Tweet
Yes, as the board discussions are revealing lately, there is a return to optimism with the return of Daniel, but there are still issues that need addressing. (1) Defense--seems to be improving, but that may be due to two things--Daniel's return and the quality of teams played of late; Evansville is no juggernaut by any stretch of the imagination. (2) But most of all, an inside game on both sides of the ball.
Yes, Austin is actually getting played (I think many of us think the game was pretty much there to begin with, he just needed time--to not only develop in practice, but to actually see minutes. Salley is getting more energized, seemingly by the presence of Austin--the two together look good. However, that is "an," if not "the" issue--why cannot two or more true inside players be on the floor at the same time for any length of time if at all? Again, we have to love Theron's athleticism and effort, but he is a small forward, and even CB and FB noted on TV how Crouch winds up guarding the post (although it was a compliment to JC when it should have been pointed out as a question). Without going on about it, since many if not most of us here have noted these issues time and time again--playing so small is a liability, not a strength and the logic of coaching to gain match-up differences seems not to hold up under the circumstances. Going with four guards, with three of them 5'10 to 5'11" is, well, it speaks for itself.
Trust me, as I mentioned earlier in the seasom, I love how that offense works at times--especially last year--it can look like the way basketball should be played from a finesse view--passing, shooting, spacing, movement--almost aesthetic in appearance as when aspects of a sport are executed to perfection. However, there in lies the rub--we are in an era of physical play, and the offense requires excellent execution and shooting. There, almost by definition, I can see the logic of guard emphasis--passing and shooting. However, when players are off and/or the team is mismatched against a tough defensive foe, there is not a balance there and one "is left with only one barrel." The excellent play of Daniel to create in the face of tight defense can and has bailed us out, but it would be so more beneficially balanced to utilize more post action in the offense. Also, the advantages of our guard oriented line-up have been, as our numerous experieces have demonstrated, negated by on the other end of the floor by by bad rebounding and interior defense. At best, our approach often is a wash and not a gain. Utilizing even the slighest larger line-up would, for more then a few mnutes here and there, give the team the opportunity to address, from a physical standpoint, what are our extremely glaring weaknesses--poor rebounding, poor interior defense, and unbalanced offense. (Note to observations of media--a few pick and rolls and benefitting from improved penetrations does not make for a true, consistent inside option that keeps defenses honest and takes the load off of the guards).
With all that being said, yes, we can be back on track to being the team we were at the start--almost taking MSU and Vandy. Even though we must admit that we have not been playing high-level caliber competition of late. At that level of play, we could win the MVC tourney, and even have an out-side shot (no pun intended when if first typed it, but now, after realizing it, yes
) at one or two wins in the NCAA or a nice NIT run. However, I think the obvious is being neglected at this stage of the season. It is my hope and desire that there is more to what we are seeing than we know, and that things will progress to address what we all seem to know, becuase there is hugh potential there to take this team to the next level--whether that is an NIT run, a sweet 16 repeat, or even something better. That is what has troubled some of us here--the potential is there, but not realized.
Yes, Austin is actually getting played (I think many of us think the game was pretty much there to begin with, he just needed time--to not only develop in practice, but to actually see minutes. Salley is getting more energized, seemingly by the presence of Austin--the two together look good. However, that is "an," if not "the" issue--why cannot two or more true inside players be on the floor at the same time for any length of time if at all? Again, we have to love Theron's athleticism and effort, but he is a small forward, and even CB and FB noted on TV how Crouch winds up guarding the post (although it was a compliment to JC when it should have been pointed out as a question). Without going on about it, since many if not most of us here have noted these issues time and time again--playing so small is a liability, not a strength and the logic of coaching to gain match-up differences seems not to hold up under the circumstances. Going with four guards, with three of them 5'10 to 5'11" is, well, it speaks for itself.
Trust me, as I mentioned earlier in the seasom, I love how that offense works at times--especially last year--it can look like the way basketball should be played from a finesse view--passing, shooting, spacing, movement--almost aesthetic in appearance as when aspects of a sport are executed to perfection. However, there in lies the rub--we are in an era of physical play, and the offense requires excellent execution and shooting. There, almost by definition, I can see the logic of guard emphasis--passing and shooting. However, when players are off and/or the team is mismatched against a tough defensive foe, there is not a balance there and one "is left with only one barrel." The excellent play of Daniel to create in the face of tight defense can and has bailed us out, but it would be so more beneficially balanced to utilize more post action in the offense. Also, the advantages of our guard oriented line-up have been, as our numerous experieces have demonstrated, negated by on the other end of the floor by by bad rebounding and interior defense. At best, our approach often is a wash and not a gain. Utilizing even the slighest larger line-up would, for more then a few mnutes here and there, give the team the opportunity to address, from a physical standpoint, what are our extremely glaring weaknesses--poor rebounding, poor interior defense, and unbalanced offense. (Note to observations of media--a few pick and rolls and benefitting from improved penetrations does not make for a true, consistent inside option that keeps defenses honest and takes the load off of the guards).
With all that being said, yes, we can be back on track to being the team we were at the start--almost taking MSU and Vandy. Even though we must admit that we have not been playing high-level caliber competition of late. At that level of play, we could win the MVC tourney, and even have an out-side shot (no pun intended when if first typed it, but now, after realizing it, yes
) at one or two wins in the NCAA or a nice NIT run. However, I think the obvious is being neglected at this stage of the season. It is my hope and desire that there is more to what we are seeing than we know, and that things will progress to address what we all seem to know, becuase there is hugh potential there to take this team to the next level--whether that is an NIT run, a sweet 16 repeat, or even something better. That is what has troubled some of us here--the potential is there, but not realized.
Comment