Defensive Intensity -- Fairfield Stags Hoops Forum

[ Show ]

Support VoyForums

[ Shrink ]

VoyForums Announcement: Programming and providing support for this service has been a labor of love since 1997. We are one of the few services online who values our users' privacy, and have never sold your information. We have even fought hard to defend your privacy in legal cases; however, we've done it with almost no financial support -- paying out of pocket to continue providing the service. Due to the issues imposed on us by advertisers, we also stopped hosting most ads on the forums many years ago. We hope you appreciate our efforts.

Show your support by donating any amount. (Note: We are still technically a for-profit company, so your contribution is not tax-deductible.) PayPal Acct: Feedback:

Donate to VoyForums (PayPal):

[ Login ] [ Contact Forum Admin ] [ Main index ] [ Post a new message ] [ Search | Check update time | Archives: 1, 2, 3, 4, [5], 6, 7, 8, 9, 10 ]

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Date Posted: 10:58:29am 12/31/05 Sat,
Author: JoeStag
Subject: Defensive Intensity
In reply to: Malibu Jim 's message, "Re: 3 great plays by Todd in last 35 secs" on 10:25:20am 12/31/05 Sat,

Malibu,

The Webcast said that we had good defensive intensity, but they also said both teams were sloppy in the 1st half. Since you were there live, wWas our defensive intensity good, or was Cal Northridge just sloppy.

It sounded over the webcast that there were some stag fans there, as I heard applause whenever something good happened for the Stags.

[ Next Thread | Previous Thread | Next Message | Previous Message ]

Replies:

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Defensive Intensity -- Malibu Jim, 11:39:42am 12/31/05 Sat, [1]

Honestly, I would call both teams sloppy. With the small gym and the level of play this game really had the feel of a high school game, rather than divison I college.

I guess it was fair to say that Fairfield's defensive intensity was good, despite Northridge's sloppy play. That's probably why they won. I didn't look at a boxscore but it appeared that Fairfield was outrebounded pretty badly. Their lack of size is going to hurt. Thank god for Middleton. At least he belongs in the middle at this level but he's really the only one.

With attendance of 697 there weren't that many fans of either team there. I could see a few people in Fairfield shirts sitting behind the bench as well as what looked to be a couple players' families. But if I had to estimate the number of Fairfield fans there I would say maybe 30 or so. If you heard their applause over the radio they must have been loud.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Defensive Intensity -- RayS, 05:48:43pm 12/31/05 Sat, [1]

Just got back home from the game last night. I agree with Malibu Jim re: defensive intensity, it also helped that they do not have anyone who seemed comfortable playing thepoint. A lot of bad passes. Their top scorer Efevberha played only about 5 mins. in the 1st half. In the 2nd half he got fouled & either got poked in the eye or had a problem with a contact. In fact after being attended to on the bench for about 4-5 mins, ibelieve Heard had to take his foul shots for him. He appeared to have problems with his vision for a while after he came back in the game.

That said it seems the addition of Max & Mamo helped the defense. We had trouble only when they took out their "big guy" Shewmate & put in Chitwood & Heard together. With those 2 in they looked a little quicker & more athletic. Fortunately They went back to Shewmate who was a real stick.

The worst part of our game was the offense. They didn't score for almost 5mins. of the first half & we could only manage 4 pts. 2 of those were free throws. Han looked like a freshman last night,but played decently. I think the lack of assists may be attributable to the fact that CSUN was overplaying the 3 pt. line I guess figuring they didn't have to worry about our inside game. That certainly worked to Max's advantage.

As for Carter it looked like he suffered a slight shoulder seperation. He came back out in a sling, but didn't seem to be in a lot of pain, hope he's ok he plays with a lot of heart.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Defensive Intensity -- JoeStag, 08:40:59pm 12/31/05 Sat, [1]

Ray,

Thanks for the report. I was wondering about Mamadou's defense. Did he play similar to Max on defense combining athleticism, physicalness and agressiveness to overcome a lack of height. Or is he more like Carter and Middleton, who have the physical attributes, but might not have the athletcism and quickness.

IMO, a combo of a tall Middleton plus an athletic forward is usually is what is needed to matchup defensively with most of our opponents.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: Defensive Intensity -- RayS, 09:05:30am 01/01/06 Sun, [1]

Mamadou only played a few minutes but I think he will prove to be an overall better player then Carter. No knock on AC but I think M brings more athleticism & is a little quicker. He should help offensively also. In any event he may have a chance to prove himself early on with the injury to AC.

By the way I might also mention that Han seemed to get a little tentative as the refs called him on a couple of charges, one of which appeared questionable at best.

[ Post a Reply to This Message ]
[ Edit | View ]