Game 28: @Marquette

  • 128 replies
  • 7572 views
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #100 on: February 21, 2018, 10:15:52 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

Based on what?  Not even close...

cjfish

  • *****
  • 1388
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #101 on: February 21, 2018, 10:19:17 PM »
Mediocre Defense and a hot team at home, too bad

Marillac

  • *****
  • 11224
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #102 on: February 21, 2018, 10:19:41 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

That is an asinine statement but ok I'll let you have it

Asinine for an 18-14 or 19-14 team with the #1 sos and a top 45 RPI to get an at large. Sure. Whatever you say. You said the same thing about us bearing Duke.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #103 on: February 21, 2018, 10:20:47 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

That is an asinine statement but ok I'll let you have it

Correct. Laughable.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #104 on: February 21, 2018, 10:22:07 PM »
Ponds was due to have a bad offensive game.  Couple that with some poor defense, nothing from Ahmed and Marv with an off-shooting night from 3, we weren't winning on the road.  Let's get back to playing well at home with the Hall on Sunday.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #105 on: February 21, 2018, 10:22:41 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

That is an asinine statement but ok I'll let you have it

Correct. Laughable.

It's beyond laughable...nothing like making an assertion that you know to be false but you also know won't actually happen so it won't be ultimately proven false so you continue to defend it...

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #106 on: February 21, 2018, 10:22:51 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

Based on what?  Not even close...
Would've been interesting for sure.  I believe only one other team had ever gotten into tournament with 14 losses. Hard to think that the last team with 14 losses would've had wins against #1 and #4 though.  Irregardless expectations going into season were tournament so this is a massive disappointment by staff.  Couple that with absolute crap recruiting class coming in and I'm not super pumped about future outlook. 
« Last Edit: February 21, 2018, 10:24:59 PM by colelatshaw2010 »

ras

  • *****
  • 2091
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #107 on: February 21, 2018, 10:23:56 PM »
Owens and Bash dissapoining today. On a positive note Trimble played excellent. We had no inside game and didn’t defend the 3. After going 0-11 , give me the NIT and I will be satisfied..

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #108 on: February 21, 2018, 10:25:41 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

Based on what?  Not even close...
Would've been interesting for sure.  I believe only one other team had ever gotten in with 14 losses has ever gotten into tournament. Hard to think that the last team with 14 losses would've had wins against #1 and #4 though.  Irregardless expectations going into season were tournament so this is a massive disappointment by staff.  Couple that with absolute crap recruiting class coming in and I'm not super pumped about future outlook. 

Providence has wins over both Xavier and Villanova and they have a better league and overall record and they are a bubble team....A 7-11 league record would be the worst league record of any at-large team.  To claim that they would be "guaranteed" is beyond stupid... and completely indefensible...

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #109 on: February 21, 2018, 10:28:40 PM »
Trimble was looking for his shot tonight. Hope he continues to take open shots.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #110 on: February 21, 2018, 10:32:21 PM »
Owens and Bash dissapoining today. On a positive note Trimble played excellent. We had no inside game and didn’t defend the 3. After going 0-11 , give me the NIT and I will be satisfied..

I'm hoping for an NIT since we crapped the bed early in the conference season.  So, it'll suffice.  But, I want to make a run if we happen to receive an invitation.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #111 on: February 21, 2018, 10:33:50 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

Based on what?  Not even close...
Would've been interesting for sure.  I believe only one other team had ever gotten in with 14 losses has ever gotten into tournament. Hard to think that the last team with 14 losses would've had wins against #1 and #4 though.  Irregardless expectations going into season were tournament so this is a massive disappointment by staff.  Couple that with absolute crap recruiting class coming in and I'm not super pumped about future outlook. 

Providence has wins over both Xavier and Villanova and they have a better league and overall record and they are a bubble team....A 7-11 league record would be the worst league record of any at-large team.  To claim that they would be "guaranteed" is beyond stupid... and completely indefensible...
You said "not even close" that's beyond stupid

Dan

  • *****
  • 1220
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #112 on: February 21, 2018, 10:39:34 PM »
Team has no depth, if Ponds isn't lights out they aren't a good team.

goredmen

  • *****
  • 5066
Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #113 on: February 21, 2018, 10:45:58 PM »
There goes the at large.

That was never realistically in play anyway

It was guaranteed if we won our the regular season.

That is an asinine statement but ok I'll let you have it

Asinine for an 18-14 or 19-14 team with the #1 sos and a top 45 RPI to get an at large. Sure. Whatever you say. You said the same thing about us bearing Duke.

So if we ran the table in the regular season, got to 7-11 and then lost to DePaul in the 1st game of the BET we would have been in without a doubt?

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #114 on: February 21, 2018, 10:54:51 PM »
Team has no depth, if Ponds isn't lights out they aren't a good team.

Depth or lack of does hurt.  But, it's the overall starting group.  Unfortunately, you can't particularly count on Owens and Ahmed on a game-to-game basis.

We'll have more depth next season, but I think we may still be a bit too dependent on Ponds.  Hopefully, we can pull a rabbit out of the hat in the late signing period. 

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #115 on: February 21, 2018, 10:59:16 PM »
Didn't see all of game. What I saw wasn't pretty. Give up 50% 3s to Marquette on the road and this will happen. Really think Simon needs to be used more inside the arc.
*wipes ketchup from his eyes* - I guess Heinz sight isn’t 20/20.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #116 on: February 21, 2018, 11:09:44 PM »
Defense wasn’t there. We didn’t turn them over or make them as uncomfortable as they were in our gym putting the ball on the floor. And they played well offensively to their credit.  We also had plenty of good looks that guys were knocking down the past few weeks, although we played slipper than normal.

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #117 on: February 22, 2018, 12:01:13 AM »
Team has no depth, if Ponds isn't lights out they aren't a good team.

Depth or lack of does hurt.  But, it's the overall starting group.  Unfortunately, you can't particularly count on Owens and Ahmed on a game-to-game basis.

We'll have more depth next season, but I think we may still be a bit too dependent on Ponds.  Hopefully, we can pull a rabbit out of the hat in the late signing period.

Same perspective here. We really needed Lovett to be able to pick the slack up if Pond's isn't on. That happened a few times earlier this year and last year. Looking at what we have coming in next year will improve things, but unless Dixon is able to be that 2nd scoring option we need, we are going to rely solely on Ponds again. Hoping we can pull some type of scoring wing/guard in the spring.

Don't get me wrong, I love Clark, but he can't put the team on the back and create his own shot and really carry the squad through a Ponds drought. He is best setup by driving, screen..etc.
« Last Edit: February 22, 2018, 12:01:32 AM by SeattleJohnny »

Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #118 on: February 22, 2018, 09:20:21 AM »
The Good
Obviously he shot well but Trimble also looked more involved overall. Maybe getting confidence. I bet you see him start to eat away at Ahmed minutes.

The Bad
The close outs on shooters has been terrible all year. Especially in identifying good shooters and especially guys that are hot. Lovett really the only guy that was good at this. Simon, Ponds especially Ahmed and Clark simply do not closeout on shooters.

Ahmed is lucky we only have 6 players.

Owens simply has to get stronger. He gets nudged and is on the floor.

Going to see a bunch of zone to prevent Ponds from penetrating.


Re: Game 28: @Marquette
« Reply #119 on: February 22, 2018, 09:34:56 AM »
I would love to see Trimble open up his game. He's been primarily a spot up shooter but last night he got out in transition and even made a nice little baseline floater. Want to see more.