LONGWOOD - Game Discussion

  • 179 replies
  • 12544 views

TONYD3

  • *****
  • 5578
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #120 on: November 26, 2013, 09:57:12 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #121 on: November 26, 2013, 10:04:06 PM »
Watching us play tonight leads me to the conclusion that our 3 best players are redshirting and our smartest player was Amir Garrett!  :D

boo3

  • *****
  • 6816
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #122 on: November 26, 2013, 10:17:04 PM »
  4-1

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #123 on: November 26, 2013, 10:22:06 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.
« Last Edit: November 26, 2013, 10:22:26 PM by redstorm212 »

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #124 on: November 26, 2013, 10:22:17 PM »
If a kid touches a hot stove and burns his hand eventually he learns not to touch the stove.
We cant hit 3's yet we continue to shoot them

I don't get it...we continue to do the same thing every game...I think the bigs are getting frustrated...ball never enters the paint unless Jordan or Branch is in game...As a result, they join the party and hoist a few themselves...

Sanchez continues to be wasted...3 shots (most, if not all, long jumpers) is ridiculous...

No flow...no positive signs thus far...

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #125 on: November 26, 2013, 10:23:01 PM »
Lavs may be right. This team may not gel until August.

+100

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #126 on: November 26, 2013, 10:26:34 PM »
What would this board be like if we actually lost one of these games?

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #127 on: November 26, 2013, 10:26:47 PM »
I wouldn't say Jordan broke out tonight...but he had a great floor game, pressured the ball on defense and looked much more confident in the 2nd half.  I look for him to take the next step very soon!

Greene forced it tonight and didn't let the game come to him.  I feel like he was playing to keep his scoring average.  He needs to be smarter than that, and not force his offense.

I also like the fearlessness of Branch.  He is the only one who even tries to penetrate. 

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #128 on: November 26, 2013, 10:28:18 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.

The other thing is SJU failed to do tonight is complete fast breaks.  Again sign of a team that presses early when they don't jump out quickly.

Guys like Sanchez and Sampson need to get cheap baskets on the break. Drop early 3's and get cheap baskets and then those Obekpa blocks become easy fast breaks and the lead goes from 7 to 10 to 15 just like that.  But they need to start better and that means they need to ring the bell.

Again many of these 3's are WIDE open, need to knock them down.

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #129 on: November 26, 2013, 10:29:18 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.

This is one of the worst teams in the nation. AND they were playing w out their only good player. Penn State should clean our clock if only because they seem to try every game they play.

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #130 on: November 26, 2013, 10:30:51 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.

This is one of the worst teams in the nation. AND they were playing w out their only good player. Penn State should clean our clock if only because they seem to try every game they play.

Again, they lost to a team we beat by 10, but by SJU fan logic, should "clean our clock."

paultzman

  • *****
  • 16981
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #131 on: November 26, 2013, 10:31:47 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.

The other thing is SJU failed to do tonight is complete fast breaks.  Again sign of a team that presses early when they don't jump out quickly.

Guys like Sanchez and Sampson need to get cheap baskets on the break. Drop early 3's and get cheap baskets and then those Obekpa blocks become easy fast breaks and the lead goes from 7 to 10 to 15 just like that.  But they need to start better and that means they need to ring the bell.

Again many of these 3's are WIDE open, need to knock them down.

Our spacing on break is chronically poor & one could assume our three point shooting  is destined to be mediocre. Why think differently? I hope you are right and we have a break out performance soon.

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #132 on: November 26, 2013, 10:32:05 PM »
I care very little about this game, I don't think we're in any danger of losing ... but this team just does not pass the "eye-ball" test.   They don't look good.
And at what point this season have they looked good?   The second half against Wisconsin?  Eh.   

2 hours in traffic getting to the game...watching this travesty, all I could do was remind myself that I felt the same way in the week leading up to the game against Duke in Lavin's 1st year...know one thing...if Lavin thinks we can ride Harrison and Greene against good teams, we will get waxed if we don't develop other options

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #133 on: November 26, 2013, 10:32:48 PM »
Wasn't a fan of the rotations tonight. Thought St. John's should have went 3 guards with Pointer at the 4 and Sanchez/Obkepa at the 5.

Branch, Greene/Jordan, Harrison, Pointer, Sanchez/Obekpa would have been my turn it up lineup. No way Longwood was running with that. Instead having Opekpa, Sanchez, and Sampson on the floor at the same time I thought it slowed down the pace and let Longwood stay in it.

Team bounced back and shared the ball well tonight but don't be mistaken Longwood could get beat by quality DIII programs.

On individual notes Branch and Jordan facilitated the ball very well tonight. This is going to be needed later in the year.
Follow Johnny Jungle on Twitter at @Johnny_Jungle

boo3

  • *****
  • 6816
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #134 on: November 26, 2013, 10:33:13 PM »
Have to imagine that at some point the shots go down.. Can't really be 10% shooters from the 3 point line..

 If Harrison has an average shooting day, this is a 30 point win, right?  I mean, I'm just looking at numbers, I didn't see it.

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #135 on: November 26, 2013, 10:34:05 PM »
I care very little about this game, I don't think we're in any danger of losing ... but this team just does not pass the "eye-ball" test.   They don't look good.
And at what point this season have they looked good?   The second half against Wisconsin?  Eh.   

2 hours in traffic getting to the game...watching this travesty, all I could do was remind myself that I felt the same way in the week leading up to the game against Duke in Lavin's 1st year...know one thing...if Lavin thinks we can ride Harrison and Greene against good teams, we will get waxed if we don't develop other options

Why I skip a lot of beginning of the season games now. Traffic is just too bad heading into Queens on a weekday. Even if they make the games later and traffic dies, I don't get home till after 1.
Follow Johnny Jungle on Twitter at @Johnny_Jungle

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #136 on: November 26, 2013, 10:36:19 PM »
Fratto will have a field day on all the blocks, but means little. To me, only positive is Jordan got out of dog house and did some decent things after poor start.
Just hope he moves back into more central role quickly...we needs his upside...hate to get into the body language but he didn't look all that engaged when sitting on bench in 2nd half...bench erupted on a dunk by Pointer...he stared straight ahead...didn't even clap

Poison

  • *****
  • 16896
Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #137 on: November 26, 2013, 10:37:33 PM »
If a kid touches a hot stove and burns his hand eventually he learns not to touch the stove.
We cant hit 3's yet we continue to shoot them

I don't get it...we continue to do the same thing every game...I think the bigs are getting frustrated...ball never enters the paint unless Jordan or Branch is in game...As a result, they join the party and hoist a few themselves...

Sanchez continues to be wasted...3 shots (most, if not all, long jumpers) is ridiculous...

No flow...no positive signs thus far...

Sanchez is wasting opportunities all by himself as well. He gets the ball under the basket, and immediately looks to kick it out. Go up w the damn ball like a man. This is the guy who is good enough to start in the NBA???

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #138 on: November 26, 2013, 10:39:36 PM »
Have to imagine that at some point the shots go down.. Can't really be 10% shooters from the 3 point line..

 If Harrison has an average shooting day, this is a 30 point win, right?  I mean, I'm just looking at numbers, I didn't see it.

This team isn't that bad at shot making but really bad at shot taking. Meaning it all comes down to shot selection.

Harrison and Greene are the worst in this process. Sanchez hasn't shown early that he is much better and Sampson has a little Sean Evan (the ball is going up) disease. It isn't a good trend when you're cold.

If Harrison and Greene could eliminate 4 bad shots that they take collectively a game that is potentially a huge swing. Try next game counting out shots early in the shot clock, deep 2's, or looks like no one is open so I'll just shoot this 3 since I have the ball. Over/Under is at 7 for the team.
Follow Johnny Jungle on Twitter at @Johnny_Jungle

Re: LONGWOOD - Game Discussion
« Reply #139 on: November 26, 2013, 10:39:52 PM »
At least finally we all agree we sucked tonight

We weren't great, but if you can suck and win by 18 that's a good thing.

This is one of the worst teams in the nation. AND they were playing w out their only good player. Penn State should clean our clock if only because they seem to try every game they play.

And Syracuse beat a lower half NEC team, St. Francis-NY, 56-50 trailing late in the game.  Somehow they managed to beat Minnesota and California.  So does that men Minny and Cal couldn't beat STF-NY?

And Kentucky beat Cleveland St last night at home after trailing by 10 with 7 minutes to go.

Duke beat Vermont by 1 and gave up 90 points.

Yet my guess is Kentucky and Duke will still be able to beat better teams, no?

Stop with this X beat Y by 15 and Y lost to D by 30 so that means D beats X by 15.  It does not work that way.