One play does not have only one option.

Kind of like one formation in football.

I also think he is just exaggerating a bit.

(07-30-2014 06:41 PM)JTS Wrote:  Frankly I've never seen them run a play.

Your hate for Pastner has blinded you eh?

(07-30-2014 07:42 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:24 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:14 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 06:27 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 04:49 PM)TripleA Wrote:  Why are you revising history that we can still remember? We got hammered 6 times last year, but NEVER from start to finish.

1. Lost at OSU 101-80, but only lost the second half by 3 points.

2. Lost at home to Cincy, 69-53, but only trailed at the half, 27-26.

3. Lost at SMU 87-72, but we were tied at the half 29-29.

4. Lost at Cincy 97-84, but only trailed by 1 with 16 minutes left in the game.

5. Lost in the AAC tourney to UConn 72-53, but we were down 16, only 45 seconds into the second half, and lost by 19, so only lost from there by 3 points.

6. Lost to UVA in NCAA tourney 78-60, but only lost by 3 in the second half.

All other losses were 10 points or less.

So, not only are you wrong, but we never had ONE GAME last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." In every case, we got rolled in one half, and were essentially even in the other half.

Why do you argue facts with people who have made up their minds?

I don't know. Character flaw, I guess. This one was so recent I actually remembered it, lol. I just had to look up the specific point details.

Semantics

Semantics? Seriously? So if we're tied at the half and then get drummed, or vice versa, you can't understand the difference between that and "absolutely hammered from beginning to end?"

That's yo problem, bro. That ain't semantics. Nobody is arguing that we didn't get hammered. Just taking issue with "getting hammered from beginning to end." Big difference, especially the ones where we were close at the half.

I know. You hate Josh, so you don't care. Then don't play, and don't argue an indefensible position.

Yes semantics, an ass whoopin is an ass whoopin, it doesn't matter when the points were scored.

I don't hate anyone. And I suggest you bite your tongue the next time you claim someone hates another person.

(07-30-2014 08:19 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:26 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 05:28 PM)TigerFan386 Wrote:  Just coach speak for "we are going to be young and I'm stressing defense right now". Not worried.

Or coach speak for, " we currently don't have anyone smart enough to run an offense".

Are you calling our players dumb?

I didn't call our players anything. Maybe you should ask Pastner what he meant.

Geoff McCluckins really enjoyed making fun of Pastner's statement this afternoon -- I believe McCluckins might have gotten on a sports field since he played tuba in high school -- so he's qualified.

(07-30-2014 09:18 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:42 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:24 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:14 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 06:27 PM)TigerBill Wrote:  Why do you argue facts with people who have made up their minds?

I don't know. Character flaw, I guess. This one was so recent I actually remembered it, lol. I just had to look up the specific point details.

Semantics

Semantics? Seriously? So if we're tied at the half and then get drummed, or vice versa, you can't understand the difference between that and "absolutely hammered from beginning to end?"

That's yo problem, bro. That ain't semantics. Nobody is arguing that we didn't get hammered. Just taking issue with "getting hammered from beginning to end." Big difference, especially the ones where we were close at the half.

I know. You hate Josh, so you don't care. Then don't play, and don't argue an indefensible position.

Yes semantics, an ass whoopin is an ass whoopin, it doesn't matter when the points were scored.

I don't hate anyone. And I suggest you bit your tongue the next time you claim someone hates another person.

Oh, so you love Josh? Not what the majority of the words you type here indicate.

And once more, you are ignoring the actual debate. I take issue with an "ass whipping from beginning to end." Just not true.

When you're tied at the half, that's not an ass whipping from beginning to end. Why is that so hard for you to admit?

I agree, in the end, we got whipped, but not in the manner described. Soime guys take liberties to make it seem worse than reality. Just because...

because they need exaggeration to make their point, when their point is not actually factually based.

(07-30-2014 08:19 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:26 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 05:28 PM)TigerFan386 Wrote:  Just coach speak for "we are going to be young and I'm stressing defense right now". Not worried.

Or coach speak for, " we currently don't have anyone smart enough to run an offense".

Are you calling our players dumb?

When half the team can't count past two, that question answers itself...

(I kid, I kid...)

(07-30-2014 09:22 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 08:19 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 07:26 PM)JTS Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 05:28 PM)TigerFan386 Wrote:  Just coach speak for "we are going to be young and I'm stressing defense right now". Not worried.

Or coach speak for, " we currently don't have anyone smart enough to run an offense".

Are you calling our players dumb?

I didn't call our players anything. Maybe you should ask Pastner what he meant.

Are you trying to metaphorically use Pastner to call the players dumb?

(07-30-2014 09:06 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  One play does not have only one option.

Kind of like one formation in football.

I also think he is just exaggerating a bit.

This sounds about right...

(07-30-2014 09:06 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  One play does not have only one option.

Kind of like one formation in football.

I also think he is just exaggerating a bit.

Our play last year had a lot of options. The guy who whiffed setting the pick would drift towards the foul line for an awkward mid range, the guard could take a contested 3 or go 1 on 2 to the rim, the big man with good position could be ignored by either not looking at him or staring him down without an entry pass so he lost position, and then 2 other guards were hanging out at the 3point line to hoist one or run the same play.

I would like a new play please.

(07-31-2014 12:07 AM)jgardne Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 09:06 PM)HoopDreams Wrote:  One play does not have only one option.

Kind of like one formation in football.

I also think he is just exaggerating a bit.

Our play last year had a lot of options. The guy who whiffed setting the pick would drift towards the foul line for an awkward mid range, the guard could take a contested 3 or go 1 on 2 to the rim, the big man with good position could be ignored by either not looking at him or staring him down without an entry pass so he lost position, and then 2 other guards were hanging out at the 3point line to hoist one or run the same play.

I would like a new play please.

Thanks I just spewed coffee everywhere

(07-30-2014 03:34 PM)holyterror Wrote:  Some would say that's 2 more plays than we had last year...

But seriously, he was only half-serious, speaking of how little experience our guard corps has.

Not really, 2 plays with multiple reads/options.

(07-30-2014 09:48 PM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  Geoff McCluckins really enjoyed making fun of Pastner's statement this afternoon -- I believe McCluckins might have gotten on a sports field since he played tuba in high school -- so he's qualified.

Which makes him more qualified than 90% of the 'experts' on this board.

(07-30-2014 04:49 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 04:24 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  Who cares how many plays they run? How about not getting blown out 4-5 times like last season (@OK St, @Cincy, Home UCONN, Neutral Site Virginia). And when I say blown out, I mean absolutely hammered from start to finish.

Why are you revising history that we can still remember? We got hammered 6 times last year, but NEVER from start to finish.

1. Lost at OSU 101-80, but only lost the second half by 3 points.

2. Lost at home to Cincy, 69-53, but only trailed at the half, 27-26.

3. Lost at SMU 87-72, but we were tied at the half 29-29.

4. Lost at Cincy 97-84, but only trailed by 1 with 16 minutes left in the game.

5. Lost in the AAC tourney to UConn 72-53, but we were down 16, only 45 seconds into the second half, and lost by 19, so only lost from there by 3 points.

6. Lost to UVA in NCAA tourney 78-60, but only lost by 3 in the second half.

All other losses were 10 points or less.

So, not only are you wrong, but we never had ONE GAME last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." In every case, we got rolled in one half, and were essentially even in the other half.

My goodness you can put some spin on recent history. The OSU, @Cincy, UCONN Tourney, and UVA losses were beatings from start to finish. Claiming we only lost by single digits in the second half, after the games were already out of reach is not a valid argument. It totally takes out the fact that the other team knows they are up big, and lose some of their initial focus. In additon, player rotations on both ends change dramatically, especially in the last ten minutes when a team is up big. To put it in terms even you can understand, it would be like a Mich State fan arguing in 08 that despite being down thirty at the half, they weren't hammered because they "outscored us by 12 in the second half".
The OSU game we ran into Smart’s career night, the UCONN tourney loss we looked lost, and unmotivated, and the UVA game we were simply outclassed. As far as CINCY, the poster stated the @CINCY loss was a blowout, not the home loss. However, we could have played those guys 10 times last year, and would have lost all ten. They simply intimidated, and outmuscled us. In addition, if you remember, our defense was so poor, their offense (which was putrid) had career nights. You are correct about the @SMU game, but once they got rolling, we fell apart in the second half.
So, not only are YOU wrong, but we DID HAVE MULTIPLE GAMES last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." The fact of the matter is that there was no team in the top 25 last year that suffered as many bad losses (by points) as we did. However, you have to be honest with yourself, and take off the blue shades to see it.
BTW not to be totally negative, we had some great wins as well (@Louisville, home Louisville, GW, Gonzaga, OSU ext.)

John Martin ‏@JohnMartin929
Josh Pastner said just now Tigers have three plays installed for Canada trip. May even get to five.

(07-31-2014 10:51 AM)TIGERCITY Wrote:  John Martin ‏@JohnMartin929
Josh Pastner said just now Tigers have three plays installed for Canada trip. May even get to five.

Pastner said that teaching defense will be worked on first with this team.

(07-30-2014 03:28 PM)Ramen_Tiger Wrote:  When opening against Witchita State. Is he bluffing?

There are only two plays in basketball. Pass and go with and pass and go opposite. Within that is the give and go and the high and low.

(07-31-2014 10:36 AM)SL030676 Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 04:49 PM)TripleA Wrote:  

(07-30-2014 04:24 PM)TiminMem23 Wrote:  Who cares how many plays they run? How about not getting blown out 4-5 times like last season (@OK St, @Cincy, Home UCONN, Neutral Site Virginia). And when I say blown out, I mean absolutely hammered from start to finish.

Why are you revising history that we can still remember? We got hammered 6 times last year, but NEVER from start to finish.

1. Lost at OSU 101-80, but only lost the second half by 3 points.

2. Lost at home to Cincy, 69-53, but only trailed at the half, 27-26.

3. Lost at SMU 87-72, but we were tied at the half 29-29.

4. Lost at Cincy 97-84, but only trailed by 1 with 16 minutes left in the game.

5. Lost in the AAC tourney to UConn 72-53, but we were down 16, only 45 seconds into the second half, and lost by 19, so only lost from there by 3 points.

6. Lost to UVA in NCAA tourney 78-60, but only lost by 3 in the second half.

All other losses were 10 points or less.

So, not only are you wrong, but we never had ONE GAME last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." In every case, we got rolled in one half, and were essentially even in the other half.

My goodness you can put some spin on recent history. The OSU, @Cincy, UCONN Tourney, and UVA losses were beatings from start to finish. Claiming we only lost by single digits in the second half, after the games were already out of reach is not a valid argument. It totally takes out the fact that the other team knows they are up big, and lose some of their initial focus. In additon, player rotations on both ends change dramatically, especially in the last ten minutes when a team is up big. To put it in terms even you can understand, it would be like a Mich State fan arguing in 08 that despite being down thirty at the half, they weren't hammered because they "outscored us by 12 in the second half".
The OSU game we ran into Smart’s career night, the UCONN tourney loss we looked lost, and unmotivated, and the UVA game we were simply outclassed. As far as CINCY, the poster stated the @CINCY loss was a blowout, not the home loss. However, we could have played those guys 10 times last year, and would have lost all ten. They simply intimidated, and outmuscled us. In addition, if you remember, our defense was so poor, their offense (which was putrid) had career nights. You are correct about the @SMU game, but once they got rolling, we fell apart in the second half.
So, not only are YOU wrong, but we DID HAVE MULTIPLE GAMES last year where we were "absolutely hammered from start to finish." The fact of the matter is that there was no team in the top 25 last year that suffered as many bad losses (by points) as we did. However, you have to be honest with yourself, and take off the blue shades to see it.
BTW not to be totally negative, we had some great wins as well (@Louisville, home Louisville, GW, Gonzaga, OSU ext.)

Then we just disagree. Getting hammered from start to finish means just that. If you're tied at the half that is NOT getting hammered from start to finish. And I don't need to take off any blue shades., or do anything else you tell me I'm quite critical when I see something I think is valid to criticize. We did get stomped several times.

I'm simply taking issue with the characterization that it was from "beginning to end' in each game, which implies we were never competitive for a minute. That is not the case. We were tied with SMU at the half, and one down to Cincy.

I cannot believe anyone could even argue with that. Not that it really matters in the end. I'm just saying the characterization is inaccurate.

It's English and implication and facts I'm debating. It doesn't have a damn thing to do with basketball, but you obviously missed that.

I think some of our fans are confusing themselves with the team. Many of our fans were absolutely hammered from start to finish.