How do you respond? This,IMHO, is when coaches make themselves. Ya, had a good plan early, now they know what you can do, and what you can't. Now is when coaching begins. Does CC have the chops to take a 3-2 team and make them 6-2? or 6-3? We have the talent to do it. Here is where things get done.
Now is when coaching starts
- Thread starter timbfischer
- Start date
We have the talent to do it, but the teams we're facing have more talent. This is one of the better NU teams of the past 25 yrs and might frankly beat any of them. But the big ten is so loaded that even a team talented enough to be ranked in the top 25 in other years, could easily end up with a losing big ten record.
I agree that adjustments will need to be made; maybe the double teams will have to come a lot later in the defensive rotation so as not to leave the shooters as open. Michigan was on fire today and could've played with Gonzaga today no doubt about it. I'm glad we get another crack at them in February and I think the result will be a lot different.
Thursday night is a big game for sure and winning will go a long ways towards keeping some momentum going after a really rough road trip. Buie remains the key and please Audige, take a breath and slow down so you can score more off assisted baskets than off your 5 second dribble and shoot a contested jumper routine.
Thursday night is a big game for sure and winning will go a long ways towards keeping some momentum going after a really rough road trip. Buie remains the key and please Audige, take a breath and slow down so you can score more off assisted baskets than off your 5 second dribble and shoot a contested jumper routine.
In most seasons, even the best teams go 14-6 in the B1G. We are 3-2 (12-8). We are above where we expected. Stick to the plan.
Look at the example of Minny:
1) Got absolutely destroyed in Champaign - 92-65
2) Followed with an OT home win against IA
3) Got destroyed again in Madison - 71-59 (score looked a lot better than the game)
4) Followed it with a home win against OSU
A team that lost Oturu. Who is starting Carr and Kalscheur from last year's team. The 3 other starters are transfers from Drake, Western MI and Utah. It's not a great team. It's not a bad team. It's... a team.
Point is, everyone has bad games. It's about how you recover and put it past you. How you learn, adapt and go in the next time with a solid game plan.
Here are my issues, that might now be less controversial as the love fest for the genius of in game coaching is cooling off:
1-Nance at the 5 - yeah, sure, brings some good stuff. But it also brings negatives. By now teams have understood you should guard him with a tallish player, but not a 5. Reason, it's actually harder for Nance to get a shot up against a faster defender, even if it's a shorter one. A taller one tends to back off a little as he fears being beaten off the dribble. A faster, albeit shorter, will be glued to his chest when he gets the ball. On top of this, we risk more being dominated in rebounds. I'm not defending necessarily a different starting 5 (though it would not be the worst idea in the world). Just that he can play 4, with RY on the floor, for much larger stretches of the game, especially if we are struggling on the boards. Problem is, by now we might have lost precious weeks on practicing and being routined playing Nance at the 4. But ultimately it's clear CC wants to run his offense, regardless of personnel. And that's the 5 at the top of the key. It was ridiculous to see Pardon doing it, and that's still how we attacked. Ryan Young is goofy doing it, and that's still our offensive scheme when he's on the court.
2-The run and gun offense. You need better athletes if you are going to force it down the throats of opponents. There is nothing wrong with playing fast. Obviously. I've always been a 4 or 24 type of guy. You take a quick shot if it's there, as so often in the scramble of transition there's an open shot. But if there isn't, you run your offense. What we have now is too many bad shots that are there later in the offense anyway. And we don't show any desire to slow it down against anyone, if we did not slow it down against IA. We are now balls deep into the B1G season and going backwards on offense
3-Drop the goofy zone defense. Why a coach that did not play zone a whole lot for years, fell in love with it last year, is beyond me. I understand trying it, especially last season, but sticking to what's not working. Befuddling. And it's always a goofy zone, last year it was 1-3-1. This year it's a 3-2 (or 1-2-2 if you prefer to see it like that). Not the old more trusty 2-3, by far more balance and why it's vastly more used. This is not Syracuse, where you are playing zone year after year. Where you are not trying to perfect it with limited time. In any given roster they have 1/2 of them have done it for 2+ year, 1/4 for a year, and only 1/4 are learning it in the beginning of the season. We find ourselves experimenting, over and over again. At the B1G level, zone is very very risky. Against good players it's just not a long term fix within a game. I remember last year, not sure against whom, might have been Maryland, where the coach used zone against us in the first half, with success, after falling behind. And telling the sideline reporter they were going to drop it for the 2nd half. Knowing we would adapt and it was risky. Zone can be good as a surprise. That's it.
4-The resting of the starters. We don't smoothly rest the starters, easing bench players into the lineup where they play with at least 2-3 starters. We just abruptly bring in a second unit playing with Kopp or Audige. I just don't see us doing well with Greer/Berry/Gaines at the same time on the court for extended minutes. Goofy.
We have to consider that we won 3 games with some abnormal circumstances:
1) MSU, Buie went off for 30
2) IU - Audige went off for 17 in the 2nd. And man did we need it as we were down
3) OSU - solid effort of not giving up when we were within striking distance but always behind throughout the day
We lost two games
1) We put up a good fight against IA, considering they are a final 4 caliber team and we were playing in Iowa City
2) We good annihilated in Ann Arbor
Ultimately I believe a lot on this board got carried away with the 3 quick wins. Realistically CC will de doing an OK job if he can get 7 wins. 9 wins would be terrific.
1) Got absolutely destroyed in Champaign - 92-65
2) Followed with an OT home win against IA
3) Got destroyed again in Madison - 71-59 (score looked a lot better than the game)
4) Followed it with a home win against OSU
A team that lost Oturu. Who is starting Carr and Kalscheur from last year's team. The 3 other starters are transfers from Drake, Western MI and Utah. It's not a great team. It's not a bad team. It's... a team.
Point is, everyone has bad games. It's about how you recover and put it past you. How you learn, adapt and go in the next time with a solid game plan.
Here are my issues, that might now be less controversial as the love fest for the genius of in game coaching is cooling off:
1-Nance at the 5 - yeah, sure, brings some good stuff. But it also brings negatives. By now teams have understood you should guard him with a tallish player, but not a 5. Reason, it's actually harder for Nance to get a shot up against a faster defender, even if it's a shorter one. A taller one tends to back off a little as he fears being beaten off the dribble. A faster, albeit shorter, will be glued to his chest when he gets the ball. On top of this, we risk more being dominated in rebounds. I'm not defending necessarily a different starting 5 (though it would not be the worst idea in the world). Just that he can play 4, with RY on the floor, for much larger stretches of the game, especially if we are struggling on the boards. Problem is, by now we might have lost precious weeks on practicing and being routined playing Nance at the 4. But ultimately it's clear CC wants to run his offense, regardless of personnel. And that's the 5 at the top of the key. It was ridiculous to see Pardon doing it, and that's still how we attacked. Ryan Young is goofy doing it, and that's still our offensive scheme when he's on the court.
2-The run and gun offense. You need better athletes if you are going to force it down the throats of opponents. There is nothing wrong with playing fast. Obviously. I've always been a 4 or 24 type of guy. You take a quick shot if it's there, as so often in the scramble of transition there's an open shot. But if there isn't, you run your offense. What we have now is too many bad shots that are there later in the offense anyway. And we don't show any desire to slow it down against anyone, if we did not slow it down against IA. We are now balls deep into the B1G season and going backwards on offense
3-Drop the goofy zone defense. Why a coach that did not play zone a whole lot for years, fell in love with it last year, is beyond me. I understand trying it, especially last season, but sticking to what's not working. Befuddling. And it's always a goofy zone, last year it was 1-3-1. This year it's a 3-2 (or 1-2-2 if you prefer to see it like that). Not the old more trusty 2-3, by far more balance and why it's vastly more used. This is not Syracuse, where you are playing zone year after year. Where you are not trying to perfect it with limited time. In any given roster they have 1/2 of them have done it for 2+ year, 1/4 for a year, and only 1/4 are learning it in the beginning of the season. We find ourselves experimenting, over and over again. At the B1G level, zone is very very risky. Against good players it's just not a long term fix within a game. I remember last year, not sure against whom, might have been Maryland, where the coach used zone against us in the first half, with success, after falling behind. And telling the sideline reporter they were going to drop it for the 2nd half. Knowing we would adapt and it was risky. Zone can be good as a surprise. That's it.
4-The resting of the starters. We don't smoothly rest the starters, easing bench players into the lineup where they play with at least 2-3 starters. We just abruptly bring in a second unit playing with Kopp or Audige. I just don't see us doing well with Greer/Berry/Gaines at the same time on the court for extended minutes. Goofy.
We have to consider that we won 3 games with some abnormal circumstances:
1) MSU, Buie went off for 30
2) IU - Audige went off for 17 in the 2nd. And man did we need it as we were down
3) OSU - solid effort of not giving up when we were within striking distance but always behind throughout the day
We lost two games
1) We put up a good fight against IA, considering they are a final 4 caliber team and we were playing in Iowa City
2) We good annihilated in Ann Arbor
Ultimately I believe a lot on this board got carried away with the 3 quick wins. Realistically CC will de doing an OK job if he can get 7 wins. 9 wins would be terrific.
I agree that our strategy of doubling the dominant big man and allowing teams to pass into threes is not working. Michigan made so many threes because so many of them were wide open. And next up is Kofi Cockburn and a team that shoots 42% from 3. What a conference. I think we have to let our bigs guard Cockburn straight up and live with a 30-point game if it happens.
I think we made a tactical error in trying so hard to stop Dickinson. First, he is a fantastic passer for a freshman and is surrounded by 4 guys who can all make shots. Second, being a freshman, I don't think he is in peak shape yet. He looked winded at times during the game. We should have let him go crazy at first and let him wear himself down as the game went on. One big weakness for Michigan is that they have no depth.
Looks like the teams NU has been playing are progressively stronger and NU is playing progressively weaker as the season continues. The first 3 conference games let us think NU is better than they are.
It will take NU's best game to win the rest of the way and that surely is a big coaching problem because CCC hasn't been able to get them there yet. NU can play better - we've seen it - and they must.
UM seems a level better than the rest of the conference and they clearly love playing at home. Maybe UW can play with them. The second level is Iowa, Rutgers, Minny, MSU, duh-OSU and Illinois. That's where NU needs to be and needs to play .500 or better against those teams if this season is going anywhere.
It will take NU's best game to win the rest of the way and that surely is a big coaching problem because CCC hasn't been able to get them there yet. NU can play better - we've seen it - and they must.
UM seems a level better than the rest of the conference and they clearly love playing at home. Maybe UW can play with them. The second level is Iowa, Rutgers, Minny, MSU, duh-OSU and Illinois. That's where NU needs to be and needs to play .500 or better against those teams if this season is going anywhere.
Going into the game, UM was shooting 33% from 3pt (in B1G games), while Dickinson was at 70% from 2PT. Per that logic - off of 10 shots, UM gets 9 pts via gunning vs. 14 pts off of their aircraft carrier.
Perhaps we could've changed it up and just stayed on the shooters, but by that time UM was already up double digits. They would've just battered us with Dickinson anyway - which was their second half plan anyway (akin to being up 2 TDs and THEN pounding with Trey Sermon).
In the offensive set, the team is so very dependent on Buie. Because he can score on penetration, as well as hit from 25 feet, the defense is off balance, which opens up for Kopp to hit catch and shoot. However, last night, he just couldn't get any scoring going - and was physically stifled - and everything was a grind.
If Buie isn't rolling, then the 'Cats have gone...:
- Nance in space. If he can get a more traditional 5 on him, then this can work as he hits the 3 enough and can knock down mid-range to create more driving lanes. I'd rather see Nance as a rim-runner first, though and this is more of a secondary option.
- Audige iso-ball. Not ideal, but he's got it in him. I'd prefer to see him attack the rack and draw fouls, but he's got step-back 3 ability. The downside of this path is that it seems that Chase is more of a feel/rhythm guy than taking the most optimal look.
- Kopp mid-range off of dribble pen. Of course, Kopp is a splendid catch and shot 3 shooter, but credit to him for developing this wrinkle in his game so he doesn't totally disappear from the offense.
- RY-M-C-A down low. Young's happy place is on the block, back to the basket taking on the 2nd team 5. His second happy place is cleaning up offensive glass for high-percentage 2s. (RY is #1 in B1G on Offensive Rebounding Rate - 20.9%) However, he can't do 5-out well since he doesn't shoot the 3, nor does he have the speed to operate on the perimeter.
- Beran as playmaker? You saw this last night when the Wolverines stayed with Buie on PNR, or left him alone at the top of the key. He was 122 ORTG on 25% usage (both career B1G game highs for him) and netted 14 points on 10 shots, 2/5 from deep; 1 assist/1 TO.
- Gaines bully-ball. Ideal when he can get someone of equal/lesser strength on him (which is usually during 2nd team).
- Ty Berry, catch and shoot (or catch and upfake/rhythm dribble, then shoot), but depends on these other guys clicking for him to get space. He's tried to go inside, but can't draw fouls nor is elusive enough to get floaters in.
In terms of growth - I'm most intrigued with Beran as playmaker - he has the IQ to pull it off. He can hit from distance (42% this year, up from 40% last year), and just needs to be better at finishing inside when they sell-out on the close-out on him.
DOCRUGBY posted a while back that is Michigan was good......but I had no idea that they were that good.!!!!Yikes...I do not know if I have seen a team like that in awhile....It was liking watching Alabama football and wondering if they could beat the Bears.
Nance should be able to post up against smaller defenders but it will take a little tweaking on their offense.
I think the zone makes sense against a lot of teams....we have a lot of tall lanky kids with not the quickest first step defensively....and some young , fairly inexperienced guards . I think it lets us keep our best offensive line-up in and not in foul trouble...but when you have to defend the post and everyone else is hitting the 3...u r n trouble.
love the get and go..offense...we do not have the ball handlers and to the basket guys to set up and run the clock all day.........and offensively it gives you some opportunities for hoops that you may not get otherwise. just need to be selective on the shot you take. I have not seen our offensive efficiency rating this year?
but I agree this conference is nuts...lots of dominant post players with good 3 pt shooting support....pick your poison and time to see how coach tweaks things up to maximize what a good team can do against some great teams
Nance should be able to post up against smaller defenders but it will take a little tweaking on their offense.
I think the zone makes sense against a lot of teams....we have a lot of tall lanky kids with not the quickest first step defensively....and some young , fairly inexperienced guards . I think it lets us keep our best offensive line-up in and not in foul trouble...but when you have to defend the post and everyone else is hitting the 3...u r n trouble.
love the get and go..offense...we do not have the ball handlers and to the basket guys to set up and run the clock all day.........and offensively it gives you some opportunities for hoops that you may not get otherwise. just need to be selective on the shot you take. I have not seen our offensive efficiency rating this year?
but I agree this conference is nuts...lots of dominant post players with good 3 pt shooting support....pick your poison and time to see how coach tweaks things up to maximize what a good team can do against some great teams
Minny does not even remotely belongs in a 2nd tier. OSU probably doesn't either.
And MI is not as good as so many are now portraying them. That's not to say they are not pretty good.
I personally see it more
1-WI/IL/IA
2-MI/Rutgers and eventually MSU
3-Everyone else but UNL
4-UNL (hopefully we don't eventually end here)
It's fluid. Rutgers is a play and a blown fairly solid lead from being undefeated. IA is two 3 pointers in less than a minute, including a buzzer beater, from being undefeated. It's that close.
Don't see Michigan rated behind Wis., ILL. or Io-a. Also Rutgers is playing as well, maybe better than those three.
I think (hope) it is this for the Cats, as well. The factor? Playing on the road. We were fortunate to get a road win at IU. Winning in the conference this year is tough, winning on the road is even harder.
For sure.
It's a cliche, but if you want to be competitive you need to win your home games, even against better competition.
Maybe the coaching should have started BEFORE Sunday's game?
I kid ... I kid ... being realistic, we may only be favored in 1 or 2 of our remaining games. Doesn't mean I expect to lose them all ..... just saying ..... the B1G is ridiculous. Every team has more "talent" than we do - but the gap isn't what it was and we can win any game, which is fun.
I am not sure how you can defend much better than NU has-doubling Garza/Dickinson but it is difficult to win when your opponent shoots lights out from 3. Ball movement generates these wide open 3s and unfortunately NU just does not get many uncontested 3s
Michigan State hammered Rutgers last night because RU was ICE COLD from 3. Road wins are hard to come by even in this fanless season. Note that Indiana has won their last two home games. Gotta protect home court and that will be a HUGE challenge vs. Illinois and Iowa.
Fans over react on wins and losses. This board has surely proven that true. Michigan had their best game of the season against us. First game at halftime or before you could see we did not have a chance of winning. Michigan is not night in and night out going to shoot that well. At the same time we had a cold shooting night and the flow on offense was off. The one thing I know is this team has taken a huge step forward this year from last.
Actually, the NU game was pretty average for UM. They aveage 84 pts and scored 85 against NU. Their overall shooting percentage is 52%, versus 50% against NU. The made a season high 12 3's, they average 8. They shot 27 3's v. NU, the 4 other games they have shot 27 they made 10, 8, 9 and 9. So the issue for NU that game wasn't that UM was hot, it was that NU was not, or wasn't able to keep up. The better team won.
It didn't take until halftime to see the loss coming. Michigan missed an untold number of layups and many of our makes were difficult. I kind of wish Collins had let Nance keep going after the first TV timeout, though you also don't want him getting gassed or pulled out of his routine.
I think it has been extremely exhausting for Nance these past two games defensively going up against Garza and Dickinson. Not getting easier with Coburn coming in tomorrow. MSU, IU and OSU's centers did not outweigh Nance by nearly as much. Rutgers and Purdue are the other schools with big beefy C's, but Minny, MD, Wisconsin, PSU and Neb shouldn't be as big an issue.
If the Robbins, I think that's his name, at Minny, continues to play at 1/2 the quality he did against OSU, you can add him to the beefy lot.
In fairness, it's unlikely anyone averages 84 pts in conference play. Last year Iowa was the highest scoring team at 77.7. And Nebraska allowed the most at 78.1.
The bottom feeder NU averaged 64.1/70.1.