VoyForums

[ VoyUser Login optional ] [ 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: Friday, February 08, 08:31:28am
Author: Cindy Crawford
Subject: No "point" in this one

Despite the fact that Sowell struggled sluggishly inside, and Jenkins was off the mark(2-12),the story in this one was how SPC managed only three assists for the entire game.
Lampley starting in place of Leon,joined his fellow guards with zero assists.
The Peacocks did try to penetrate with Daryl showing some nice moves on 5-10 shooting and Nick frequently getting fouled.Their 27-36 from the charity stripe kept it from being a blowout.
Leon led the Peacocks with 15 pts,with 10 consecutive free throws in the first half. On one play driving to the hoop, Patsos double bench T and ejection resulted in Nick's draining six straight.
(Nick left the game with an ankle injury on a bizarre "no call" collision)
With the Peacocks shooting 32%--22% on threes to Loyola's blistering 55%, the outcome was inevitable.
On the plus side ,SPC only turned the ball over six times and outrebounded the bigger Greyhounds37-34.
Tim Spitler had his best game of the season with 9 points and 6 boards in 19 minutes,while giving his usual kamikaze 100% effort.
Costner drained his first three and was active battling on the glass but had trouble finishing missing four that were contested inside. I would like to see him bulk up a bit,which might help him to close the deal.

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

Replies:

[> Re: No "point" in this one -- oldtimer#1, Friday, February 08, 09:31:00am [1]

Loyola had 20 assists with only 8 turnovers. Fairfield's Hann in his last game against us had 13 assists on his own! Your "point" or lack thereof is well taken. Been saying that our "small" guards Lampley and Leon are basically #2 guards who have, thus far, unsuccessfully trying to adapt to the point. No knock at their skills or potential value to the team but they are what they are. Difficult to adapt to playing "point" as it requires more of a mindset than skillset.

[Edit]

[> Re: No "point" in this one -- E++, Friday, February 08, 11:41:24am [1]

Where is Mumford in all of this? I know the idea was to red-shirt him, but given the overwhelming evidence that neither Leon or Lampley can play the point, why hasn't he suited up?

Has Dunne so far given up on the season, that he feels that keeping Mumford for an extra year ( four years from now ) is more important than winning games....or, Tom said ominously, is Mumford just another undersized two guard?

[Edit]

[> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- loyal, Friday, February 08, 11:45:01am [1]

The latter.

[Edit]

[> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- Coach Knight, Friday, February 08, 11:51:07am [1]

I believe he has an ACL injury.

[Edit]

[> [> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- Eport, Friday, February 08, 12:04:48pm [1]

What happened to Orta and Sowell in this game? Orta's line of 4 Pts., 0 Rebs. and Sowell's 5 Pts., 4 Rebs., 0 blks. are way below par. Can't believe Orta, who is probably the team's best shooter only took 4 shots.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- Cindy Crawford, Friday, February 08, 01:16:53pm [1]

Raul came out with right wrist heavily taped. Removed it at the half and only saw limited action.
Sowell did not match well against Tuck. He was not getting particularly crisp passes from the guards and was frequently double and triple teamed.He simply did not appear fast enough to overcome getting the ball as far from the hoop as he was being forced to go . He also played limited minutes because of this--23.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- Eport, Friday, February 08, 01:27:22pm [1]

Thanks for the heads-up.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- jajk, Friday, February 08, 02:29:16pm [1]

How are we now lumping Leon and Lampley together as to their potential to be a PG? Nick had a substantial amount of time at this position knowing that he was going to play a lot of minutes at this slot even if he made significant number of miscues. Leon plays hard and has bb talents(obviously we want him on the foul stripe where everyone else has struggled) but I get concerned about Dunne's potential when he went as long as he did with Nick being asked to do something that he just is not suited for.

Now Lampley was not a point in HS and hopefully we know that this is a position that takes time to adapt to. I think anyone who is being fair at all would say Darrell has not yet had the opportunity to show his skills or mindset at this slot. Let's not treat Darrell like Giant fans treated Eli in a similar position of learning how to be an NFL quarterback. Darrell obviously has not proven yet that he can be a PG for a successful MAAC program. But there is no question in my mind that he has shown the potential to do it. He has the quickness and handle to do it and is a sufficient scoring threat to do it.

Lampley has to get better at certain things but point guards do not operate in a vacuum. A big part of their success depends on their coach maximizing their strengths and minimizing their weaknesses but even more important on showing confidence in them. I always rermember Coach K at Duke putting up with many miscues and agggressive plays from Bobby Hurley early on because he was a good enough coach and talent evaluator to know tht Hurley would go on to become a great college point guard.

I did not see the game in person so this is from the perspective of viewing it on the computer. But from that perspective,I can not understand emphasizing this games performance from the perspective of what Darrell or indeed Nick did or did not do. There is a big overemphasis here,I believe, on measuring PGs by their assists numbers. A point guard can't make the open J off his own pass nor can he make the lay-up. I measure a point guard more by how he opens up the court and the energy and movement of the whole team when he is on the court. My thought is that Lampley and Bacon will eventually do things for us together since Ryan knows where to be when a PG dribble penetrates,has good hands and can finish. Let the two two of them have a fair chance to show it. And Dunne,.put them in a position to do it.

As far as pg on defense, I would be the first to admit that having a small-sized one is a negative at times.It does help out the opposing PG making entry passes and dribble and dishes. I will also agree that Darrell is still getting beat at times one-on -one with poor positioning. But I will still insist he is a lot like KeeKee was on defense,making up for those weaknesses with hustle,court intelligence and upping the whole team's defensive effort while he is on the court. There were a whole lot of defensive lapses last nightbut Darrell would be one the last that I would point to in this regard.

Lastly,Iwould like to know why Dunne took Lampley out at about the five minute mark last night when any miutes he gets at the PG now are so valuable in terms of doing something decent in the MAAC tourney and in terms of what slots are recruited for next year. Was it because he took a missed outside shot or dove and made the basket or was fouled? How many offensive options were available at that point. I believe that he subbed for Lampley with Tim so I would just like to stress that I had no problem with Tim in the game. As always,he played with tremendous heart which a few guys for whatever reason did not seem to last night.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- oldtimer#1, Friday, February 08, 06:32:17pm [1]

Jajk, one of the worst posts I have ever read. Your rationalizations and ignoring much of the history of this season is insulting. Now I happen to like Leon better as a player than Lampley but I have also criticized Nick and supported your call for Darrell. Darrell has had plenty of time playing point this year and to ignore that as if he hasn't is pure rationalization. Nick has started but Darrell consistently came in early on in the first half usually to replace Nick at point, not play along side of him. Peacock made a comment before the season started to the effect that it's not so much who plays but how much they play. The difference in time played between Leon and Lampley is negliable. And, by the way, where is it written that only point guards can get assists?





You moan about opportunity and playing time but ignore the facts. Darrell has played significant minutes this year. He has played much, much more than most freshmen usually do. Now you begin to criticize and second guess Dunne if he doesn't play your boy enough. Perhaps you should go back and read an early season post by another observer who stated that Dunne stuck with Darrell, refusing to pull him, in several games where Darrell was out of control. And if you don't like that phrase, it was true.




Now you're trying to rationalize that the team is more intense when Darrell is on the floor. That's an insult to Orta and Gooding who take charges and are frequently on the floor diving for loose balls. It also insults Jenkins and Leon who have more steals than Darrell. Not badmouthing Darrell as he gives effort but to imply that he is the straw that stirs the drink is ridiculous.



Finally, if Darrell is to become our point guard of the future he needs to think pass and distribute. Others have called him selfish, I prefer to think that it's just not in his nature. He's a scorer, not passer. Check out his assists for the year without trying to explain therm away. Peacock is right insofar as assist totals do depend on several factors. But even taking that into account anyone who has seen Darrell this year knows that he is a shoot first type of player, and without trying to insult him I would not say that court vision and intelligence are his greatest strengths.



My attitude is to let Darrell be Darrell and not try to make him into something he is not. Darrell has skills that can become big contributions but he is not the hyped player that you made him out to be before the season started. Lack of opportunity is not the reason. Also let's stop making this a Darrell thing, our problems and needs are much bigger!!!

[Edit]

[> Re: No "point" in this one -- Sludge, Friday, February 08, 12:33:04pm [1]

Thanks again Cindy for a balanced report. Wonder how the coaching staff performed in this game. Maybe someone attended that could provide us with a critical insight into the "teachings" here.

[Edit]

[> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- Cindy Crawford, Friday, February 08, 01:28:29pm [1]

Hard to know what's going on inside the huddle.Players still appear to be listening intently. All are schooled when they return to the bench. Whether or not they are getting the message if there is a message, cannot begin to be determined here.
One thing evident last night was an even more rapid substitution pattern than usual.Perhaps the coach is just looking for someone who can play,or a hot hand. Nine players each had at least seventeen minutes.

[Edit]

[> [> Almost sounds like bait -- Peacock, Friday, February 08, 04:24:07pm [1]

I'll only make three comments.

Sowell first does not handle crisp passes and he takes a siesta before he makes any decision on what to do with the ball after he gets it. The multiple teaming are as much a product of his lack of speed as it is by competitive design.

A comment made to me cited the difference in the two offenses. Loyola speeds the ball around perimeter until the open shot results while every SPC player has to stop look around to see if he has an open shot or pass it to next guy. A little exaggerated but you get the point. Criticism on lack of assist attributed to the PG must also assign much of the blame for the rest not being in a position to put anything home. Statistics can mislead and while I will not defend the PGs, much of the problem also lies with the rest of the team.

Has anybody taught defense. This team rivals Leckie's first year.

Take what ever you want from these comments about teaching, but please don't give me this dumb player analysis. While statistics can mislead they still lead to a standard distribution. And while this is a small sample size and could be an abnormal distribution for basketball IQ, it then is the 2nd year of same.

[Edit]

[> [> [> One thing is clear -- Sludge, Friday, February 08, 05:22:21pm [1]

You're seeing what other's are seeing on the court. Now for the discussion on the cause(s).

Hard to see how this statistic is misleading. Out of 19 field goals, 16 unassisted, none from the point spot. Doesn't this also lead to a standard distribution?

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> Re: One thing is clear -- jajk, Friday, February 08, 06:29:19pm [1]

stats can support just about anything. The first eight games when Dunne's coaching did not yet show its full impact on these kids: total team assists-104; assists for Leon and Lampley-42. Now that Dunne's coaching is really being reflected in the new guys' play over the last eight games: team assists-58: assists for Leon and Lampley-26. Again, no point guard operates in a vacuum.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> Re: One thing is clear -- oldtimer#1, Friday, February 08, 07:26:19pm [1]

The observation that no point guard operates in a vacuum is undoubtedly true. But if we are swinging the pendulum to promote another agenda i.e. we don't need help at that postion then I say bring Leon back. He shoots better, drives to the basket better (much better), has proportionally more assists and plays equally well (or poorly) on defense. Of course, I'm saying the above half seriously.


The new agenda seems to be it's Dunne's fault, that Lampley has not been given a chance... Reality is that there is blame to go all over. We are playing shorthanded with players who are not only freshmen but not as skilled/good as our opponents. There has been no senior leadership and the coach is not above criticism or responsibility. Bottom line, it's a lot of things and everything AND IT IS OBVIOUS THAT THERE ARE HOLES TO FILL.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> Funny how you don't understand -- Peacock, Saturday, February 09, 12:21:11am [1]

that if a teammate doesn't present himself in a position to score nothing is going to result. Lampley made a beautiful pass on one play that went right through the frontcourts hands.

The key to statistics is understand the data and its generation, of which you seem not to want to do. Wonder if that supports your agenda.

One might say the plays only call for unassisted field goals or do you fail to consider that as a potential. Even with poor guards one might think assists would come from just the ball movement. The lack of same is more indicting.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> Does your infallability come directly from the Divine -- Sludge, Saturday, February 09, 03:55:03pm [1]

You are incapable of absorbing any thought other than what already fits your biased agenda. Rather than admitting that there exist a number of causes, you immediately seek to put forth some unfounded premise that, if unchallenged, allows you to draw to your already established conclusion. A balanced perspective is not in your makeup. If one tries to put forth several thoughts for consideration, your response is to call them out for their alleged inconsistencies.

Since Lampley made "one beautiful pass" that went through a teammates hands, then your logic concludes that he is a passer/point guard, and only suffers due to the inability of others to execute. Or perhaps Dunne should have had someone with better hands at the other hand. Poor Darrell, we have made him the whipping boy for all our woes.

One has to wonder why you ever ask questions when you already have the answers. Choose your agenda, close your mind to other opinions and everything will safely follow suit.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> Lets be realistic -- Peacock, Saturday, February 09, 04:51:01pm [1]

You see problems behind every tree. You don't challenge or explain away what even you see You just attempt to play the GOD of judgement and balance. As I have said before, have you ever had an opinion of your own other than that the other guy is wrong or right. Personally I am a disciple of Ockham. Yes there are other problems but are they the root cause. The fact that you have a problem distilling down your observations is your problem and you continue to demonstrate it by constantly attempting to expand a singular example into a conspiracy or agenda. Why do you fail constantly to rebut the fact that the team does not provide themselves for assists and only blame it on Leon or Lampley. Did you miss that. Hell under a decent system assists would result just from being there regardless of the quality of the guards. Try putting your perceived expertise on the game rather than guessing at agenda or conspiracies. I have the feeling you have no clue to what you think of this team.

The balanced perspective is not in your make-up as you chose to hold on to failures until they slap you in the face. You showed it in the Leckie era and you show it here. Your real problem is your inability to understand that sometimes the most obvious is the reason and what you call observations has been very evident even to you but you chose to HIDE behind every excuse you can muster. If the man turns it around I’ll back him up, but what you have seen so far doesn’t deserve the Bullshit you spout as support. One will wonder when you would actually ever make a decision on the team. I think we may have to wait for someone else to tell you what that should be.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> You drown in your own minutia -- Sludge, Saturday, February 09, 08:10:22pm [1]

You persist in misrepresenting my views. You deride others but you don't put forth a solid position or statement other than to continually infer that all ills rest with the staff. Much like your free-spirited philosopher, Ockham, you attempt to reduce all to a simplistic cause, provided of course that it suits your predetermined purpose.

Unless Mr. Ockham is our answer at point guard, look for our problems to continue. Our shortcomings are many and have been reported. Your assaults add nothing to the discussion or help with a solution.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You drown in your own minutia -- oldtimer#1, Saturday, February 09, 11:48:01pm [1]

Einstein's comment on Ockham's razor: "It is vain to think that the simplest theory is the correct one'

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Like this is the Theory of Relativity -- Peacock, Sunday, February 10, 02:23:14pm [1]

It's not rocket science and I doubt Einstein was talking about the lowly science of basketball. In fact the theorm goes, "All other things being equal," This is not always the case in the world Einstein inhabited, but is more applicable to the SPC program.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> Re: You drown in your own minutia -- oldtimer#1, Sunday, February 10, 05:12:24pm [1]

Didn't know that they played basketball in Ockham's day, either.

[Edit]

[> [> [> [> [> [> [> [> No one misinterprets your views -- Peacock, Sunday, February 10, 02:16:26pm [1]

You have no views. I imply that apologists like yourself will seldom touch the scared cow and blame totally the players. You acknowledge all the observations and still have a problem commenting on the coaching. Instead you take the cop out and claim other issues. For whatever reason you have serious issues extracting the issue of coaching from your convoluted concepts. Hell even here you imply that a PG will solve the problem. Shallow to the MAX. You must be a thrill at your own meetings.

Why don't you step up to the plate and list the things you like about the coaching you have seen. If you don't have any, I never invited you comment. You entered on you own, and cried that you were derided. I'll tell you why you can't, you need someone else to tell you. You spend more time assigning agendas to other's opinion and inventing reasons why this team shows little to no promise. I don't give a damn about what you think, but when you can't put forth a supportable comment stop attacking others. Yes and this with two players that had prior MAAC All Star team recognitions and a promising sophomore. Wonder what you extraneous reason are for their lack of contribution.

[Edit]

[> Re: No "point" in this one -- SPC Fan, Saturday, February 09, 08:16:04am [1]

Watched the game on the computer.Same lack of flow on offense we have seen all season. Watch the difference in Loyola passing on the perimeter and quick entry passes inside as opposed to our stagnant stand in one place and telegraph it ways and you see what a lot of the problem is no matter which guard is playing the point.
That said can't deny Lampley is quicker and has better handle than Nick who is a far superior shooter. Hard to say if it's the coaching or the execution but the same woes have gone on for over 20 games now.
At this point these players are no longer freshman this far into the season.Lack of improvement is the biggest indictment of the staff.
Still looks like we need at least a player at the 1 and 5 with the last two scholarships.I think we find a player at the 3 from the current roster.

[Edit]

[> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- oldetimer#1, Saturday, February 09, 10:18:22am [1]

Well balanced and reasoned commentary. When things are this bad it's easy to point fingers all over the place. As stated several weeks ago there's plenty of blame to go around.




One observation to add to SPC Fan's comments. There are obviously plays being called. Recently, you can see Dunne instructing his point guard, whoever that might be, to run such and such play. More often than not the play never develops and for the rest of the time clock our players just play catch or dribble until a penetration attempt is made or more often a poor shot is hoisted up.






So I pose the question, what's the problem? Is it Raul showing little or no offense? Or is it Sowell not having quick feet, combined with poor hands? Or is it Jenkins trying to create and often taking forced shots? How about Nick dribbling too much? Or Darrell not seeing the floor and often playing one on one? Maybe it's Costner of whom one poster said early on that he wasn't a developed enough player to contribute but now asks why he hasn't played more! Is it the fact that we rely heavily on freshmen? Perhaps it is that while some of our players are just not that good? Or is it the staff who some like to say have no clue?






When things are this bad all of us are concerned and disappointed. I also assume that the players and especially the staff are moreso. Even if our freshmen develop we have, as SPC Fan and others have pointed out, obvious needs. It's the nature of these Boards to point specific fingers but the reality is that there are many contributing factors.

[Edit]

[> [> Re: No "point" in this one -- NickD, Saturday, February 09, 11:05:41pm [1]

If team cannot run the plays or will not run the plays are both the fault of the coach and his staff.After 21 games it is ridiculous..I watched Siena and Marist last night and it was a great game to watch. We are light yrs away from being able to play and shoot like those two teams.The main thing missing for SPC is the talent level.

[Edit]


[ Contact Forum Admin ]

Forum timezone: GMT-5
VF Version: 2.94, ConfDB:
Before posting please read our privacy policy.
VoyForums(tm) is a Free Service from Voyager Info-Systems.
Copyright © 1998-2008 Voyager Info-Systems. All Rights Reserved.