching has never been a foul at any level. And the way the refs call the game will be to one team's advantage every time. if they call it tight it is to Michigan's advantage
  6. The women's final is tomorrow, but I would guess that that game is to physical for you too.
  7. In my experience, just the opposite is true. Probably skip guys like Pitino, Donovan, Self, Izzo because they are boring.
  8. Michigan's used to that kind of play. I'm not sure it would phase them too greatly. If Louisville insists on pressuring the ball, Michigan has a very good chance of winning. I think the keys to this game are the matchup of McGary and Dieng as well as GR III against the Louisville 4 man. If GR III is a major liability on defense and doesn't show up on offense, they'll be in trouble.They will pressure regardless, although I expect it to just be token pressure if Michigan is smart and clears out. If they try and catch the inbound and go, Louisville will bring the traps when they are there and I expect them to turn them over in that scenario often enough to make the press an overall plus for them. I suspect this will be the case. Louisville isn't a full on havoc team like VCU. They are very selective with their press and if they get burnt on it, they will change it up. They are the first team that I can remember who has so many wrinkles on their press. They will pretty much adapt to whatever the team is doing. If you inbound the ball and quickly try to reverse it, they'll rotate and take away the inbounder. If you clear out and let your PG do it all, they run and jump you. Now Burke might just be that good he can beat it on his own but I suspect they'll try to trap him a few times if they do clear out. But as you mention, some of their press is just token pressure to eat up 10 seconds before the other team can get in the offense and I think they'll want to slow down Michigan a bit so they'll just want to delay their offense and throw its rhythm off. Quite frankly, I'm surprised more teams don't run the press this way. Perhaps it is b/c they don't have the athletes but half the times teams beat Louisville's press or even VCU's press, they didn't attack and just pulled it out which fails to take advantage of the easy points and make the other team pay for pressing. Not to get sidetracked, but, if/when the NCAA shortens the shot clock, you will see a lot of teams start running this type (black-white/run-and-jump) of pressure. I coach several teams that use 24/8 and the black-white coupled with an Amoeba zone are much more effective with those parameters and allow us to compete with teams that are much more skilled and athletic than us.
  9. Because Artest is doing so well this year that he will command more money elsewhere.
  10. Michigan's used to that kind of play. I'm not sure it would phase them too greatly. If Louisville insists on pressuring the ball, Michigan has a very good chance of winning. I think the keys to this game are the matchup of McGary and Dieng as well as GR III against the Louisville 4 man. If GR III is a major liability on defense and doesn't show up on offense, they'll be in trouble.They will pressure regardless, although I expect it to just be token pressure if Michigan is smart and clears out. If they try and catch the inbound and go, Louisville will bring the traps when they are there and I expect them to turn them over in that scenario often enough to make the press an overall plus for them.
  11. I was willing to defend the president a few days ago, but after he fired the AD I'm inclined to say to hell with him. From an outside and admittedly poorly-informed perspective, this looks like gutless leadership no matter how you cut it. I'm not buying the letter from the AD. If it were from December it would be an entirely different thing. Allegations on your way out the door by disgruntled ex-employees happen every day. His defense of Rice on numerous ESPN interviews, after the tapes aired but before Rice the public backlash makes me think his "gut decision" was entirely different than what he is alleging in his after-the-fact letter.
  12. "So after I excluded the data that didn't support my position, the data was compelling in support of my position."<blockquote> You're looking at the wrong end of the court, unless defensive stats don't count as traditional stats.Syracuse is a bit of an outlier, but generally the only way to effectively defend the college three is to deny it.What metric are you using and why is college different thanany other level? Three point percentage defense, as shown in the link. The flat graph comparing early and late season in conference shows there's almost no correlation between three point % defense from one conference game to the next. If defending the three well or not well percentage-wise was a thing people did with some regularity at the college level that flat line would be closer to 45 degrees. The only levels I'm familiar with are college and the NBA. They're different because the line is different. NBA fans can tell you that the corner three is an important element of NBA half court offensive game plans because it's shorter and thus easier to make. The college three is essentially the NBA corner three in terms of difficulty, but since you can shoot it from anywhere around the arc and get the same benefit. That makes it even harder to defend and thus comparatively more important IMO. And I hate to do the whole "watch the games" routine, but anyone who's watched can see how important the line is to half court play. Nobody's screening anyone to create midrange looks, or feeding the post/penetrating without also setting up shooters right on the line to force the defense to commit one way or another. I'm not arguing that the line isn't an important element of the game. I am questioning that denying the shot is the only effective way to defend it. Not all shots are equal so comparing them as such will lead to a faulty conclusion. There is a reason the expression "hands down, man down" (stolen from boxing) has become popular among coaches in recent years. I don't know what to tell you. I understand that it seems sort of counterintuitive, but the data is there. There's some exceptions, and Syracuse appears to be one of them (although that's also kind of counterintuitive since most people think the way to beat a zone is with the three- maybe teams lean on it harder than they would otherwise and force looks or take lower quality ones because they can't get to the rack?). But generally that seems to be how it works. Here's another explanation. Like I said you can deny the look, but you can't really do much about how often it goes in if they get it. http://www.d3coder.com/thecity/2012/10/11/hand-down-man-down-new-source-of-nba-data-reveals-critical-detail-for-more-effective-shot-defense/
  13. "So after I excluded the data that didn't support my position, the data was compelling in support of my position."<blockquote>You're looking at the wrong end of the court, unless defensive stats don't count as traditional stats.Syracuse is a bit of an outlier, but generally the only way to effectively defend the college three is to deny it.What metric are you using and why is college different thanany other level? Three point percentage defense, as shown in the link. The flat graph comparing early and late season in conference shows there's almost no correlation between three point % defense from one conference game to the next. If defending the three well or not well percentage-wise was a thing people did with some regularity at the college level that flat line would be closer to 45 degrees. The only levels I'm familiar with are college and the NBA. They're different because the line is different. NBA fans can tell you that the corner three is an important element of NBA half court offensive game plans because it's shorter and thus easier to make. The college three is essentially the NBA corner three in terms of difficulty, but since you can shoot it from anywhere around the arc and get the same benefit. That makes it even harder to defend and thus comparatively more important IMO. And I hate to do the whole "watch the games" routine, but anyone who's watched can see how important the line is to half court play. Nobody's screening anyone to create midrange looks, or feeding the post/penetrating without also setting up shooters right on the line to force the defense to commit one way or another. I'm not arguing that the line isn't an important element of the game. I am questioning that denying the shot is the only effective way to defend it. Not all shots are equal so comparing them as such will lead to a faulty conclusion. There is a reason the expression "hands down, man down" (stolen from boxing) has become popular among coaches in recent years.
  14. "So after I excluded the data that didn't support my position, the data was compelling in support of my position.">If I had to pick one "traditional" stat for my college team to excel at, it would be shooting the three. Really tough to win without it, almost impossible to suck wi th it. You're looking at the wrong end of the court, unless defensive stats don't count as traditional stats.Syracuse is a bit of an outlier, but generally the only way to effectively defend the college three is to deny it.What metric are you using and why is college different thanany other level?
  15. Not really informative at all. Even JT erroneously refers to it as an amoeba in the beginning.Good point. The Boeheim zone isn't trying to be deceptive like the Tarkanian or Dale Brown zones. They're just good at covering a lot of ground within it.IMO the hubbub over the Boeheim zone is he has the personnel to play man-to-man but runs a zone anyway. It looks superhuman because the athletes running it could play man, and usually teams that rely on the 2-3 zone aren't that athletic. There's some method to the madness. Instead of guessing at which man-to-man matchups will work best and worrying about switches, you can count on a player always being responsible for the part of the floor you want him to cover. Sometimes it can cost a few rebounds because boxing out can get a little complicated, but a good zone team can install organized breaks to run off misses and turnovers in ways man defenses can't predict. One big advantage of the zone is that about 90% of the teams in the NCAA play man. Because of that, teams spend most of their time practicing their man sets and have more of them. There are only a handful of actions that teams run against zones so teams that zone are very familiar, most of the time, with what can be thrown at them. This late in the season, armed with a scouting report, they can more effectively scheme for a team and funnel the ball to where they feel is your weakest link. This can always backfire in bad execution or the guy you are choosing to beat you having a career game. Other strengths of the zone are keeping good players out of foul trouble, hiding bad defenders, and, as you stated, always being in a good position to transition.
  16. Not really informative at all. Even JT erroneously refers to it as an amoeba in the beginning.
  17. You need to beat their zone with quick 1-2's. IMO they are most susceptible to a quick pass to the weak block from the HP, with a shooter spacing in the weak corner. You won't get a lob because they are quick to react to the first pass so whoever is working the blocks need to anticipate his seals on the angle changes. Traditionally, you would get the ball to the short corner and dive the HP down the lane and flash the weak wing, but they drill against that action regularly and will trap immediately in the SC with the C-F and bring the weak F all the way to the strong side block, dropping both G's. Should be interesting how 'Cuse's length effects the ball movement.
  18. So you're on board with the pushing, shoving and ball throwing?? Really?My comment was posted before the video was uploaded. Of course the kicking and punching cross the line, but I'm fine with the pushing, shoving, and occasional ball-throwing. What a #####.
  19. AND 1 TEAMs play match up zone and match up press?
  20. Because the flow and rhythm isn't affected when you get a look in at another game instead of the commercial.
  21. Larry Bird is the greatest tough shot maker the league has ever seen.This. Call me when Kobe shoots over the back board and make it. Bird made a lot of absolutely ridiculous shots.Love Bird, but that's kind of a gimmick thing.It wasn't a gimmick. It was during a game. The shot didn't count.
  22. Fisher and Artest are bigger competitors.
×
  • Create New...