(12-28-2012 06:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Chatter: yup...our defense IS the key to this team. It's sad to hold a team to 55 and LOSE...geez.

but as Bounce was pointing out our shortcomings, and accuratley so i believe we have to remember, our strength is not going to be offense...it's just not.

Our Strengths are:
1. Defense...which includes creating havoc, steals, blocks, and generally forcing teams to take bad/contested shots...we are maybe the best in the nation at this...if not, we have to be at least top 5
2. depth
3. rebounding

(12-28-2012 06:26 PM)Edgebrookjeff Wrote:  I think that if we play anyone with good inside players we will struggle. Even Mick admitted that a few weeks ago on his radio show. But how many teams will we face that have big men that average 12 points and 6-10 rebounds a game. Not too many, I'd say.[/b]


[b]

(12-28-2012 06:21 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  Chatter: yup...our defense IS the key to this team. It's sad to hold a team to 55 and LOSE...geez.

but as Bounce was pointing out our shortcomings, and accuratley so i believe we have to remember, our strength is not going to be offense...it's just not.

Our Strengths are:
1. Defense...which includes creating havoc, steals, blocks, and generally forcing teams to take bad/contested shots...we are maybe the best in the nation at this...if not, we have to be at least top 5
2. depth
3. rebounding

(12-28-2012 06:35 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  I don't quite agree with you on Cash, I think he does a great job of keeping pressure on the defense. Cash is doing his job very well, the problem is with our current roster he needs to do more than that for us to win.

(12-28-2012 05:44 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  Just had a chance to watch the New Mexico basketball game. Man, oh man was that ugly. These were a few of the things that were really concerning.

1) Low Basketball IQ- I am not expecting UC to be like a Duke or a Butler but they really have poor basketball IQ. The kids play very hard, but that will only get you so far. There is huge difference between playing hard and playing smart.

2) Non Existent Bigs- UC's bigs really don't exist. Outside of shot blocking, none of them do anything well. Jackson, Mbodj and Nyarsuk are complete liabilities. They even got lost three or four times in a row on pick and rolls. It is really, really hard to run a dribble drive offense if the other team doesn't have to guard 2 guys.

3) Overrated Guard play- Yes I said it, these guards overrated. Kilpatrick really cannot create his own shot against legitimate defensive teams and tries way too hard to force things. Oregon, Alabama, Wright State and now UNM all shut him down. Cashmere Wright is such a good scorer but he spends a lot time contributing nothing. The decision making from both has been downright horrible at times, especially for 4th and 5th year players. Parker is contributing about what I expected, the other two have been slight disappointments. That being said, these guards are very good. However, they aren't nearly good enough to carry this team by themselves. A lot of people have made the comparison to the Villanova team a few years ago with Allen Ray, Kyle Lowry and Nardi. Those guards were able to carry that team, ours cannot.

4) Motivation- This is now the 3rd or 4th year in a row that Cronin has said the team has been "feeling themselves too much." I do not know if that is due to this current roster, or if that is due to the coaching staff but that needs to be fixed.

Bottom line: UC is top 12-20 team. They have the capability of making a deep run in march as Mick has now shown two years in a row but it will be difficult to take the next step to elite.

(12-29-2012 12:55 AM)levydl Wrote:  

(12-28-2012 05:44 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  Just had a chance to watch the New Mexico basketball game. Man, oh man was that ugly. These were a few of the things that were really concerning.

1) Low Basketball IQ- I am not expecting UC to be like a Duke or a Butler but they really have poor basketball IQ. The kids play very hard, but that will only get you so far. There is huge difference between playing hard and playing smart.

2) Non Existent Bigs- UC's bigs really don't exist. Outside of shot blocking, none of them do anything well. Jackson, Mbodj and Nyarsuk are complete liabilities. They even got lost three or four times in a row on pick and rolls. It is really, really hard to run a dribble drive offense if the other team doesn't have to guard 2 guys.

3) Overrated Guard play- Yes I said it, these guards overrated. Kilpatrick really cannot create his own shot against legitimate defensive teams and tries way too hard to force things. Oregon, Alabama, Wright State and now UNM all shut him down. Cashmere Wright is such a good scorer but he spends a lot time contributing nothing. The decision making from both has been downright horrible at times, especially for 4th and 5th year players. Parker is contributing about what I expected, the other two have been slight disappointments. That being said, these guards are very good. However, they aren't nearly good enough to carry this team by themselves. A lot of people have made the comparison to the Villanova team a few years ago with Allen Ray, Kyle Lowry and Nardi. Those guards were able to carry that team, ours cannot.

4) Motivation- This is now the 3rd or 4th year in a row that Cronin has said the team has been "feeling themselves too much." I do not know if that is due to this current roster, or if that is due to the coaching staff but that needs to be fixed.

Bottom line: UC is top 12-20 team. They have the capability of making a deep run in march as Mick has now shown two years in a row but it will be difficult to take the next step to elite.

Kind of funny to read the 4 points and then the bottom line. Low IQ, no bigs, overrated guards, too full of themselves = top 20 team. OK.

To me, this is an overreaction. UC shot historically bad from inside the arc and did not get any help going to the foul line. Kilpatrick and Parker were 3-18 on 2 point shots, while Rubles and Jackson were 1-11. That was the game. I doubt those four will shoot 13% on midrange shots and layups again.

As far as the bigs, Cheik had 10 rebounds (6 offensive) and Jackson had 8. They aren't going to be all americans, but if they can play good D and rebound this team will at least be in every game.

I'm more concerned that they didn't run that trapping press last night. NM didn't seem to have more than 1 good ball handler and UC was having trouble scoring, so it seemed like they could force some turnovers and get some easy points. I thought they'd come out of halftime and turn up the pressure like they did against XU, but they never did.

(12-28-2012 09:46 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(12-28-2012 06:35 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  I don't quite agree with you on Cash, I think he does a great job of keeping pressure on the defense. Cash is doing his job very well, the problem is with our current roster he needs to do more than that for us to win.

Cashmere Wright has too many long stretches where he doesn't score or even shoot. Then all of a sudden he'll drop in 8 straight. He is too good of shooter and scorer to defer for that long. He is the best player on the team by far. Oh and he is pretty damn clutch. I guess I was just expecting he'd step his play up a notch from last year more than he has.

(12-29-2012 10:15 AM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(12-28-2012 09:46 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(12-28-2012 06:35 PM)BeerCat Wrote:  I don't quite agree with you on Cash, I think he does a great job of keeping pressure on the defense. Cash is doing his job very well, the problem is with our current roster he needs to do more than that for us to win.

Cashmere Wright has too many long stretches where he doesn't score or even shoot. Then all of a sudden he'll drop in 8 straight. He is too good of shooter and scorer to defer for that long. He is the best player on the team by far. Oh and he is pretty damn clutch. I guess I was just expecting he'd step his play up a notch from last year more than he has.

I was expecting Cash to take the last shot vs New Mexico....I don't want to get into Mick-bash here with this but I think it was an error not having him take the last shot, he has done it time and again and seems to be pretty damn good at it. The play we ran was DOA from the start....we inbounds it in the corner and thought we'd get a good shot off???? They needed to get it to the top of the key to Cash for us to have a chance to hit a buzzer beater. But oh well...like someone said, I didn't expect us to go undefeated this year.

(12-29-2012 10:50 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  If we are so limited offensively I still don't understand why we don't force the fast break issue and press all over the floor from the first second until the last second. Wasn't our depth supposed to be our greatest asset? Can we only press and fast break against weak teams? Fast break doesn't always mean a layup, five against four means an open 15 footer or open spot up uncontested 3-pointer. Press doesn't always mean turnover ( that would be nice ) but limits time to run offense and wears opponents down. This is like the 3rd year in a row we do this to start season then let better teams dictate to us instead of us dictating to them the way the game is going to be played.

(12-29-2012 12:55 AM)levydl Wrote:  To me, this is an overreaction. UC shot historically bad from inside the arc and did not get any help going to the foul line. Kilpatrick and Parker were 3-18 on 2 point shots, while Rubles and Jackson were 1-11. That was the game. I doubt those four will shoot 13% on midrange shots and layups again.

(12-29-2012 12:25 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(12-29-2012 12:55 AM)levydl Wrote:  To me, this is an overreaction. UC shot historically bad from inside the arc and did not get any help going to the foul line. Kilpatrick and Parker were 3-18 on 2 point shots, while Rubles and Jackson were 1-11. That was the game. I doubt those four will shoot 13% on midrange shots and layups again.

I agree. To me this was nothing more than a bad game. It was extremely frustrating because NM would have been a very good win, but I don't take any long-term concerns out of this one. The fact that they only lost by 1 to a good team while shooting 9-38 from inside the arc shows how good they can be with better shot selection and more offensive toughness in the paint. I expect both of those to improve.

(12-29-2012 12:30 PM)Bearcat_Bounce Wrote:  

(12-29-2012 12:25 PM)Bearcat04 Wrote:  

(12-29-2012 12:55 AM)levydl Wrote:  To me, this is an overreaction. UC shot historically bad from inside the arc and did not get any help going to the foul line. Kilpatrick and Parker were 3-18 on 2 point shots, while Rubles and Jackson were 1-11. That was the game. I doubt those four will shoot 13% on midrange shots and layups again.

I agree. To me this was nothing more than a bad game. It was extremely frustrating because NM would have been a very good win, but I don't take any long-term concerns out of this one. The fact that they only lost by 1 to a good team while shooting 9-38 from inside the arc shows how good they can be with better shot selection and more offensive toughness in the paint. I expect both of those to improve.

They have scored under 30 points in the first half for 4 straight games. I know the team will come around, but those are rather concerning numbers.