Temple Game Thread

[cincrulz11]

Yep, you have to do both. My overall point was defense does not win championships. They both do. There is no point in trying to get an elite defense if you are giving up offense to do it. You try to have a balance. We’ve seen elite defenses the last 10 years and have nothing to show for it in the tourney.

i really think we have a coach that is going to get us there on both sides.


For those of you that don't follow Jordan Sperber on twitter, you should add him, great college hoops breakdowns. Yesterday he made a video of Dayton's offense and why it's so good this year. It's a great watch. Anthony Grant and John Brannen have been close for a long time and I think this is the sort of stuff we want to be running once Brannen gets all his guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT8ozvgKHEM&feature=youtu.be


The one thing I like that we're doing this year is the way we move Vogt around which allows him to get easy position down on the block.


With Diarra growing as a player, watch that Dayton video and imagine what our offense could look like in 2 years with Diarra at the 5 and some of these guards/wings we already have (harvey/maw) and the ones we're bringing in.

 

[waterhead]

If I saw these numbers I'd be giving the advantage to the offense. One outlier really throws the offensive average off. drop the worst from offense and defense and offensive average goes down to 5.2 with defense at 7.33.

top 3 offense won 6 of 10 years. only 1 top 3 defense won in 10 years. 4 top 5 defenses won in 10 years.


But really the main takeaway is you better play both.


Outside of the uconn year, haven't almost all champions been top 30 in both for a long time? I swear I remember hearing that stat years ago.

I remember seeing a stat some years ago something to the effect of you had to either be top 22 in both O and D. Or you had to be top 10 in one and top 40 in the other to hope to win a NC. But top 10 or 11 in both looks like the obvious way to go...LOL!

 

[waterhead]

This is a weird take considering Tre Scott has the #1 Defensive rebounding percentage in the conference right now.

LOL the day John Brannen benches his league leading defensive rebounder is the day I think he's absolutely nuts.

I like Diarra. But I like him in short bursts.


Tre Scott takes a lot of heat on this board.

But his last two games:
16 points, 11 Rebounds, 1 assists
16 points, 11 rebounds, 5 assists


When he puts up 16,11, & 5 on the road, he should get some serious praise. Thats Gary Clark like numbers.

Because lets be real. When Tre is at his he matches Gary's numbers pretty spot on. Its just needs to be as consistent as Gary was.



The dude has put up double figures in 10 of the 19 games we've played. He's had double digit rebounds in 8 games and has 7-9 rebounds in 9 other games.


He was not recruited to be a scorer.


But his elite athleticism and length is something I hope Brannen finds a way to recruit more of. You need a guy like Tre Scott on your team.

I don't think too many are dogging on HIM just a few things that he can improve on. He is a plus defender, rebounder, passer (for a big), leader, etc etc. I love the guy. But he should not be trying to make plays by putting the ball on the ground with spin moves etc. He should not be taking early to mid shot clock 3's or 2 pt jumpers. He needs to slow it down a little at the rim.

I will take 8-10 pts and 8-10 rebounds from him. If he gets 16pts it should come in the flow of the game and not from volume jumpers. Many of his miscues are completely unnecessary. He would be much better on O by trying to do less. A lot of his points in the last couple of games came off dunks from good feeds etc. He just needs to keep moving without the ball so he can get more of that action.

 

[sedziobs]

If I saw these numbers I'd be giving the advantage to the offense.

I'd agree that offense probably has an edge in championship games of the last 20 years. That's WAY different than "It's been proven that offense is more important in the tournament as long as you have a decent defense." Offense is not any more important in the first 5 rounds.

 

[cincrulz11]

I don't think too many are dogging on HIM just a few things that he can improve on. He is a plus defender, rebounder, passer (for a big), leader, etc etc. I love the guy. But he should not be trying to make plays by putting the ball on the ground with spin moves etc. He should not be taking early to mid shot clock 3's or 2 pt jumpers.

I will take 8-10 pts and 8-10 rebounds from him. If he gets 16pts it should come in the flow of the game and not from volume jumpers. Many of his miscues are completely unnecessary. He would be much better on O by trying to do less. A lot of his points in the last couple of games came off dunks from good feeds etc. He just needs to keep moving without the ball so he can get more of that action.

Its the freshman mistakes he still makes that are just the worst. Like with 9 minutes left vs temple and us up by one. They trap Jarron before midcourt and he passes to tre. Instead of Tre holding the ball and resetting the offense, he dribbles into traffic and shoots a midrange jumper with 20 seconds left on the clock. Brannen just puts his head down and looks at the floor. Temple gets the easy board cause nobody was ready for him to shoot that and they're laying the ball in on the other end 7 seconds later. It's basically a live ball turnover.


A 5th year sr should never do that. He's been taught not to do that. Why does he do that. And he does those things multiple times a game. Just stop doing those things.

 

[cincyguy13]

I'd agree that offense probably has an edge in championship games of the last 20 years. That's WAY different than "It's been proven that offense is more important in the tournament as long as you have a decent defense." Offense is not any more important in the first 5 rounds.

You really believe defense is more important? The one constant we have had has been elite defense over the years. Lost in the first weekend almost every year. Explain that. Was it cronin? You would think if defense was as important as you claim we would have had more success.

9 years is a fairly large sample size.

 

[cincrulz11]

I'd agree that offense probably has an edge in championship games of the last 20 years. That's WAY different than "It's been proven that offense is more important in the tournament as long as you have a decent defense." Offense is not any more important in the first 5 rounds.

And I agree with that. Although I think as more teams start to play the nba style of 3's and paint shots offense it might start to lean more towards offense in all the rounds.


Or the teams that figure out defense for that type of offense are really going to be tough to beat.

 

[waterhead]

i really think we have a coach that is going to get us there on both sides.


For those of you that don't follow Jordan Sperber on twitter, you should add him, great college hoops breakdowns. Yesterday he made a video of Dayton's offense and why it's so good this year. It's a great watch. Anthony Grant and John Brannen have been close for a long time and I think this is the sort of stuff we want to be running once Brannen gets all his guys.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=fT8ozvgKHEM&feature=youtu.be


The one thing I like that we're doing this year is the way we move Vogt around which allows him to get easy position down on the block.


With Diarra growing as a player, watch that Dayton video and imagine what our offense could look like in 2 years with Diarra at the 5 and some of these guards/wings we already have (harvey/maw) and the ones we're bringing in.

I think we will have 4 positions (with Eason) who can put the ball on the floor and shoot. Finding a 5 who can do all that and score in the paint will be hard. Diara has SOME of that going for him and Vogt has 1. Toppin does it all. Even if we can find a poor man's Toppin...it would help a lot. Not sure how well Dou will be able to seal his man or put the ball on the ground.

 

[waterhead]

Its the freshman mistakes he still makes that are just the worst. Like with 9 minutes left vs temple and us up by one. They trap Jarron before midcourt and he passes to tre. Instead of Tre holding the ball and resetting the offense, he dribbles into traffic and shoots a midrange jumper with 20 seconds left on the clock. Brannen just puts his head down and looks at the floor. Temple gets the easy board cause nobody was ready for him to shoot that and they're laying the ball in on the other end 7 seconds later. It's basically a live ball turnover.


A 5th year sr should never do that. He's been taught not to do that. Why does he do that. And he does those things multiple times a game. Just stop doing those things.

I remember that play well. I was saying while the shot was in the air..."That shyt better go in". It didn't

 

[skyblade]

You really believe defense is more important? The one constant we have had has been elite defense over the years. Lost in the first weekend almost every year. Explain that. Was it cronin? You would think if defense was as important as you claim we would have had more success.

9 years is a fairly large sample size.

You rather quickly changed the goalposts: you started out saying "You can win with a defense in the top 30."

9 years of one teams NCAA tournament games is a very small sample size. The NCAA tournament is largely random, we see plenty of teams with top offenses and/or top defenses go down early every year. There are some things Cronin could have done better, but the NCAA tournament largely comes down to luck if you aren't an elite team (and there's still luck even if you are). If you aren't a top 4 seed, the first game is often pretty much a toss up.

I think we can all agree that it's important to be excellent on both offense and defense. If you want to have a good shot at advancing deep in the NCAA tournament (and not counting on getting luck) you better be top 20 in both (and ideally top 10 in both). If you are elite (top 3) on one end you can get away with being a little worse on the other.

 

[cincyguy13]

You rather quickly changed the goalposts: you started out saying "You can win with a defense in the top 30."

9 years of one teams NCAA tournament games is a very small sample size. The NCAA tournament is largely random, we see plenty of teams with top offenses and/or top defenses go down early every year. There are some things Cronin could have done better, but the NCAA tournament largely comes down to luck if you aren't an elite team (and there's still luck even if you are). If you aren't a top 4 seed, the first game is often pretty much a toss up.

I think we can all agree that it's important to be excellent on both offense and defense. If you want to have a good shot at advancing deep in the NCAA tournament (and not counting on getting luck) you better be top 20 in both (and ideally top 10 in both). If you are elite (top 3) on one end you can get away with being a little worse on the other.

We all change the goal post. Just like you do with Vogt. It used to be he can’t play at all, to he can’t do it the whole year, to the offense is designed for him. I’ve heard from many college basketball talking heads that offense is more important. Am I too lazy to do research? Yes. But no one has proven that defense is more important either. So I am still not sure what not playing Vogt would accomplish. If you have to be good at both, taking out an elite scorer will make the offense even worse. And offfense that isn’t as good as the defense. I’m pretty sure,

 

[cincyguy13]

You rather quickly changed the goalposts: you started out saying "You can win with a defense in the top 30."

9 years of one teams NCAA tournament games is a very small sample size. The NCAA tournament is largely random, we see plenty of teams with top offenses and/or top defenses go down early every year. There are some things Cronin could have done better, but the NCAA tournament largely comes down to luck if you aren't an elite team (and there's still luck even if you are). If you aren't a top 4 seed, the first game is often pretty much a toss up.

I think we can all agree that it's important to be excellent on both offense and defense. If you want to have a good shot at advancing deep in the NCAA tournament (and not counting on getting luck) you better be top 20 in both (and ideally top 10 in both). If you are elite (top 3) on one end you can get away with being a little worse on the other.

Also after a while it’s not luck. You’re doing something wrong and not changing it or trying something different is not very smart. Will the new thing work? No clue but I know what hasn’t worked for 9 years. That’s trying to put 5 athletes on the floor and out “toughing” teams. Hoping you can shut down tournament level teams is never going to work consistently. They’re too good.

 

[sedziobs]

You really believe defense is more important? The one constant we have had has been elite defense over the years. Lost in the first weekend almost every year. Explain that. Was it cronin? You would think if defense was as important as you claim we would have had more success.

9 years is a fairly large sample size.

I believe efficiency is most important, with little regard to whether that efficiency is achieved through offense, defense, pace, toughness, basketball IQ, 3 pt shooting, rebounding, mobile centers, seniors, bench, zone, NBA style, money, tradition, crowds, or anything else you can come up with.

In Cronin's years, we were top 16 in efficiency only once. We went to the Sweet Sixteen once. We lost to a less efficient team three times (Harvard, St Joes, Nevada). We beat one more efficient team (Florida St). We also won two tossup games against a team ranked immediately below us (Texas, Purdue).

Nine years is a tiny sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from that. For every anecdote like Cincinnati you find to support your point, you can find one to support a different point (like Creighton). There is a ton of random variation in basketball, which is what makes it so exciting. If just a couple games swing the other way, the narrative changes completely.

 

[cincyguy13]

I believe efficiency is most important, with little regard to whether that efficiency is achieved through offense, defense, pace, toughness, basketball IQ, 3 pt shooting, rebounding, mobile centers, seniors, bench, zone, NBA style, money, tradition, crowds, or anything else you can come up with.

In Cronin's years, we were top 16 in efficiency only once. We went to the Sweet Sixteen once. We lost to a less efficient team three times (Harvard, St Joes, Nevada). We beat one more efficient team (Florida St). We also won two tossup games against a team ranked immediately below us (Texas, Purdue).

Nine years is a tiny sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from that. For every anecdote like Cincinnati you find to support your point, you can find one to support a different point (like Creighton). There is a ton of random variation in basketball, which is what makes it so exciting. If just a couple games swing the other way, the narrative changes completely.

I agree, its usually comes down to a couple games changing things completely. If we beat Nevada, Cronin is probably still here. If Kenyon doesn't get hurt, Huggins might still be here. At some point you have to look at actual results, and nine years is a good chunk of time.
I also think you have to be able to score when playing good teams. They are going to score no matter how good your defense is.

 

[cincyguy13]

I believe efficiency is most important, with little regard to whether that efficiency is achieved through offense, defense, pace, toughness, basketball IQ, 3 pt shooting, rebounding, mobile centers, seniors, bench, zone, NBA style, money, tradition, crowds, or anything else you can come up with.

In Cronin's years, we were top 16 in efficiency only once. We went to the Sweet Sixteen once. We lost to a less efficient team three times (Harvard, St Joes, Nevada). We beat one more efficient team (Florida St). We also won two tossup games against a team ranked immediately below us (Texas, Purdue).

Nine years is a tiny sample size. No real conclusions can be drawn from that. For every anecdote like Cincinnati you find to support your point, you can find one to support a different point (like Creighton). There is a ton of random variation in basketball, which is what makes it so exciting. If just a couple games swing the other way, the narrative changes completely.

If efficiency is the key, the good news is we have a coach that cares and knows more about efficiency than anyone on here.

 

[cincrulz11]

If efficiency is the key, the good news is we have a coach that cares and knows more about efficiency than anyone on here.

i know im much more efficient at work when i dont open this website.

 

[justinhub2003]

i know im much more efficient at work when i dont open this website.

That’s the truth.

I’ll be in Mexico City for work for the @WSU game.

I hope I can stream it but if not I expect top notch in game analysis from all of you.

 

[skyblade]

We all change the goal post. Just like you do with Vogt. It used to be he can’t play at all, to he can’t do it the whole year, to the offense is designed for him. I’ve heard from many college basketball talking heads that offense is more important. Am I too lazy to do research? Yes. But no one has proven that defense is more important either. So I am still not sure what not playing Vogt would accomplish. If you have to be good at both, taking out an elite scorer will make the offense even worse. And offfense that isn’t as good as the defense. I’m pretty sure,

Vogt has definitely outperformed my expectations. The offense is designed for the bigs comment isn't meant to be an attack on Vogt. As I said in the comment, Vogt (and Scott and Diarra) still have to be in the right place and be able to finish (and seal their man out).

But overall, Vogt is barely better than average as a big man. Elite finisher at the rim, terrible defense and at best average rebounding. If you can take him out and the offense drops off by 5%, but the defense and rebounding increase by 10% it is a good trade. As Diarra improves on offense (especially if he can start hitting some more threes), that trade off becomes more and more possible as reality.

In real game to game terms, it's about finding and exploiting matchups and preventing the other team from doing the same. In many games, Vogt creates mismatches on offense, but he is also a defensive mismatch the other team looks to exploit. It's up to Brannen to determine which side is winning that battle and to adjust accordingly.

 

[cincyguy13]

I think we will have 4 positions (with Eason) who can put the ball on the floor and shoot. Finding a 5 who can do all that and score in the paint will be hard. Diara has SOME of that going for him and Vogt has 1. Toppin does it all. Even if we can find a poor man's Toppin...it would help a lot. Not sure how well Dou will be able to seal his man or put the ball on the ground.

Eason’s shot looks really broke. They might have to start from scratch with that thing. He looks really skilled aside from that.

 

[skyblade]

I think we will have 4 positions (with Eason) who can put the ball on the floor and shoot. Finding a 5 who can do all that and score in the paint will be hard. Diara has SOME of that going for him and Vogt has 1. Toppin does it all. Even if we can find a poor man's Toppin...it would help a lot. Not sure how well Dou will be able to seal his man or put the ball on the ground.

I think Diarra will get there. He has shown some ability to put the ball on the ground, but right now he gets too rushed when he drives and misses the shot. I think he will get there, it's just a matter of how long it takes. He should make another big jump next year, I expect him to be getting 30+ minutes as the starting PF.