I know its WAY WAY early to talk 2016 basketball but let's agree on a few things while we have some down time and can think clearly...

1. Nobody comes back from the summer league games and says the new UC recruit <insert name> is going to be the next Michael Jordan...which happens every year.

2. Nobody comes back from the summer league games and says current UC player <insert name> played with much more aggressive play and may go for 20ppg this upcoming year. Which happens almost every year.

3. Nobody says that UC will finally run an up tempo run and gun offense because Mick finally has 'all the right pieces'. It's been eight years, it's not going to happen. We will score 55-60 ppg., our defense will hold teams to less and half the board will argue offensive efficiency actually proves that our offense isn't too bad and those that look at ppg will say they are crazy.

4. We should make predictions preseason on how many games Ellis gets kicked out of next year. The winner of that pre season bet gets a round of beers bought for him/her at the next annual board meet up after next season.


am I missing anything?

1. It's gonna happen.
2. See #1.
3. See #2.
4. Best idea ever.

1. It's already started with the Jenifer thread.
2. This should just be named the "Shaq Thomas rule".
3. Give me someone who can put the ball in the basket on a consistent basis and can shoot over 70% from the FT line and I'll be happy. Anything else is just regurgitated talk from the past 8 years.
4. That's assuming he makes it through the off-season without any "nightclub altercations".

They very likely won't play in the summer league, so you're clear there...

I really don't recall anyone saying Jenifer would be the next Jordan. The kid is a fantastic distributor, it's not really up for debate. There's a ****-ton of video showing it, it's not something he'll need to achieve; he already mastered that aspect of his game.
That said, no one knows how he'll handle D1 play. Different caliber athletes and defenses, will likely take time to adjust to.
Last year, people complemented Clark, saying he would be the next big thing and honestly, he earned the praise. So, stymie the ***** fest, please. People said Caupain would be a good one, he showed sparks of that this year.(particularly at home against UConn.)

With #3, the point total, we already exceeded 60 ppg this year at 62.4 and I don't think it's unrealistic to expect 65-70.
That being said, uptempo? Probably not. Only time I remember a Mick team going uptempo, was when Yancy was out after the Xavier fight.

With #4 I think he needs to do what he did in the Kentucky game. Relish in the bad guy role and get under other people's skin. He really pissed that Lyles kid off. If he can be a villain, I think he could be a very big asset for us.

Let's agree that offensive efficiency and not PPG is the important metric.

Heard Terry Nelson say on tv last night that you need at least two future NBA players on your roster to win a national title, when questioned he said go back and look at the last twenty years of winners. Even when UC didn't win they had NVE and Blount. If that's the case, we won't be involved for a while.

(03-30-2015 07:18 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  Heard Terry Nelson say on tv last night that you need at least two future NBA players on your roster to win a national title, when questioned he said go back and look at the last twenty years of winners. Even when UC didn't win they had NVE and Blount. If that's the case, we won't be involved for a while.

Lance Stephenson and Sean Kilpatrick

(03-30-2015 10:02 AM)@ES Trader Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 07:18 AM)CincyBro Wrote:  Heard Terry Nelson say on tv last night that you need at least two future NBA players on your roster to win a national title, when questioned he said go back and look at the last twenty years of winners. Even when UC didn't win they had NVE and Blount. If that's the case, we won't be involved for a while.

Lance Stephenson and Sean Kilpatrick

I don't know what exactly Nelson was saying but I would think what he meant was among other things, a team needs a couple legit NBA players to have a good chance at the title. Those legit NBA talents need a decent supporting cast also.

Here's what I wanna see in the offseason and going into next year.

Ellis: Get stronger. Much much stronger. He has a decent enough post game that if he added 25lbs to his frame he could be a very effective scorer. I could care less about his hot-headedness. I like it when players play with passion and agressiveness so if that means he makes a bone-headed play every so often so be it. Don't get me wrong, I don't want him cheap shotting a guy like in the UK game.

Clark: Like Ellis, get stronger. But in addition to that I'd like to see him develop some post moves to complement his lone move of backing his many down and turning to his right for a jump hook. He also needs to improve his ball handling and a jump shot out to 15 feet. Right now defenders can back off him and force him to shoot it or put the ball on the floor 15 feet away from the basket.

Caupain: Realize you're the leader of this team and start acting like it on the floor. Put the game in your hands and start making plays. He does this at times but then has stretches and games where he's invisible. When the shot clock is winding down or the game is on the line get the ball in your hands and make a play. Keep attacking the basket and find the open man.

Thomas: Your game is attacking the basket. Realize it. Stop settling for 18 foot jumpers. Nothing worse than watching him dribble it around the perimeter then pull up for an 18+ foot line drive jumper.

Cobb/Johnson: Both of you need to be 40% 3-point shooters. I love it when you two are attacking the basket as well but that is the exception rather than the norm. The norm is you two shooting threes so you both need to improve that %.

DeBerry: You're 270lbs, start using that size. No one should be able to stop you from getting a good shot up every time you receive the ball 7 foot and in.

UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

(03-30-2015 10:20 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

Actually you don't even need a "mountain of data" - just take a look at the "offense" stats/data of UK, Wiskey, and the Blue Devils - (and considering the scare they threw into the overall #1 seed, you could add ND to the mix) - they can all score the basketball.

(03-30-2015 10:30 AM)richardk Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:20 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

Actually you don't even need a "mountain of data" - just take a look at the "offense" stats/data of UK, Wiskey, and the Blue Devils - (and considering the scare they threw into the overall #1 seed, you could add ND to the mix) - they can all score the basketball.

Agree. I have harped on this through the years.

Of the games we scored under 60 points this year:

Losses... Ole Miss, Nebraska, VCU, UConn, Memphis, ECU, Temple, Tulane, X, UConn, UK

Wins... St Francis, Eastern Ill, N Carolina Central, SMU, UCF, Tulsa

(03-29-2015 09:03 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  Let's agree that offensive efficiency and not PPG is the important metric.

(03-30-2015 10:55 AM)Topkat Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:30 AM)richardk Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:20 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

Actually you don't even need a "mountain of data" - just take a look at the "offense" stats/data of UK, Wiskey, and the Blue Devils - (and considering the scare they threw into the overall #1 seed, you could add ND to the mix) - they can all score the basketball.

Agree. I have harped on this through the years.

Of the games we scored under 60 points this year:

Losses... Ole Miss, Nebraska, VCU, UConn, Memphis, ECU, Temple, Tulane, X, UConn, UK

Wins... St Francis, Eastern Ill, N Carolina Central, SMU, UCF, Tulsa

Please stop focusing on Points per Game

(03-30-2015 12:05 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 09:03 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  Let's agree that offensive efficiency and not PPG is the important metric.

(03-30-2015 10:55 AM)Topkat Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:30 AM)richardk Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:20 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

Actually you don't even need a "mountain of data" - just take a look at the "offense" stats/data of UK, Wiskey, and the Blue Devils - (and considering the scare they threw into the overall #1 seed, you could add ND to the mix) - they can all score the basketball.

Agree. I have harped on this through the years.

Of the games we scored under 60 points this year:

Losses... Ole Miss, Nebraska, VCU, UConn, Memphis, ECU, Temple, Tulane, X, UConn, UK

Wins... St Francis, Eastern Ill, N Carolina Central, SMU, UCF, Tulsa

Please stop focusing on Points per Game

Please stop NOT focusing on it. Get your head out of the sand and realize its UC's #1 problem. It doesn't matter how efficient your offense is when you're only scoring 60 points a game you give the opponent a better chance to be in the game. When you only score 60 points a game you put extra pressure on your defense to be perfect and its impossible to be perfect every game. No matter how good your defense is there is going to be a game where the opponent is a bad matchup or they just shoot unusually well. Your offense has to be able to generate points to match them.

And for the record, even if you don't look at points per game and look at offensive efficiency .... UC isn't very good in that statistic either.
http://kenpom.com/index.php?s=RankAdjOE
UC is 101st in offensive efficiency. All of the final four teams rank in the Top 13. And 7 of the 8 one and two seeds are ranked in the Top 10.

(03-30-2015 12:05 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(03-29-2015 09:03 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  Let's agree that offensive efficiency and not PPG is the important metric.

(03-30-2015 10:55 AM)Topkat Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:30 AM)richardk Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 10:20 AM)nachoman91 Wrote:  UC Coaching Staff: You won't ever win a championship averaging 60 points a game. When you're a low scoring team you keep the opposing teams in the game. I'm not expecting 80 points per game but you've got to speed up the game, get some easy baskets off fast breaks and steals, and increase the number of possessions. The old adage that "offense wins games, defense wins championships" is simply not true in college basketball. You've got to be good at both. I can show you a mountain of data that proves this.

Actually you don't even need a "mountain of data" - just take a look at the "offense" stats/data of UK, Wiskey, and the Blue Devils - (and considering the scare they threw into the overall #1 seed, you could add ND to the mix) - they can all score the basketball.

Agree. I have harped on this through the years.

Of the games we scored under 60 points this year:

Losses... Ole Miss, Nebraska, VCU, UConn, Memphis, ECU, Temple, Tulane, X, UConn, UK

Wins... St Francis, Eastern Ill, N Carolina Central, SMU, UCF, Tulsa

Please stop focusing on Points per Game

You can try to convince yourself that it doesn't matter, but it does. Maybe if we held opponents to 45 ppg, scoring 62 would be acceptable. But until that happens, we have to find a way to at least get to 70.

Go ahead and name the last team that won a national championship scoring less than 70 ppg. I don't know how long ago it was, but I can tell you I just went through every champion going back to Kentucky in 1998 and not a single one averaged less than 72. In fact, the vast majority of them were near 80 and several were close to 90.

We will never win a championship or even sniff one averaging 60-65 ppg. Great teams bury lesser teams. This season we were too often unable to do that. I do expect more scoring this year and I am very optimistic about our program's future. Just don't act like points per game don't matter.

A good offense is actually a great defense. It forces the other team to have to get in their half court offense and work hard for basket. On the contrary, a good defense can be a great offensive weapon, but for some Cronin has never focused on getting easy transition baskets.

(03-30-2015 12:17 PM)nachoman91 Wrote:  Stop NOT focusing on it. It doesn't matter how efficient your offense is when you're only scoring 60 points a game you give the opponent a better chance to be in the game. When you only score 60 points a game you put extra pressure on your defense to be perfect and its impossible to be perfect every game. No matter how good your defense is there is going to be a game where the opponent is a bad matchup or they just shoot unusually well. Your offense has to be able to generate points to match them.

And for the record, even if you don't look at points per game and look at offensive efficiency .... UC isn't very good in that statistic either.
http://kenpom.com/index.php?s=RankAdjOE
UC is 101st in offensive efficiency. All of the final four teams rank in the Top 13. And 7 of the 8 one and two seeds where ranked in the Top 10.

I didn't say UC was a good offense last season. So pointing out their ranking is meaningless.

Now compare the offensive efficiency list to the tempo list and see where the final 4 teams rank http://kenpom.com/index.php?s=RankAdjTempo

UC averaged a possession more per 40 minutes than Wisconsin
Duke is the highest of all the final 4 teams and they were only 122nd with 5.5 more possessions per 40 minutes than UC.
UK and MSU play almost the same pace with significantly different results.

Wisconsin, as slow of a pace as they play, had the most efficient offense in the country.

As much as I love the offensive intensity, I would like to see at least a glimmer of an organized, semi-set offense to help out. Too many times it seems like the offense consists of dribbling around 25 - 30 feet from the rim and then rushing a bad shot/3 pointer or turning it over. And when they do manage to get ahead, it seems like they try to resurrect the Dean Smith 4 corners offense and let the air out of the ball. My suggestions:
Start the offense MUCH earlier in the shot clock
Work with G Clark on his 15-18 foot jumper and plant him firmly at the foul line to work the pick and roll game
Have Clark and Ellis/DeBerry flash either up and down the lane or move from side to side so the defense has to shift/locate them and then run people behind them
Have a pattern of some basic type to run... like receivers and QBs in football. Don't script it, make it a "read option" type of thing

(03-30-2015 12:37 PM)cpawfan Wrote:  

(03-30-2015 12:17 PM)nachoman91 Wrote:  Stop NOT focusing on it. It doesn't matter how efficient your offense is when you're only scoring 60 points a game you give the opponent a better chance to be in the game. When you only score 60 points a game you put extra pressure on your defense to be perfect and its impossible to be perfect every game. No matter how good your defense is there is going to be a game where the opponent is a bad matchup or they just shoot unusually well. Your offense has to be able to generate points to match them.

And for the record, even if you don't look at points per game and look at offensive efficiency .... UC isn't very good in that statistic either.
http://kenpom.com/index.php?s=RankAdjOE
UC is 101st in offensive efficiency. All of the final four teams rank in the Top 13. And 7 of the 8 one and two seeds where ranked in the Top 10.

I didn't say UC was a good offense last season. So pointing out their ranking is meaningless.

Now compare the offensive efficiency list to the tempo list and see where the final 4 teams rank http://kenpom.com/index.php?s=RankAdjTempo

UC averaged a possession more per 40 minutes than Wisconsin
Duke is the highest of all the final 4 teams and they were only 122nd with 5.5 more possessions per 40 minutes than UC.
UK and MSU play almost the same pace with significantly different results.

Wisconsin, as slow of a pace as they play, had the most efficient offense in the country.

And they still averaged 72.8 PPG. Going through 17 years of data, 72 has been the minimum for a national championship team. Even if we continue playing at a slow pace, we still need to get over 70 ppg. 62 or even 67 is not going to cut it if we want to seriously contend.

Here's the offensive and defensive efficiency numbers for the Elite 8 teams. This data speaks for itself. Offense is more important than defense but overall you need to be good at both. UC is ranked 101st offensively and 13th defensively.

Two of the three worst defensive teams moved on. The lone one that didn't was Notre Dame which nearly beat the best college team of the last quarter century.

The worst offensive team by far lost.

Two of the three best defensive teams lost.

.................. Offense ... Defense
Kentucky .....  5 ......... 1
Arizona ........ 7 ......... 3
Wisconsin ....... 1 ....... 55
Duke ............. 3 ....... 17
Gonzaga ....... 6 ....... 29
N. Dame ....... 2 ....... 102
Michigan St. .... 13 ..... 47
Louisville ........ 66 ...... 5