a post with substance for HD6...

[Coach34]

let me repeat what I said earlier in the week- we are not, repeat- n-o-t, in a slump....Bost is being hounded up and down the court, defenders denying the ball to him as much as possible. We are being defended.

1. When you dont have any type of offense to make people pay for playing D like they are and over playing, you are going to struggle shooting the basketball.
2. When all you do is set ballscreens and call that an "offense", you are going to struggle.
3. When you launch 3 pt shots from 25 feet with 25 seconds on the shot clock, you are going to struggle.
4. When you take as many 3's as you take 2 pointers, you are going to struggle.
5. And lastly, when your guys are having to dribble around and try to create shots for themselves on a constant basis, you are going to struggle.

Many of us arent happy that we are losing. We 17'ing hate it. We are just sick and tired of seeing the crap that Stansbury is putting on the court. We are tired of seeing the same ol ****. He recruits fairly well, beats most of the ****** teams in a schedule full of them because of it, and some of you think thats all we need every year. Thats not cutting it anymore.

 

[Coach34]

let me repeat what I said earlier in the week- we are not, repeat- n-o-t, in a slump....Bost is being hounded up and down the court, defenders denying the ball to him as much as possible. We are being defended.

1. When you dont have any type of offense to make people pay for playing D like they are and over playing, you are going to struggle shooting the basketball.
2. When all you do is set ballscreens and call that an "offense", you are going to struggle.
3. When you launch 3 pt shots from 25 feet with 25 seconds on the shot clock, you are going to struggle.
4. When you take as many 3's as you take 2 pointers, you are going to struggle.
5. And lastly, when your guys are having to dribble around and try to create shots for themselves on a constant basis, you are going to struggle.

Many of us arent happy that we are losing. We 17'ing hate it. We are just sick and tired of seeing the crap that Stansbury is putting on the court. We are tired of seeing the same ol ****. He recruits fairly well, beats most of the ****** teams in a schedule full of them because of it, and some of you think thats all we need every year. Thats not cutting it anymore.

 

[Coach34]

let me repeat what I said earlier in the week- we are not, repeat- n-o-t, in a slump....Bost is being hounded up and down the court, defenders denying the ball to him as much as possible. We are being defended.

1. When you dont have any type of offense to make people pay for playing D like they are and over playing, you are going to struggle shooting the basketball.
2. When all you do is set ballscreens and call that an "offense", you are going to struggle.
3. When you launch 3 pt shots from 25 feet with 25 seconds on the shot clock, you are going to struggle.
4. When you take as many 3's as you take 2 pointers, you are going to struggle.
5. And lastly, when your guys are having to dribble around and try to create shots for themselves on a constant basis, you are going to struggle.

Many of us arent happy that we are losing. We 17'ing hate it. We are just sick and tired of seeing the crap that Stansbury is putting on the court. We are tired of seeing the same ol ****. He recruits fairly well, beats most of the ****** teams in a schedule full of them because of it, and some of you think thats all we need every year. Thats not cutting it anymore.

 

[DerHntr]

lost just about every person who might have read this thread by stating

let me repeat what I said earlier in the week- we are not, repeat- n-o-t, in a slump

 

[shaschboy]

Everything you state is correct. When I watch Vandy's offense, I sit there and go "Why can't we do that?". I would compare our offense to North Carolina's 4 corners from the late 70's against Ralph Sampson. Only problem is we now have a shot clock.</p>

 

[bulliegolfer]

but we will manage to make the NIT so life will go on.

 

[Shmuley]

nm

 

[8dog]

d

 

[boomboommsu]

...even though i generally agree with you:

when you have 2forwards that can't drive to the basket without getting called for a charge (Kodi, Ravern), a SG that has trouble making layups (Randy), and a PG that lately can't finish or pass off of penetration.......then what are you going to do?

to put it another way, any other type of offense requires good passing, and you can't have that when 80% of the team on the floor thinks they should take whatever shot they have as soon as they get the ball.

I think that a real offense requires each player to know their roles, and we don't have that. i think the only players who know their roles are Jarvis and Turner. the rest think they are way better than they actually are.

 

[Agentdog]

except the recruiting well. We have one or two all around good basketball players. We have guys that can shoot but don't defend. We have guys who defend well but are marginal shooters. This basketball team is very average in basketball talent....bottom line. Lucky for us, that is all it takes in the SEC.

Another thing, we do not have one single guy who can shoot or is willing to shoot the midrange jumper. Everything is a 3 or spinning hook shot from Vanardo. Occassionaly, Augustus wanders in to the lane and throws up a shot. However, it does not seem to fall very often.

One more.........why are players now-a-days reluctant to use a screen? Half the time the screen is set. They fake into the screen and attempt to drive past the defender. Is it because the idea of a screen is to pass to the screener rolling to the basket and players don't want to give the ball up? It is not just State either....I see it alot in other games.

 

[8dog]

The idea is that you will catch your guy trying to get under or through the screen in anticipation of your using it. And then that allows you to have a step on them in the direction opposite the screener.

 

[Agentdog]

Yep, I understand what the player is trying to do. However, I think players now-a-days do that so they can shoot rather than passing to the screener. Pick and roll = old white man basketball now-a-days. I think.....

 

[8dog]

I watched Jay Wright break down about 5 different options he wants his team to identify when using a ball screen.

Im not saying we aren't coached on it, Im just saying that its not really supposed to be a random decision.

 

[VirgilCain]

and started playing with a lot of emotion? They went from frustrating to downright pathetic. I was stunned that playing with emotion actually makes our team worse.

 

[DawgatAuburn]

Kodi is at his best when he is either at the high post knocking down 15 footers or taking one dribble and finishing strong, crashing the offensive boards, or coming off screens for wide open threes. Anything else and he tends to have a negative play. That includes driving from 20 feet, or shooting pull up threes with a man near him. We do very little to get Kodi those opportunities.

Ravern is similar. He is at his best shooting wide open threes, particularly from the corners or straight away at the top of the key. He doesn't seem to be as accurate from the wings. I have actually been impressed the last few games with some authoritative drives to the basket by Ravern. He isn't strong enough to finish a lot of them though, and I can not explain his atrocious FT shooting. We let him camp in the corner too often though, just waiting for the ball. Maybe two or three times a game MAX we swing it around the perimeter fast enough to get him an open shot. We don't seem to run him off of a lot of screens.

You get the point. Our players do have some strengths, but it does not seem that our offense consistently sets up our players to take advantage of those strengths. Instead we far too often make one pass and take a shot. The shots we take could be gotten 15-20 seconds deeper in the shot clock after trying to get a better one. As much as we complain about the offensive plan, the shot selection has to improve before any offense will work.Yeah, when you shoot 40% from three, that corrects a lot of things, but we did the exact same thing last year that we are doing this year. Light people up in the non-conference (bunch of nobodies both years), then get in SEC play and struggle when we face real defenses. I don't know that stats and I am not looking them up. I'll let HD6 do that, but I guarantee you that is accurate.

 

[OMlawdog]

His half court offense is eerily similar to the half court offense I watch when I watch Ole Miss which for the most part is spread the court and do a high ball screen. Its brutal to watch because the defense doesn't have to work at all.

The one area that both school do a horrible job with is setting off ball screens. What I mean by that is both the picker and runner just go through the motions, they don't actually even try to set or run off a screen. Watch Wisconsin run their offense and you will notice the picker will set up wide, and the player running off the screen will basically hit the arms of the picker creating space. Watching Ole Miss and MSU the guy just runs near the screen and doesn't even attempt to create space. Its just being lazy. Everyone does it from time to time, but at Ole Miss and MSU it is done all the time.

There is no such thing as a motion offense for either school, it is NBA basketball. Two man game, and the talent difference simply isn't that great. UK can play a two man game with Wall dishing to wide open shooters because they have two beasts in the paint that will get rebounds and they can just out talent you. Neither MSU or OM is talented enough to do that.

The worst part is that most of the SEC plays this two man game crap, and doesn't adopt a motion offense that values possessions. I really want Bob Knight to do an OM or MSU game so that he can just rips the two offenses to shreds.

 

[8dog]

I think he would have thrown a chair last night.

 

[paindonthurt_]

This statement:

<span style="font-style: italic;">to put it another way, any other type of offense requires good passing,
and you can't have that when 80% of the team on the floor thinks they
should take whatever shot they have as soon as they get the ball.</span>
<br style="font-style: italic;"><span style="font-style: italic;">I
think that a real offense requires each player to know their roles, and
we don't have that. i think the only players who know their roles are
Jarvis and Turner. the rest think they are way better than they
actually are.</span>

equals coaching problems. The coach has to teach and persuade guys when and when not to give up the ball. Hell Dee penetrates sometimes (and others) and the defense completely collapses. when they do, we either one don't flash to the goal (the guy whose defender left him) or we don't dish it to the wide open guy. When this happens 12 years in a row and we never improve. Coaching, coaching, coaching. Not fun fun fun.

 

[birdZdawg]

.

 

[Original48]

Any other commentator (like Knight mentioned above) would have ripped into the offense that isn't. Booker finally decided to not even comment anymore after 26 footer upon crossing half court...but you could hear his exasperated groan. I think he really likes State, but like most, is sick of watching this nonsense.

 

[Coach34]

it seemed like he was just a couple of seconds away from shouting "What the 17 are they doing out there??????"

 

[Shmuley]

How much of the no offense assclownism we are forced to endure can be attributed to the fact that the high schools where deez affletes come from have shitastic coaching? Seems to me that street ball is the rule in football states. Great athletes, ****** coaching at the high school level. Very little competent instruction. Just roll the damn ball out there and let the athletes do what the hell ever. Am I totally wrong?

 

[MStateU]

Not that I am trying to be the other side, but in a slight defense of Stans allot more could be done with this team if we could:

-Bring in E. Bailey to rest JV
-Have Twany come in to help Bost
-Have Sidney on the court

Not that this would have solved everything, but you can see what his plan was. Barring injuries and NCAA meltdowns at least we could have gone big or small, and been able to go inside. This instead of just going small or smaller, and trying to look like the Globetrotters with the shot selection.

 

[MagnoliaHunter]

If Bobby Knight would have been doing a MSU vs om game, he would have gone WWE or WWF or WWwhatever the last letter is now and come off of the table on both their heads with a chair.

 

[Coach34]

he has played Kodi at the 5 some lately and we have looked pretty good doing it.Instead of doing it a little moreto rest Jarvis, he just runs him back in there.

Also, if Jarvis didnt have to run out to almost half-court to set ballscreens constantly and then roll back to the paint, he'd have a little more gas in the tank

 

[MStateU]

I agree 100%.

 

[SallyStansbury]

spitting up diet coke**

 

[SallyStansbury]

Could shitcanning Cunningham and Kirby and combining their salaries be enough to match what Barry Booker is currently being paid as an investments guy / basketballcommentator? Would he do it? If not him, who would? Who will be our 2010Stan Jones? Because we damn sure need one.

 

[Shmuley]

but this thread is proof positive that this f'n board can civilly discuss **** in a constructive manner.

And it needs to stop immediately.

 

[dawgstudent]

[No message]

 

[SallyStansbury]

Because you, nor none of us really know......Purely speculative: How similar is this relatively civil, informed discussion to what is being discussed inside the Bryan Building this AM? And who would Greg Byrne be discussing this with anyway?

 

[BriantheDawg]

.

 

[boomboommsu]

In general it does, but it's also just a constant problem in college bball lately. every DI ball player grew up the star player. they've never played team ball.

so, is it just that some schools (KY) have the luxury we don't of telling these players to get in line or get lost, or is it a coaching deficiency?

i think it's both. i think Stans has drawn the line at defense/rebounding. that he thinks offensive discipline is just more than he can ever get out of MState's recruit pool. given our transfer problems, you can make a good case that he's been straddling that line about right. but a different coach could almost certainly extract more discipline, more team ball. but then, he'd likely be doing it with less talented players.

 

[paindonthurt_]

personality, something, etc.

It seems like not a one of the players every listens or respects him. At some point that falls on the coach.

We have an offensive coaching problem. Period. It may be due to a diff of personality, lack of it, and relaying that message to players, but there is an offensive coaching problem. period.

 

[boomboommsu]

his 'buddy' style is what brings recruiting success, and what brings lack of discipline. can't gain the latter without losing the former.

i think the recent Stans-hate just has to do with the fans being sick of talented but undisciplined ball. it's grown old, even if it does offer our best success. right now we'd rather see a team that played smart and played fully up to its potential, even if that potential is lower than what we have now. we'd rather take a chance on a coach that probably won a lot less division titles, but if the pieces all fell into place some year could go deep in the tourney, instead of having the pieces in placenearly every yearand falling apart/exploited/outcoached at the end of the season.

 

[chew1095]

How much of the no offense assclownism we are forced to endure can be attributed to the fact that the high schools where deez affletes come from have shitastic coaching? Seems to me that street ball is the rule in football states. Great athletes, ****** coaching at the high school level. Very little competent instruction. Just roll the damn ball out there and let the athletes do what the hell ever. Am I totally wrong?

Throw in the legalized prostitution thatis the AAU circuit, the pimptastic and pandering shoe companies and the "I'm gonna get mine" mentality and I think you just about nailed it.

 

[paindonthurt_]

as long as they played like they had some semblance of basketball knowledge. We look lost on offense (or the lack thereof). All we do is pass, pass, shoot. Or pass shoot. Or shoot.

 

[Hanmudog]

his 'buddy' style is what brings recruiting success, and what brings lack of discipline. can't gain the latter without losing the former.

i think the recent Stans-hate just has to do with the fans being sick of talented but undisciplined ball. it's grown old, even if it does offer our best success. right now we'd rather see a team that played smart and played fully up to its potential, even if that potential is lower than what we have now. we'd rather take a chance on a coach that probably won a lot less division titles, but if the pieces all fell into place some year could go deep in the tourney, instead of having the pieces in placenearly every yearand falling apart/exploited/outcoached at the end of the season.

Speak for yourself. Step back from the computerand think about that statement. Can you imagine this statement on sixpackspeak: "Sure we lost by 20last night but man did you see that back door layup play we ran a few times?"

 

[paindonthurt_]

could coach it, he'd be a great coach. he won't do that though. Therefore mediocre coach.

Again, we have the talent to be better than 16-6. At worst we should be 18-4 (5-2).

 

[jamdawg96]

But having played some high school and AAU ball growing up, there are still some damn good coaches at those levels who emphasize fundamentals. That said, what I've seen from our recent crop of incoming guys over the past two years would suggest otherwise. I had the luxury of playing under guys like Greg Carter and Orien Watson at those stages. Other programs and AAU teams aren't guided by people who actually understand basketball as well.<div>
</div><div>It's still no excuse for our lack of basics. But what I don't understand is why these players are so different from those just a few years ago. We were fundamentally sound years ago. We ran an offense. The lack of tourney success is used to negate that, but those teams looked entirely different on the court. Was Stan Jones that influential? Are these players just that selfish and/or stupid? Has Stans lost interest in developing guys and beating the importance of defense and rebounding into their heads? I don't know.</div>