UC 84 Bellemaine 72

BearcatTalk

Help Support BearcatTalk:

I'd love for us to start a season at some point in the future and hear about all the reasons why we're going to be a good team and not all the reasons why we might not be good. Every season the groundwork for the eventual excuses is laid before the season even starts.

They are not excuses, they are the reasons.

UK is over rated by a lot at preseason #1, as they were last year when they were preseason #3. None of UK's freshman are the second coming of Anthony Davis. A team relying on freshman is going to struggle. None of UC's freshman are the second coming of Oscar Robertson. 21-10, 20-11, is about what to expect for the regular season record.
 
I think the point is...rather than say "watch these guys do it"...he is supposed to be able to COACH our teams to do it. But we have had slow ball movement around the perimeter since he has been here. In other words...it may not be a player issue...it may be a coach issue. If Cronin wants to change that...I think it's time to look in the mirror.

That was exactly what I was getting at. Games don't usually help a player learn new skills. Practice, drills and coaching add the extra skill sets. Bellarmine did not get better by watching other teams play, their coach has a philosophy and he knows how to implement it to perfection.
 
I feel that the lacking of good perimeter passing and even quality entry passes to the post are a result of a few things.

Practice is focused mainly on defense, not much time and effort put into offense (or at least doesn't appear that way)

Players playing tentative, afraid of making a TO and getting yanked

Players just don't have a high bball IQ

Entry passes to post are the 3 above reasons and the post player on block needs to set a good target and clear space.

Hopefully with better guard/bball IQ play the passing and cutting will get better. In the end I don't think they learned how to pass the ball better because they played Bellarmine. They were thinking about what they are going to do that night halfway through the second half, not the zip on all of the opponent's passes.
 
That was exactly what I was getting at. Games don't usually help a player learn new skills. Practice, drills and coaching add the extra skill sets. Bellarmine did not get better by watching other teams play, their coach has a philosophy and he knows how to implement it to perfection.

This is demonstrably false. New skills are learned from playing good teams\ players all the time. Bellarmine executed about as well as they could with UC (purposely) not adjusting to their strength and they still lost. Mick's point, which is a reasonable one, is to show what happens when you make an extra pass and find the open man it can really open things up for the offense. In practice these things are simulated. When it happens in a game it has a greater effect. If you play against Jordan everyday as opposed to your high school gym teacher you will pick up a lot of things that will make you a better player. Im not saying you dont refine skills in drills and practice but playing games against skilled opponents is an invaluable part of the process of getting better at your own game.
 
I am actually just happy to hear that he wants to play that way. That's half the battle. Now he just has to figure out why it isn't happening. To me it's clear that the coach has yet to make it as high of a priority as D or not turning the ball over. If he yanked players for holding the ball too long...they might start getting the picture.
 
I think when Mick yanks players, it's not necessarily that they made a mistake but that they fail to execute what his gameplan is. When someone does something crazy on offense, like take an ill-advised shot or try to get too cute with the ball, that goes against what he wants the offense to do. On the same note on defense when a player gets completely burned or misses his assignment or just commits a horribly stupid foul then Mick gets his quick-trigger because that goes against what he teaches not to happen. I'll agree that sometimes it seems that quick trigger is too quick and can make players play tentative, but at the same time I like that he holds players accountable for their mistakes. How do they learn not to go against the team gameplan if they aren't taken out for doing their own thing?

As far as them playing Bellarmine because they pass the ball like he wants us to pass the ball, I like it. We got a lot of young kids and nothing motivates you better than getting beat, not necessarily a game but you personally getting beat on defense. The best way to teach someone why to pass the ball that extra time is to show how it works and he has plenty on tape of that. (Of course we could always review some past year's tapes of when we played Notre Dame.) But with so many young guys that are learning to play this level for the first time I like the approach. You need tape to show why it works and its better to have some tape of it happening to you to better motivate guys.
 
I think when Mick yanks players, it's not necessarily that they made a mistake but that they fail to execute what his gameplan is. When someone does something crazy on offense, like take an ill-advised shot or try to get too cute with the ball, that goes against what he wants the offense to do. On the same note on defense when a player gets completely burned or misses his assignment or just commits a horribly stupid foul then Mick gets his quick-trigger because that goes against what he teaches not to happen. I'll agree that sometimes it seems that quick trigger is too quick and can make players play tentative, but at the same time I like that he holds players accountable for their mistakes. How do they learn not to go against the team gameplan if they aren't taken out for doing their own thing?

As far as them playing Bellarmine because they pass the ball like he wants us to pass the ball, I like it. We got a lot of young kids and nothing motivates you better than getting beat, not necessarily a game but you personally getting beat on defense. The best way to teach someone why to pass the ball that extra time is to show how it works and he has plenty on tape of that. (Of course we could always review some past year's tapes of when we played Notre Dame.) But with so many young guys that are learning to play this level for the first time I like the approach. You need tape to show why it works and its better to have some tape of it happening to you to better motivate guys.

Hey TYZ...I am not faulting Cronin for having a plan and holding kids accountable. I think that's how coaching works best. There seems to be a disconnect though between what Mick SAYS he wants them to do on O (IE pass the ball and move the ball like Bellarmine) and what he will take them out for (IE turnovers and D). I am guessing his trigger isn't so quick on whether a guy holds the ball too long or misses a wide open guy on offense as opposed to a TO or not being in the right place on D.

It is VERY clear what his priorities are...and it's not ball movement. That might come 3rd or 4th to D, Reb's and TO's etc. I would like to see a bit more balance between emphasis on ball movement and a little less on the occasional TO but I can totally understand the emphasis on D. It's hard to tell players to be more free wheeling on O when you are going to yank them for a TO.
 
Hey TYZ...I am not faulting Cronin for having a plan and holding kids accountable. I think that's how coaching works best. There seems to be a disconnect though between what Mick SAYS he wants them to do on O (IE pass the ball and move the ball like Bellarmine) and what he will take them out for (IE turnovers and D). I am guessing his trigger isn't so quick on whether a guy holds the ball too long or misses a wide open guy on offense as opposed to a TO or not being in the right place on D.

It is VERY clear what his priorities are...and it's not ball movement. That might come 3rd or 4th to D, Reb's and TO's etc. I would like to see a bit more balance between emphasis on ball movement and a little less on the occasional TO but I can totally understand the emphasis on D. It's hard to tell players to be more free wheeling on O when you are going to yank them for a TO.

I find this analysis to be somewhat off base. There is a difference between Bellarmine's offensive philosophy and their ability to pass the basketball. Mick does not want his offense to be run like Bellarmine's. Mick wants his guys to pass the ball as well as them. Bellarmine has no inside presence and a bunch of capable shooters. They need to get those shooters open shots behind the arc at all costs to give them a chance to win the game. To do this they weave in and out the lane with whoever has the ball and they kick to the corner and reverse quickly. At any point if the shooter is open they take the shot. UC has very few consistent outside threats and they are trying to work the ball to the high post. Titus and Justin (Who are good passers) have the offense run through them trying to get the ball as close to the rim as possible. The styles and objectives are complete opposites. You have to tailor your offense towards your personnel. For UC to run their offense like Bellarmine would make no sense. I agree that Mick obviously is Hugginsesque in his philosophy of defense first and I would like to see a more fluid offense. If they passed the ball better especially to the post that would be accomplished. But saying that he wants his offense to be run like Bellarmine is off base.
 
Hey TYZ...I am not faulting Cronin for having a plan and holding kids accountable. I think that's how coaching works best. There seems to be a disconnect though between what Mick SAYS he wants them to do on O (IE pass the ball and move the ball like Bellarmine) and what he will take them out for (IE turnovers and D). I am guessing his trigger isn't so quick on whether a guy holds the ball too long or misses a wide open guy on offense as opposed to a TO or not being in the right place on D.

It is VERY clear what his priorities are...and it's not ball movement. That might come 3rd or 4th to D, Reb's and TO's etc. I would like to see a bit more balance between emphasis on ball movement and a little less on the occasional TO but I can totally understand the emphasis on D. It's hard to tell players to be more free wheeling on O when you are going to yank them for a TO.

I would agree and say his trigger is quicker on defense than offense probably. I'm not sure if I really explained my point terribly well. My point on why he pulls guys so quick isn't just that they make a mistake and they're out, I think it's more he preaches don't do this, don't do that and when you do those things then it's the quick trigger. All we see as fans is the guy makes a mistake and within seconds someone on the bench is running to midcourt. We don't necessarily notice it when a player makes a mistake and a replacement doesn't come in for him. And it's not an automatic that if you turn the ball over you're going to come out.

As far as the part in bold, I'm not so sure about that. I know he focuses and preaches defense because to him those are things you can control as opposed to whether or not your shots are falling. But I've heard him gripe just as much about us standing around on offense, not having ball movement to get guys open and not being able to put in the high percentage shots. I hate to say it, but my guess is with this past few years' teams he probably realized our players were incapaple of doing those things on offense so he just adapted his gameplan to be lockdown on defense to keep the score as low as possible. I might would agree he's more forgiving on not executing the offense than not executing the defense, but again that goes back to those things he says you can control.
 
I would agree and say his trigger is quicker on defense than offense probably. I'm not sure if I really explained my point terribly well. My point on why he pulls guys so quick isn't just that they make a mistake and they're out, I think it's more he preaches don't do this, don't do that and when you do those things then it's the quick trigger. All we see as fans is the guy makes a mistake and within seconds someone on the bench is running to midcourt. We don't necessarily notice it when a player makes a mistake and a replacement doesn't come in for him. And it's not an automatic that if you turn the ball over you're going to come out.

As far as the part in bold, I'm not so sure about that. I know he focuses and preaches defense because to him those are things you can control as opposed to whether or not your shots are falling. But I've heard him gripe just as much about us standing around on offense, not having ball movement to get guys open and not being able to put in the high percentage shots. I hate to say it, but my guess is with this past few years' teams he probably realized our players were incapaple of doing those things on offense so he just adapted his gameplan to be lockdown on defense to keep the score as low as possible. I might would agree he's more forgiving on not executing the offense than not executing the defense, but again that goes back to those things he says you can control.
And therein lies negative reinforcement. The way to coach is do this do that.
 
I would agree and say his trigger is quicker on defense than offense probably. I'm not sure if I really explained my point terribly well. My point on why he pulls guys so quick isn't just that they make a mistake and they're out, I think it's more he preaches don't do this, don't do that and when you do those things then it's the quick trigger. All we see as fans is the guy makes a mistake and within seconds someone on the bench is running to midcourt. We don't necessarily notice it when a player makes a mistake and a replacement doesn't come in for him. And it's not an automatic that if you turn the ball over you're going to come out.

As far as the part in bold, I'm not so sure about that. I know he focuses and preaches defense because to him those are things you can control as opposed to whether or not your shots are falling. But I've heard him gripe just as much about us standing around on offense, not having ball movement to get guys open and not being able to put in the high percentage shots. I hate to say it, but my guess is with this past few years' teams he probably realized our players were incapaple of doing those things on offense so he just adapted his gameplan to be lockdown on defense to keep the score as low as possible. I might would agree he's more forgiving on not executing the offense than not executing the defense, but again that goes back to those things he says you can control.

I agree with your first paragraph...we don't know when he isn't pulling guys for mistakes...just that he's a bit trigger happy compared with other coaches. Obviously some coaches are trigger happy as well.

But for the second paragraph I am not sure. We just played Bellarmine who had many players capable of moving the ball. I can't for the life of me think that are guys are so BB IQ clueless over the past few years with SK, CW and JP that we couldn't impliment a quick pass movement offense better than a D2 team. Maybe because Cash was never 100% but IDK. However, we now have some added quickness, length, depth and athletecism so if Cronin REALLY wants to do it...we should be able to. Not only should we be able to move around without the ball...we also have added length to pass over the top of defenses when the situation calls for it.

We'll see. I really hope this is the year it starts.
 
And therein lies negative reinforcement. The way to coach is do this do that.

I think I agree with this philosophy a bit more. In exhibition games and early year easier OOC games we should say to the kids...I am going to give you a certain amount of time on the floor...here is what I want you to do. If at the end of that time you made too many mistakes you will receive less minutes on the floor the next time out. If you do well...I might just keep you in there. If you completely botch the job in the first 2 of 5 minutes I will take you out.

The bench is a powerful motivator...but it also can take away much of a players assertiveness and creativity...because they would rather stay on the court than risk coming out. I believe if we look at our historical offensive stats we will find too much emphasis placed on avoiding negatives (getting yanked) and not enough on creating positives (assertive and creative play).
 
And therein lies negative reinforcement. The way to coach is do this do that.

That's so naive. To be a good coach you have to be a good teacher. What not to do is just as important as what to do. When you go a full week of practice and constantly go over certain things and they are not executed or flat out done the opposite way they were taught you should have your ass yanked. It's all about making the guys understand if you dont do it right then you come out. Very simple. It's not negative reinforcement. It's a lesson. Every coach in America uses this tactic. Do it right or sit on the bench. Mick has the depth this year where he can afford to yank anyone. Huggins was someone who did this constantly. It's an effective tactic especially with so many young players.
 
I think the point is...rather than say "watch these guys do it"...he is supposed to be able to COACH our teams to do it. But we have had slow ball movement around the perimeter since he has been here. In other words...it may not be a player issue...it may be a coach issue. If Cronin wants to change that...I think it's time to look in the mirror.

I could tell you all day how to write succinct, even terse, yet descriptive prose - full of imagery.....or you could just read Hemingway - which would be more effective, me teaching you or you reading Hemingway?
 
So we should focus on the entire package. One player could make 5 assertive positive plays and make 2 mistakes resulting in let's say 8 points of O and negative 2 points because of mistakes (6 points adjusted). Player B makes 0 mistakes but does little to create plays that result in points...let's say 2 points (2 points adjusted). The net gain for rewarding assertiveness and creativity is 4 points in this scenario.

I think to be a powerhouse type of team we will need to get better offensively...our D can only do so much. Our coach must be willing to address areas of deficiency if we are going to step up to the next level. If he is not willing...we can still make the dance but I think we are limited in how far we can go. Stubborness can be a good trait at times...but if you are too stubborn to change ideologies that aren't working...it can be a bad thing.

I think it was Lincoln who said something to the effect "Show me the value in another man's opinion and I will be happy to change mine". Cronin should always be looking to see areas where he can improve individually
 
That's so naive. To be a good coach you have to be a good teacher. What not to do is just as important as what to do. When you go a full week of practice and constantly go over certain things and they are not executed or flat out done the opposite way they were taught you should have your ass yanked. It's all about making the guys understand if you dont do it right then you come out. Very simple. It's not negative reinforcement. It's a lesson. Every coach in America uses this tactic. Do it right or sit on the bench. Mick has the depth this year where he can afford to yank anyone. Huggins was someone who did this constantly. It's an effective tactic especially with so many young players.
Naive? You said it yourself. Do it - not don't do this. I've instructed, and I've coached (though not at this level). Good instructors/coaches know how to extract the most from their players.
 
I could tell you all day how to write succinct, even terse, yet descriptive prose - full of imagery.....or you could just read Hemingway - which would be more effective, me teaching you or you reading Hemingway?


"An intelligent man is sometimes forced to be drunk to spend time with his fools."
 
I could tell you all day how to write succinct, even terse, yet descriptive prose - full of imagery.....or you could just read Hemingway - which would be more effective, me teaching you or you reading Hemingway?

I will take your comments to heart but your time may be better spent in an English Lit forum. I thinkest thou may be a doucher.

When you are in the first row, over the huddle on the UC side, make sure you keep a keen ear on Cronin. Be sure to be persistent that he say "I would prefer one maintaineth thou fornicating opponent betwixt one's foreward glaring eyes lest the Lord disaprove" than to say "Keep your FU#@ing man in front of you God dam##it".
 
Last edited:
Naive? You said it yourself. Do it - not don't do this. I've instructed, and I've coached (though not at this level). Good instructors/coaches know how to extract the most from their players.

@LanceMcAlister
Mick: Biggest thing as a coach, is to understand what a guy is capable of and demand it from him.
 
Naive? You said it yourself. Do it - not don't do this. I've instructed, and I've coached (though not at this level). Good instructors/coaches know how to extract the most from their players.

Yes naive to think that only positive enforcement is effective. Each player has their own personality and you have to figure out how to coach each of them individually to extract the most out of them. Some players react to being yelled at. Some players need you to coddle them. Teaching/coaching at this level requires holding players accountable. You see players being yanked for a mistake as negative reinforcement. Mick sees it as teaching a lesson.
 
Back
Top