As you may recall up until post X game, I was very down on the team last year. Then half of the guys got suspended. We came out the following games and showed somekind of movement and flow offensively. I came on here and said it was good to finally see some resemblance of an offense
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Rutgers Predictions
- Thread starter UCBearcats
- Start date
Help Support BearcatTalk:
As you may recall up until post X game, I was very down on the team last year. Then half of the guys got suspended. We came out the following games and showed somekind of movement and flow offensively. I came on here and said it was good to finally see some resemblance of an offense
I honestly believe that mick is so defensive oriented that he doesn't spend that much time working on offense. People get recruited for being a good offensive player, you very rarely see someone get recruited to DI that averages less than 20 per game in prep or high school, unless the team that they play on is stacked like a lot of prep schools are now. However college basketball is so great because teams actually play defense, unlike the NBA. I don't have a problem with Mick's Philosophy, 14-3 You can not be upset with at this point, come march we will be right in the mix as long as everyone stays healthy.
I honestly believe that mick is so defensive oriented that he doesn't spend that much time working on offense. People get recruited for being a good offensive player, you very rarely see someone get recruited to DI that averages less than 20 per game in prep or high school, unless the team that they play on is stacked like a lot of prep schools are now. However college basketball is so great because teams actually play defense, unlike the NBA. I don't have a problem with Mick's Philosophy, 14-3 You can not be upset with at this point, come march we will be right in the mix as long as everyone stays healthy.
I totally agree with this.
It just feels to me that guys who CANNOT CREATE and have LITTLE BBALL IQ should not be put in an OFFENSE where they are supposed to do just that.... CREATE and MAKE DECISIONS.
WAITE HOYT 2
Well-known member
- Joined
- Jan 5, 2012
- Messages
- 8,404
Our you really that thick headed or are you just straved for attention? THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE SKILLS AND TALENT TO RUN IT. They do run a offense you just can't recognize it because your limited in your expertise. You think they are 14-3 because they play pick up basketball. Please stop your making yourself look foolish. Like many teams they have flaws. The number 1 flaw is they have no one who can post up and score consistently down low. The are perimeter oriented and trying to change that will require different personal not a new offense. If you truly want to help Mick and the team get a sign and sit behind the basket and wave it when the other team is shooting free throws.So lets get this straight. You have guys who have little basketball IQ. You have no post presence. You have no one who can create for their own and youre going out there playing pick up basketball???
Dont you want to make it easier on them by implementing some kind of scheme offensively. I damn trash can can do what they do now. 6th graders can run an offense....why cant we
TheLongHaul
Well-known member
- Joined
- Dec 29, 2009
- Messages
- 3,036
Their offense is to pass the ball around the perimeter and hope to get a mismatch. If you do, you take them one on one. If you don't, you pass it around the perimeter until the shot clock runs down and you shoot a three or still try to take them one on one. It's simple as that....It does not create a lot of open shots, hence the reason Mick is so persistent on offensive rebounding...If it works fine, but I cannot say I enjoy watching it. Though I do think its debatable as to whether it actually works.
If you are going to run an offense like this you better be able to get up and down the court and this team simply hasn't since the competition has spiked up. If you are going to slow the game down ala OSU, Wisconsin, UCLA in years past, Pitt, etc, than you need an efficient offense. UC's is anything but efficient.
If you are going to run an offense like this you better be able to get up and down the court and this team simply hasn't since the competition has spiked up. If you are going to slow the game down ala OSU, Wisconsin, UCLA in years past, Pitt, etc, than you need an efficient offense. UC's is anything but efficient.
Hicks' Guns
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
- Messages
- 374
As you may recall up until post X game, I was very down on the team last year. Then half of the guys got suspended. We came out the following games and showed somekind of movement and flow offensively. I came on here and said it was good to finally see some resemblance of an offense
Fair enough. Just wanted to gauge your barometer for success, which is more reasonable based on your view of last year's team.
Agreed the offense needs some work. Disagreed at your characterization of the 2012-13 team as a whole.
Hicks' Guns
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 15, 2012
- Messages
- 374
Their offense is to pass the ball around the perimeter and hope to get a mismatch. If you do, you take them one on one. If you don't, you pass it around the perimeter until the shot clock runs down and you shoot a three or still try to take them one on one. It's simple as that....It does not create a lot of open shots, hence the reason Mick is so persistent on offensive rebounding...If it works fine, but I cannot say I enjoy watching it. Though I do think its debatable as to whether it actually works.
If you are going to run an offense like this you better be able to get up and down the court and this team simply hasn't since the competition has spiked up. If you are going to slow the game down ala OSU, Wisconsin, UCLA in years past, Pitt, etc, than you need an efficient offense. UC's is anything but efficient.
I've watched Duke a handful of times this year and I think they have a very similar offense to ours. The huge differences from ours, however, are:
(1) Mason Plumlee is a very legitimate NPOY candidate who is extremely active moving without the ball and attacking the basket (Not to Mention Ryan Kelly who also is a big Forward and scorer). This is such a huge difference...Plumlee and Kelly vs. Rubles/Mbodj (or Jackson/Mbodj). It is no contest. That offense works well when you have bigs that move a ton and can successfully attack the basket, roll to the basket and most importantly, finish from 5 feet and in consistently.
(2) Although I love SK/Parker, Duke has multiple McDonald's All-Americans who inevitably handle the ball better, attack the basket better and can pass/dish. Basketball IQ is higher as well.
(3) Passing very quickly (which really is expedited by Duke getting into the paint more and getting the ball into Plumlee/Kelly and other bigs much more often than we do)
I think Duke shows what the offense is when run very very well. For us though...With only 3 guards that are only pretty good at creating their own shot, and no real post-presence or option for a big consistently to score, I do think it is a difficult offense to run.
That said, I think we took some steps forward in the past two games (since the St. John's one), and I do think as Rubles, Sanders, Shaq improve, that will help. Obviously, we won't be Duke.
I really do wish we just had an Option B on offense. When the other team is in man, it seems like it's all we have. I'd love an Option B offense where we set a ton of screens for SK, Parker and Cash, and our bigs were active in the paint.
Last edited:
Weaknesses -
1. When Cash doesn't show up on the score sheet, we lose.
2. Need someone to finish around the rim like a man.
3. Kilpatrick needs to be aggressive. We have 3 good guards and while Parker and Wright have shown they can lift this team, neither is supposed to be the main scorer.
Now, with number 3, I actually think Nyarsuk(Next year) could be a decent 5. My thing is, Rubles can drive and fly, he's big and he needs to go strong to the rim. Jackson doesn't have the handle but I've seen him make tough shots at the basket before, I just don't see him tearing the rim off over people. With his athleticism, he needs to be doing that. Maybe he's just lacking in bulk? Don't like how he's playing like a guard. Cheikh is Cheikh. Against softer teams, he'll get a few buckets. He's just not built like a brick shit house you know?
What's eating at me though, is last year, Dixon could at least take it to the rim. Parker can kind of do that but Kilpatrick, as big as he is, should be able to take it there. Cashmere Wright can score around bigs, without having a lazy lay up blocked every time, why can't Kilpatrick?
Another thing that helps, is bench points.
The positives -
A good number of ball handlers.
When we shoot well, we're going to win.
We have depth, especially useful if the officials pull crap.(except at the point)
The defense is so good, we'll always have a puncher's chance.
1. When Cash doesn't show up on the score sheet, we lose.
2. Need someone to finish around the rim like a man.
3. Kilpatrick needs to be aggressive. We have 3 good guards and while Parker and Wright have shown they can lift this team, neither is supposed to be the main scorer.
Now, with number 3, I actually think Nyarsuk(Next year) could be a decent 5. My thing is, Rubles can drive and fly, he's big and he needs to go strong to the rim. Jackson doesn't have the handle but I've seen him make tough shots at the basket before, I just don't see him tearing the rim off over people. With his athleticism, he needs to be doing that. Maybe he's just lacking in bulk? Don't like how he's playing like a guard. Cheikh is Cheikh. Against softer teams, he'll get a few buckets. He's just not built like a brick shit house you know?
What's eating at me though, is last year, Dixon could at least take it to the rim. Parker can kind of do that but Kilpatrick, as big as he is, should be able to take it there. Cashmere Wright can score around bigs, without having a lazy lay up blocked every time, why can't Kilpatrick?
Another thing that helps, is bench points.
The positives -
A good number of ball handlers.
When we shoot well, we're going to win.
We have depth, especially useful if the officials pull crap.(except at the point)
The defense is so good, we'll always have a puncher's chance.
Last edited:
Amberlycolonel
Well-known member
- Joined
- Feb 28, 2011
- Messages
- 443
Absolutely not. What a ludicrous statement. A sweet 16 last year and a deep deep run this year proves otherwise
No, the ludicrous statements came from your 10 point predictions for wins against ND and NM. That was ludicrous.
BearcatMick
Well-known member
No, the ludicrous statement came from your 10 point predicted wins against ND and NM. That was ludicrous.
Conveniently you forget the 18 other predictions dating back to last year I got right
Fair enough. Just wanted to gauge your barometer for success, which is more reasonable based on your view of last year's team.
Agreed the offense needs some work. Disagreed at your characterization of the 2012-13 team as a whole.
I hope youre right, believe me. I work down here in Louisville and I run my mouth to these fools. They prob watch just as much Cinci ball now as I. And each day following a UC game they come in to work and laugh at me. I stay strong, although its tough.
What worries me is last year we atleast had Gates. This season we have no scoring inside. Zero. Im just not sure we can rely on the same thing. And can only question with 3 solid gaurds who play most of the time and a 4th who would prob be a 3 in most offenses....why we arent running more. Create easy buckets when you struggle in the half court
Last edited:
Our you really that thick headed or are you just straved for attention? THEY HAVE TO HAVE THE SKILLS AND TALENT TO RUN IT. They do run a offense you just can't recognize it because your limited in your expertise. You think they are 14-3 because they play pick up basketball. Please stop your making yourself look foolish. Like many teams they have flaws. The number 1 flaw is they have no one who can post up and score consistently down low. The are perimeter oriented and trying to change that will require different personal not a new offense. If you truly want to help Mick and the team get a sign and sit behind the basket and wave it when the other team is shooting free throws.
Are, an, you're, ???, They
Ok now lets continue.
Youre telling me that he recruited a bunch of bodies with no brains that cant figure out how to set a screen or pick and roll. Perhaps even roll off a screen at the elbow. Watch the games! The elbow is open all freakin day and we refuse to pass it into him. Im tired of dribbling around the 3 pt line. That doesnt fly in the BE. Find a way to make it easier on these guys to get HIGH PERCENTAGE SHOTS. Not one 3 ft beyond the arch with a hand in the face
Yes we are 14-3. Im happy. At the same time we played little sisters of the poor for 75% of those wins and we just lost two BE games at HOME only scoring 55 and 60 (offensive explosion for us). If this is not concerning then I'm sorry, but Id hate to play on your team.
This has now reached the point of ridiculous. This program is 14-3 and coming off a road win against a team that had won 7-8 going in. This thread makes my point about Cincinnati sports fans. They don't care about results, they want it to be pretty. Go watch the ballet people! Sports are about winning! I don't care if it's 21-20 it is about winning and playing to your strengths!
IMO I dont think were hard enough on our teams.
Aside from this board, which Im sure Mick doesnt read, sorry fellas, there is little heat on Mick Cronin or this program. Little
Look at the elite programs at any level in the country. Yankees, Heat, Patriots, Packers, Duke, NC
When those teams lose 2 in a row you'd think the world is going to end.
I've watched Duke a handful of times this year and I think they have a very similar offense to ours. The huge differences from ours, however, are:
(1) Mason Plumlee is a very legitimate NPOY candidate who is extremely active moving without the ball and attacking the basket (Not to Mention Ryan Kelly who also is a big Forward and scorer). This is such a huge difference...Plumlee and Kelly vs. Rubles/Mbodj (or Jackson/Mbodj). It is no contest. That offense works well when you have bigs that move a ton and can successfully attack the basket, roll to the basket and most importantly, finish from 5 feet and in consistently.
(2) Although I love SK/Parker, Duke has multiple McDonald's All-Americans who inevitably handle the ball better, attack the basket better and can pass/dish. Basketball IQ is higher as well.
(3) Passing very quickly (which really is expedited by Duke getting into the paint more and getting the ball into Plumlee/Kelly and other bigs much more often than we do)
I think Duke shows what the offense is when run very very well. For us though...With only 3 guards that are only pretty good at creating their own shot, and no real post-presence or option for a big consistently to score, I do think it is a difficult offense to run.
That said, I think we took some steps forward in the past two games (since the St. John's one), and I do think as Rubles, Sanders, Shaq improve, that will help. Obviously, we won't be Duke.
I really do wish we just had an Option B on offense. When the other team is in man, it seems like it's all we have. I'd love an Option B offense where we set a ton of screens for SK, Parker and Cash, and our bigs were active in the paint.
Wow! Thank you
This has been the point Im trying to make. The offense makes sense for a team full of Magics, Jordans, Birds, Oscars and Shaqs. Guys who can create on their own and know what to do with the ball in a limited offense.
It makes little sense to me to run this offense when you have no one really who can get to the rim on a consistent basis. Killa and Parker maybe. You have no post presense to give your shooters open looks with an inside outside game. You have low bball IQ so when these guys have little offensive sets they are truly using their IQ to make their own decisions.
Im sorry it just doesnt make sense to me
UCalum08
Well-known member
Why don't we just run and gun it instead of grinding it out? We struggle in the half court so why not seriously push the tempo?
BearcatMick
Well-known member
Why don't we just run and gun it instead of grinding it out? We struggle in the half court so why not seriously push the tempo?
Our half court d is tremendous. The Rutgers gameplan implemented by mick was incredible. Slow down the pace, don't give Rutgers any easy buckets in transition and take the crowd out of it
Wow! Thank you
This has been the point Im trying to make. The offense makes sense for a team full of Magics, Jordans, Birds, Oscars and Shaqs. Guys who can create on their own and know what to do with the ball in a limited offense.
It makes little sense to me to run this offense when you have no one really who can get to the rim on a consistent basis. Killa and Parker maybe. You have no post presense to give your shooters open looks with an inside outside game. You have low bball IQ so when these guys have little offensive sets they are truly using their IQ to make their own decisions.
Im sorry it just doesnt make sense to me
I think we are fully aware that you don't like the offense.
What's your solution then? What type of offense should they be running?
I think we are fully aware that you don't like the offense.
What's your solution then? What type of offense should they be running?
How about a transition game? All this tough D and we cant get easy 2 on 1 buckets. Can you racall the last Dunk or layup this team made? Easy points. I cant even recall the last open shot weve takin without a hand in the face
How about, as I mentioned in an above post, rolling killa and parker off screens at the elbow. That gives the ball to your best players 10 ft away from the hoop instead of 30. If we want to create matchups that favor us, we have to come off screens and picks. Cause switches and confusion. Cant just weave around the 3 pt line. That confuses no one
If you think what they are doing right now is working or the best option, Id have to say youre nuts
Last edited:
How about a transition game? All this tough D and we cant get easy 2 on 1 buckets. Can you racall the last Dunk or layup this team made? Easy points. I cant even recall the last open shot weve takin without a hand in the face
How about, as I mentioned in an above post, rolling killa and parker off screens at the elbow. That gives the ball to your best players 10 ft away from the hoop instead of 30.
If you think what they are doing right now is working or the best option, Id have to say youre nuts
None of those things that you mentioned are a type of offense.
I don't mind the single-post offense, but it sure works a hell of a lot better if you have a big man that is worthy of a double team. That would free up so many more outside looks. If our big man is not going to score at all then I wouldn't mind seeing what they could do out of a high-post, 2-3 high type of offense. Instead of Mbodj and his man camped under the basket, open up the lane for more drives and back cuts. I'd really like to see how it work with either Rubles or Jackson in the high-post surrounded by 4 shooters (Cash, SK, Parker, and Sanders).
UCalum08
Well-known member
I agree it was a good game plan but why can't we still play our tough nosed defense and then push the ball down the court quickly? Maybe a run and gun just on offense?Our half court d is tremendous. The Rutgers gameplan implemented by mick was incredible. Slow down the pace, don't give Rutgers any easy buckets in transition and take the crowd out of it
Similar threads
- Replies
- 14
- Views
- 25K