of why we lost. We couldn't hit anything. We out rebounded Cincinnati but they got way more second chance points out of theirs. They shot 58% in the second half, 80% from 3pt range. We shot 24% in the second half and 10% from 3. CC goes 2-11 and "0" FT's. Geron goes 2-13 and JJ SHOOTS Two free throws. When two of our guards shooting over 85% brick FT's and we have 8 FT's total shot by our starting guards that's the story basketball fans.

The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

(01-05-2014 05:12 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

Watch the game again. Most of the 17 threes were wide open. In fact the one Chris hit in the second half might have been the most contested one he shot.

They are shooting 29% from 3. That's 315th in the country. They've missed against everyone.

The shooting has affected every other aspect of the offense. That's basketball. You have to make some shots. From the 18 min mark to the 10 min mark Cincy made three huge threes. That allowed them to play totally differently and take control of the game.

Tigers aren't really getting much of that right now and it's killing them

(01-05-2014 05:24 PM)Time4Reason Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:12 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

Watch the game again. Most of the 17 threes were wide open. In fact the one Chris hit in the second half might have been the most contested one he shot.

They are shooting 29% from 3. That's 315th in the country. They've missed against everyone.

The shooting has affected every other aspect of the offense. That's basketball. You have to make some shots. From the 18 min mark to the 10 min mark Cincy made three huge threes. That allowed them to play totally differently and take control of the game.

Tigers aren't really getting much of that right now and it's killing them

It would be foolish to think the other teams will not use that game as a textbook of how to compete with the Tigers. Slowing us down totally changed the way we play. This is a transition team and not a half court team. I look forward to seeing what adjustments Josh will make come the Louisville game. But no matter what else if we shoot like we did against Cincy we lose no matter who we play if they shoot as well as the Bearcats did.

(01-05-2014 05:24 PM)Time4Reason Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:12 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

Watch the game again. Most of the 17 threes were wide open. In fact the one Chris hit in the second half might have been the most contested one he shot.

They are shooting 29% from 3. That's 315th in the country. They've missed against everyone.

The shooting has affected every other aspect of the offense. That's basketball. You have to make some shots. From the 18 min mark to the 10 min mark Cincy made three huge threes. That allowed them to play totally differently and take control of the game.

Tigers aren't really getting much of that right now and it's killing them

The only wide open shots I saw were from Cincinnati players. Every 3 I saw shot by Memphis was contested or rushed. And I don't want to re-watch the game.

(01-05-2014 07:17 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:24 PM)Time4Reason Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:12 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

Watch the game again. Most of the 17 threes were wide open. In fact the one Chris hit in the second half might have been the most contested one he shot.

They are shooting 29% from 3. That's 315th in the country. They've missed against everyone.

The shooting has affected every other aspect of the offense. That's basketball. You have to make some shots. From the 18 min mark to the 10 min mark Cincy made three huge threes. That allowed them to play totally differently and take control of the game.

Tigers aren't really getting much of that right now and it's killing them

The only wide open shots I saw were from Cincinnati players. Every 3 I saw shot by Memphis was contested or rushed. And I don't want to re-watch the game.

Agree. Most of our perimeter shots were contested

NEWSFLASH:

This team is not a dominant nor competent threat from deep. Stats don't lie.

Memphis and the 3pnt shot

We is what we is

Here's the stat that got my attention.

The 4 guards took 32 of the 37 shots in the 2nd half and missed 31 of them.

IMHO that's an unbelievable scary stat that tells it all.

(01-05-2014 07:47 PM)jgardne Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 07:17 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:24 PM)Time4Reason Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 05:12 PM)plaidtiger Wrote:  We shot poorly because they contested every shot and their length bothered our players. Maybe we had an off night shooting, but I would commend Cincy on their defense first. If we don't make adjustments the next time we meet, the same results probably occur.

Watch the game again. Most of the 17 threes were wide open. In fact the one Chris hit in the second half might have been the most contested one he shot.

They are shooting 29% from 3. That's 315th in the country. They've missed against everyone.

The shooting has affected every other aspect of the offense. That's basketball. You have to make some shots. From the 18 min mark to the 10 min mark Cincy made three huge threes. That allowed them to play totally differently and take control of the game.

Tigers aren't really getting much of that right now and it's killing them

The only wide open shots I saw were from Cincinnati players. Every 3 I saw shot by Memphis was contested or rushed. And I don't want to re-watch the game.

Agree. Most of our perimeter shots were contested

11 of the 17 were absolutely clean looks. None of the 5 shot by Johnson were even contested

Crawford took two contested shots in a row from the same spot with 12:34 and 12:02 left - made one, missed one.

Another huge momentum play was 5:50 mark. Down 54-47 Josh called timeout and it was actually a very well designed play. Crawford's man got caught up on a flare screen and Chris popped back to the wing and had a good look in rhythm. If he makes there maybe a different game.

Dixon's first shot from the corner wasn't a terrible look but it was rushed. Also had another good look off a good screen by Shaq with 5:20 left down 9.

(01-05-2014 08:36 PM)BealeStreetTiger Wrote:  Here's the stat that got my attention.

The 4 guards took 32 of the 37 shots in the 2nd half and missed 31 of them.

IMHO that's an unbelievable scary stat that tells it all.

Wow, I knew it was bad, but I had no idea it was that bad.

I know some of it is due to the fact that they were kind of packing it in daring us to shoot, but not all of it. I noticed in the Jackson State and South Florida games, Joe Jackson made a couple of nice low post passes. It seemed to me the post guys (Goodwin, Nichols) were a little uncomfortable playing with their back to the basket? Granted it would have been much more difficult to pass into the paint against Cincy, but they should have tried some, even if it was just to pass it back out.

You live by the 3 you will die by it.

I'll say it again guardy...

The bad thing is that these same guys as a group minus Dixon shot it well from three last year. For whatever reason they aren't falling

(01-05-2014 09:48 PM)tigers0830 Wrote:  The bad thing is that these same guys as a group minus Dixon spot it will from three last year. For whatever reason they aren't falling

Panic, rushing to shoot, poor form, contested, etc, etc.

(01-05-2014 10:14 PM)dan o Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 09:48 PM)tigers0830 Wrote:  The bad thing is that these same guys as a group minus Dixon spot it will from three last year. For whatever reason they aren't falling

Panic, rushing to shoot, poor form, contested, etc, etc.

Clutch is slipping. Nothing new.

(01-05-2014 04:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

Despite the poor shooting? Are you crazy? We were 9-35 from the field in the 2nd half; a ton of them were open. The most contested of the bunch were the 3 pointer that Crawford actually made and maybe 3 or 4 of Dixon's.

(01-06-2014 11:49 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 04:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

Despite the poor shooting? Are you crazy? We were 9-35 from the field in the 2nd half; a ton of them were open. The most contested of the bunch were the 3 pointer that Crawford actually made and maybe 3 or 4 of Dixon's.

No shat. That's why you make changes. Move away from the small lineup a bit and go inside out. How bout some defensive adjustments? Zero. Just because the 3s aren't falling doesn't mean you can't win. You see that they aren't falling and you adjust your game plan. It's that simple.

(01-06-2014 12:11 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(01-06-2014 11:49 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 04:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

Despite the poor shooting? Are you crazy? We were 9-35 from the field in the 2nd half; a ton of them were open. The most contested of the bunch were the 3 pointer that Crawford actually made and maybe 3 or 4 of Dixon's.

No shat. That's why you make changes. Move away from the small lineup a bit and go inside out. How bout some defensive adjustments? Zero. Just because the 3s aren't falling doesn't mean you can't win. You see that they aren't falling and you adjust your game plan. It's that simple.

Shaq was 2-5 and Nichols was 1-4. Nichols had a wide open alley to the basket on the first play of the game and was very weak and got it blocked from behind. The bigs weren't getting position against Cincy. Most of the shots were wide open. Pastner made plenty of defensive adjustments, but everything Cincy put up went in.

I thought Crawford was going to be a difference maker because he was wide open the whole game, but couldn't hit anything. The whole team stunk. If you consider the talent level of our team, of the opponent and the fact that the game was played on our home court; it was the worst performance by a Josh Pastner coached team I've ever witnessed.

Pastner didn't coach a great game by any stretch; but there isn't a coach on the planet that is going to be able to overcome 9-35 shooting on mostly wide open shots.

(01-06-2014 12:11 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(01-06-2014 11:49 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 04:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

Despite the poor shooting? Are you crazy? We were 9-35 from the field in the 2nd half; a ton of them were open. The most contested of the bunch were the 3 pointer that Crawford actually made and maybe 3 or 4 of Dixon's.

No shat. That's why you make changes. Move away from the small lineup a bit and go inside out. How bout some defensive adjustments? Zero. Just because the 3s aren't falling doesn't mean you can't win. You see that they aren't falling and you adjust your game plan. It's that simple.

the key to your post is the last three words you typed. making adjustments and changing something that you are doing that is not working is indeed "simple". why? because you see what is going on on the floor and you make a decision to do something different. the square peg will not fit into the circle hole, lets try something different.

(01-06-2014 12:18 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-06-2014 12:11 PM)450bench Wrote:  

(01-06-2014 11:49 AM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-05-2014 04:58 PM)450bench Wrote:  The box score speaks of tangibles. It doesn't say what happened to produce those tangibles. Adjustments could have been made to change the outcome, despite the poor shooting.
You have to make in game changes if you want to win a game like that. That's part of coaching. Pastner chose not to change anything, hence, we lost.

Despite the poor shooting? Are you crazy? We were 9-35 from the field in the 2nd half; a ton of them were open. The most contested of the bunch were the 3 pointer that Crawford actually made and maybe 3 or 4 of Dixon's.

No shat. That's why you make changes. Move away from the small lineup a bit and go inside out. How bout some defensive adjustments? Zero. Just because the 3s aren't falling doesn't mean you can't win. You see that they aren't falling and you adjust your game plan. It's that simple.

Shaq was 2-5 and Nichols was 1-4. Nichols had a wide open alley to the basket on the first play of the game and was very weak and got it blocked from behind. The bigs weren't getting position against Cincy. Most of the shots were wide open. Pastner made plenty of defensive adjustments, but everything Cincy put up went in.

I thought Crawford was going to be a difference maker because he was wide open the whole game, but couldn't hit anything. The whole team stunk. If you consider the talent level of our team, of the opponent and the fact that the game was played on our home court; it was the worst performance by a Josh Pastner coached team I've ever witnessed.

Pastner didn't coach a great game by any stretch; but there isn't a coach on the planet that is going to be able to overcome 9-35 shooting on mostly wide open shots.

And thus you make the change to pound it inside. The 2 bigs only got 9 shots. There's the problem.