Game Thread: UC vs (18)OSU 11/6/2019

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

I was looking for effort and I was very satisfied. It is to early to pass judgement or panic about the team right now. I LOVE the 7 footers, they will play better. I felt the 7 footers were feeling their way through the game and will make adjustments as the year goes along. I don't think they beat X but I do feel better about their chances vs X and the AAC.
Our bigs played great pick and role defense. Osu tried to exposed them but never could.
 
And to be even more fair. Some of the Cronin haters (not me or you) had a lot of time to develop that feeling. So complaining in the first game of season 12 would be a lot different than 1 game into a new tenure.


I was a hardcore Mick defender for 10 years on this board.
 
Brannen's show was quite funny for his perceived deadpan personality. Of course Terry Nelson asking questions helps bring out the humor.

Nelson asked you are very into analytics and metrics...how does your family feel about that...does that leak into the kitchen with percentages and stuff? Brannen said no I do not mention if the house is 70% clean or the food 40% cooked.

Brannen also said a scout that has watched 38 different teams practice told him UC moves the ball better/faster than 37. brannen said it's not fast enough yet...we have to work on that.

He talks a lot about a consistent message. The players need to know it's going to be the same message all the time no matter the subject.
 
I was a hardcore Mick defender for 10 years on this board.

Yah...I defended him against haters/trolls and knee jerk reactions. I will do the same for Brannen. I was normally on the Cronin side of the fence each year even up to the time he left. But I also saw the value (for Cronin and UC) to part ways in the end. It was hard to see a F4 coming in the future even if he kept the team this year.
 
The board used to have a meltdown after every loss. Justin is a little overboard, but some criticism is valid. Infinite positivity is almost as bad as the meltdowns.

Last year, the team looked like they would have won had Jarron played more minutes. They also played better in the second half.

This year, Jarron played the whole game, but wasn't as involved as we are used to. We lost the second half badly and even though it was close, a comeback seemed unlikely.

Brannen needs to be successful this year, because next year is going to be a down year - we will be very young. Cronin was given extra time because he walked into a mess. Brannen walked into a great team, but was unable to keep them all together.

He did have the opportunity to get replacements though and also kept 3 of the core 4. Even without Brooks, I am positive Cronin would have taken this team to the NCAA tournament (with Diarra/Nsoseme at center and a lot of isoball featuring Jarron). If we fail to make the NCAA tournament this year, I think it is very valid to question Brannen.

But for the first game of the season, it's too early. Like it was too early last after the OSU loss and many said we weren't an NCAA team.

We played a tough team and didn't look very good. But it's early in the season and we have plenty of room to improve. I'm waiting to see how we look when conference play starts before I make too many judgements.

Though I do think we need to start playing small ball. Our 7-footers (especially Sorolla) are not high-major level players.
 
Though I do think we need to start playing small ball. Our 7-footers (especially Sorolla) are not high-major level players.


I mean they did neutralize one of the best bigs in college basketball. Not bad for not being any good at all.


You thought he'd curb stomp them.
 
The board used to have a meltdown after every loss. Justin is a little overboard, but some criticism is valid. Infinite positivity is almost as bad as the meltdowns.

Last year, the team looked like they would have won had Jarron played more minutes. They also played better in the second half.

This year, Jarron played the whole game, but wasn't as involved as we are used to. We lost the second half badly and even though it was close, a comeback seemed unlikely.

Brannen needs to be successful this year, because next year is going to be a down year - we will be very young. Cronin was given extra time because he walked into a mess. Brannen walked into a great team, but was unable to keep them all together.

He did have the opportunity to get replacements though and also kept 3 of the core 4. Even without Brooks, I am positive Cronin would have taken this team to the NCAA tournament (with Diarra/Nsoseme at center and a lot of isoball featuring Jarron). If we fail to make the NCAA tournament this year, I think it is very valid to question Brannen.

But for the first game of the season, it's too early. Like it was too early last after the OSU loss and many said we weren't an NCAA team.

We played a tough team and didn't look very good. But it's early in the season and we have plenty of room to improve. I'm waiting to see how we look when conference play starts before I make too many judgements.

Though I do think we need to start playing small ball. Our 7-footers (especially Sorolla) are not high-major level players.

I don't mind some valid objective criticism if it goes both ways. But this whole concept of Brannen needs to make things happen this year is a little short sighted. These are not his players but he needs to get something out of them. from what I have seen and heard I think he will do just fine. But if he doesn't make the dance...we still have to weigh the circumstances end of year. He has 30% of his offense installed so far. If he can add 10% (a new wrinkle) each game over the next 7...and win at the same time...we will probably be looking pretty good. I am expecting another bump in the road and meltdown on the board but if we are progressing and getting better it will just be a blip on the radar.

I have no allegiance to brannen other than him being coach and that I think supporting him (rather than criticizing him) is the best for our program for the short term. I had no specific allegiance to Cronin but I supported him. I was critical at times of course and I will be critical of Brannen but it's too early for being overly critical. Demanding he play Cumberland ISO ball is just silly. Hoping he can find better ways to utilize Cumberland is not silly. Suggesting Cumberland is our only hope is silly. Expecting JC2 and Mcneal to keep missing shots at this pace would be silly. Expecting Scott to play that poorly would be silly.
 
Who says I’m losing my mind?

I’m just pointing out what I saw.

And I’d love nothing more than John Brannen to win a championship at cincinnati. So stop with this BS about me almost wanting UC to fail so I could pounce. That’s not it at all. I can live every aspect of the game except the way Jarron was handled.

That’s it.

Jarron has been an impact player since day 1. His legacy deserves some respect around here. He was better then gary Clark, Jacob Evans and Kyle Washington in his tourney appearances. I want him to get national recognition.

I just don’t think he was featured like a preseason all American should have been.

That’s it.

For recruiting, we absolutely need to show we know how to manage elite talent
 
I mean they did neutralize one of the best bigs in college basketball. Not bad for not being any good at all.


You thought he'd curb stomp them.

They didn't exactly neutralize him though. We doubled him on every touch in the post and then had Sorolla/Vogt follow him everywhere on defense. That left the lane open because our rim protector was standing at the three point line face guarding Wesson. Scott tried to take on the help defender/rim protector role that we didn't have a center filling, but he didn't do very well at it.

The center is generally a rim protector and last line of defense. If Vogt/Sorolla can be pulled away from the basket like they were against OSU, there are going to be a lot of driving lanes available against us on defense (not to mention, Vogt will continue to rack up the fouls). We will see against Drake, as every player they play can shoot threes.
 
I think our bigs are going to fit in very well on this team. We have completely overhauled our style of play, and we can't evaluate players on the old system. On offense we went from running iso sets and high ball screen sets to 5 out motion and pick-n-roll motion. On defense we went from switching man and double teaming the post to straight man and double teaming the corners. With the new system, we need bigs who can pass on the perimeter and stand ground in the paint without help. We often use our 5 at the top of the key to reverse the ball or hit a back door cut. Sorolla and Vogt seem much more suited to that role than Brooks. Scott seems very lost in the new system, but there's still a lot of time to learn it.

A big man at the 5 is important in the new system. Before watching any games I thought we would play a lot of small lineups, but after finally seeing Brannen's system in action, I would guess we'll almost always have a big on the floor. Unfortunately they're both very foul prone though.

Going forward with recruiting, we won't necessarily need an elite 5. We just need a big body who can pass. We went from a team modeled on the Blazers and Lakers to a team modeled on the Raptors and Celtics. We need Marc Gasol and Al Horford type centers rather than Hassan Whiteside and Dwight Howard. That's a major difference.
 
They didn't exactly neutralize him though. We doubled him on every touch in the post and then had Sorolla/Vogt follow him everywhere on defense. That left the lane open because our rim protector was standing at the three point line face guarding Wesson. Scott tried to take on the help defender/rim protector role that we didn't have a center filling, but he didn't do very well at it.

The center is generally a rim protector and last line of defense. If Vogt/Sorolla can be pulled away from the basket like they were against OSU, there are going to be a lot of driving lanes available against us on defense (not to mention, Vogt will continue to rack up the fouls). We will see against Drake, as every player they play can shoot threes.



have you seen games where lesser teams try to double bigs like that and get destroyed by them anyway? If Vogt/Sorolla were awful Wesson would have had his way on Wednesday night.

Brooks was not exactly shutting good bigs down by himself.
 
The board used to have a meltdown after every loss. Justin is a little overboard, but some criticism is valid. Infinite positivity is almost as bad as the meltdowns.

Last year, the team looked like they would have won had Jarron played more minutes. They also played better in the second half.

This year, Jarron played the whole game, but wasn't as involved as we are used to. We lost the second half badly and even though it was close, a comeback seemed unlikely.

Brannen needs to be successful this year, because next year is going to be a down year - we will be very young. Cronin was given extra time because he walked into a mess. Brannen walked into a great team, but was unable to keep them all together.

He did have the opportunity to get replacements though and also kept 3 of the core 4. Even without Brooks, I am positive Cronin would have taken this team to the NCAA tournament (with Diarra/Nsoseme at center and a lot of isoball featuring Jarron). If we fail to make the NCAA tournament this year, I think it is very valid to question Brannen.

But for the first game of the season, it's too early. Like it was too early last after the OSU loss and many said we weren't an NCAA team.

We played a tough team and didn't look very good. But it's early in the season and we have plenty of room to improve. I'm waiting to see how we look when conference play starts before I make too many judgements.

Though I do think we need to start playing small ball. Our 7-footers (especially Sorolla) are not high-major level players.

A comeback seemed unlikely? We played terrible but literally could have been within a point with 2 minutes left if Jaevin makes a wide open 3. I don’t think either team played well but it’s not like it was a blowout.
 
I think our bigs are going to fit in very well on this team. We have completely overhauled our style of play, and we can't evaluate players on the old system. On offense we went from running iso sets and high ball screen sets to 5 out motion and pick-n-roll motion. On defense we went from switching man and double teaming the post to straight man and double teaming the corners. With the new system, we need bigs who can pass on the perimeter and stand ground in the paint without help. We often use our 5 at the top of the key to reverse the ball or hit a back door cut. Sorolla and Vogt seem much more suited to that role than Brooks. Scott seems very lost in the new system, but there's still a lot of time to learn it.

A big man at the 5 is important in the new system. Before watching any games I thought we would play a lot of small lineups, but after finally seeing Brannen's system in action, I would guess we'll almost always have a big on the floor. Unfortunately they're both very foul prone though.

Going forward with recruiting, we won't necessarily need an elite 5. We just need a big body who can pass. We went from a team modeled on the Blazers and Lakers to a team modeled on the Raptors and Celtics. We need Marc Gasol and Al Horford type centers rather than Hassan Whiteside and Dwight Howard. That's a major difference.

I don't think we need an elite big, though I do think an elite big would be nice to have. In college basketball, elite bigs are the hardest players to get and thus the most valuable. A big can impact the game in a way a guard can't.

I still don't think Vogt/Sorolla are a very good fit though. For a big to provide value playing outside the arc, he really needs to be able to shoot the 3. Otherwise, the other teams center can just back off and clog cutting/driving lanes. Vogt/Sorolla made a couple nice passes from outside the arc, but for the most part they were pretty useless out there. They also had a couple of TO's as well when handling outside the arc.

I'd think having Scott (or Diarra if he can figure it out) play the role Vogt/Sorolla were playing would provide a lot more value. He can shoot the three and also has the athleticism/speed to get to the hoop on pick-and-rolls.
 
A comeback seemed unlikely? We played terrible but literally could have been within a point with 2 minutes left if Jaevin makes a wide open 3. I don’t think either team played well but it’s not like it was a blowout.

Jaevin made a nice pump fake but ended up I think just a little off balance. He had to shoot it but I think he makes his set shots more often than not. He had one off balance 3 that went in from the corner. he shot one ill advised 3 from far too deep. He shot one 3 on the move deep probably not going to be highly successful. He made his set shots against TMC.

He also made a nice floater that ended in a charge so he's got limited play making ability. He WILL make his set shots and he CAN make some higher degree of difficulty shots if he doesn't have much choice.

Keith tried one that was just a little off balance too. They just have to realize when they are set to take a shot and when not to opt out if time is left on the clock. Jarron took a couple of ill advised 3's that had Brannen shaking his head. The point of his offense is to take almost EVERY good opportunity that presents itself and not to force the others. The tape will come in handy and I think we start to learn more as we get more tape.
 
I don't think we need an elite big, though I do think an elite big would be nice to have. In college basketball, elite bigs are the hardest players to get and thus the most valuable. A big can impact the game in a way a guard can't.

I still don't think Vogt/Sorolla are a very good fit though. For a big to provide value playing outside the arc, he really needs to be able to shoot the 3. Otherwise, the other teams center can just back off and clog cutting/driving lanes. Vogt/Sorolla made a couple nice passes from outside the arc, but for the most part they were pretty useless out there. They also had a couple of TO's as well when handling outside the arc.

I'd think having Scott (or Diarra if he can figure it out) play the role Vogt/Sorolla were playing would provide a lot more value. He can shoot the three and also has the athleticism/speed to get to the hoop on pick-and-rolls.

Agreed Scott is almost perfect for the top of key passing. He can turn and shoot if needed or he can roll to the basket and is a lot more mobile than the 7 footers. I would much rather have him roll than put the ball on the floor. He's got very nice athleticism but limited ball skills. I just don't know where you put the other big on the court? In the corner? A defense will just leave them out there. We would almost need to play small for Scott to be at the top of the key passing. Otherwise he is one of the other options to shoot
 
Agreed Scott is almost perfect for the top of key passing. He can turn and shoot if needed or he can roll to the basket and is a lot more mobile than the 7 footers. I would much rather have him roll than put the ball on the floor. He's got very nice athleticism but limited ball skills. I just don't know where you put the other big on the court? In the corner? A defense will just leave them out there. We would almost need to play small for Scott to be at the top of the key passing. Otherwise he is one of the other options to shoot


Scott can't shoot and he's not a thick boi for setting screens. Probably why brannon doesn't use him like that. The size of the 7 footers really forces that help to hedge hard. Thats how we got multiple lay ins.


I'd be fine with Scott taking some 3's if he looked confident in doing so, but man, he looks so timid every time he's open. Never gonna make them like that. I said it before and I'll say it again, I was really surprised to see him like that in the exhibition. I thought he had put in a ton of work in the offseason and was going to come in super confident.
 
Agreed Scott is almost perfect for the top of key passing. He can turn and shoot if needed or he can roll to the basket and is a lot more mobile than the 7 footers. I would much rather have him roll than put the ball on the floor. He's got very nice athleticism but limited ball skills. I just don't know where you put the other big on the court? In the corner? A defense will just leave them out there. We would almost need to play small for Scott to be at the top of the key passing. Otherwise he is one of the other options to shoot

Agreed, Scott seems much more suited to playing the top of the key then Vogt/Sorolla and also much more suited to that role than the role he was playing last night. But it would only work if Vogt/Sorolla were out of the game, otherwise you are basically playing 4v5 on offense.

I know I wasn't a fan of playing small a couple weeks ago, but after seeing us be much better small in the exhibition and having Vogt/Sorolla not impress vs OSU (though Vogt was better than I expected minus the fouls) I think small is the way to go. It's possible playing small is the plan and OSU having Wesson forced our hand. We will see against Drake, their 7-footer is someone Scott should be able to handle and when they go small we may be forced to play small anyway. I'm hoping to see a lot of Scott, some Diarra and not very much Vogt/Sorolla against Drake.

The biggest issue with playing small may be our lack of depth. We need Moore to to healthy and/or some of the freshman guards to play well.
 
Scott can't shoot and he's not a thick boi for setting screens. Probably why brannon doesn't use him like that. The size of the 7 footers really forces that help to hedge hard. Thats how we got multiple lay ins.


I'd be fine with Scott taking some 3's if he looked confident in doing so, but man, he looks so timid every time he's open. Never gonna make them like that. I said it before and I'll say it again, I was really surprised to see him like that in the exhibition. I thought he had put in a ton of work in the offseason and was going to come in super confident.

Supposedly Scott has shot well in practice. He also was shooting pretty well at the end of last season. His biggest issue seems to be too much confidence, shooting threes when he is off-balance, rather than catch and shoot threes where he has his feet set. He doesn't need to be a huge threat to shoot threes, he just has to shoot well enough to keep the other teams big honest.

Scott was used to set screens plenty last year and he did fine. And Vogt/Sorolla don't screen that much anyway, Brannen's offense has them cut to the basket more often than they actually set the screen. Cronin's offense was more screen heavy and Scott was pretty regularly used to set them.
 
Last edited:
Scott can't shoot and he's not a thick boi for setting screens. Probably why brannon doesn't use him like that. The size of the 7 footers really forces that help to hedge hard. Thats how we got multiple lay ins.


I'd be fine with Scott taking some 3's if he looked confident in doing so, but man, he looks so timid every time he's open. Never gonna make them like that. I said it before and I'll say it again, I was really surprised to see him like that in the exhibition. I thought he had put in a ton of work in the offseason and was going to come in super confident.

Yah I get the confidence issue and I agree. But Scott can shoot at least 30% with low volume as he did last year. Moving the line back doesn't help his chances. He's definitely not a shooter but neither of the other bigs will even put a shot up out there. I don't think he needs to be 260lbs to set a good screen. I just hope the line moving back doesn't completely screw up Scott's psyche. Brannen will get that smoothed over.
 
Agreed, Scott seems much more suited to playing the top of the key then Vogt/Sorolla and also much more suited to that role than the role he was playing last night. But it would only work if Vogt/Sorolla were out of the game, otherwise you are basically playing 4v5 on offense.

I know I wasn't a fan of playing small a couple weeks ago, but after seeing us be much better small in the exhibition and having Vogt/Sorolla not impress vs OSU (though Vogt was better than I expected minus the fouls) I think small is the way to go. It's possible playing small is the plan and OSU having Wesson forced our hand. We will see against Drake, their 7-footer is someone Scott should be able to handle and when they go small we may be forced to play small anyway. I'm hoping to see a lot of Scott, some Diarra and not very much Vogt/Sorolla against Drake.

The biggest issue with playing small may be our lack of depth. We need Moore to to healthy and/or some of the freshman guards to play well.

I think OSU forced our hand. I am not worried about wing/guard depth over time. Harvey and Moore and Harvey or Moore will probably be fine. If not we have 3 VERY good options anyway. MAW may be feasible at some point. I actually think Davenport may have seen one of his most optimal opportunities against OSU. He's not playing wing and it may depend on Diara if he gets more chances like that.
 
Back
Top