William & Mary Basketball is already SIX GAMES into the REGULAR SEASON! With next Saturday's game vs. Hampton on the horizon, check out our 6-game ANALYSIS below. Freshmen look strong, and the veterans are chugging along (would like to see more out of Dixon though, but Whitman has vastly improved). Unfortunate drop against a good mid-major team in CMU this week, but plenty of opportunities to get better from here on out. LET'S GO TRIBE!!!

Article:
https://wmsportsblog.com/2016/12/02/wm-b...t-6-games/

Last year W&M was 1st in the conference offensively by KenPom and 7th defensively. This year so far they're 1st again...and 8th defensively. That's preferable to Charleston, which is 1st defensively but 8th offensively (and was dead last offensively last year).

(12-01-2016 10:29 PM)Rocco Wrote:  Last year W&M was 1st in the conference offensively by KenPom and 7th defensively. This year so far they're 1st again...and 8th defensively. That's preferable to Charleston, which is 1st defensively but 8th offensively (and was dead last offensively last year).

I don't know that I agree. Defense is much more constant than offense. A great offensive team can have an off night and lose. A great defensive team is going to hold its opponents and be much less fickle. I prefer the constant, more stable nature of teams built on superb defense. Obviously, you still have to score; but scoring 85 to your opponents' 78 is a lot more susceptible to being upset than scoring 78 and holding your opponents to 60-65 pretty consistently.

While there is obviously a disparity in talent, Virginia has held true to this very effectively. Virginia has held its Division I opponents to 44 points per game. It's a lot easier, even with a mediocre offense, to know you only need to get to 50 to give yourself a shot to win.

(12-02-2016 11:25 AM)TribeNiner Wrote:  

(12-01-2016 10:29 PM)Rocco Wrote:  Last year W&M was 1st in the conference offensively by KenPom and 7th defensively. This year so far they're 1st again...and 8th defensively. That's preferable to Charleston, which is 1st defensively but 8th offensively (and was dead last offensively last year).

I don't know that I agree. Defense is much more constant than offense. A great offensive team can have an off night and lose. A great defensive team is going to hold its opponents and be much less fickle. I prefer the constant, more stable nature of teams built on superb defense. Obviously, you still have to score; but scoring 85 to your opponents' 78 is a lot more susceptible to being upset than scoring 78 and holding your opponents to 60-65 pretty consistently.

While there is obviously a disparity in talent, Virginia has held true to this very effectively. Virginia has held its Division I opponents to 44 points per game. It's a lot easier, even with a mediocre offense, to know you only need to get to 50 to give yourself a shot to win.

I'm mostly talking about from a watchability standpoint. I'd rather watch a team that can score a boatload and give up a boatload than a team that gums its opponents to death.

(12-02-2016 12:27 PM)Rocco Wrote:  

(12-02-2016 11:25 AM)TribeNiner Wrote:  

(12-01-2016 10:29 PM)Rocco Wrote:  Last year W&M was 1st in the conference offensively by KenPom and 7th defensively. This year so far they're 1st again...and 8th defensively. That's preferable to Charleston, which is 1st defensively but 8th offensively (and was dead last offensively last year).

I don't know that I agree. Defense is much more constant than offense. A great offensive team can have an off night and lose. A great defensive team is going to hold its opponents and be much less fickle. I prefer the constant, more stable nature of teams built on superb defense. Obviously, you still have to score; but scoring 85 to your opponents' 78 is a lot more susceptible to being upset than scoring 78 and holding your opponents to 60-65 pretty consistently.

While there is obviously a disparity in talent, Virginia has held true to this very effectively. Virginia has held its Division I opponents to 44 points per game. It's a lot easier, even with a mediocre offense, to know you only need to get to 50 to give yourself a shot to win.

I'm mostly talking about from a watchability standpoint. I'd rather watch a team that can score a boatload and give up a boatload than a team that gums its opponents to death.

That's fair. I meant from a number of wins, standpoint.

From Coach Shaver's time here, I think we've had a lot more success with strong offensive teams than strong defensive teams. I'd rather be susceptible to a 90-85 upset than a 30-35 upset. Early on in his tenure, it seemed like we had a lot more of the latter. I'd say that 1st in defense and 5th in offense is better than the reverse, but the absolute extremes favor offense over defense.

(12-02-2016 10:49 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  From Coach Shaver's time here, I think we've had a lot more success with strong offensive teams than strong defensive teams. I'd rather be susceptible to a 90-85 upset than a 30-35 upset. Early on in his tenure, it seemed like we had a lot more of the latter. I'd say that 1st in defense and 5th in offense is better than the reverse, but the absolute extremes favor offense over defense.

How much of this is based on the fact that it's hard to recruit to W&M -- specifically big men who might help us on defense? I'm potentially of the mind that it's "easier" to put together an offensive system that takes advantage of the players W&M is able to recruit, rather than install a defense with long, athletic players that typically get recruited to other, bigger schools (or schools that lower some of their academic expectations). There are only so many solid "big men" out there, and putting the added layer of academic requirements over them doesn't help our cause in that area. Not at all saying we shouldn't do this though! Academics first, always.

Wondering what people think about that theory.

(12-03-2016 10:47 AM)WMSportsBlog Wrote:  

(12-02-2016 10:49 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  From Coach Shaver's time here, I think we've had a lot more success with strong offensive teams than strong defensive teams. I'd rather be susceptible to a 90-85 upset than a 30-35 upset. Early on in his tenure, it seemed like we had a lot more of the latter. I'd say that 1st in defense and 5th in offense is better than the reverse, but the absolute extremes favor offense over defense.

How much of this is based on the fact that it's hard to recruit to W&M -- specifically big men who might help us on defense? I'm potentially of the mind that it's "easier" to put together an offensive system that takes advantage of the players W&M is able to recruit, rather than install a defense with long, athletic players that typically get recruited to other, bigger schools (or schools that lower some of their academic expectations). There are only so many solid "big men" out there, and putting the added layer of academic requirements over them doesn't help our cause in that area. Not at all saying we shouldn't do this though! Academics first, always.

Wondering what people think about that theory.

Begrudgingly, I agree. I'm not a big fan of our style of play. But Tony makes it work well and it's best for the players we can get.

Sent from my SM-G920V using Tapatalk

(12-03-2016 10:47 AM)WMSportsBlog Wrote:  

(12-02-2016 10:49 PM)TribeInTheBurg Wrote:  From Coach Shaver's time here, I think we've had a lot more success with strong offensive teams than strong defensive teams. I'd rather be susceptible to a 90-85 upset than a 30-35 upset. Early on in his tenure, it seemed like we had a lot more of the latter. I'd say that 1st in defense and 5th in offense is better than the reverse, but the absolute extremes favor offense over defense.

How much of this is based on the fact that it's hard to recruit to W&M -- specifically big men who might help us on defense? I'm potentially of the mind that it's "easier" to put together an offensive system that takes advantage of the players W&M is able to recruit, rather than install a defense with long, athletic players that typically get recruited to other, bigger schools (or schools that lower some of their academic expectations). There are only so many solid "big men" out there, and putting the added layer of academic requirements over them doesn't help our cause in that area. Not at all saying we shouldn't do this though! Academics first, always.

Wondering what people think about that theory.

Largely agree, but a couple additional thoughts.

1. Similar to other posters, I believe that defense is largely about attitude. I don't necessarily think we need a super athletic big man in order to play great defense. We just need guys that have the swagger, heart, energy, whatever you want to call it, to stop opponents. I can't remember when the specific article came out (either one or two years ago) that talked about how Tarpey used to play ball in NYC, but it was clear from watching him that he had a level of attitude/hustle that I associate with guys that grow up playing against other tough players. Every game, he worked his tail off to get steals and it showed. This is one of the reasons I hate playing Towson - they always seem to have guys from Baltimore/Philly that have clearly played in a lot of physical games and magnify the pitfalls of our more finesse style.
2. This may just be my naivety with respect to our recruiting process, but it seems like recruiting big men has always played second fiddle to recruiting guards/shooters at WM. Just because we can't land an athletic big man that might typically commit to the Kentucky's, Louisville's, or Carolina's of the world does not mean there aren't talented big men out there that could help us. Sure, they might not be the best, but they could easily be developed to contribute to our success. When I look at Verbal Commits, it looks like we've already extended offers to two guards in the the H/S class of 2018. When that group comes in, Seacat will be a senior and Knight a junior. Why haven't we extended an offer yet to a big man in that class? I'm sure we will eventually, but it seems like getting a great big man is less of a priority than getting a great guard.

On an unrelated note, given our poor performance on defense this season, I'm curious if Shaver at least experiments with playing two bigs once Seacat returns. If he's slated to return vs. Milligan, I wonder if he puts two bigs on the floor at least for a couple minutes to see how it impacts both our offensive and defensive games.

I like the idea of experimenting with 2 bigs. There's little chance of that this year, unless there was something we were working on in the off season that Seacat's suspension took off the table. By this time in the season, we're already set in our playbook.

Maybe Hunter will return with a hungry, tougher mentality that will benefit the whole team in practice and when he's on the floor.

Defense wins games when you need to dig out of a hole. College of Charleston was down 11 pts to Davidson today with 15 minutes left in the ball game, and got in their face and won by 15. That kind of effort and result will carry over into conference play. Shutting down the other team is very rewarding, but it takes all 5 players together on the floor. Unfortunately, our three captains, Omar, Daniel and David are not defense-first players, collectively. They are all capable. It takes a lot of passion and pride. I think Daniel has been a mixed bag on the defensive end, where his effort could make a big difference until he regains his offensive confidence. He has helped to fill Terry's void with steals, but Terry had 69 blocks on the season last year, and Daniel had 21. This year he has zero to date.

Great offense is fun, but if these guys want to be the first to crash the party, it's not going to happen without a very good defense, regardless of whether we're effectively running the offense.

Right now you would have to rank the Tribe behind UNCW, C of C, Hofstra and Towson. And after watching Elon give Georgetown all it could handle in DC yesterday (3-point loss) you might put Elon in there too. Very concerned about the fragile mental makeup of this W&M team right now...appears rudderless and even the lineup appears unstable.

Too many substitutions...let's perhaps give the starters more time on the court. Yes, we are deep, but
let's develop some defensive cohesion with our top guys playing longer.

Agree Seacat might be the key to shaking this team up in practice and ultimately in games. He's not as big as Knight, but he seems more intense defensively. Remember he was the only one who could contain Gutsys. Hope he comes back confident, pissed (at himself) and ready to work hard.

I've been high on Seacat since the NCSU game last fall. I like his footwork (for a freshman), and his post presence. I'm really hoping he is staying in shape and will comeback with a vengeance after exams.

Defense is about effort, desire and hustle. Offense is more about skills, polish and finesse. While I don't know for sure, it would seem to be easier to light the fire for defensive effort than to teach offensive skills.

At this point it seems to be about getting a plan, sticking with the plan and executing with persistence and a vengeance. There needs to be more fire on the court. Everyone know that these guys are talented and capable, but they need to prove that they can perform up to potential for more than 15-20 minutes a game.

I've never met Seacat personally (I walked by him once when he was a high school senior at an Elon game, he's a very big dude) so I don't know if this is true in life but on the court he's got a mean streak. And that's exactly what our defense needs, someone inside with an attitude. I really think the whole team could feed off that energy when he comes back. I'd love to see Jack and Nate adopt more of that style as well.

(12-05-2016 11:28 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  I've never met Seacat personally (I walked by him once when he was a high school senior at an Elon game, he's a very big dude) so I don't know if this is true in life but on the court he's got a mean streak. And that's exactly what our defense needs, someone inside with an attitude. I really think the whole team could feed off that energy when he comes back. I'd love to see Jack and Nate adopt more of that style as well.

Where's JML when you need him?

(12-06-2016 02:17 PM)TribeToTheEnd Wrote:  

(12-05-2016 11:28 AM)zablenoise Wrote:  I've never met Seacat personally (I walked by him once when he was a high school senior at an Elon game, he's a very big dude) so I don't know if this is true in life but on the court he's got a mean streak. And that's exactly what our defense needs, someone inside with an attitude. I really think the whole team could feed off that energy when he comes back. I'd love to see Jack and Nate adopt more of that style as well.

Where's JML when you need him?

Rocco needs to weigh in here on the JML mention. I think he's still looking for those extra 9-10 wins back in 2010-2011.

Even more bad news about Hunter Seacat (who, as you know by now was convicted of DUI in WJCC court on Nov 8). My nephew is a Tribe student-athlete and says the word is that Seacat is not coming back to the team. Seacat is looking to transfer after this semester. Will no doubt leave W&M thin in the post this season, given Whitman & Knight's propensity to get into foul trouble. So, the Tribe needs another big man in their next recruiting class.

(12-06-2016 06:42 PM)Pete24 Wrote:  Even more bad news about Hunter Seacat (who, as you know by now was convicted of DUI in WJCC court on Nov 8). My nephew is a Tribe student-athlete and says the word is that Seacat is not coming back to the team. Seacat is looking to transfer after this semester. Will no doubt leave W&M thin in the post this season, given Whitman & Knight's propensity to get into foul trouble. So, the Tribe needs another big man in their next recruiting class.

That IS bad news

Very sorry to hear that, if it happens.


Sent from my SM-N910V using CSNbbs mobile app