After a couple of losses by my favorite teams this week (Purdue losing to Indiana at Bloomington and ETSU losing to The Citadel in Johnson City), one factor in both losses was a lack of toughness.

The Bucs have players that show "flash." Flash is risk-taking or showmanship or seemingly undisciplined. It shows itself as taking a really long 3, going for the highlight reel dunk, or poking to get the steal. Flash can change momentum and can get the fans into the game. Flash's opposite is "tough." Rebounding, defense, going for 50/50 balls are examples of "tough." Tough helps negate the other team's flash and helps maintain momentum or a lead. Flash is not better than tough, nor is tough better than flash. Teams need both. Successful teams manage the tough/flash balance effectively.

I think we are too weighted toward flash. Both our players and Coach Oliver tend toward flash. Flash is great, but it needs to be balanced with tough. I wonder if Silas leaving messed up that balance and we haven't adjusted enough yet.

Is my theory crap or it there some element of truth in it?

(01-23-2022 08:01 AM)frankenheimer Wrote:  After a couple of losses by my favorite teams this week (Purdue losing to Indiana at Bloomington and ETSU losing to The Citadel in Johnson City), one factor in both losses was a lack of toughness.

The Bucs have players that show "flash." Flash is risk-taking or showmanship or seemingly undisciplined. It shows itself as taking a really long 3, going for the highlight reel dunk, or poking to get the steal. Flash can change momentum and can get the fans into the game. Flash's opposite is "tough." Rebounding, defense, going for 50/50 balls are examples of "tough." Tough helps negate the other team's flash and helps maintain momentum or a lead. Flash is not better than tough, nor is tough better than flash. Teams need both. Successful teams manage the tough/flash balance effectively.

I think we are too weighted toward flash. Both our players and Coach Oliver tend toward flash. Flash is great, but it needs to be balanced with tough. I wonder if Silas leaving messed up that balance and we haven't adjusted enough yet.

Is my theory crap or it there some element of truth in it?

Can someone describe the kind of offense that we run?

I see this completely different.

I believe that this team is playing about as well as it can given the level of talent/experience on the team. The team lacked depth in the post and then lost 2 post players. The Bucs have no 5, one 4, and some good 3 players playing WAY out of position. The guards are playing pretty well but sometimes have an off night, it happens.

This is just a bad year not much more can be said. Hopefully there will be immediate contributors recruited for next year.

(01-23-2022 08:01 AM)frankenheimer Wrote:  After a couple of losses by my favorite teams this week (Purdue losing to Indiana at Bloomington and ETSU losing to The Citadel in Johnson City), one factor in both losses was a lack of toughness.

The Bucs have players that show "flash." Flash is risk-taking or showmanship or seemingly undisciplined. It shows itself as taking a really long 3, going for the highlight reel dunk, or poking to get the steal. Flash can change momentum and can get the fans into the game. Flash's opposite is "tough." Rebounding, defense, going for 50/50 balls are examples of "tough." Tough helps negate the other team's flash and helps maintain momentum or a lead. Flash is not better than tough, nor is tough better than flash. Teams need both. Successful teams manage the tough/flash balance effectively.

I think we are too weighted toward flash. Both our players and Coach Oliver tend toward flash. Flash is great, but it needs to be balanced with tough. I wonder if Silas leaving messed up that balance and we haven't adjusted enough yet.

Is my theory crap or it there some element of truth in it?

Glad I'm not the only Purdue and ETSU fans in here.

(01-23-2022 12:54 PM)etsuandpurdue3 Wrote:  

(01-23-2022 08:01 AM)frankenheimer Wrote:  After a couple of losses by my favorite teams this week (Purdue losing to Indiana at Bloomington and ETSU losing to The Citadel in Johnson City), one factor in both losses was a lack of toughness.

The Bucs have players that show "flash." Flash is risk-taking or showmanship or seemingly undisciplined. It shows itself as taking a really long 3, going for the highlight reel dunk, or poking to get the steal. Flash can change momentum and can get the fans into the game. Flash's opposite is "tough." Rebounding, defense, going for 50/50 balls are examples of "tough." Tough helps negate the other team's flash and helps maintain momentum or a lead. Flash is not better than tough, nor is tough better than flash. Teams need both. Successful teams manage the tough/flash balance effectively.

I think we are too weighted toward flash. Both our players and Coach Oliver tend toward flash. Flash is great, but it needs to be balanced with tough. I wonder if Silas leaving messed up that balance and we haven't adjusted enough yet.

Is my theory crap or it there some element of truth in it?

Glad I'm not the only Purdue and ETSU fans in here.

Any ETSU and UVA fans on here? Now, there’s no flash on Tony Bennett’s teams as UVA is having a rather off year so far by his standards, but an overall outstanding record, accompanied with that national championship trophy, built around much toughness, discipline, and teamwork.

(01-23-2022 12:01 PM)BucDoctor Wrote:  I see this completely different.

I believe that this team is playing about as well as it can given the level of talent/experience on the team. The team lacked depth in the post and then lost 2 post players. The Bucs have no 5, one 4, and some good 3 players playing WAY out of position. The guards are playing pretty well but sometimes have an off night, it happens.

This is just a bad year not much more can be said. Hopefully there will be immediate contributors recruited for next year.

I don't know that I'd call this a "bad" year; "middling" would be my description.

Offensively, this team has a lot of weapons. Sloan, King, and the brothers Brewer have demonstrated the ability to drop 20 points on any given night. That is a great tool to have in your team's toolbox. I've followed a lot of teams that have only had one player that could do that.

I would disagree that the performance thusfar has been limited by the talent and experience. With just a little more discipline rebounding and taking care of the ball, I see wins against NC A&T, Wofford, and The Citadel. And I see a 10-point win over VMI instead of 1 point. I would agree that the talent may not get us over UTC away and it would be a stretch to get a conference championship. So I somewhat agree with your assessment, just not to your extent.

(01-23-2022 09:47 AM)bucfan81 Wrote:  Can someone describe the kind of offense that we run?

As much as it hurts to say this, I see a number of half court sets of the "one person dribble around and then find a lousy shot with 5 seconds" offense. We have some players that can generate a bucket that way, but it's a real momentum-killer when they can't.

I do like the little weave thing that is run. I do appreciate when David penetrates. He really makes the defense adjust and many times something opens up. I'm not a fan of dribbling around and launching a 25-foot shot; although they do go in occasionally, I just think there's better options if you run a more structured set.

The Bucs losing Silas and Webber or anyone else not having the skills to be a good facilitator, changed the offense from inside out to a guard oriented offense. Every team the Bucs play know the Bucs are weak at the 4 and 5 and take full advantage of the situation. They play a high defense to force the Bucs off the 3pt line knowing full well there is no offensive threat from the front line. Oliver has also reduced both Brewer brothers involvement in ball handling, due to their propensity for turnovers. Bucs have only two reliable ball handlers and when either get in foul trouble, the offense is further restricted. Sloan and King have to carry the load of point and shooting guard. When either one is off the floor, Bucs offense is greatly reduced with the loss of a 3pt threat and a ball handler. That situation leads to more dribbling around, trying to find an open lane or create an open 3 from the corner.

To generate offense, Bucs have to play fast, outrun their opponent, spot up for open 3s or get fast break points. Ty and Ladarious are a mismatch for the defenders and have the ability to post up or drive for easy buckets but to often lose the ball or throw a bad pass. It's unfortunate but it's their history, good play, great play and then follow that with bad play, just inconsistent.

Bucs are undersized and playing out of postion. If the guard play breaks down, poor foul shooting or they commit a high amount of turnovers, their chance of winning is slim to none.

In simplistic terms, if Bucs had shot their normal free throw percentage, Sloan didn't pick up his 4th foul with 5 min to go, Bucs win. Ladarius making an easy dunk would have given the Bucs a excellent chance to win. They had Citadel speeded up, turning ball over, had the momentum and it all changed back to Citadel with that missed dunk bunny. Again to many unforced errors.

(01-23-2022 08:01 AM)frankenheimer Wrote:  The Bucs have players that show "flash." Flash is risk-taking or showmanship or seemingly undisciplined. It shows itself as taking a really long 3, going for the highlight reel dunk, or poking to get the steal. Flash can change momentum and can get the fans into the game. Flash's opposite is "tough." Rebounding, defense, going for 50/50 balls are examples of "tough." Tough helps negate the other team's flash and helps maintain momentum or a lead. Flash is not better than tough, nor is tough better than flash. Teams need both. Successful teams manage the tough/flash balance effectively.

I think we are too weighted toward flash. Both our players and Coach Oliver tend toward flash. Flash is great, but it needs to be balanced with tough. I wonder if Silas leaving messed up that balance and we haven't adjusted enough yet.

Is my theory crap or it there some element of truth in it?

I think you're on the right track, except I wouldn't characterize "flash" and "tough" as opposites. I believe you can have flash and be tough, too. I certainly agree that we have more of the former than the latter. On defense, this team may get a lot of steals, but overall it does not impose its will on the opponent. Against decent teams, especially ones with good post play, it's usually the opposite, with their offense imposing their will on our defense. In particular, we seem hapless against on ball screens, and the far too easy result is either a mismatch down low, or an open 3-point shot. In addition, we give up too many 3's when the outside defenders drop too far down on help defense — beyond the point they can recover and defend their own man. As I've said before, this coaching staff could use a defensive guru.

On offense, it's become apparent that the goal is to generate mismatches, and I'm okay with that strategy. Both Sloan and LA Brewer are inside/outside threats, and I think either one can get off a good shot against just about any single defender. However, when teams double up on the mismatch, we too often force up a bad shot instead of making a pass. I don't know if that's just bad decisions by the players, or if the coaching staff has failed to install and teach a system with good passing options. In some cases, and really far too often, the player has to force up a shot with the clock winding down — because it has taken too long for the coach to call the offense, too long for the players to get into position, and too long to execute. When these players draw a double-team, somebody is open. That player has to have the mindset to take advantage of the passing opportunity, and the coaches need to have the other players positioned advantageously and with enough time to cash it in.

Some of this is surely attributable to growing pains for a first-time head coach and a new staff. Just like the players, the coaching staff (especially a new one) needs to progress as the season goes along. Can this staff make the needed adjustments as we head into February and then March? If the coaches can get this team to play with more "toughness," if we can impose our will and get more defensive stops, then the offense will have more opportunities to run and operate at the fast pace which seems to suit them best. Or, if we are running a half court set, get the play started quicker, and make sure there are good passing options available to whoever is our attacking player.

The players are playing hard, and they certainly appear to be willing to work to get better. I'll be looking for the coaches to find more ways to position them for success. Both the players and staff have room to improve, and I expect they will do so.

Great discussion. I enjoy and learn a lot from reading other peoples thoughts.

Guys, you continue to discount, overlook the lack of a 4 or 5 that can individually generate offense, play tough D against the opponents 4 or 5 and be a force on the boards. Bucs simply don't have the size and experience at this time. You cannot create offense by passing the ball to our current 4 or 5 players unless the guards can penetrate, draw the D to them and the so called 'bigs' are open for a layup.

Bucs 'bigs' are playing out of postion. They are not true 'bigs'. They are not going to put on 20 lbs of muscle and gain enough experience in 3 months to be a force. Webber has been in the weight program 2 1/2 years. He had gained maybe, 10-15lbs. Has shown some improvement. Yes, he can occasionally hit a 3 and he plays hard but he's not going to get you 12 and 5, and play tough D. I'm not picking on Webber, just stating the obvious. Bucs do not have a single player that can hold their on at the 4 or 5.

Oliver, his staff or some defensive guru cannot magically transform players with limited skill, limited size and limited experience into championship caliber players.

(01-25-2022 01:11 PM)Buc76 Wrote:  Guys, you continue to discount, overlook the lack of a 4 or 5 that can individually generate offense, play tough D against the opponents 4 or 5 and be a force on the boards. Bucs simply don't have the size and experience at this time. You cannot create offense by passing the ball to our current 4 or 5 players unless the guards can penetrate, draw the D to them and the so called 'bigs' are open for a layup.

Bucs 'bigs' are playing out of postion. They are not true 'bigs'. They are not going to put on 20 lbs of muscle and gain enough experience in 3 months to be a force. Webber has been in the weight program 2 1/2 years. He had gained maybe, 10-15lbs. Has shown some improvement. Yes, he can occasionally hit a 3 and he plays hard but he's not going to get you 12 and 5, and play tough D. I'm not picking on Webber, just stating the obvious. Bucs do not have a single player that can hold their on at the 4 or 5.

Oliver, his staff or some defensive guru cannot magically transform players with limited skill, limited size and limited experience into championship caliber players.

You are right, of course, about our "bigs" not being true "bigs," and no coach is a magician. I don't disagree with anything you said. But, the areas for improvement I outlined earlier have nothing to do with those facts. What I want to see is the coaching staff guiding these Bucs to be the best they can be. And, I think these players have the talent to be a lot better team, on a consistent basis, than what we've seen so far.

I would further state my emphatic belief that you can win the SoCon without benefit of a true big, but you will not win this league without great guard play.

Good, skilled players will be consistant, something we all want, most of all, the coaches.

I don't see a single player that has not improved, even though the 'bigs' are playing out of postion, team is playing short handed and rotations have been constantly changing with two experienced players quitting, Covid problems and an all freshman bench. IMO, the coaches and the players have done a tremendous job of overcoming a myriad of problems. They have won or been in postion to win every mid major game. The exception was Chatt.

This team was essentially destroyed last season. 'Bigs' that were Freshman would have been Sophomores this year. They would had a years experience and definitely would have been stronger. Bucs had good backups and part time starters at guard. All those players transferred, The entire coaching staff left. The Bucs started over with a new coaching staff, only one 'big', who quit, two bench players, one quit and 3 starters. The coaching staff was handicapped with only a few days to recruit. The entire bench are true freshman. One transfer Freshman has been forced to be a starter at the 5 position, A postion he's never played and is at a physical disadvantage every game. The other bench player had been forced to play either the 4 or 5. Positions he has not played before.

I don't see where the coaches or the players are not performing to their abilities and their experience. They have been pressed into unfamiliar roles, are having to learn on the go and are playing to many minutes against very good mid major competition.

Bucs were not picked or expected to win the conference or tournament. With the loss of Silas and now Vonnie, chances are even less but Bucs will not be an easy out. They have to play an almost perfect game to win, a tough task for a short handed, undersized team, mostly inexperienced team.

Bucs in all probability, will not win the conference or tournament this year but they have already won games no one expected them to win. Yes, they have lost some winnable games, but with their short comings, that's unfortunately going to happen.

Oliver and staff will bring in experienced true 'bigs' and others for next season and our freshman will grow stronger and will be prepared for D1 competition.

Again, I don't disagree with anything you said, including "I don't see where the coaches or the players are not performing to their abilities and their experience."

Where we may disagree is, you seem to think this is as good as it's going to get during this season (my apologies if I'm missing the mark), whereas I am pointing out specific areas where I believe the staff and players can and will improve as the season progresses.

What most people seem to be missing is that NEXT year is when the real rebuilding begins.
We currently have 13 players and only 1 senior but based on my own feelings and things that have heard I am going to assume the Brewers won't be back. So that is 3 scholarships, We have already signed 3 so we are full at 13.
I put the over/under at losing 3.5 players (including the Brewers) I am sure 1 or 2 more will leave, but hard to know which to pick so this is going to be based on those 13. If/when someone leaves hopefully Oliver can find that unicorn big we need.

With Sloan + the brothers we are losing a ton of leadership and production.

That leaves King in that role as leader, Weber will be here for his fourth season but hasn't shown signs up till now of taking on that role, maybe he will step up. Also, the guy from Coastal seems like the type who will step up.

We are getting more length but bulk is still in short supply.
Sr.
None
Jr
Weber 6'9 215 F
King 6'0 172 G
Tipler 5'10 175 G
So
Charles 6'8 200 F
Seymour 6'8 191 F
Yasser 6'5 183 G
Fr-Red
Nunez 6'10 246 C
Farah 6'7 208 F
Hall 6'3 184 G
Strothers 6'1 167 G
Fr-New
Ilic 6'10 205 F
Gregory 6'8 240 F
Shaw 6'7 170 G

I just hope we can keep Gregory committed.

(01-26-2022 11:25 AM)squeak Wrote:  I just hope we can keep Gregory committed.

He signed, all 3 of those guys signed during the early period.

(01-26-2022 11:38 AM)RodShaw2 Wrote:  

(01-26-2022 11:25 AM)squeak Wrote:  I just hope we can keep Gregory committed.

He signed, all 3 of those guys signed during the early period.

Gregory and Nunez underneath would be fun to watch. Those are some big fellers.