|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 14:39:44 GMT -5
we're going to win the game, but thompson reverting to poor decision making taking (and of course, missing) two 3's with plenty of time left on the shot clock with a big lead on the last two possessions. patience is all that is needed to finish the game at this point.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 14:43:43 GMT -5
lesann checking in with less than 2 minutes to go
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 14:49:18 GMT -5
hc wins 73-57. nice, comfortable win today.
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Nov 25, 2016 14:59:33 GMT -5
Sloppy win but a win
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 25, 2016 14:59:41 GMT -5
I was wrong about this game not being a blow-out. SC St led 2-0 after the first minute (on a beautiful feed and layup that did make me nervous). After that, the rest of the game belonged to HC. Yes, there were some cold spells and shooting the last two 3s by AT was not a good choice - unless that was what the coach told him to do if he was open, which he was. Now a VERY tough opponent in Monmouth on Sunday.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 25, 2016 15:01:28 GMT -5
If you are talking about the last few minutes, then yes they were sloppy. That was not the case for most of the game. Having 15 turnovers is not our best, but having an edge with 10 more rebounds than S.C.State helped a good deal.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 15:05:29 GMT -5
If you are talking about the last few minutes, then yes they were sloppy. That was not the case for most of the game. Having 15 turnovers is not our best, but having an edge with 10 more rebounds than S.C.State helped a good deal. agreed. i would also not describe this as a sloppy win.
|
|
|
Post by Sons of Vaval on Nov 25, 2016 15:11:41 GMT -5
Did exactly what we needed to do today, taking care of business at home against an inferior opponent. Encouraging play by Champion, Husek, and Charles.
Ant looks to have struggled again, but managed the game well for the most part.
Ziggy had spurts of solid play in the first half, which I think is pretty important.
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 25, 2016 15:12:54 GMT -5
Some quick stats: FG% = HC 56% / SCS 46% 3 pt% = HC 37% / SCS 23% FT% = HC 77% / SCS 68% Reb = HC 29 / SCS 19 Assists = HC 19 (on 23 baskets) / SCS 13 (on 24 baskets) Overall - a nice day
One negative - SCS had 9 steals to only 4 for HC
|
|
|
Post by rgs318 on Nov 25, 2016 15:14:28 GMT -5
Is it my imagination, of does PB look "in control" whenever he is on the court? His poise seems to be that of a more experienced player both on offense and defense.
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 25, 2016 15:15:40 GMT -5
HC 16-22 on twos very impressive--lots of back doors and other close shots
|
|
|
Post by KY Crusader 75 on Nov 25, 2016 15:16:36 GMT -5
Is it my imagination, of does PB look "in control" whenever he is on the court? His poise seems to be that of a more experienced player both on offense and defense. Not your imagination
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Nov 25, 2016 15:25:41 GMT -5
i know he has been frustrating, but husek has too much talent not to be a regular contributor on this team. i'm not giving up on him and i think having him on the floor gives us the highest ceiling. Very interesting take considering the treatment of AT and burying him at every possible opportunity. If you just want to look at shooting as the sole indicator of one's play, then sure, Husek shoots it pretty well. However, there are huge holes in other areas. On the other hand, AT is a very steadying presence on the floor, gets guys in the right spot, and allows others to make plays. SC State made several runs today when he came off the floor. Benzan is a totally different player when he is playing off of AT versus when he is the sole PG on the floor. It would be tough to argue that we have a higher ceiling with Husek than we would have if we could get Floyd going.
|
|
|
Post by crusader1970 on Nov 25, 2016 16:06:04 GMT -5
Nice win. So glad to see.
One negative in my mind is AT is now 7 for 26 or 27% for the year on threes. His freshman year 3 point % is starting to look like the aberration.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 25, 2016 16:12:22 GMT -5
He handled the ball better. He should give up the three.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 16:16:14 GMT -5
i know he has been frustrating, but husek has too much talent not to be a regular contributor on this team. i'm not giving up on him and i think having him on the floor gives us the highest ceiling. Very interesting take considering the treatment of AT and burying him at every possible opportunity. If you just want to look at shooting as the sole indicator of one's play, then sure, Husek shoots it pretty well. However, there are huge holes in other areas. On the other hand, AT is a very steadying presence on the floor, gets guys in the right spot, and allows others to make plays. SC State made several runs today when he came off the floor. Benzan is a totally different player when he is playing off of AT versus when he is the sole PG on the floor. It would be tough to argue that we have a higher ceiling with Husek than we would have if we could get Floyd going. what's so "interesting" about this take? there was no comparison between the actual production of husek and thompson today or in general. and while i like floyd as a nice change of pace, if you think a 6'7 player who is athletic but lacking in basketball skill brings more potential to our team than a player who is 6'11 and can shoot and pass the ball, that tells us all we need to know about your lack of any grasp of what attributes lead to success in carmody's system. the bottom line is that it would be nice to get either player going consistently, but the skills that husek has lend themselves better to this team. i thought thompson has been a little better than the last two years despite poor statistics. that's an admittedly low bar. i also thought that he was overall okay today, despite going 0-5 from 3 pt range with some questionable decisions on those shots and dishing out just 2 assists - albeit nice ones on rare (for him) drives and dishes - in 34 minutes. he also did a nice job not turning the ball over, cutting with purpose and intention, and forcing fewer shots than he normally does. meanwhile, husek was 5-5 from the field, 2-2 from three, for 12 points and grabbed 5 boards in just 20 minutes. incredible production in limited minutes. with benzan now capable of manning the point guard minutes, keep in mind that thompson's 30+ minutes per game are eating into minutes and opportunities for husek, ziggy, floyd, and others who are generally more productive with their minutes. and i love the fact that "steadying", "getting guys in the right spot", "allows others to make plays" are all you can come up with in this weak comparison about the virtues of husek and thompson. they are all subjective and generally inaccurate. i love pass first point guards who create, ala jave meade. thompson does some things well, but he is not one of these point guards. in fact, in addition to shooting very poorly - which despite your typical oversimplification that me or anyone else thinks is all that matters, is especially important in the PO - and being a defensive liability, floor vision, a pass first mentality, and defensive intensity are the very attributes that good point guards in this mold generally possess that thompson does not. benzan posseses most of them. while we're on the topic of visiting past posts, did carmody and staff suddently start watching film, coming up with game plans specific to an opponent, and caring about defense the last few games or do you only bitch and complain about such things after losses? any thoughts on the 300 wins milestone, or is this also somehow just due to pete carril and whatever excuse you can come up with for why carmody's wins at northwestern should be discredited? one thing is for sure, your contrarian takes on everything - be it defending everything about tom gilmore, criticizing everything about bill carmody, and now making thompson out to be a great game manager - are certainly amusing, if nothing else!
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 25, 2016 16:25:23 GMT -5
1554 in attendance--pretty good without students I liked the look of the match up D. Not quite RW-like, but it is getting better. And it is very early to completely learn a complex D. It provides a fine compliment to the 1-3-1 16 assists on 23 hoops-- a tribute to the PO as well as the offense vs their zone
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 16:40:42 GMT -5
1554 in attendance--pretty good without students I liked the look of the match up D. Not quite RW-like, but it is getting better. And it is very early to completely learn a complex D. It provides a fine compliment to the 1-3-1 16 assists on 23 hoops-- a tribute to the PO as well as the offense vs their zone agree across the board. seeing the match-up zone work relatively well was one of the highlights of the win today. the fact that we are developing two unique defenses that are difficult for opponents to prepare for should really pay off for us as the season goes on.
|
|
|
Post by hchoops on Nov 25, 2016 16:51:02 GMT -5
Also a tribute to the PO is that a small forward/power forward for much of the game can get 9 assists. One of KC's best games.
|
|
|
Post by dadominate on Nov 25, 2016 16:59:31 GMT -5
Also a tribute to the PO is that a small forward/power forward for much of the game can get 9 assists. One of KC's best games. as one of the announcers noted, the angles that karl employs both on his drives to the hole and with his pinpoint passes in the po are incredibly impressive. the ability to see these angles, both offensively and defensively, can negate a quickness advantage and karl is expert at this. it's one of the reasons he has been so successful in his young career. he was exceptional today and i can't wait to see how he continues to develop.
|
|
|
Post by Tom on Nov 25, 2016 17:05:45 GMT -5
A nice win. One nitpik - when the team was up in the 2nd half, I thought they had a period of losing focus. I always expect a run, but SC State's run that trimmed it to 11 was largely fed off of HC turnovers. There were a few minutes when HC's play was quite sloppy on the offensive end. Fortunately HC regrouped before things got too close
It was nice to see Zignorski being productive in meaningful minutes
|
|
|
Post by DiMarz on Nov 25, 2016 17:30:47 GMT -5
A nice win. One nitpik - when the team was up in the 2nd half, I thought they had a period of losing focus. I always expect a run, but SC State's run that trimmed it to 11 was largely fed off of HC turnovers. There were a few minutes when HC's play was quite sloppy on the offensive end. Fortunately HC regrouped before things got too close
It was nice to see Zignorski being productive in meaningful minutes 5 possessions in a row..4 steals on poor passes, soft cross court/diagonal, and then RC tossed it out of bounds...
|
|
|
Post by ncaam on Nov 25, 2016 17:34:40 GMT -5
Question: Does losing focus = sloppy play? Coach called it careless and you can't win much with 15 turnovers.
Is there a link to watch a replay?
|
|
|
Post by bringbackcaro on Nov 25, 2016 17:47:30 GMT -5
Very interesting take considering the treatment of AT and burying him at every possible opportunity. If you just want to look at shooting as the sole indicator of one's play, then sure, Husek shoots it pretty well. However, there are huge holes in other areas. On the other hand, AT is a very steadying presence on the floor, gets guys in the right spot, and allows others to make plays. SC State made several runs today when he came off the floor. Benzan is a totally different player when he is playing off of AT versus when he is the sole PG on the floor. It would be tough to argue that we have a higher ceiling with Husek than we would have if we could get Floyd going. what's so "interesting" about this take? there was no comparison between the actual production of husek and thompson today or in general. and while i like floyd as a nice change of pace, if you think a 6'7 player who is athletic but lacking in basketball skill brings more potential to our team than a player who is 6'11 and can shoot and pass the ball, that tells us all we need to know about your lack of any grasp of what attributes lead to success in carmody's system. the bottom line is that it would be nice to get either player going consistently, but the skills that husek has lend themselves better to this team. i thought thompson has been a little better than the last two years despite poor statistics. that's an admittedly low bar. i also thought that he was overall okay today, despite going 0-5 from 3 pt range with some questionable decisions on those shots and dishing out just 2 assists - albeit nice ones on rare (for him) drives and dishes - in 34 minutes. he also did a nice job not turning the ball over, cutting with purpose and intention, and forcing fewer shots than he normally does. meanwhile, husek was 5-5 from the field, 2-2 from three, for 12 points and grabbed 5 boards in just 20 minutes. incredible production in limited minutes. with benzan now capable of manning the point guard minutes, keep in mind that thompson's 30+ minutes per game are eating into minutes and opportunities for husek, ziggy, floyd, and others who are generally more productive with their minutes. and i love the fact that "steadying", "getting guys in the right spot", "allows others to make plays" are all you can come up with in this weak comparison about the virtues of husek and thompson. they are all subjective and generally inaccurate. i love pass first point guards who create, ala jave meade. thompson does some things well, but he is not one of these point guards. in fact, in addition to shooting very poorly - which despite your typical oversimplification that me or anyone else thinks is all that matters, is especially important in the PO - and being a defensive liability, floor vision, a pass first mentality, and defensive intensity are the very attributes that good point guards in this mold generally possess that thompson does not. benzan posseses most of them. while we're on the topic of visiting past posts, did carmody and staff suddently start watching film, coming up with game plans specific to an opponent, and caring about defense the last few games or do you only bitch and complain about such things after losses? any thoughts on the 300 wins milestone, or is this also somehow just due to pete carril and whatever excuse you can come up with for why carmody's wins at northwestern should be discredited? one thing is for sure, your contrarian takes on everything - be it defending everything about tom gilmore, criticizing everything about bill carmody, and now making thompson out to be a great game manager - are certainly amusing, if nothing else! Yikes, someone's a little sensitive today! What's "interesting" is that you seem to ignore the impact that each (AT and MH) has on their teammates. AT provides a steadying presence on both defense and offense, whereas MH has trouble contributing more with more than shooting (which seems to be the only thing you care about). I strongly challenge your take that Husek is a good passer, as he really struggles with the ball in the high post, and he is very slow of foot, which is a challenge on the defensive end given the way our perimeter defenders over-rotate and fly past offensive players on close-outs, allowing a ton of dribble penetration and needing quick rotations on the back end to recover (having someone like Floyd to protect the rim would be a huge plus for the current scheme). Whoever is playing the 5 is significantly behind Champion, Charles, and Malachi as a scoring option, so I would value that position a lot more on the defensive end. Again, I apologize for caring about defense and being unable to grasp the Carmody system at the same level as you. I will work to get better. On the topic of point guards and Carmody's offense, after the first pass, there is often very little difference who the point guard is, as the PG makes a cut through the paint and out to the corner, or replaces with a wing, and all players are moving with each guy on the floor looking to hit a cutter with a pass. We also don't look to push the ball up the floor very often, which would be another major task of a PG in a traditional offense. However, the PG is very important in getting the ball up the floor and throwing the first pass from the right position to engage in the PO with proper spacing, and also as the primary defender at the top of the key on defense. If you think Benzan is ready to perform each of these roles, I question how closely you are paying attention. While I am very encouraged with Benzan's jump from last year to this year, and think he can provide far more than was originally expected this year, he is benefiting greatly from being able to play off the ball with AT being able to carry the load as the lead PG. As I said before, the team looked drastically different today when AT came out and PB was the lone PG. Your line about AT taking minutes from Husek, Ziggy, and Floyd because you think Benzan can just take over PG duties, is pretty outrageous. I'll take the combination of AT and PB over PB and Ziggy any day of the week and twice on Sunday. Ziggy is struggling on offense and a liability of defense (I know, I know, that doesn't matter, but still...). If you think those minutes should go to Husek or Floyd, that means we're going Benzan, Champion, Charles at the 1-3, which will result in smart coaches turning up the pressure and us being in serious trouble. Re: 300 wins, that's great and congrats to Coach! Will have 10,000 words coming up on that later after I have a chance to gather my thoughts and grasp the feat! Also, I understand the need to exaggerate to prove your point, but for the record, I never said that the staff doesn't watch film and doesn't care about defense. Also for the record, comparing the Gilmore situation to Coach Carmody and HC hoops is silly, but you already know that. Happy Thanksgiving! (*I apologize if I have offended or used any trigger words in this post. Safe space!)
|
|
|
Post by DiMarz on Nov 25, 2016 19:30:45 GMT -5
I just watched the post game presser and realized that HC wore their purple uniforms for the game today.....I wonder what that was about...
|
|