Yes and no. We've been a pretty competitive team this year without really any marquee portal guys. There's still a lot of games play this year, so we'll table it until the off-season. But with Sha as coach (versus a Willard), I like our chances of making lemonade from lemons more. But count me with you on wanting an end to the "Wild, Wild West."
20pt Win
- Thread starter The_Hall
- Start date
As i remember, in 2nd galf he got one shot in the key, and was forced to his weak hand.
Last edited:
And twice inbounding the ball under his own basket he
1. Threw the ball hard off the body of one of his teammates
2. Threw the ball away and out of bounds from a very bad angle.
I am not going to turn back on any of my criticisms of Sha and his "offense" just because of one great half of basketball. Statistically over the course of his whole career, his teams do not do well offensively, and he did not suddenly become a great offensive coach because of our second half in this game.
Unless our defense is consistently as good as it was getting steals in the 2half of the X game (which is not the case) then I don't believe it's sustainable. We will have spurts like this but we won't be able to consistently beat good teams who also have good defenses.
Also, X has no inside presence whatsoever and we were able to drive at will once we started moving the ball better in the 2 half. I would need to see some CONSISTENT OFFENSE before I jump on the Sha is a genius bandwagon. That includes no 10 minute lulls where we hit 1 fg. Let me see a few games of this kind of play against the dregs of the conference before I get at all optimistic that it will continue.
Unless our defense is consistently as good as it was getting steals in the 2half of the X game (which is not the case) then I don't believe it's sustainable. We will have spurts like this but we won't be able to consistently beat good teams who also have good defenses.
Also, X has no inside presence whatsoever and we were able to drive at will once we started moving the ball better in the 2 half. I would need to see some CONSISTENT OFFENSE before I jump on the Sha is a genius bandwagon. That includes no 10 minute lulls where we hit 1 fg. Let me see a few games of this kind of play against the dregs of the conference before I get at all optimistic that it will continue.
I want to believe this team can make the tournament, but we cannot continually get into the large deficits. In 8 of our 10 Big East games, we have trailed by 10+ points in the second half. Once is a fluke, twice is a coincidence, three times is a trend....8 out of 10 is highly alarming and it's clear a change is warranted.
I understand Sha's thought process in not wanting kill players' confidence, but if a certain group is putting you in a 10+ point hole game after game eventually you have to tinker with the lineup. It's more problematic to be down 10+ points every game than have Mike Williams upset. No one is bigger than the team.
crazy he thinks putting a guy on the bench to start the game will ruin a players confidence. But nobody has mentioned the guy on the bench that deserves to start. You don’t think that messes with his confidence? I’d be furious if I watched an undeserving player start over me game after game.
And spare me the minutes thing. Starting means more than that.
Excellent point. When Willard started Sina over Carrington it caused untold controversy in the locker room. To a man every player, with the possible exception of Gibbs, Sina's best friend, knew it was wrong.
But Willard made a promise to the Sina family to ensure he did not leave after the previous year and he stood true to his word, until near the end of the season when Sina quit after not starting for the first time.
That’s an excellent point. Winning aside, good luck retaining simpkins. You’re protecting Williams psyche at the risk of alienating simpkins - and to Dan’s point you run the risk of losing the locker room. I don’t want to beat a dead horse and post their stats but I encourage you all to do a side by side comparison. From a metrics perspective it’s not even remotely close.