|
Post by ncaam on Feb 7, 2017 11:32:17 GMT -5
We are the same team we were last year. PB is much better, but the loss of EG counteracts his improvement. MA and JF about the same with KC, AT and RC not producing as much. MH is slightly better but the deep bench is invisible save one serendipitous game for CLS. The top of the PL is better. The bottom, especially AU and LC, terrible. Gotta beat LC.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Feb 7, 2017 11:46:26 GMT -5
Wanted to take a closer look at what Jehyve Floyd did after he was inserted into the lineup with 8:14 left, over the course of seven minutes, before both teams cleared their benches. Bucknell's starters and top subs were in this whole time. In no particular order . . .
1. When Floyd came in, we were down 21. When he went back to the bench, we were down 14. For those of us waxing nostalgic about +/-, that's +7 2. My eyes saw Bucknell suddenly having some difficulty scoring inside. In fact, they made just two field goals inside the arc over the seven minutes Floyd was patrolling underneath the basket. They had 23 twos during the preceding 32 minutes. 3. In this span, Floyd had a basket, two assists, three steals, a block, a couple deflections, just one foul, and zero turnovers.
Whatever his lack of body-on-body strength may be, it seems to me,Jehyve alters the game for the better defensively around the rim. He is fast, agile, has good hands, and is disruptive, horizontally and vertically. We could do worse than giving him more of Husek's minutes. Starting now.
|
|
|
Post by purplehaze on Feb 7, 2017 11:47:43 GMT -5
Husek's inside game is soft and that really hurts us. I thought there was an embarrassing play last night when McKenzie (6 ft guard) scored on a layup against Matt as he tried to block the shot in vain and tumbled to the floor. Yes, he has made some big 3 pointers, esp last march during the playoff run, but that's where his game has remained.
|
|
|
Post by lou on Feb 7, 2017 11:54:33 GMT -5
Husek's inside game is soft and that really hurts us. I thought there was an embarrassing play last night when McKenzie (6 ft guard) scored on a layup against Matt as he tried to block the shot in vain and tumbled to the floor. Yes, he has made some big 3 pointers, esp last march during the playoff run, but that's where his game has remained. Agree, and I thought the same thing, embarrassing, though I think it was worse. Instead of preventing the layup of the kid a foot shorter with an aggressive foul, he did neither. He fouled but did nothing to prevent the basket, another display of futility by our big guy
|
|
|
Post by beaven302 on Feb 7, 2017 11:56:35 GMT -5
WCHC: Good points, except perhaps for Carm. He is constantly talking to players and teaching all the time. We had a jumping yelling coach previously who never taught much. My own view is that he is a clear step up. Good point. Carmody is simply not the kind of coach who engages in court side histrionics. When he was at Northwestern, his manner during games was analytical/professorial.
|
|
|
Post by sader1970 on Feb 7, 2017 12:40:03 GMT -5
Uhhh, Carmody can be very animated at times and does yell, just not at the refs enough to earn a "T." Here's the thing, and I know I posted this before, Milan was like a big brother to the players. Carmody is like a stern father. I don't think he cares if the players like him but they do respect him. Heard from multiple sources that some of the players are intimidated by Carmody and, yes, he seems to have a fast hook for young players who make a mistake. But like, RW, they know why they are taken out and if there is any doubt, he explains why and told how to correct. i think Carmody is like a boss I once had who told me that his management philosophy is that he expects a great job being done and if you don't hear from him, it means you are doing great. So, don't expect a pat in the back, just remember that if you are not getting kicked in the rear, that's the same as an attaboy. Of course, if you step on the baseline while dribbling or take your eye off the ball and miss a pass, even I could tell the player what they did wrong.
|
|
|
Post by cmo on Feb 7, 2017 13:02:17 GMT -5
Husek's inside game is soft and that really hurts us. I thought there was an embarrassing play last night when McKenzie (6 ft guard) scored on a layup against Matt as he tried to block the shot in vain and tumbled to the floor. Yes, he has made some big 3 pointers, esp last march during the playoff run, but that's where his game has remained. Agree, and I thought the same thing, embarrassing, though I think it was worse. Instead of preventing the layup of the kid a foot shorter with an aggressive foul, he did neither. He fouled but did nothing to prevent the basket, another display of futility by our big guy Thought at the time "that's a weight room issue." Looked awful. Need a Whearty.
|
|
|
Post by sarasota on Feb 7, 2017 15:37:28 GMT -5
I still feel that CBC is not demanding enough of his regular rotation players. I have no idea why. There's just way too much constant repetition of poor play by the team and by individuals. Last night he sat CLS twice immediately after miscues, but that's some kind of exception.
|
|
|
Post by cfrivals on Feb 7, 2017 18:42:14 GMT -5
Three coaches in 6 years. Consistently finishing in the bottom half of pl, and some very sub par recruiting has led to what you have now. SK had 1 recruit and two transfers. Dudz was best big man since Whearty. MB recruited players too small who were not good at their positions. With exception of miller. CBC has recruited 5 players and only 1 looks like he is a D1 player. With that said you are left with about 3 maybe 4 low major players. We are mismatched most night unless we are player a sub 250 team. I am not sure we have the right coach going into the future as the style of play at this level is poor and produces zero excitement. I hope I am wrong and next years class turns out to be awesome! But to expect MZ, JF, CLS, MP to jump into starting positions, that is asking way too much.
|
|
|
Post by hopjim on Feb 7, 2017 18:48:43 GMT -5
Living in TX now, first game I have seen this year, but have to agree. More talent than I anticipated after living the year through this Board. While Bucknell appears to have more talent at all levels including Frosh, all it may take is 1-2 strong recruits and starting 5 will be competitive. My current questions are: -Why were there so many turnovers close to basketball? Motion offense got several open layups but turned the ball over more than most games seen. Coaching, guards, overall talent? Current offense requires everyone to be a passer, hard to recruit for in this "me first" world. Without some in game adjustments, other teams, as Bucknell did, will learn the cuts and plug the lanes. Bucknell's defense adjusted-didn't see much change from Crusaders. -Defense seemed one dimensional. 1-3-1 zone early in game worked well, then Bison started to drive the middle. Shut middle down and Bucknell had open 3s. Didn't seem to have ability to adjust on the fly. -Is the overall talent level as thin as it looked? Was surprised when walk ons come in. While there is a reason they are not on scholarship, they also can help overall game readiness in practice. Bucknell, with 10+ strong players, would appear to have a major edge in this department.
|
|
|
Post by WorcesterGray on Feb 7, 2017 19:01:12 GMT -5
-Is the overall talent level as thin as it looked? Was surprised when walk ons come in. While there is a reason they are not on scholarship, they also can help overall game readiness in practice. Bucknell, with 10+ strong players, would appear to have a major edge in this department. Number of Players Averaging 10+ Minutes: BU 11 Navy 10 AU 10 Laf 10 Buck 9 Loy 9 Arm 9 Gate 8 Lehigh 8 HC 7
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Feb 7, 2017 19:20:33 GMT -5
Living in TX now, first game I have seen this year, but have to agree. More talent than I anticipated after living the year through this Board. While Bucknell appears to have more talent at all levels including Frosh, all it may take is 1-2 strong recruits and starting 5 will be competitive. My current questions are: -Why were there so many turnovers close to basketball? Motion offense got several open layups but turned the ball over more than most games seen. Coaching, guards, overall talent? Current offense requires everyone to be a passer, hard to recruit for in this "me first" world. Without some in game adjustments, other teams, as Bucknell did, will learn the cuts and plug the lanes. Bucknell's defense adjusted-didn't see much change from Crusaders. -Defense seemed one dimensional. 1-3-1 zone early in game worked well, then Bison started to drive the middle. Shut middle down and Bucknell had open 3s. Didn't seem to have ability to adjust on the fly. -Is the overall talent level as thin as it looked? Was surprised when walk ons come in. While there is a reason they are not on scholarship, they also can help overall game readiness in practice. Bucknell, with 10+ strong players, would appear to have a major edge in this department. Nice objective observations, hopjim. The talent isn't that great, but it should be enough for the quality of the Patriot League. However, the coach has a very rigid system with his motion/Princeton offense that does not run any sets to get the ball to our best players in favorable positions and is overly reliant on perimeter jump shots, a whacky zone defense that causes turnovers on the perimeter but is horrific inside the 3-point line and on the defensive boards, and a refusal to attack the offensive boards in any way. Also, outside of Pat Benzan (who may have just needed a year to catch up to the speed of the D1 game after playing low-level High school ball before 1 year at Worcester Academy), there has been minimal-to-no individual improvement for anyone from the time Carmody took over to now.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Feb 7, 2017 19:26:54 GMT -5
Living in TX now, first game I have seen this year, but have to agree. More talent than I anticipated after living the year through this Board. While Bucknell appears to have more talent at all levels including Frosh, all it may take is 1-2 strong recruits and starting 5 will be competitive. My current questions are: -Why were there so many turnovers close to basketball? Motion offense got several open layups but turned the ball over more than most games seen. Coaching, guards, overall talent? Current offense requires everyone to be a passer, hard to recruit for in this "me first" world. Without some in game adjustments, other teams, as Bucknell did, will learn the cuts and plug the lanes. Bucknell's defense adjusted-didn't see much change from Crusaders. -Defense seemed one dimensional. 1-3-1 zone early in game worked well, then Bison started to drive the middle. Shut middle down and Bucknell had open 3s. Didn't seem to have ability to adjust on the fly. -Is the overall talent level as thin as it looked? Was surprised when walk ons come in. While there is a reason they are not on scholarship, they also can help overall game readiness in practice. Bucknell, with 10+ strong players, would appear to have a major edge in this department. I know the announcer called a couple of the HC players walk-ons, but they are not. Yes, right now we are thin and several players clearly need to continue to develop.
|
|
|
Post by bison137 on Feb 7, 2017 21:02:35 GMT -5
-Is the overall talent level as thin as it looked? Was surprised when walk ons come in. While there is a reason they are not on scholarship, they also can help overall game readiness in practice. Bucknell, with 10+ strong players, would appear to have a major edge in this department. Number of Players Averaging 10+ Minutes: BU 11 Navy 10 AU 10 Laf 10 Buck 9 Loy 9 Arm 9 Gate 8 Lehigh 8 HC 7 Boston U's numbers are distorted by all of the suspensions. Two players - Goff and Mahoney - average slightly over 10 minutes per game because of the absence of suspended players Mosley, Barnes, Mgbargorba, and Havener. And three of the suspended players averaged over 10 mpg - but only for 9-10 games in two cases. Had they not had disciplinary issues, they be in the 9 category.
|
|