2016-2017 Season

[waterhead]

We disagree here. College hoops is moving outside the arc and the best teams are able to spread the floor, shoot the three and create driving lanes. The days of bigs camping on the block is over. They will flash there and post but they won't run down the floor, straight to the block, turnaround and demand the ball. Those days are done. I actually think, if I had one criticism to make of Mick, that he needs to recruit players that fit a 4 out 1 in mentality. I think he has been slow to adapt to that but this class and the 2017 class is showing a move in that direction.

I'm not going to argue against 4 out 1 in. I love it. We can't fall in love with the 3. We can't have bigs looking to shoot 3s 5 seconds into a shot clock when somewhat contested.

If I thought we could shoot 40 percent as a team I would say fire away. Try to get it to the block...try to slash the lane. If we have 4 on the perimeter we should be able to get a decent shot off late clock if all else fails. It's hard to block a 6'9" shooter on the perimeter.

Always take a wide open 3. Hoping for hot shooting nights to start games to open up a zone...is going to be a 50-50 proposition. We have players to take advantage of most opportunities presented.

 

[jacobkdoyle]

I'm not going to argue against 4 out 1 in. I love it. We can't fall in love with the 3. We can't have bigs looking to shoot 3s 5 seconds into a shot clock when somewhat contested.

If I thought we could shoot 40 percent as a team I would say fire away. Try to get it to the block...try to slash the lane. If we have 4 on the perimeter we should be able to get a decent shot off late clock if all else fails. It's hard to block a 6'9" shooter on the perimeter.

Always take a wide open 3. Hoping for hot shooting nights to start games to open up a zone...is going to be a 50-50 proposition. We have players to take advantage of most opportunities presented.

I don't think it's realistic to hope for 40% team 3 pt shooting. Maybe a couple individual players. But as a team, I'd say 36%+ will suffice.

 

[waterhead]

I don't think it's realistic to hope for 40% team 3 pt shooting. Maybe a couple individual players. But as a team, I'd say 36%+ will suffice.

Haha! I would be happy with that too. I was talking about being 3 happy. I don't think we have the type of team to just fall in love with it. We are finally very balanced offensively..that is our biggest asset imo. Lots of options. We need to use them.

 

[JasonS]

I was a big Huggins fan, and when he got fired and we hired Mick I was really happy about it, thought Mick was the perfect hire.

The reason I asked was because a bunch of your points were complaints many had about Huggs when he was here, especially in the last 5+ years.

1. Huggs' recruiting towards the end (call it last 3 years or so) wasn't great and was a far cry from when we were landing Derrmar Johnson, etc. I think Huggs was in the same position Mick is in now. College landscape of recruiting was changing and conference affiliation was starting to be more important.

2. Huggs would yank players very quickly for mistakes or defensive lapses.

3. Huggs didn't really publicly make excuses (that I remember) but I also agree with 95% of what Mick has been saying so I don't have any issues with it and view it more as having his team's back than whining.

4. Offense - agree here. Huggs teams were better on the offensive end for sure.

5. Huggs was, and still is, a prick in interviews. I think Mick is much better here.

What I want to see this year from the offense is that they play faster, get out and run when possible, and be more efficient. If they aren't averaging 75 points per game, I will be disappointed.

 

[GarradJ21]

We need to also keep a solid lead. We had a lot of bad bounces last year, but if we were winning by 5 towards the end of the game and not tied or up 1 (something of that nature) we wouldn't have even been in those positions. We need to stop having every game go to the last shot either defensively or offensively.

 

[#BearcatNation]

1. Huggs' recruiting towards the end (call it last 3 years or so) wasn't great and was a far cry from when we were landing Derrmar Johnson, etc. I think Huggs was in the same position Mick is in now. College landscape of recruiting was changing and conference affiliation was starting to be more important.

Have to be careful to not turn this into a Mick vs Huggs debate, since that's not at all what I'm doing, but when you look at Huggs' 2016 and 2017 classes at WVU, he's definitely struggling there right now, at least on paper. Only 1 of his 8 commits are even in the top 150. And that's with the benefit of being in a legitimate conference.

I think Huggs would've had a chance to really turn his recruiting around in 2006 and 2007 with OJ Mayo, Bill Walker, and Michael Beasley, but it's not like he's out there raking in all kinds of talent right now. He was hot from about 1993-2001, then it started to taper off. The majority of highly rated recruits Huggs brought to UC after 2001 all got into trouble, and many didn't even end up stepping onto the court.

 

[JasonS]

Have to be careful to not turn this into a Mick vs Huggs debate, since that's not at all what I'm doing, but when you look at Huggs' 2016 and 2017 classes at WVU, he's definitely struggling there right now, at least on paper. Only 1 of his 8 commits are even in the top 150. And that's with the benefit of being in a legitimate conference.

I think Huggs would've had a chance to really turn his recruiting around in 2006 and 2007 with OJ Mayo, Bill Walker, and Michael Beasley, but it's not like he's out there raking in all kinds of talent right now. He was hot from about 1993-2001, then it started to taper off. The majority of highly rated recruits Huggs brought to UC after 2001 all got into trouble, and many didn't even end up stepping onto the court.

Absolutely. I don't want that which is why I made sure to preface my comment with the fact that I loved when Huggs was our coach. I was just pointing out that many of the things Mick gets criticized for are the same things that Huggs did when he was here, especially in the last few seasons. Definitely room for improvement in all aspects of the program. That will always be the case until you win a National Title. That's the ultimate that everyone strives for and until you achieve that, you can be better. Even when you achieve that, you can be better. That doesn't mean that because you don't achieve it, that you are bad or should be replaced. There are realistic goals and then there are stretch goals. It's my opinion that we should all strive to be elite in whatever we do. It's also my opinion that it is impossible to be elite in whatever you do because you can always improve and get better.

 

[JasonS]

I'm not going to argue against 4 out 1 in. I love it. We can't fall in love with the 3. We can't have bigs looking to shoot 3s 5 seconds into a shot clock when somewhat contested.

If I thought we could shoot 40 percent as a team I would say fire away. Try to get it to the block...try to slash the lane. If we have 4 on the perimeter we should be able to get a decent shot off late clock if all else fails. It's hard to block a 6'9" shooter on the perimeter.

Always take a wide open 3. Hoping for hot shooting nights to start games to open up a zone...is going to be a 50-50 proposition. We have players to take advantage of most opportunities presented.

I will say that if Gary Clark has the ball 3 feet from the basket, isn't double teamed, and passes the ball out to the three point line, I'll pull my hair out...and I don't have much left. LOL

 

[UCBearcats]

The reason I asked was because a bunch of your points were complaints many had about Huggs when he was here, especially in the last 5+ years.

1. Huggs' recruiting towards the end (call it last 3 years or so) wasn't great and was a far cry from when we were landing Derrmar Johnson, etc. I think Huggs was in the same position Mick is in now. College landscape of recruiting was changing and conference affiliation was starting to be more important.

2. Huggs would yank players very quickly for mistakes or defensive lapses.

3. Huggs didn't really publicly make excuses (that I remember) but I also agree with 95% of what Mick has been saying so I don't have any issues with it and view it more as having his team's back than whining.

4. Offense - agree here. Huggs teams were better on the offensive end for sure.

5. Huggs was, and still is, a prick in interviews. I think Mick is much better here.

What I want to see this year from the offense is that they play faster, get out and run when possible, and be more efficient. If they aren't averaging 75 points per game, I will be disappointed.

Why are you talking about Huggins?? I find it funny that folks like you on this board are constantly harping back to Huggins. You'll complain that fans are still hung up on Bob yet you're the one who brings him up. I'm talking about Mick Cronin, not Bob Huggins.....what does one have to do with the other at this point?

Are you really so unable to have a rational thought process about Mick Cronin's critics that you can't fathom someone who doesn't think he's the answer isn't necessary still hung up on something that happened 12 years ago? I know in your mind you think you have my point of view figured out but I promise you that you don't.

Let me ask you an honest question, is there some sort of personal affiliation between you and Mick? You seem to take criticism of him as a personal assault on your integrity. Believe me, my criticism of Mick Cronin is directed at him as a coach and not at fans of our program who have no control over how he chooses to coach our team.

 

[JasonS]

Why are you talking about Huggins?? I find it funny that folks like you on this board are constantly harping back to Huggins. You'll complain that fans are still hung up on Bob yet you're the one who brings him up. I'm talking about Mick Cronin, not Bob Huggins.....what does one have to do with the other at this point?

Are you really so unable to have a rational thought process about Mick Cronin's critics that you can't fathom someone who doesn't think he's the answer isn't necessary still hung up on something that happened 12 years ago? I know in your mind you think you have my point of view figured out but I promise you that you don't.

Let me ask you an honest question, is there some sort of personal affiliation between you and Mick? You seem to take criticism of him as a personal assault on your integrity. Believe me, my criticism of Mick Cronin is directed at him as a coach and not at fans of our program who have no control over how he chooses to coach our team.

I'll explain this simply so you can understand and then I am done. As I mentioned in another post, people who loved Huggs seem to criticize Mick for the exact same things they loved about Huggins. That is why I asked and that is why I responded to you. If you can't understand that, then I can't help you. It is ok to bring up Huggins in the context of this program. He happened to coach here and is a part of the recent history. I don't want to turn this into Huggs vs. Mick because that is not what this thread is for, but if you are going to criticize the coach and program for things that had been done before the last time this program was #1 in the country, I have a problem with that and will call it out. This isn't rocket science.

 

[Bearcat_NTS]

I don't think it's realistic to hope for 40% team 3 pt shooting. Maybe a couple individual players. But as a team, I'd say 36%+ will suffice.

I don't see it. UC shot 34.8% from three last year but lost Cobb who shot 39.4% from the three and took 25.9% of our attempts.

 

[UCBearcats]

I'll explain this simply so you can understand and then I am done. As I mentioned in another post, people who loved Huggs seem to criticize Mick for the exact same things they loved about Huggins. That is why I asked and that is why I responded to you. If you can't understand that, then I can't help you. It is ok to bring up Huggins in the context of this program. He happened to coach here and is a part of the recent history. I don't want to turn this into Huggs vs. Mick because that is not what this thread is for, but if you are going to criticize the coach and program for things that had been done before the last time this program was #1 in the country, I have a problem with that and will call it out. This isn't rocket science.

Lol, I really appreciate your smugness, the arrogance of your statements and your outlook towards opinions other than your own in general. We really need someone like you on the right side of this battle. I'll save a seat for your on the #makeucgreatagain bandwagon if you ever want to hop on and play for a winner.

 

[JasonS]

Lol, I really appreciate your smugness, the arrogance of your statements and your outlook towards opinions other than your own in general. We really need someone like you on the right side of this battle. I'll save a seat for your on the #makeucgreatagain bandwagon if you ever want to hop on and play for a winner.

Nope. I'm happy with the program and direction it's going. Thanks for your wonderful invite.

 

[UCBearcats]

Nope. I'm happy with the program and direction it's going. Thanks for your wonderful invite.

Sounds great, then we'll just continue to disagree. Looking forward to it.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

I don't see it. UC shot 34.8% from three last year but lost Cobb who shot 39.4% from the three and took 25.9% of our attempts.

I agree with you.

 

[Madman81]

Lol, I really appreciate your smugness, the arrogance of your statements and your outlook towards opinions other than your own in general. We really need someone like you on the right side of this battle. I'll save a seat for your on the #makeucgreatagain bandwagon if you ever want to hop on and play for a winner.

i think the general point is that no coach is perfect, and it then follows that a natural comparison is of the flaws of the current coach and the flaws of the previous coach, especially when that previous coach is credited with establishing the level of success it seems like the critics of the current coach would like to return to.

when it seems like a lot of the critics of the current coach were staunch supporters of the previous coach, i think it makes sense to compare the two to see if some of the conclusions being drawn aren't entirely rational.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

i think the general point is that no coach is perfect, and it then follows that a natural comparison is of the flaws of the current coach and the flaws of the previous coach, especially when that previous coach is credited with establishing the level of success it seems like the critics of the current coach would like to return to.

when it seems like a lot of the critics of the current coach were staunch supporters of the previous coach, i think it makes sense to compare the two to see if some of the conclusions being drawn aren't entirely rational.

Very good!!!! I enjoyed this. LMAO!!!! You didn't capitalize the I to start your comment.

 

[justinhub2003]

So SB NATION just released its top 100 players.


UC had 2 players on the list: Gary Clark and.... Jacob Evans.


TC was not on the list oddly and was on the honorable mention. A bit odd to me considering his PPG and APG and lack of TO

http://www.sbnation.com/a/ncaa-basketball-preview-2016/top-100#n

 

[Madman81]

Very good!!!! I enjoyed this. LMAO!!!! You didn't capitalize the I to start your comment.

style <> content, pops.

 

[WAITE HOYT 2]

style <> content, pops.

LOL!!! I'd be mad if it wasn't true. I am pops.