We won in basketball...

[JxnDawg39211]

1. Osby has earned more minutes. It is frustrating to see Benock come in before Osby and Osby being 3rd off the bench . He is shooting well , but he does need to quit dribbling so much . He did have 2 balls stolen from him last night for easy layups on the other end. 4-4 shooting will negate that though.

2. We went in stall mode again last night with about 6 minutes left in the game. I wouldnt complain if we were half way decent at doing this, but running the shot clock down does not work for us . It is just not our style. We did it against Richmond with 4 minutes left up 5 and it costs us the game. Stans needs to just run normal sets if we are up until under 2 minutes .

3. I think we do need to be screening more and moving around more on the perimeter. I agree with our style of play though. The 4 out-1 in approach works, but it would be nice to see more screens on the perimeter to get shooters open (similar to what Wright St did against us).

4. Perimeter D is still lacking . Ravern is the best shooter Ive seen , but it is give and take with him becasue he is so fragile on the defensive end . The guy Jarvis was guarding last night did hit at least 3- 3 pointers. He would step out and hit a three Jarvis would not get out of the paint , so it was not just our guards not defending the perimeter

 

[Foronce]

## Player Name FG-FGA FG-FGA FT-FTA OF DE TOT PF TP A TO BLK S MIN
24 Kodi Augustus....... f 4-9 1-1 0-1 2 3 5 4 9 0 1 1 0 15
32 Jarvis Varnado...... f 8-8 0-0 6-8 2 12 14 3 22 2 4 7 0 36
02 Ravern Johnson...... g 4-11 2-8 0-0 0 1 1 1 10 1 0 0 0 29
03 Dee Bost............ g 3-11 3-6 5-6 1 1 2 5 14 7 2 0 1 39
22 Barry Stewart....... g 2-10 2-7 1-4 1 2 3 3 7 3 0 0 0 37
05 Romero Osby......... 2-3 0-0 0-0 1 2 3 1 4 0 1 1 0 11
15 Riley Benock........ 0-2 0-2 0-0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1 0 0 4
25 Phil Turner......... 3-6 2-3 0-0 2 3 5 2 8 1 3 0 1 25
30 Wendell Lewis....... 0-2 0-0 0-0 1 0 1 1 0 0 0 0 0 4
TEAM................ 2 1 3
Totals.............. 26-62 10-27 12-19 12 25 37 20 74 15 12 9 2 200

 

[jcdawgman18]

And the fact that Dee Bost was a turnover waiting to happen. Both of those have been corrected.

 

[DerHntr]

I played for one of the best coaches ever in Mississippi, Bert Jenkins and we won a couple of championships.

/couldn't help myself

 

[hullabaloodog]

3. I think we do need to be screening more and moving around more on the perimeter. I agree with our style of play though. The 4 out-1 in approach works, but it would be nice to see more screens on the perimeter to get shooters open (similar to what Wright St did against us)

This is my only complaint with our offense. I really like that we are playing to our strength (perimeter shooting), but there is no excuse to have 4 guys standing around on the perimeter. I understand that the idea is to spread the floor, but when we have a bunch of guys standing still it loses it's purpose. Far too many of our threes are highly contested, and those shots won't always fall at the percentage that they are now. I'm a big fan of taking what the opponent gives you, and I also love transition 3s. I just have a hard time watching our perimeter players stand and watch when they should be moving off the ball and creating more scoring opportunities.

 

[dawgstudent]

we can't have criticism? Is that what you are saying?

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

No...that is not what I am saying. I just think it is ridiculous to ***** about how you won the game every time out. That is what has been happening every game since our Rider debacle, win or lose and it is just becoming redundant.

Okay...we shot a **** load of 3's in our recent wins....but we won. All I am saying is why change what is working until it stops working? Stans gets criticized constantly for changing things during a game that take us our of our flow. Now he is letting them run the court and we are bitching because we aren't passing 10 times before we shoot every offensive set. I just don't get it. It gets to the point where you think nothing will satisfy the fans on here.

Look, I don't like a lot of things I have seen this season, but I am not going to bring them up every single time we have a game. Especially when we are actually winning.

 

[tbaydog]

I feel very sure-- not many people on this board knows Bert or Jerry.

 

[bowenhalldawg]

Everybody's main concern is what happens when we don't hit threes. It is a legitimate concern. While I do believe it will be hard for us to have a night where all of our shooters are off, we can count on it happening at least a few games. One thing that gives me hope is the LSU home game last year. We lost but played well against a solid team and almost one. We couldn't hit anything all night, but we started pounding inside, and Jarvis had a huge night. Does this mean we will adjust when we don't hit the long ball? I don't know, but it does give me hope that we will change what we are trying to do if we're not hitting our threes.</p>

 

[Stormrider81]

Quit shooting 3's just in case we get cold in the future? When you are shooting 3's at the clip we are, you don't stop. That's just stupid.

 

[Hanmudog]

Whether we win by 50, 25, or 11 there is always a damn thread on here bitching about something. I go news for some of you.....most teams in America will lose on a bad shooting night. We only shot 25 threes against Wright St. That is less than we have been shooting lately and about what most teams shoot on average. We are not mindlessly bombing contested threes from 25 ft out. We scored 80 freaking points against a pretty good defensive team. The refs were not calling dick on the inside and Jarvis got fouled (uncalled) virtually every time he got the ball inside. That probably had a little to do with our unwillingness to dump it down low much.
I have no problem with honest criticism but could we maybe just once say "great game guys" or "Stansbury really had the team ready to play"?

 

[whatever.sixpack]

Who says we don't have a plan B??? Usually when plan A is working, you don't go to plan B. How bout we wait until that happens?
Also, we're getting WIDE OPEN three's, that's not exactly "jacking" them. Sometimes 3 guys need to stand around so one guy can penetrate, create, and dish it out, that's basic basketball.

The other big point is that Stans gets criticized after every game, win or lose. But he never, EVER gets credit when things go right, and things have gone right an awful lot in his tenure. Others always get the credit or we win in spite of his coaching.
In my opinion, offense, defense, effort, rebounding, and recruiting are the five things you can look for a coach to have. Our coach has a plus on four out of five, but he gets railed for the one shortcoming. You don't fire those types of coaches, forcing him to bring in an offensive assistant maybe, but firing? </p>

 

[dawgstudent]

about our play this season. I was ecstatic with the Depaul and UCLA wins.

 

[Dawgbreeze]

But if they had seen Bert coach then they would understand. He still has the record I believe for state titles and won a boatload of Big 8 titles too. I went to several MSU games with him before he got too sick to go and he told me MSU plays great defense and he also said he liked Stansbury and how hard he works. I could give a crap how many of these tools complain but we ain't going to get a better coach than the one we have and coach 34, Thick, Fishwater and a few of their cohorts aren't going to change it. It truly is sad that they can't even enjoy a victory without bitching. Must be a sad life.

 

[Hanmudog]

about our play this season. I was ecstatic with the Depaul and UCLA wins.

I got on here a while ago for the first time since the game last night and I had to go all the way to page 5 to find a positive thread about the game and it had all of two posts in it. Houston may very well beat us Saturday but damn it is like no one even enjoys the wins. I mean seriously, who complains about their team hitting too many threes?

 

[HD6]

when we were running the ball down the Rebel's throat in the Egg Bowl, did you ever wish Relf would have thrown it? Or were you just content with what we were doing, because we were winning?

We have good shooters, it's highly doubtful they are all going to throw up bricks and on the same night, we can't get anything going with Varnado. Do you see how many things have to go wrong for that to be the case? The Rider game was lost on poor defense, not poor shooting.

There is a difference between commenting on weakness and straight up bitching about the way you are winning. And the latter is what is happening. As we learned last night "Stats are for losers, and so are wins when you are talking about Stansbury."

 

[BuckSimmons]

To compliment a team on a win just does not show how knowledgeable you are about the game. If you really want to impress, be overly critical of every little detail that was just not perfect, now thats on your teams players , certainly not the opponents players cause when they make a mistake it might be that have you to say something to the effect of good team defense ect. If your team is hot behind the 3 pt line , point out that they rarely scored in the paint, or vice versa.

Needless to say I am just blown away by the knowledge of the game exhibited on this board.

One other note, please excuse JCdawgman18 obvious lack of knowledge about the game, but if he will stick around and take in the finer points of the game as seen by some of you he will learn, it might take time tho.

 

[IBleedMaroonDawg]

about our play this season. I was ecstatic with the Depaul and UCLA wins.

I really wasn't singling you out DS. Sorry if you thought I was. Maybe next time I will find a better place to voice my opinion in a thread.

 

[whatever.sixpack]

HD6 I think that should be the board's logo for bball season.

"MSU Basketball... Because winning is for losers"</p>

 

[SnakePlissken]

That is not a suck up to you Gen but your post was dead on and a shows what is wrong with so many posters here!

edited to clarify....