(01-12-2017 02:58 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:54 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Wut?

Can someone else help me with this one?

It's easy if you try. When you're managing the clock at end of game, the advantage comes by stopping the clock before additional seconds run off. If the clock is already stopped (dead balls, free throws - your suggestions), a TO gets you no clock advantage. And if you call it after their made basket, it gets you nothing because you're already inbounding the ball.

Go back and watch the last 2 minutes. How much clock would have been saved by any timeout we could have called? None. Zero.

Wow.

Do you understand what timeouts do outside of "saving the clock?"

This is getting more and more interesting as you continue.

You're trying too hard to tilt at windmills. There are plenty of things to complain about the game last night. Having timeouts at the end of the game is really not one of them. Maybe 10th on the list?

You still didn't answer the question - so I'll expand it to make it easier for you. Where could we have used those 2 timeouts at any point in the 2nd half that would have made a difference? Do you think we should have used them while we were making the run? Or maybe when the clock was already stopped after Tulsa had just made free throws?

Why are you so concerned about timeouts being used for the sole purpose of "stopping the clock?"

How many times are timeouts NOT used to stop the clock but to compose a team after a run of bad plays (hence the adage "Get a t.o. baby...!!"--not for the purpose of stopping the clock, right?).

Here are a couple places that came to mind watching the game:

With 4:40 in the game, Memphis was up 66-65.
In the next two minutes of play, the Tigers:
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup
Turned the ball over
Stole the ball and made 1-2 FT's
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup

At that point, there was 2:48 to go. Tulsa is now up 69-67. Memphis had made one basket in the last three minutes and turned the ball over three times. Four of the guys on the court had played at least 32 minutes at that point.

That might have been a good time to call a timeout. To refocus the team, set up a good play and reset assignments and to refocus on basics like boxing out.

If you don't like a timeout there, then:

The play after that Dedric scores, the Tulsa comes down, misses a shot and Edogi gets a rebound and slams the ball. What little crowd gets excited. 71-69 Tulsa with 2:02 to go.

Might be a good time then. Slow the momentum down after the dunk.

But, if you want to wait some more:

Next play, Dedric takes a quick shot, Tulsa takes the ball down and Dedric commits a foul and the Tulsa player gets an and-1. Makes the FT.

Now it's 74-69 Tulsa with 1:18 to go. Tigers have two timeouts. Surely this is a good time to call one. Try to decide whether to go for two or three.


Nope.

Martin comes down and gets stuffed. Rivers fouls, Tulsa makes FT and is now up 7.

Lawson misses a three with 1:08 to go. The Tigers go 20 seconds without fouling and finally foul with 12 seconds or so on the shot clock.

Memphis ended up making one basket in the last 5 minutes of the game (not counting Dedric's uncontested shot with :02 to go) and only 5 total points in the last 5:44 of the game. And 4 turnovers.

There were multiple opportunities to call a TO to refocus the team or to "draw up a play" but whatever.

So at the 4:40 mark, it had been a 1-possession game for the previous 8 minutes. It was still a 1-possession game, but you would feel the need to call a to? Hindsight and all about what WAS ABOUT to happen. But at the time, no sense to call a TO.

At 2:48, still a 1-possession game, but you honestly think a TO was warranted? To setup a play. We scored on that next possession - DL on a jumper. 16 seconds. Tie game. How does a TO help?

At 2:02, still a 1-possession game. It's been that way for over 10 minutes. You think it's the right time? Because you know the wheels are about to fall off, right.

DL takes the next shot 18 seconds in. Not exactly a "quick shot".

So there's no place a non-clairvoyant would call one where it helps. That's a fact.

Over the next 1:18 the wheels fall off. You could call a TO after they score. How does it help? You can't stop the clock. You could set a play. If you think the magic was in the play setting - not execution or rebounding - then go for it. I don't see any scenario where the TO changes the outcome. They hit every shot over the final minute and we missed every shot until DL's jumper with 3 seconds left.

But if that's your new thing - Tubby's floor coaching - and you're off the recruiting drumbeat for a little while...go for it!

(01-12-2017 09:33 PM)SpiderMan79x Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 07:15 PM)hsvtiger Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:58 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  Wow.

Do you understand what timeouts do outside of "saving the clock?"

This is getting more and more interesting as you continue.

You're trying too hard to tilt at windmills. There are plenty of things to complain about the game last night. Having timeouts at the end of the game is really not one of them. Maybe 10th on the list?

You still didn't answer the question - so I'll expand it to make it easier for you. Where could we have used those 2 timeouts at any point in the 2nd half that would have made a difference? Do you think we should have used them while we were making the run? Or maybe when the clock was already stopped after Tulsa had just made free throws?

Why are you so concerned about timeouts being used for the sole purpose of "stopping the clock?"

How many times are timeouts NOT used to stop the clock but to compose a team after a run of bad plays (hence the adage "Get a t.o. baby...!!"--not for the purpose of stopping the clock, right?).

Here are a couple places that came to mind watching the game:

With 4:40 in the game, Memphis was up 66-65.
In the next two minutes of play, the Tigers:
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup
Turned the ball over
Stole the ball and made 1-2 FT's
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup

At that point, there was 2:48 to go. Tulsa is now up 69-67. Memphis had made one basket in the last three minutes and turned the ball over three times. Four of the guys on the court had played at least 32 minutes at that point.

That might have been a good time to call a timeout. To refocus the team, set up a good play and reset assignments and to refocus on basics like boxing out.

If you don't like a timeout there, then:

The play after that Dedric scores, the Tulsa comes down, misses a shot and Edogi gets a rebound and slams the ball. What little crowd gets excited. 71-69 Tulsa with 2:02 to go.

Might be a good time then. Slow the momentum down after the dunk.

But, if you want to wait some more:

Next play, Dedric takes a quick shot, Tulsa takes the ball down and Dedric commits a foul and the Tulsa player gets an and-1. Makes the FT.

Now it's 74-69 Tulsa with 1:18 to go. Tigers have two timeouts. Surely this is a good time to call one. Try to decide whether to go for two or three. When to foul or keep playing defense after a miss or make?

Nope.

Martin comes down and gets stuffed. Rivers fouls, Tulsa makes FT and is now up 7.

Lawson misses a three with 1:08 to go. The Tigers go 20 seconds without fouling and finally foul with 12 seconds or so on the shot clock.

Memphis ended up making one basket in the last 5 minutes of the game (not counting Dedric's uncontested shot with :02 to go) and only 5 total points in the last 5:44 of the game. And 4 turnovers.

There were multiple opportunities to call a TO to refocus the team or to "draw up a play" but whatever.

Gotta give Saluki the win on this one - well done!

Totally agree. That post is a spot on.

Yep

(01-12-2017 01:23 PM)gusrob Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:50 PM)tiger1016 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:31 PM)gusrob Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:54 AM)TubbyTime Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:04 AM)gusrob Wrote:  Relax. All good. We beat several REALLY good teams. UTRVG, Millwaukee, Savannah St, McNeese, Jackson St, UAB, Incarnate Word. We lost to Providence, Monmouth and Ole Miss.

All this despite some solid talent. Talent better than Tubby recruited at TT and Minn and maybe even Kensucky. People have reason to gripe.

You're right, we should have never let wonder boy take his smiling azz to GT. Hiring Tubby is the worst decision in the history of Tiger basketball. I know, why don't you write a letter of recommendation to Rudd and Bowen on behalf of Tic Price. I'm sure we could get him in here. Good idea champ?

(01-12-2017 09:55 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:04 AM)gusrob Wrote:  Relax. All good. We beat several REALLY good teams. UTRVG, Millwaukee, Savannah St, McNeese, Jackson St, UAB, Incarnate Word. We lost to Providence, Monmouth and Ole Miss.

All this despite some solid talent. Talent better than Tubby recruited at TT and Minn and maybe even Kensucky. People have reason to gripe.

Nice of you to leave out Iowa, South Carolina, and at Oklahoma. We hear you clearly.

Sure, people have reason to gripe after a loss. I went to bed griping and woke up griping. Don't spin an agenda though, with selective facts like this.

Hard to have a decent convo here. Most posters are way too Sunshine Pumping or way too Debbie Downer. Impossible. Freggin clowns.

Intelligent retort.

Your initial post had no semblance of an intelligent discussion.

The point is clear. You just didn't agree. We haven't done much of anything to write home about. We lose to teams in Top50. No major wins. No major losses. Typical Tubby team. We'll be 20-10. Hard to get overly excited or overly depressed. Posters are going nuts about other posters complaining about the loss. It's natural to be pissed. I am. You probably are. So chill. There's the point.

Every discussion doesn't need to become so polar. Somehow it usually does here. AS EVIDENCE BY YOU RIGHT NOW. It's not all or none. Pointing out that we're just as mediocre as many predicted does NOT mean we want Josh back. I love how pointing out the mediocrity equals spinning an agenda. Tubby is exactly what he's always been. Not even sure what agenda you think I do or should have.

Let's quit this stupid discussion based on your defense of......I don't know what....so you can get back to your career-which I'm sure involves higher thought.....since you're such an intellectual. LMAO

A winning coach who's taken what, 5 different teams to the NCAA's? A NC coach? A future HOF coach? A first year coach who inherited a pile of crap who's cobbled together an above .500 record so far?

ANYONE who expected an outstanding season this year was delusional.

(01-12-2017 04:36 PM)Smith Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 03:51 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(01-11-2017 10:32 PM)roundhouse74 Wrote:  

(01-11-2017 10:19 PM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  The sky is falling, the sky is falling!!!

Yeah, relax. It's only a basketball loss to Tulsa.

It was a bad loss, no doubt.

All losses are bad. I would rather win every game in a blow-out.

Some hurt more than others. True fact.

(01-12-2017 02:58 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:54 AM)salukiblue Wrote:  Wut?

Can someone else help me with this one?

It's easy if you try. When you're managing the clock at end of game, the advantage comes by stopping the clock before additional seconds run off. If the clock is already stopped (dead balls, free throws - your suggestions), a TO gets you no clock advantage. And if you call it after their made basket, it gets you nothing because you're already inbounding the ball.

Go back and watch the last 2 minutes. How much clock would have been saved by any timeout we could have called? None. Zero.

Wow.

Do you understand what timeouts do outside of "saving the clock?"

This is getting more and more interesting as you continue.

You're trying too hard to tilt at windmills. There are plenty of things to complain about the game last night. Having timeouts at the end of the game is really not one of them. Maybe 10th on the list?

You still didn't answer the question - so I'll expand it to make it easier for you. Where could we have used those 2 timeouts at any point in the 2nd half that would have made a difference? Do you think we should have used them while we were making the run? Or maybe when the clock was already stopped after Tulsa had just made free throws?

Why are you so concerned about timeouts being used for the sole purpose of "stopping the clock?"

How many times are timeouts NOT used to stop the clock but to compose a team after a run of bad plays (hence the adage "Get a t.o. baby...!!"--not for the purpose of stopping the clock, right?).

Here are a couple places that came to mind watching the game:

With 4:40 in the game, Memphis was up 66-65.
In the next two minutes of play, the Tigers:
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup
Turned the ball over
Stole the ball and made 1-2 FT's
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup

At that point, there was 2:48 to go. Tulsa is now up 69-67. Memphis had made one basket in the last three minutes and turned the ball over three times. Four of the guys on the court had played at least 32 minutes at that point.

That might have been a good time to call a timeout. To refocus the team, set up a good play and reset assignments and to refocus on basics like boxing out.

If you don't like a timeout there, then:

The play after that Dedric scores, the Tulsa comes down, misses a shot and Edogi gets a rebound and slams the ball. What little crowd gets excited. 71-69 Tulsa with 2:02 to go.

Might be a good time then. Slow the momentum down after the dunk.

But, if you want to wait some more:

Next play, Dedric takes a quick shot, Tulsa takes the ball down and Dedric commits a foul and the Tulsa player gets an and-1. Makes the FT.

Now it's 74-69 Tulsa with 1:18 to go. Tigers have two timeouts. Surely this is a good time to call one. Try to decide whether to go for two or three. When to foul or keep playing defense after a miss or make?

Nope.

Martin comes down and gets stuffed. Rivers fouls, Tulsa makes FT and is now up 7.

Lawson misses a three with 1:08 to go. The Tigers go 20 seconds without fouling and finally foul with 12 seconds or so on the shot clock.

Memphis ended up making one basket in the last 5 minutes of the game (not counting Dedric's uncontested shot with :02 to go) and only 5 total points in the last 5:44 of the game. And 4 turnovers.

There were multiple opportunities to call a TO to refocus the team or to "draw up a play" but whatever.

Game, set, match.

(01-13-2017 11:08 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  ANYONE who expected an outstanding season this year was delusional.

I don't think anyone expected outstanding.

I think some wanted to see a little more urgency on the recruiting trail in the late period, but it is what it is at this point and no use going over the same old ground.

Some folks are like "look at what he's doing!"

And others are like "look at what this team could've been."

Don't think many are doubting that the available players look better coached and are showing improvement.

Tubby actually knows how to use Dedric Lawson so that the other players feed off of the best player on the team so that it makes them better as well - i.e. playing Lawson out of double teams, backdoor cuts, etc.

It didn't help that Chad got hurt and that Kessee and Clergeot just were not ready for this level yet.

(01-13-2017 11:12 AM)TigerBlue4Ever Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:58 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 02:24 PM)Tiger87 Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 12:34 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 10:01 AM)Tiger87 Wrote:  It's easy if you try. When you're managing the clock at end of game, the advantage comes by stopping the clock before additional seconds run off. If the clock is already stopped (dead balls, free throws - your suggestions), a TO gets you no clock advantage. And if you call it after their made basket, it gets you nothing because you're already inbounding the ball.

Go back and watch the last 2 minutes. How much clock would have been saved by any timeout we could have called? None. Zero.

Wow.

Do you understand what timeouts do outside of "saving the clock?"

This is getting more and more interesting as you continue.

You're trying too hard to tilt at windmills. There are plenty of things to complain about the game last night. Having timeouts at the end of the game is really not one of them. Maybe 10th on the list?

You still didn't answer the question - so I'll expand it to make it easier for you. Where could we have used those 2 timeouts at any point in the 2nd half that would have made a difference? Do you think we should have used them while we were making the run? Or maybe when the clock was already stopped after Tulsa had just made free throws?

Why are you so concerned about timeouts being used for the sole purpose of "stopping the clock?"

How many times are timeouts NOT used to stop the clock but to compose a team after a run of bad plays (hence the adage "Get a t.o. baby...!!"--not for the purpose of stopping the clock, right?).

Here are a couple places that came to mind watching the game:

With 4:40 in the game, Memphis was up 66-65.
In the next two minutes of play, the Tigers:
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup
Turned the ball over
Stole the ball and made 1-2 FT's
Turned the ball over and Tulsa scored a layup

At that point, there was 2:48 to go. Tulsa is now up 69-67. Memphis had made one basket in the last three minutes and turned the ball over three times. Four of the guys on the court had played at least 32 minutes at that point.

That might have been a good time to call a timeout. To refocus the team, set up a good play and reset assignments and to refocus on basics like boxing out.

If you don't like a timeout there, then:

The play after that Dedric scores, the Tulsa comes down, misses a shot and Edogi gets a rebound and slams the ball. What little crowd gets excited. 71-69 Tulsa with 2:02 to go.

Might be a good time then. Slow the momentum down after the dunk.

But, if you want to wait some more:

Next play, Dedric takes a quick shot, Tulsa takes the ball down and Dedric commits a foul and the Tulsa player gets an and-1. Makes the FT.

Now it's 74-69 Tulsa with 1:18 to go. Tigers have two timeouts. Surely this is a good time to call one. Try to decide whether to go for two or three. When to foul or keep playing defense after a miss or make?

Nope.

Martin comes down and gets stuffed. Rivers fouls, Tulsa makes FT and is now up 7.

Lawson misses a three with 1:08 to go. The Tigers go 20 seconds without fouling and finally foul with 12 seconds or so on the shot clock.

Memphis ended up making one basket in the last 5 minutes of the game (not counting Dedric's uncontested shot with :02 to go) and only 5 total points in the last 5:44 of the game. And 4 turnovers.

There were multiple opportunities to call a TO to refocus the team or to "draw up a play" but whatever.

Game, set, match.

^^^This.

(01-12-2017 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This team is very limited at the guard position and at the 5. The sooner we accept this, the quicker we can happily accept the results of this years squad. They are inconsistent because our PG is inconsistent... and we don't have the interior players to get 2nd chance buckets.

Ok and what players are being heavily developed this year that will rectify these shortcomings next year?

Generally, (Unless you are brining in 4-5 star studs) it takes a year to develop a freshman and sometimes even a JUCO player so that they are effective D1 bb players.

Tubby is mainly playing 5-6 guys but not much else and certainly no other bigs. So, unless he lands one helluva recruiting class there's no reason to think next year's team will be anything but marginally better than this year's team since there's no one being developed to take care of the shortcomings you've pointed out; particularly down low.

(01-13-2017 12:40 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This team is very limited at the guard position and at the 5. The sooner we accept this, the quicker we can happily accept the results of this years squad. They are inconsistent because our PG is inconsistent... and we don't have the interior players to get 2nd chance buckets.

Ok and what players are being heavily developed this year that will rectify these shortcomings next year?

Generally, (Unless you are brining in 4-5 star studs) it takes a year to develop a freshman and sometimes even a JUCO player so that they are effective D1 bb players.

Tubby is mainly playing 5-6 guys but not much else and certainly no other bigs. So, unless he lands one helluva recruiting class there's no reason to think next year's team will be anything but marginally better than this year's team since there's no one being developed to take care of the shortcomings you've pointed out; particularly down low.

It will be interesting to watch it play out for sure. Next year's roster will be a clear indication of what the next 4 years will look like too. He's had well over a year to piece it together and figure it out.

As you alluded to, some questions concerning the front court:

Will Dedric return? (most indications are no)
Will Azab ever be cleared? (he is at least practicing with the team)
Will Chad be granted another year? (most likely yes)
What will late recruiting look like? (will they play the grad market and land a big fish)

As it is, all current indications are that the front line next year will be Chad, Azab, Rivers and Enoh. Not sure that's enough without Dedric drawing double teams and players playing off of him.

Here's basically what it looks like - the top three listed returning guys are all question marks.

Chad Rykhoek C 6-11 SR Fort Worth, Texas/Baylor
Karim Sameh Azab C 6-11 SO Giza, Egypt
Dedric Lawson F 6-8 JR Memphis, Tennessee

If you worst case scenario it right now (those three are gone and no one else new is added), there is your 9 man rotation next year:

Victor Enoh F 6-8 FR Decatur, Georgia
KJ Lawson F 6-7 SO Memphis, Tennessee
Jimario Rivers F 6-7 SR Clarksville, Tennessee/Southwest CC
David Nickelberry G/F 6-7 FR Windermere, Florida
Markel Crawford G 6-5 SR Memphis, Tennessee
Jamal Johnson G 6-4 FR Birmingham, Alabama
Craig Randall G 6-4 JR Phoenix, Arizona
Jeremiah Martin G 6-3 JR Memphis, Tennessee
Keon Clergeot G 6-1 SO Auburndale, Florida

One thing is a given, whatever the roster, it will not be good enough for:

Poop
Salukiblew
Pinhead
Blueballs

I'm sure I've missed a couple.

(01-13-2017 01:32 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  One thing is a given, whatever the roster, it will not be good enough for:

Poop
Salukiblew
Pinhead
Blueballs

I'm sure I've missed a couple.

(01-13-2017 01:50 PM)salukiblue Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:32 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  One thing is a given, whatever the roster, it will not be good enough for:

Poop
Salukiblew
Pinhead
Blueballs

I'm sure I've missed a couple.

Damn.

TOGC has our number?

(01-13-2017 12:47 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 12:40 PM)bluebacker Wrote:  

(01-12-2017 09:31 AM)Marc Mensa Wrote:  This team is very limited at the guard position and at the 5. The sooner we accept this, the quicker we can happily accept the results of this years squad. They are inconsistent because our PG is inconsistent... and we don't have the interior players to get 2nd chance buckets.

Ok and what players are being heavily developed this year that will rectify these shortcomings next year?

Generally, (Unless you are brining in 4-5 star studs) it takes a year to develop a freshman and sometimes even a JUCO player so that they are effective D1 bb players.

Tubby is mainly playing 5-6 guys but not much else and certainly no other bigs. So, unless he lands one helluva recruiting class there's no reason to think next year's team will be anything but marginally better than this year's team since there's no one being developed to take care of the shortcomings you've pointed out; particularly down low.

It will be interesting to watch it play out for sure. Next year's roster will be a clear indication of what the next 4 years will look like too. He's had well over a year to piece it together and figure it out.

As you alluded to, some questions concerning the front court:

Will Dedric return? (most indications are no)
Will Azab ever be cleared? (he is at least practicing with the team)
Will Chad be granted another year? (most likely yes)
What will late recruiting look like? (will they play the grad market and land a big fish)

As it is, all current indications are that the front line next year will be Chad, Azab, Rivers and Enoh. Not sure that's enough without Dedric drawing double teams and players playing off of him.

Dedric is not coming back. And if our program is relying on Azab and Chad to bolster the inside play, we have fallen farther than I realized. They would be role players for all of Pastner's years (NOT A PASTNER FAN) except possible his first.

I had assumed Tubby would be in with some 4/5 starbigs that would be ready immediately. Are we not?

Same stupid crap from the same agenda driven poster. He just changes the words here and there, but in the end it's the same crap.

I dunno what this is all about, but Hoosiers is on, and Barbara Hershey doesn't want Jimmy to play!

(01-13-2017 01:35 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:32 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  One thing is a given, whatever the roster, it will not be good enough for:

Poop
Salukiblew
Pinhead
Blueballs

I'm sure I've missed a couple.

Cool selfie, I would have thought you were older, but it does explain a lot.

(01-13-2017 02:31 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:35 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  

(01-13-2017 01:32 PM)BuccTiger Wrote:  One thing is a given, whatever the roster, it will not be good enough for:

Poop
Salukiblew
Pinhead
Blueballs

I'm sure I've missed a couple.

Cool selfie, I would have thought you were older, but it does explain a lot.

RRR

(01-13-2017 02:30 PM)bubbapt Wrote:  I dunno what this is all about, but Hoosiers is on, and Barbara Hershey doesn't want Jimmy to play!

Surely, you're not implying that Pinhead is really Barbara Hershey?