(04-24-2015 01:12 PM)cmhcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 10:41 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 09:00 AM)levydl Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 08:40 PM)jarr Wrote:  If anybody wants to argue that the game isn't unwatchable anymore, go ahead and YouTube some old videos of UCLA in the 70's, Lakers/Celtics in the 80's, UNLV and Loyola Marymount from the late 80s and early 90s, etc. or even just some other more ordinary teams of those times. It will blow you away how skilled some of those guys used to be.

There are like 50 guys in the NBA who are college aged. Players from those older teams you mention would be 1 and done today, so it's not really a fair comparison. Anthony Davis was the best center in the NBA in what would have been his senior year of college. The college game is comparatively worse than before because the best players leave much earlier than they used to.

And what do the Lakers and Celtics of the 80s have to do with the college game?

Go watch people in those eras dribble. nobody has a left hand. Watch the defense ...it's not nearly as tough. The players aren't as athletic and the attention to detail on defense isn't the same. Teams don't switch and communicate like they do now. Despite that teams turn the ball over less now and shooting has remained fairly consistent. Hell free throw shooting is better now than it was back then. Most objective data shows that fundamentals are better now then they were in the past. Everyone has nostalgia for the past, but by most objective analysis players and teams are simply better now.

Agree that the defense is much more intense now but you have to remember (and you're probably too young to) that you couldn't carry the ball when dribbling back in the day...you had to keep your hand on top of the ball. If they enforced that today there would be a travel call on every touch.

A thousand Amens!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

(04-24-2015 01:12 PM)cmhcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 10:41 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 09:00 AM)levydl Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 08:40 PM)jarr Wrote:  If anybody wants to argue that the game isn't unwatchable anymore, go ahead and YouTube some old videos of UCLA in the 70's, Lakers/Celtics in the 80's, UNLV and Loyola Marymount from the late 80s and early 90s, etc. or even just some other more ordinary teams of those times. It will blow you away how skilled some of those guys used to be.

There are like 50 guys in the NBA who are college aged. Players from those older teams you mention would be 1 and done today, so it's not really a fair comparison. Anthony Davis was the best center in the NBA in what would have been his senior year of college. The college game is comparatively worse than before because the best players leave much earlier than they used to.

And what do the Lakers and Celtics of the 80s have to do with the college game?

Go watch people in those eras dribble. nobody has a left hand. Watch the defense ...it's not nearly as tough. The players aren't as athletic and the attention to detail on defense isn't the same. Teams don't switch and communicate like they do now. Despite that teams turn the ball over less now and shooting has remained fairly consistent. Hell free throw shooting is better now than it was back then. Most objective data shows that fundamentals are better now then they were in the past. Everyone has nostalgia for the past, but by most objective analysis players and teams are simply better now.

Agree that the defense is much more intense now but you have to remember (and you're probably too young to) that you couldn't carry the ball when dribbling back in the day...you had to keep your hand on top of the ball. If they enforced that today there would be a travel call on every touch.

Yeah, its rate when you see a palming/carry violation.

Also, back 20 plus years ago...players could only take 2 steps after the dribble, now, its 3-4 (maybe even more) and refs don't call traveling.

Its sad really, as I remember spending so much time in practice on "pivot foot" drills, now, there is no such thing because players can take so many steps.

How about having to land and plant on your pivot foot.

It would matter when and where you threw a pass. You could very easily throw a pass that would force your teammate to travel. You can't do that any more. Now you can waltz until you are facing the basket.

As someone mentioned, it's not so much that the defensive have become so much better, just way more physical. Bill Russell and the Celtics used to have dominant defenses without fouling every play. I know I am switching between pro and college, but I was talking about basketball in general and not just college.

You kids with your music and clothes....

I don't really have a problem with the top teams in college basketball and their offense. Regardless of how you measure it, they looked smooth(er) on offense and could put 65-70 or more points up against "good" competition.

The Bearcats had problems putting up 60 a most games against "good" competition (Ole Miss, Nebraska, VCU, SMU, UConn, Memphis, Temple, X, Tulsa, Ky) and lost the majority of those games. Scoring under 60 jumped up and bit the SK team in its first tourney game.

I think this years team shot .446 from the field. I believe that is the highest shooting % since joining the Big East (the Big East was a whole different animal in terms of competition and our internal struggles). But we do have two years data against the AAC.

I would guess .446 is not good no matter how you stack it up against most teams that advance farther in the tourney. I would also guess it pales in comparison to the majority of Bearcat teams of the 90's and early 2000's.

Not only the shooting %, but the number of times the Cats get to the foul line this year was under 700 attempts. We need to get to the free throw line about 150 more attempts in a season.

I'm only using other teams as comparison for offense only (and how it looks to my eye test). You can use all the efficiency #'s you want but it still comes down to putting points on the board. Winning with defense is tough against better competition. I really want to see the Cats take the next step to advancing more consistently in the tourney.

(04-24-2015 01:12 PM)cmhcat Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 10:41 AM)bearcatmark Wrote:  

(04-24-2015 09:00 AM)levydl Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 08:40 PM)jarr Wrote:  If anybody wants to argue that the game isn't unwatchable anymore, go ahead and YouTube some old videos of UCLA in the 70's, Lakers/Celtics in the 80's, UNLV and Loyola Marymount from the late 80s and early 90s, etc. or even just some other more ordinary teams of those times. It will blow you away how skilled some of those guys used to be.

There are like 50 guys in the NBA who are college aged. Players from those older teams you mention would be 1 and done today, so it's not really a fair comparison. Anthony Davis was the best center in the NBA in what would have been his senior year of college. The college game is comparatively worse than before because the best players leave much earlier than they used to.

And what do the Lakers and Celtics of the 80s have to do with the college game?

Go watch people in those eras dribble. nobody has a left hand. Watch the defense ...it's not nearly as tough. The players aren't as athletic and the attention to detail on defense isn't the same. Teams don't switch and communicate like they do now. Despite that teams turn the ball over less now and shooting has remained fairly consistent. Hell free throw shooting is better now than it was back then. Most objective data shows that fundamentals are better now then they were in the past. Everyone has nostalgia for the past, but by most objective analysis players and teams are simply better now.

Agree that the defense is much more intense now but you have to remember (and you're probably too young to) that you couldn't carry the ball when dribbling back in the day...you had to keep your hand on top of the ball. If they enforced that today there would be a travel call on every touch.

Calling palm balls ain't gonna up the offensive output in college basketball.

(04-24-2015 02:54 PM)Bearcat Otto Wrote:  How about having to land and plant on your pivot foot.

It would matter when and where you threw a pass. You could very easily throw a pass that would force your teammate to travel. You can't do that any more. Now you can waltz until you are facing the basket.

This won't spark high scoring contests either...

Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

(04-27-2015 04:31 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

Never have liked the shot clock; cuts down on the opportunity for the offense to unfold and forces an artificially-fast speed of play. If anything, they should put it back to 45 seconds.

(04-27-2015 06:21 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 04:31 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

Never have liked the shot clock; cuts down on the opportunity for the offense to unfold and forces an artificially-fast speed of play. If anything, they should put it back to 45 seconds.

If ever there was a team who needed a shorter shot clock, it's UC's.
Think about all the last second shots they got burned on, it's just going to make the defense that much more effective + they might be tempted not to dribble it around so much. I think it's a net positive for our style of play.

(04-27-2015 07:21 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 06:21 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 04:31 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

Never have liked the shot clock; cuts down on the opportunity for the offense to unfold and forces an artificially-fast speed of play. If anything, they should put it back to 45 seconds.

If ever there was a team who needed a shorter shot clock, it's UC's.
Think about all the last second shots they got burned on, it's just going to make the defense that much more effective + they might be tempted not to dribble it around so much. I think it's a net positive for our style of play.

?? There will still be last second shot clock shots...

(04-27-2015 06:21 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 04:31 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

Never have liked the shot clock; cuts down on the opportunity for the offense to unfold and forces an artificially-fast speed of play. If anything, they should put it back to 45 seconds.

Great, so we can watch the Cats throw it around the perimeter for 15 more seconds. Sounds like fun!

I don't think the shot clock affects us either way. An efficient defense and inefficient offense will be still be an efficient defense and inefficient offense with 5 less seconds on the clock.

(04-27-2015 08:23 PM)Bearcats#1 Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 07:21 PM)Recluse1 Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 06:21 PM)Former Lurker Wrote:  

(04-27-2015 04:31 PM)Bearcat2012 Wrote:  Andy KatzVerified account
‏@ESPNAndyKatz

Rules committee boss: Men's college hoops likely headed for 30-second shot clock http://es.pn/1EKsXap

Never have liked the shot clock; cuts down on the opportunity for the offense to unfold and forces an artificially-fast speed of play. If anything, they should put it back to 45 seconds.

If ever there was a team who needed a shorter shot clock, it's UC's.
Think about all the last second shots they got burned on, it's just going to make the defense that much more effective + they might be tempted not to dribble it around so much. I think it's a net positive for our style of play.

?? There will still be last second shot clock shots...

Given how hard some teams had to work for them, I'm betting there's more shot clock violations. The defense isn't changing, those 5 seconds might not seem like much but if it makes it even slightly more difficult on the opposition; that's a good thing in my book. \

That may help the Cats whose defense is tough to find good looks against and teams will be forced to go faster, which may lead to more turnovers and we could force more shot clock violations and bad shots.

I think it will also force the Cats offense to go a little faster, which could be just what the doctor ordered. We still won't be run and gun as we are best inside out, but we should have guys that can get their own shots if needed. Hopefully this leads to a better offense on the Cats part, with the still good defense, which could make a big positive impact on the Bearcats.

(04-23-2015 08:17 PM)pobearman Wrote:  Borderline unwatchable, absolutely unwatchable is a better description. What is not mentioned is horrific inconsistent officiating that does not call fouls particularly inside the paint.

Totally agree on the game being unwatchable and the officiating being horrendous. It's gone from maybe my favorite sport growing up to one of my least favorite. Just horrible what has happened to that game.

(04-28-2015 09:26 AM)Marcus Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 08:17 PM)pobearman Wrote:  Borderline unwatchable, absolutely unwatchable is a better description. What is not mentioned is horrific inconsistent officiating that does not call fouls particularly inside the paint.

Totally agree on the game being unwatchable and the officiating being horrendous. It's gone from maybe my favorite sport growing up to one of my least favorite. Just horrible what has happened to that game.

Agree 100%...and shortening the shot clock is not the answer.

Any 'benefit' our D may (or more likely will not) gain will surely be offset by our totally inept offense.

Short of bringing in an innovative offensive coordinator on our staff I don't see this amounting to much for us. Just more possessions. More opportunities to pass it around the perimeter and wait on someone to play 'hero ball.'

Net, net....for the rest of college hoops....i do believe it will help make the game marginally more attractive. More possessions will amount to more action.


mc

(04-28-2015 10:41 AM)cmhcat Wrote:  

(04-28-2015 09:26 AM)Marcus Wrote:  

(04-23-2015 08:17 PM)pobearman Wrote:  Borderline unwatchable, absolutely unwatchable is a better description. What is not mentioned is horrific inconsistent officiating that does not call fouls particularly inside the paint.

Totally agree on the game being unwatchable and the officiating being horrendous. It's gone from maybe my favorite sport growing up to one of my least favorite. Just horrible what has happened to that game.

Agree 100%...and shortening the shot clock is not the answer.

In theory, it should speed up the tempo of the game, more possessions equal more scoring.