Skyblade, I love dou also and you called out Brannen for playing Vogt last year EARLY! You get hella credit for seeing that. For love of all of us, PLEASE stop with promoting our boy as all conference. He just doesn’t get it brother and it’s time move on from him if he doesn’t progress as season goes along. 25+min his for taken right now let’s see if he takes them. I’m starting think he a scrub though.
Brannen likes short jitterbugs at PG, that’s killing us defensively just as much Vogt is. We need our short PG to get stronger or we need some with length. We don’t pressure the ball nor get deflections like we use to. If we practice D 95% of time in practice, whoever leading these practices need be fired immediately. Our best basketball right now is AAU ball. I thought we hired X and O genius?
the guy finished with 3 rebs, 0 pts, a couple decent defensive plays and some dumb plays. Does anything about that say NBA to you? And you’re talking about how good he was. And he’s 23 years old.Diarra played well last night, he's not a star but he played solid. Had one silly foul and one pass that should have been a TO but Eason bailed him out. But he was in for our first half run to get back in it and did a very good job cutting off drives. He needs playing time to learn, but so do most of our guys.
Look at the NBA, there are quite a few guys who earn a living by defending the 1-5 and rebounding, even if they are capable of little more than making a dunk on offense. I've watched a couple UCLA games this year and Jalen Hill is considered an NBA prospect because of that fact.
Not saying Diarra will make the NBA (though I still say he has the athleticism to play there, but he needs to improve mentally a lot). But a big who can defend/rebound and just not turn the ball over on offense is far more valuable at the NBA and the high-major college level than a big who is skilled on offense but can't defend or rebound well. That's why I've said from the beginning that Diarra can become a valuable contributor and Vogt should be on the bench.
Dou should definitely play before Vogt. Skyblade was right on that one. With Vogt, I feel like we have to completely change everything to cater to him. Dou you just put him in, and we can still play how we want tothe guy finished with 3 rebs, 0 pts, a couple decent defensive plays and some dumb plays. Does anything about that say NBA to you? And you’re talking about how good he was. And he’s 23 years old.
Not trying to be mean but come on man
the guy finished with 3 rebs, 0 pts, a couple decent defensive plays and some dumb plays. Does anything about that say NBA to you? And you’re talking about how good he was. And he’s 23 years old.
Not trying to be mean but come on man
the guy finished with 3 rebs, 0 pts, a couple decent defensive plays and some dumb plays. Does anything about that say NBA to you? And you’re talking about how good he was. And he’s 23 years old.
Not trying to be mean but come on man
Stats don't tell the whole story, especially when it comes to big men. Look at the first half, SMU goes on a 10-3 run with Vogt in the game. We try to press, but SMU just throws it in to the guy who Vogt is covering.
Then Diarra comes into the game. We immediately force back-to-back TO's. Did Diarra force the TO's? No. But he did guard his man (and provide some help to others). Instead of SMU having an easy outlet pass to their big against the press, all of their players were being guarded and it led to them making mistakes.
Just one small example of how Diarra (and Eason) impact the game in many more ways than Vogt that don't show up on the stat sheet.
I've watched pretty much every UC game of every season for the last 5+ years and watch a fair amount of college basketball outside of UC (mostly AAC games, but also some UCLA and WVU as well as top teams). Diarra is excellent at cutting off drives and pick-and-roll defense. Earlier this year Brannen said Diarra graded out as elite in pick-and-roll defense in practice. It's a small thing, but extremely valuable, even at the pro-level. If he cuts guys off before they get to the basket or take a shot, he doesn't get a chance at a block, but it's a bigger defensive impact.
Diarra has a lot to work on, but nothing that's not correctable. Needs to get better at defending 1-vs-1 against another big, to commit fewer silly fouls, get more comfortable on offense among other things. Given he has relatively little playing time, it will probably be corrected with playing time. Look at our bugs under Cronin, they had a history of being foul prone and making silly mistakes, then correcting it once they became starters and got some experience under their belts.
Diarra may not become a star, but he's not too far from becoming an elite defender. And from a center that's far more valuable than offense. Though ideally you want a guy like Eason - who can do both. But I'm not sure Eason has the size (nor desire) to be a long term starter at center.
He’s just not mentally there. Lot of that is instinct. You don’t really develop that. I hope he comes back next year, I think he can play a role. Especially since we most likely won’t have a big ready by then but I don’t see him improving that much, I hope he does
I continue to have trouble believing that Vogt wasn't meant to be a starter (or at least get significant minutes). If that is true, why did Brannen recruit so many guys with the same body type (Vogt, Sorolla, Rap, Lakhin). I also have trouble believing that Nsoseme would have left had he been told he'd be the starter.
It also doesn't explain Brannen's dedication to playing Vogt. Diarra was outplaying Vogt at the end of last season, he outplayed Vogt last night. But who has been given every possible chance this season, was the first off the bench last night? Who played more second half minutes? Vogt. Look at how much longer of a leash Rap was given than Diarra.
To me it seems that Brannen has had trouble understanding the level of athleticism required from a big to play at this level and also in his system. It doesn't make much sense because guys like Vogt also don't seem to fit into his "94 feet both ways" philosophy. It does seem like he is slowly changing. But it also seems like Brannen being very slow to adjust is a theme.
The smaller lineup (and the Diarra + Eason lineup) did quite well, we may struggle against bigger teams (WSU being one of them). Hopefully Brannen has finally learned the lesson that Vogt doesn't belong on the floor.
Dou barely outplayed Vogt. I’m not a fan of either getting major minutes. Vogt doesn’t have the athleticism and Dou can’t understand how to play basketball/to waiting to happen.
That’s what I was thinking. I would rather play Dou as backup before Vogt but that isn’t saying a lot right now.
I agree that the small lineup looked very good (maybe not great). Still somewhat worried about the possibility of this being an anomaly.
We had our best three point shooting game of the season. If we shot as well as we did in our second best three point shooting game, we have 2 fewer makes. If SMU shoots their average from three they'd have had 2/3 more makes.
That 12-15 point swing would be enough for SMU to have won comfortably and have UC fans up in arms. Though to be fair 12-15 points would have meant it was close if Brannen didn't spot them 7 points by playing Vogt early. The question is, did we finally just get lucky (or not unlucky) with our three point shooting, or did the offense/defense actually change something. Did MAW shoot 80% (4-5) because he got better looks, or just law of averages.
To my mind we did get better looks offensively, but SMU also missed open looks that we gave up on defense. We probably aren't as good as we looked on defense (or even on offense) last night, but we probably aren't as bad as we've looked in the past either.
Getting Vogt out of the lineup is definitely going to help us. I still expect a lot of close games, but maybe a few more of them will go our way.
Not being sarcastic or anything, but why can’t Davenport be more than a role player. Shoots well, plays hard, and has been great every opportunity he has had. But I’ve heard a couple times now, he’s just a role player. Isn’t there a chance he’s good? He’s a sophomore that barely played last year, and is still further along than Tre and Keith when they were sophomoresI was great they got a win, success helps with development maybe a game like this could loosen them up more. The win def stemmed from missed SMU shots, and what seemed to be them taking thier foot off the gas. We've won 8 straight against them so when it became money time maybe they got tight since the Bearcats hit some shots and put pressure on them towards the end of the 2nd half. Primarily Kieth actually being able produce during money time offensively but defensively with a steal towards the end. It's nice to see Davenport be productive but we certainly cant live off him hes really, just a role player. It was nice to see a win tho
Not being sarcastic or anything, but can’t Davenport be more than a role player. Shoots well, plays hard, and has been great. But I’ve heard a couple times now, he’s just a role player. Isn’t there a chance he’s good?
Davenport seems like the type of glue guy that Cronin loved. Plays hard, defends, rebounds and brings toughness/energy. I think he can develop into more than a role player, but he needs a lot of work.
Right now he's not a guy who can create his own shot and isn't great off the dribble. Also needs to work on his passing. The difference between role player and key player is becoming a creator. Maybe he can get there, but he's not there yet.