(01-13-2014 01:54 PM)homefry20 Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 01:50 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 01:41 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 09:43 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(01-12-2014 10:47 PM)Stammers Wrote:  Yes he made a lot of terrific adjustments to barely beat a ****** Temple team. Out of the 3 games everyone is talking about, the Temple game was the least well coached one of the bunch, by a country mile.

Why don't you just go shoot yourself in the head and put yourself out of your obvious misery? Or maybe go find a different team to root for. My gosh you're a miserable excuse for a fan. Objective analysis by Marc Mensa - someone I NEVER agree with - just showed you how wrong you are about the lack of any attempt at an inside game against Cincy and you still argue.

It pointless to argue with someone who simply wants to argue, and Stammers has managed to twist himself into a pretzel in order to continue to battle this windmill. All anyone has to do is go back and watch the last 12:30 of the UC game. We hardly ran a set for 9:00, while Cincy continually reversed the ball, penetrated and scored. Their defense was good because our offense was nothing more than our guards trying to go one-on-one off the dribble into the teeth of the UC defense.. As we continued to throw up brick after brick on offense, the team defense then began to break down as Cincy spread us out, penetrated and dished. Its all there. If anyone has 20 minutes go check it out.
Memphis v UC

If Josh couldn't coach, then we'd seen more of the same against UL and Temple, but we didn't. The guy learned from his mistakes. I do not see why its so hard to admit as much. Our bigs saw a whole lot more of the ball. We actually reversed it and got some easy drives to the bucket against Temple. There was far less dribbling and far more passing. Our man defense lacked but our zone was, at times, effective.

If our team didn't shoot horribly against Cincy it would have opened everything else up. We missed a ton of wide open shots. The board has a few posters that go into hysterics; claiming that Pastner is great in one game and horrible in the next. One game we're going to the Final Four, the next game we should fire him.

Many of the shots we made against Louisville, were more difficult than the shots we missed against Cincy. The pass from JJ to Geron for the slam was ill advised, but was right on the money. The team missed a dozen easier passes in the Cincy game.

MemphisCanes and I have explained why the bigs weren't seeing the ball against Cincy. If people have hard heads, it's not our fault.

Thats the point, a good coach can see that the ball isnt going in and make some adjustments. when it is going in, then you facilitate that by making good substitutions and keeping the team fresh.

Its pretty moronic to say that making shots is the only thing that matters. if that was the case then there would be no need for coaches at all.

Trueth

(01-13-2014 01:50 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 01:41 PM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  

(01-13-2014 09:43 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(01-12-2014 10:47 PM)Stammers Wrote:  

(01-12-2014 10:23 PM)DicksHatBand Wrote:  Great observation. I feel the same way. I didn't think coach made enough changes or corrections in the Cincy game. Actually he may not have made any. The criticism for at least not trying to make adjustments was certainly warranted. I thought he did a much better job in that regard in Louisville and at Temple. Obviously, coaches have off nights too. All of them do.

Yes he made a lot of terrific adjustments to barely beat a ****** Temple team. Out of the 3 games everyone is talking about, the Temple game was the least well coached one of the bunch, by a country mile.

Why don't you just go shoot yourself in the head and put yourself out of your obvious misery? Or maybe go find a different team to root for. My gosh you're a miserable excuse for a fan. Objective analysis by Marc Mensa - someone I NEVER agree with - just showed you how wrong you are about the lack of any attempt at an inside game against Cincy and you still argue.

It pointless to argue with someone who simply wants to argue, and Stammers has managed to twist himself into a pretzel in order to continue to battle this windmill. All anyone has to do is go back and watch the last 12:30 of the UC game. We hardly ran a set for 9:00, while Cincy continually reversed the ball, penetrated and scored. Their defense was good because our offense was nothing more than our guards trying to go one-on-one off the dribble into the teeth of the UC defense.. As we continued to throw up brick after brick on offense, the team defense then began to break down as Cincy spread us out, penetrated and dished. Its all there. If anyone has 20 minutes go check it out.
Memphis v UC

If Josh couldn't coach, then we'd seen more of the same against UL and Temple, but we didn't. The guy learned from his mistakes. I do not see why its so hard to admit as much. Our bigs saw a whole lot more of the ball. We actually reversed it and got some easy drives to the bucket against Temple. There was far less dribbling and far more passing. Our man defense lacked but our zone was, at times, effective.

If our team didn't shoot horribly against Cincy it would have opened everything else up. We missed a ton of wide open shots. The board has a few posters that go into hysterics; claiming that Pastner is great in one game and horrible in the next. One game we're going to the Final Four, the next game we should fire him.

Many of the shots we made against Louisville, were more difficult than the shots we missed against Cincy. The pass from JJ to Geron for the slam was ill advised, but was right on the money. The team missed a dozen easier passes in the Cincy game.

MemphisCanes and I have explained why the bigs weren't seeing the ball against Cincy. If people have hard heads, it's not our fault.

Pastner is a work in progress. In my opinion, he has gone from a mediocre sideline coach to a decent one; yet I think he does underestimate the coach's influence on a game. It is a players game, but its also the coach's chessboard.

What I don't understand though is why he is so publically insistent on his stance of winning or losing with his 4 guards? He has two, skilled 5 star studs playing down low who are constantly being told the game is going to be won and lost on the backs of the guards. Why? This team can win with its bigs and it can win with its guards. The last two games, the bigs contributions were the difference between the wins and losses. This team has quality depth at both the guard and post positions, so I would think Josh would do himself a favor by backing off his 4 guard promises and publically putting each game on the back of the entire team.