PDA

View Full Version : Zags are the Most Complete team in the NCAA



MotoZag
03-10-2009, 10:47 AM
When clicking on all cylinders of course.

As pointed out in a another post, GU is the only team in D-1 ranked in the top 10 for offensive and defensive efficiency, 6th and 10th respectively.

http://kenpom.com/stats.php

I'm trying not to get too far ahead of myself, but the way this team is playing right now is a Final Four team, hands down. Not even UNC is as complete as that (1st and 21st respectively). Given, UNC shows glimpses of good defense, but so do other teams that are otherwise strictly offense. barring and injury or catastrophic meltdown mentally, I don't think anything can stand in the way of these guys. However, they still have to prove that they can come back after taking a punch, say being down 5-10 at halftime or such.

My two cents.

brian_sun
03-10-2009, 11:08 AM
It's also about the styles of plays. GU don't like the style of plays that a Memphis or Pitt will employ. I think those teams will give GU a lot of troubles in the tourney. UNC is an insanely gifted offensive team. Their fastbreak style is a lot more similar to the Zags offense. I wouldn't say GU is better defensively just based on this stat. You have to factor in UNC play in a much tougher conference than GU. I think it will be a fun game between GU and UNC, but I think the individual athletism of UNC will ultimately prevail. GU against Memphis or Pitt will not be that close.


When clicking on all cylinders of course.

As pointed out in a another post, GU is the only team in D-1 ranked in the top 10 for offensive and defensive efficiency, 6th and 10th respectively.

http://kenpom.com/stats.php

I'm trying not to get too far ahead of myself, but the way this team is playing right now is a Final Four team, hands down. Not even UNC is as complete as that (1st and 21st respectively). Given, UNC shows glimpses of good defense, but so do other teams that are otherwise strictly offense. barring and injury or catastrophic meltdown mentally, I don't think anything can stand in the way of these guys. However, they still have to prove that they can come back after taking a punch, say being down 5-10 at halftime or such.

My two cents.

former1dog
03-10-2009, 11:13 AM
brian_sun is the complete contrarian. ;)

Once and Future Zag
03-10-2009, 11:13 AM
A little more on balance...

http://www.yocohoops.com/story/2009/2/27/115841/545

Money Quote:


Why should you care? Because according to KenPom.com, all five of the most recent NCAA Tournament champions were among the nation's Top 12 most efficient clubs on both offense and defense.

GoZags
03-10-2009, 11:23 AM
It's also about the styles of plays. GU don't like the style of plays that a Memphis or Pitt will employ. I think those teams will give GU a lot of troubles in the tourney. UNC is an insanely gifted offensive team. Their fastbreak style is a lot more similar to the Zags offense. I wouldn't say GU is better defensively just based on this stat. You have to factor in UNC play in a much tougher conference than GU. I think it will be a fun game between GU and UNC, but I think the individual athletism of UNC will ultimately prevail. GU against Memphis or Pitt will not be that close.

While it is true that UNC plays in a much tougher conference than Gonzaga -- it is also true that in the 10 OOC BCS* (Big 12; Big 10; SEC; Pac 10; ACC; Big East plus Memphis/Utah) games the Zags played -- their f.g. percentage defense was 38.1 % -- which over the course of the season would be ranked number 5 in the nation.

*Zags played schools from each of the BCS conferences this season. BTW, a total of zero of the BCS/Memphis and Utah games were played on Gonzaga's home floor.

75Zag
03-10-2009, 11:28 AM
Speaking as a weary veteran of the long, quiet, shuttle bus ride from the Oakland Coliseum back to the alumni association party venue on the night that UCLA drove a knife through the heart of GU basketball, I recommend that we refrain from making grandiose claims just yet.

GU may be peaking at the perfect moment, but so are various other teams (including our friends in Memphis and Seattle). I prefer to proceed one game at a time, and cheer my heart out over each potential victory.

Hope is great. Optimism is great. Reality is what it is.

Go Bulldogs. Beat the Next Guys!

CDC84
03-10-2009, 11:31 AM
It's also about the styles of plays. GU don't like the style of plays that a Memphis or Pitt will employ. I think those teams will give GU a lot of troubles in the tourney. UNC is an insanely gifted offensive team. Their fastbreak style is a lot more similar to the Zags offense. I wouldn't say GU is better defensively just based on this stat. You have to factor in UNC play in a much tougher conference than GU. I think it will be a fun game between GU and UNC, but I think the individual athletism of UNC will ultimately prevail. GU against Memphis or Pitt will not be that close.

We have already proven on this board that Gonzaga's defensive stats throughout non-league play were just about as good as what they did in the WCC. They were in the top 10 in defensive efficiency throughout most of the non-league sked. In fact, the WCC competition hurt Gonzaga's defensive rating at times because these ratings incorporate the quality of opponent you are facing.

Gonzaga is a better defensive team than North Carolina. Ty Lawson is poor at guarding the point of attack (see their losses and how opposing guards like Vasquez ripped them up), and they do not have the shotblocking presence that GU does in the middle. Ellington can be a defensive liability at the wing. What Carolina happens to be is the best offensive team in the country. They have more weapons than anyone, and they play defense that is at least good enough to win the national title. But if you gave them GU's defense, they may not have a loss right now.

As impressive as Gonzaga's stats are, they don't measure intangibles. They don't measure a team's toughness and an ability to make big plays in big moments. The Zags have a lot to prove before they can say they belong with the one and two seeds that will be in this tournament. At the same time, if I were one of those one or two seeds, I would prefer that Gonzaga be in somebody else's bracket. Their talent level is greater than a team typically seeded at 4 or 5.

bballbeachbum
03-10-2009, 12:08 PM
I prefer to proceed one game at a time, and cheer my heart out over each potential victory.

Hope is great. Optimism is great. Reality is what it is.

Go Bulldogs. Beat the Next Guys!

From someone who also endured that game in person, I wholeheartedly agree. There's no in between here.

We've earned what we've done, and the next chance to earn more is in 10 days or whatever...aiming at that one game right now, that's it

CDC covered it nicely imo

GO TEAM ZAGS!!!

TacomaZAG
03-10-2009, 12:22 PM
the statistics are meaningless. It doesn't matter if Memphis or NC would beat us 8 out of 10 times, we only play them once (if we both get that far)and the loser goes home. The statistics help out with the seeding, but after that it doesn't matter. In a series of one game seasons, I like our balance and our team defense. We have senior leadership and great floor balance on both ends of the floor.

Since all games will be on a neutral floor (theoretically) and the Zags travel very well, a lot of the intangibles go away as well. Due to our showing at the WCC tourney we should be in Boise or Portland.

It comes down to making in game adjustments and who wants it more on that night. I don't think Jeremy, Micah, and Josh are ready to be done next weekend, and just making the Dance isn't good enough for the guys anymore.

I like our chances to make some noise. Every team needs a little lady luck for an E8 or FF. We rolled a 7 in Vegas, let it ride...............

Go ZAGS

ZagSlug
03-10-2009, 12:44 PM
From the title of this thread I thought that someone was smoking the Kool-Aid.

Almost ashamed to see some salient points in the thread. So much of the success in the NCAA's is dependent upon match ups and styles of play. The only thing consistent is defense and GU has some good D this year.

TM27
03-10-2009, 12:46 PM
My thoughts dont mean much but here they are....

1. This board is bi-polar.

2. Agree GU looked great, and also agree it is easy to get caught up...but our front line depth is still cause for concern. I like the enthusiasm but if this team, and the past couple of teams has taught us anything....it is that everyone needs to find that middle ground.

3. I dont believe that the SMC team we saw last night would have beat any team in top 20. We beat a bubble team. However, and along those same lines I think GU played them as well as any team could have (meaning I dont think UNC or Pitt would have faired any better or worse).

4. We now will play teams with tall athletic 3 guards, those which give Micah problems. We now play teams with long athletic and quick 2/3 the kind that over the years have taken away Matt's first step. Not allowing Matt into the key (where he is among D1's most dangerous triple threat) neutralizes a huge portion of Matt's game and immediately takes away part of GU offense. If calls go against Josh and Austin, we are left relying on Will. Love the heart but that fact alone should sober up some on this board.

5. GU is dangerous b/c they dont rely on one aspect or one person. And the amount of teams that have all the above weapons are few and far between...but GU is still suspect in many areas. Emotions and expectations should be tempered until the brackets are released and we see whom GU will play...as we have seen in recent years, the committee appears bored with GU and occasionally rewards them by sending them to extreme hostile environments....lets see how this plays out before we declare them a #1 seed.

Sincerely,
Debbie Downer :o

Spokanicoug
03-10-2009, 12:47 PM
Most Complete Team in NCAA...history.

Fixed

Ikancagin
03-10-2009, 04:01 PM
Most Complete Team in NCAA...history.

Fixed

Except for rebounding against WCC opponents.

gamagin
03-10-2009, 04:23 PM
Except for rebounding against WCC opponents.

to get our share of boards at both ends from now on, or we might be prematurely heading home, imo. You can bet our foes will be working just as hard to deny us our share.

It will be determined as much by a battle of wits and wills as skills and drills. I like our chances in a 40 minute, winner takes all, test.

When a fighter meets a puncher, the fighter wins every time. IF he has the bigger heart. I think we have become mostly fighters, if recent events are any indication, with plenty of heart.

Go TEAM Zags !

MotoZag
03-10-2009, 04:30 PM
My thoughts dont mean much but here they are....

1. This board is bi-polar.



Any board based on opinion will seem this way.

brian_sun
03-10-2009, 05:46 PM
As impressive as Gonzaga's stats are, they don't measure intangibles. They don't measure a team's toughness and an ability to make big plays in big moments. The Zags have a lot to prove before they can say they belong with the one and two seeds that will be in this tournament. At the same time, if I were one of those one or two seeds, I would prefer that Gonzaga be in somebody else's bracket. Their talent level is greater than a team typically seeded at 4 or 5.

CDC, I totally agree on the intangibles part. How would this group of players respond to adversity. If you look back at the tourney history, 99% of the eventual champions have to endure some adversity. You might be able to walk through the first couple rounds, but to win 6 games in a roll, you are going to run into some extremely close games. The Zags won some, and lost some close games this year. They have not proven they have the intestinal fortitude to be able to rise on occasion when faced with adversity. The UConn game is an example, when UConn miraculously tied the game and sent it to OT, GU was done. You could just see it in those players eyes. You are going to run into a UConn situation again in the tourney if you want to go deep. How would the players respond? It's easy to blow someone out by 30 points, because you are much more talented than they are, but when you face teams that have as much talent as you are, can you grind it out? To me, GU has not proven it has done that since the Casey Calvary days. I think not letting Robert Sacre play when he can come back and play will be a very regretful decision. Foster, Heytfelt, Daye and Ira Brown just either don't have the talent or the toughness to stop a Blake Griffin. a Dejuan Blair, a Tyler Hansborough or a Jon Brockman from getting that offensive rebound. Robert Sacre at least can compete with those guys. He will be the missing piece between a sweet 16 and a final 4. Is that a good enough reason to burn his red shirt year to try to get to the FF? You bet it is.

ZaggyStardust
03-10-2009, 06:02 PM
CDC, The UConn game is an example, when UConn miraculously tied the game and sent it to OT, GU was done. You could just see it in those players eyes.


Ya think that perhaps it was because almost our entire starting lineup was on the bench after fouling out???? Just sayin!

Nevtelen
03-10-2009, 06:59 PM
Ya think that perhaps it was because almost our entire starting lineup was on the bench after fouling out???? Just sayin!

Agreed - the Port St game perhaps showed a lack of toughness. The Mempis game was clearly a lack of toughness. The UConn game? That was foul trouble. I do agree this team hasn't necessarily demonstrated that toughness. But if they can find it, they have every other attribute they need to go deep. I'm honestly not sure what to think about how far this team will go. But I'm cheering for them like crazy! And I believe that they have a good chance to beat any team in the country this year.

Larrylegend
03-10-2009, 08:45 PM
They have not proven they have the intestinal fortitude to be able to rise on occasion when faced with adversity.


Ummmm... did you watch the Zags play at Tennessee where they came back from 17 and won in overtime? Gonzaga's win broke Tennesse's 37-game home winning streak. And GU hasn't proven they can over-come adversity?

brian_sun
03-10-2009, 11:13 PM
Ummmm... did you watch the Zags play at Tennessee where they came back from 17 and won in overtime? Gonzaga's win broke Tennesse's 37-game home winning streak. And GU hasn't proven they can over-come adversity?

Yes, I watched that game. I believe it was nationally televised. I also believe entering that game, the Zags were in a funk and lost 3 straight. Look, UT is a decent team, but they are only 19-11 overall, and 10-6 in a very mediocre SEC this year. Do you realize that after they lost to Gonzaga at home to snap the 37 game winning streak, they proceed to lose to a NIT bound Kentucky team at home, then dropped 2 straight at home to Memphis and LSU, 2 good teams, no doubt, and at the season finale, they dropped another buzzer beater thriller to Alabama at home. They lost 5 frigging times at home this year. This isn't the same UT team of last year when they ranked no. 1 at one time and went to the sweet 16 two years in the roll. The Zags were good at that game, but it turns out that UT wasn't that good of a team. In the tourney, you are going to run into a Memphis, Pitt or UNC. When you face that calibre of a team, can you overcome. I am not talking about the regular season, I am talking about the tourney. Mr. Few just hasn't done that in his 10 years here.

bballbeachbum
03-11-2009, 07:29 AM
message received, brian sun.

Zags are weak. Coach Few can't get it done. Sacre should risk it all (a college kid...this is your most revealing position), etc.

anyway, glad I know who you are now, your perspective on the Zags.

so who is your favorite team?

Peace

JLGutrocks
03-11-2009, 08:41 AM
Yes, I watched that game. I believe it was nationally televised. I also believe entering that game, the Zags were in a funk and lost 3 straight. Look, UT is a decent team, but they are only 19-11 overall, and 10-6 in a very mediocre SEC this year. Do you realize that after they lost to Gonzaga at home to snap the 37 game winning streak, they proceed to lose to a NIT bound Kentucky team at home, then dropped 2 straight at home to Memphis and LSU, 2 good teams, no doubt, and at the season finale, they dropped another buzzer beater thriller to Alabama at home. They lost 5 frigging times at home this year. This isn't the same UT team of last year when they ranked no. 1 at one time and went to the sweet 16 two years in the roll. The Zags were good at that game, but it turns out that UT wasn't that good of a team. In the tourney, you are going to run into a Memphis, Pitt or UNC. When you face that calibre of a team, can you overcome. I am not talking about the regular season, I am talking about the tourney. Mr. Few just hasn't done that in his 10 years here.

why do you even post here? Go sleep it off fusky.

cjm720
03-11-2009, 08:52 AM
Yes, I watched that game. I believe it was nationally televised. I also believe entering that game, the Zags were in a funk and lost 3 straight. Look, UT is a decent team, but they are only 19-11 overall, and 10-6 in a very mediocre SEC this year. Do you realize that after they lost to Gonzaga at home to snap the 37 game winning streak, they proceed to lose to a NIT bound Kentucky team at home, then dropped 2 straight at home to Memphis and LSU, 2 good teams, no doubt, and at the season finale, they dropped another buzzer beater thriller to Alabama at home. They lost 5 frigging times at home this year. This isn't the same UT team of last year when they ranked no. 1 at one time and went to the sweet 16 two years in the roll. The Zags were good at that game, but it turns out that UT wasn't that good of a team. In the tourney, you are going to run into a Memphis, Pitt or UNC. When you face that calibre of a team, can you overcome. I am not talking about the regular season, I am talking about the tourney. Mr. Few just hasn't done that in his 10 years here.


Hindsight is always 20-20. That was a great game by the Zags and it showed a lot of strength and toughness.

GO ZAGS!!

Bogozags
03-11-2009, 10:02 AM
message received, brian sun.

Zags are weak. Coach Few can't get it done. Sacre should risk it all (a college kid...this is your most revealing position), etc.

anyway, glad I know who you are now, your perspective on the Zags.

so who is your favorite team?

Peace

Think you are being a little unfair...he makes valid points in all areas. I too, live and die Zags and have issues the next day after a loss; however, I see their weaknesses and strengths. Our success will be determined by what type of team with which we matched and whether or not we use the leadership we have on this team. Our best game of the season was at WSU, when we came out and just dominated them on THEIR court. That is the type of intensity we will need each and every game , against any type of team we play! We didn't have it against UA, Portland, Utah or Memphis and Bardo seems to hit the nail on the head when he said we do not react well when we are "punched in the mouth!"

It was said earlier in this thread that "...lets wait and see with whom we are matched BEFORE we start buying FF tickets!"

We have the talent to reach the SS but will we be ready? I sure hope so...

brian_sun
03-11-2009, 10:21 AM
message received, brian sun.

Zags are weak. Coach Few can't get it done. Sacre should risk it all (a college kid...this is your most revealing position), etc.

anyway, glad I know who you are now, your perspective on the Zags.

so who is your favorite team?

Peace

I never said the Zags are weak. They are my second favorite team, after a certain Pac 10 team located in Seattle, from which I graduated from.

I read some where from the UW board that Mark Few has been terrible playing lower seeding teams in the tourney. I haven't done enough research in all of his 10 coaching years, but Wyoming, Nevada and Davidson come to my mind immediately. Maybe they were also upset by Indiana in one of those years when Indiana was the lower seeding team. In short, I think that message conveys that Mark Few always gets his team up when they are the underdog, but don't know what to do when they are the favorite. I think the same post also says that Tom Izzo has an almost impeccable record when playing lower seeding team. In other words, Tom Izzo's team almost never got upset in the tourney. I am not sure what it is, but maybe Few's team tend to overlook weaker teams, and gear up for stronger teams in the tourney. If that pattern continues, assume the Zags gets a 4th seed, then, if they get to the Sweet 16, they should be able to assume the underdog status, and do well from there.

bballbeachbum
03-11-2009, 10:24 AM
[QUOTE=Bogozags;397369]Think you are being a little unfair....QUOTE]

Went back and reread everything....

I disagree with you on that, Bogozags.

No biggie, party on.

GO TEAM ZAGS!!!

bballbeachbum
03-11-2009, 10:26 AM
I never said the Zags are weak. They are my second favorite team, after a certain Pac 10 team located in Seattle, from which I graduated from.

I read some where from the UW board that Mark Few has been terrible playing lower seeding teams in the tourney. I haven't done enough research in all of his 10 coaching years, but Wyoming, Nevada and Davidson come to my mind immediately. Maybe they were also upset by Indiana in one of those years when Indiana was the lower seeding team. In short, I think that message conveys that Mark Few always gets his team up when they are the underdog, but don't know what to do when they are the favorite. I think the same post also says that Tom Izzo has an almost impeccable record when playing lower seeding team. In other words, Tom Izzo's team almost never got upset in the tourney. I am not sure what it is, but maybe Few's team tend to overlook weaker teams, and gear up for stronger teams in the tourney. If that pattern continues, assume the Zags gets a 4th seed, then, if they get to the Sweet 16, they should be able to assume the underdog status, and do well from there.

message received...again.

Peace...again.

kitzbuel
03-11-2009, 10:34 AM
As it turns out, not very many teams at all beat UNC, Pitt or Memphis in the NCAA's the last couple of years.

Bogozags
03-11-2009, 11:15 AM
I never said the Zags are weak. They are my second favorite team, after a certain Pac 10 team located in Seattle, from which I graduated from.

I read some where from the UW board that Mark Few has been terrible playing lower seeding teams in the tourney. I haven't done enough research in all of his 10 coaching years, but Wyoming, Nevada and Davidson come to my mind immediately. Maybe they were also upset by Indiana in one of those years when Indiana was the lower seeding team. In short, I think that message conveys that Mark Few always gets his team up when they are the underdog, but don't know what to do when they are the favorite. I think the same post also says that Tom Izzo has an almost impeccable record when playing lower seeding team. In other words, Tom Izzo's team almost never got upset in the tourney. I am not sure what it is, but maybe Few's team tend to overlook weaker teams, and gear up for stronger teams in the tourney. If that pattern continues, assume the Zags gets a 4th seed, then, if they get to the Sweet 16, they should be able to assume the underdog status, and do well from there.



I remember watching each of those games and thinking that something just wasn't right...after Turiaf got that second foul, the game was overas the team just "stopped playing." In addition, looking back against both Wyoming and Nevada, our AA Guards (Stepp/Dickau) just didn't produce, having horrible shooting games.

Last year, think our heads were just not screwed on right after losing to SD @ SD...and Josh was never up to snuff after he came back.

Still trying to remember why Batista was involved in receiving a pass in the backcourt?

We can second guess forever and just hope this squad is ready next week!

MedZag
03-11-2009, 11:22 AM
Still trying to remember why Batista was involved in receiving a pass in the backcourt?

UCLA had a vicious press that year. JP was the "bailout" big man coming to help the inbounder get the ball in in under 5 seconds.

Bogozags
03-11-2009, 11:32 AM
UCLA had a vicious press that year. JP was the "bailout" big man coming to help the inbounder get the ball in in under 5 seconds.

I remember that but still think I would have had another ball handler in for him...as I said, we (I) can second guess forever...

UberZagFan
03-11-2009, 11:52 AM
Didn't every group of friends in junior high have that one kid who always said the prettiest girl in school wasn't all that? It always seemed to be the kid who didn't have a snowball's chance in hell of hooking up with her or the kid who already had a girlfriend but she was from Cali or Canada or anywhere but here.

jim77
03-11-2009, 11:59 AM
"4. We now will play teams with tall athletic 3 guards, those which give Micah problems. We now play teams with long athletic and quick 2/3 the kind that over the years have taken away Matt's first step. Not allowing Matt into the key (where he is among D1's most dangerous triple threat) neutralizes a huge portion of Matt's game and immediately takes away part of GU offense. If calls go against Josh and Austin, we are left relying on Will. Love the heart but that fact alone should sober up some on this board." TM27


Good points.

I hate going back (again) to the Memphis game but, I think we can still learn from it. I'm in no way knocking the fellas play...the're playing great. However, don't confuse bad play with great defenders. Sometimes the fellas in front of you are the reason for the bad play. Right now coach Few has defferred to Bouldin for a bigger chunk of the point....and Matt is playing terrific. There are teams out there who can "out athlete " us. The team needs to be ready for that to happen and I think the coach will need a faster hook when it happens. (if it happens) I think Goodson is gonna be needed more than most think. He might not be the point Jeremy or Matt are but, his speed makes up for a bunch...no team in college is too athletic for Meech. I hope he's being given lots of point time in practice cause i think if we go past the sweet 16 he's gonna play a bigger role than most expect.

As far as our frontcourt goes...we got what we got. I do think Josh's intensity under the hoop is much improved from the start of the season. The other thing that helps Josh is he's pretty good at not getting stupid fouls.

In conclusion the team needs to be mentally/gameplan prepared to go up against team who are able to totally disrupt what we are used to doing......teams like Memphis.

siliconzag
03-11-2009, 12:33 PM
As impressive as Gonzaga's stats are, they don't measure intangibles. They don't measure a team's toughness and an ability to make big plays in big moments. The Zags have a lot to prove before they can say they belong with the one and two seeds that will be in this tournament. At the same time, if I were one of those one or two seeds, I would prefer that Gonzaga be in somebody else's bracket. Their talent level is greater than a team typically seeded at 4 or 5.

This is why CDC84 is the EFHutton of the Hoops Board. I agree wholeheartedly. Right now, here are the only teams where I feel we are at a distinct disadvantage and beating them would be a stretch:

1) Pitt
2) Kansas
3) Memphis

All the rest we could beat. Memphis because they have already established the dominance hierarchy, and we were pathetic against them. Beating them would take a huge mental as well as physical effort. In terms of Kansas, the problem is Aldrich and guard play. I think they may have us in the post and the perimeter. In terms of Pitt, see Kansas. Everybody else in the field, I think we could beat. Some will present more problems than others, but this team, the one that beat St. Mary's is formidable. And they should not be intimidated by anybody, even the aforementioned trio mentioned above. Finally for those of you who have believed in this team all season long, despite skeptics like your's truly, I salute you, I think you might have been right. That said, we still have opportunities. Even against St. Mary's, there were moments where I thought our play was unfocused. The close of the first half showed poor clock management (assuming the goal was to make a basket with little time remaining. I think the coach needs to make a distinction for our team between, little time remaining like 2 seconds, and no time remaining, the later being harder to manage). Still, these are kids, not pros, and they are playing a lot better than they were earlier in the year. And I think inserting Micah Downs into the startinig line up with his tenacity and work ethic was the crucial difference.
Sil

Reborn
03-11-2009, 01:50 PM
Sili! Honestly, I am quite tired of the EF Huttons of the basketball world telling everyone who cares to listen to them that Gonzaga is soft. I'm tired of the EF Hutons saying that St Mary's will wax us because we're not any kind of a match for them and St Patty Mills. They (the EF Huttons) were all clammering that St. Mary's would advance beyond the Sweet 16, and Gonzaga would not make it out of the first round. Last week the talk was all about the Zags inability to beat St. Mary's. Well. We kind of waxed 'em didnt we. So now it's we can't compete against the 3 top teams in the country so I guess they've made some progress.

What amazes me, is that EF Hutton says he's played a lot of basketball. If he has, wouldn't he know that to go undefeated in conference play, to be the 10th best defensive team in the country, and is 2nd in the country in defending shooters, and the #1 team that defends the two point shot takes toughness? Doesn't he know that it takes toughness to be the 6th best offensive team in the country.? Oh I forgot he doesn't like stats. I've played against soft teams, and they are nothing like the Zags. I have not even met a contender, let alone a champion, who isnt tough. The words champion and soft, or unable to make a big play, or concepts that can't exist together.

There's a certain mental toughness that I like and it's the kind of toughness that requires an athlete and a team to learn and execute a very complex offensive system with the perfection that the Zags have now mastered, I believe. Discipline is one of the best paths that leads to toughness, and the Zags have that. Teams that have not played the Zags are going to have one heck of a time trying to defend us. Watch.

Here's a big play for ya CDC and Sili. Matt misses two free throws near the end of regularion play to keep St. Mary's chances a live. They are only down by two with 12 seconds left to play. Matt could have hung his head and quit, but no he hustled his butt off and forced St Mary's to turn the ball over on their out of bounds play at mid-court to seal the victory for the Zags. HUGE PLAY. Yes tough.

I remember against San Diego how we were really in a funk at the beginning of that game at San Diego at the end of the regular season. Pargo stole the ball on two ocnsecutive plays to toally change the game in the Zags favor. Huge plays, imo. Tough.

I'm not saying we can beat Memphis, Pitt or whoever you name. But Im also not saying we cant. But please! Don't call the Zags panzies or a more political correct word like "soft." It's kind of wierd how the talk about St. Mary's and St. Patty Mills has gone silent. I've never heard silence as more beautiful, especially when the panzies held St. Mary's to under 60 points, and St. Patty Mills to 2-16 shooting. No toughness there. Oh I almost forgot. The game was "TAINTED." There is no way that Gonzaga could be that good.

I appreciate one thing you did say Sili, and that's an admission that you've been just a little wrong about the panzies. It takes guts. Something I haven't heard from EF Hutton.

I think the days are over when the ZAGS NEED TO PROVE themselves. If you don't believe in them now you never will. And to say that stats don't measure toughness and an ability to make a big play, is hilarious. They do!!! But you need to be open minded enough to see what the stats say. The Huttons have gotten so used to saying that Gonzaga is WEAK and can't play defense that an analyst the other night after the St Marys victory in Las Vegas could barely speak when he had to admit that Gonzaga is the #1 tean in defending the shot.

And we haven't even said anything about intelligence yet. Why is that concept never talked about. It's always TOUGHNESS. Basketball has evolved a great deal. It really is no longer a game played by two cave men.

Zagsker
03-11-2009, 02:26 PM
I think the days are over when the ZAGS NEED TO PROVE themselves.

disagree....as of now...the Zags need to prove themselves more than ever.

Are we overhyped? OR Are we legit??

Reborn
03-11-2009, 04:11 PM
disagree....as of now...the Zags need to prove themselves more than ever.

Are we overhyped? OR Are we legit??

I need some help here. When were the Zags overhyped?

VaBeachZAG
03-11-2009, 04:28 PM
"When were the Zags overhyped."

Are you kidding? How about an early season 4th ranking and every other breath out of the sports talking heads was about the Zags being a shoo in for the final four. How about the expectation of a great competitive game with Memphis that never materialized, and finally, how about the many years of expected deep tournament runs by the Zags that never materialized.

So yes, the Zags have much to prove. The good news is that a favorable perfect storm may be materializing for the Zags: current tournament expectations around the nation for the Zags are not so great, the Zags should be well positioned with a good seed (4 or 3) and being able to play close to home, the Zags are playing their best ball of the season right now and their confidence seems sky high, and finally, they do have the talent to go very deep in the tournament if the cards fall right and a few lucky breaks can be had. A deep run would restore the Zags buzz around the nation's kitchen tables for sure!

gamagin
03-11-2009, 04:58 PM
"4. We now will play teams with tall athletic 3 guards, those which give Micah problems. We now play teams with long athletic and quick 2/3 the kind that over the years have taken away Matt's first step. Not allowing Matt into the key (where he is among D1's most dangerous triple threat) neutralizes a huge portion of Matt's game and immediately takes away part of GU offense. If calls go against Josh and Austin, we are left relying on Will. Love the heart but that fact alone should sober up some on this board." TM27


Good points.

I hate going back (again) to the Memphis game but, I think we can still learn from it. I'm in no way knocking the fellas play...the're playing great. However, don't confuse bad play with great defenders. Sometimes the fellas in front of you are the reason for the bad play. Right now coach Few has defferred to Bouldin for a bigger chunk of the point....and Matt is playing terrific. There are teams out there who can "out athlete " us. The team needs to be ready for that to happen and I think the coach will need a faster hook when it happens. (if it happens) I think Goodson is gonna be needed more than most think. He might not be the point Jeremy or Matt are but, his speed makes up for a bunch...no team in college is too athletic for Meech. I hope he's being given lots of point time in practice cause i think if we go past the sweet 16 he's gonna play a bigger role than most expect.

As far as our frontcourt goes...we got what we got. I do think Josh's intensity under the hoop is much improved from the start of the season. The other thing that helps Josh is he's pretty good at not getting stupid fouls.

In conclusion the team needs to be mentally/gameplan prepared to go up against team who are able to totally disrupt what we are used to doing......teams like Memphis.

sharpen them. we need to take our weaknesses and minimize or neutralize them.

We need to keep the giant chip on our shoulders polished and placed there by the WCC, and further, we need to want to keep our desire to win stronger, by our nonstop hustle, than anyone we face.

We need to fill every minute of every game, we need to focus & we need to dance like nobody's watching, showing ourselves and the world that nobody fills 40 minutes of basketball with 40 minutes of basketball played better than we do.

Go TEAM Zags !

bigblahla
03-11-2009, 05:37 PM
sharpen them. we need to take our weaknesses and minimize or neutralize them.

We need to keep the giant chip on our shoulders polished and placed there by the WCC, and further, we need to want to keep our desire to win stronger, by our nonstop hustle, than anyone we face.

We need to fill every minute of every game, we need to focus & we need to dance like nobody's watching, showing ourselves and the world that nobody fills 40 minutes of basketball with 40 minutes of basketball played better than we do.

Go TEAM Zags !

Agreed.

I think we have an edge in between the ears and it's finally starting to show.

If the fellas come out and put on a demonstration in their first tournament game like they did in Vegas then notice will be given that we are a contender and the confidence factor will make us that much more dangerous.

Yes it's about matchups but defense wins championships and ours looks darn good. We all know our offensive capabilities. It's good to be a Zag.

Go!! Zags!!!

Reborn
03-11-2009, 05:53 PM
Silicon: I apologize to you for the harshness of my tone and insensitivity of my ideas. I am reacting not so much to you or CDC, but to all the basketball gurus on ESPN who did nothing but "put down" Gonzaga all week before our game against St. Mary's. Your post was actually very very positive about the Zags. I reacted to your quote from CDC that reminded me of Jay Bilas and Bob Knight. Bilas in particular has really overhyped the idea of toughness. And he has called the Zags soft. And he has not retracted that. I haven't heard a word from him since we beat up on St. Mary's. My "attitude" was mostly directed toward Bilas, and I know he thinks he's EF Hutton. :D

Again. My apologies to two great fans for my overeaction, and I am sorry.

gamagin
03-11-2009, 06:14 PM
This is why CDC84 is the EFHutton of the Hoops Board. I agree wholeheartedly. Right now, here are the only teams where I feel we are at a distinct disadvantage and beating them would be a stretch:

1) Pitt
2) Kansas
3) Memphis

All the rest we could beat. Memphis because they have already established the dominance hierarchy, and we were pathetic against them. Beating them would take a huge mental as well as physical effort. In terms of Kansas, the problem is Aldrich and guard play. I think they may have us in the post and the perimeter. In terms of Pitt, see Kansas. Everybody else in the field, I think we could beat. Some will present more problems than others, but this team, the one that beat St. Mary's is formidable. And they should not be intimidated by anybody, even the aforementioned trio mentioned above. Finally for those of you who have believed in this team all season long, despite skeptics like your's truly, I salute you, I think you might have been right. That said, we still have opportunities. Even against St. Mary's, there were moments where I thought our play was unfocused. The close of the first half showed poor clock management (assuming the goal was to make a basket with little time remaining. I think the coach needs to make a distinction for our team between, little time remaining like 2 seconds, and no time remaining, the later being harder to manage). Still, these are kids, not pros, and they are playing a lot better than they were earlier in the year. And I think inserting Micah Downs into the startinig line up with his tenacity and work ethic was the crucial difference.
Sil

afterall, if we can't stay with them, and I believe we can, if we decide to, we don't deserve to advance.

as I read your post Sili, i wondered what ever happened to e.f. hutton. here's what happened:

August 2006: "E. F. Hutton & Co. was an American stock brokerage firm founded in 1904 by Edward Francis Hutton, his brother Franklyn Laws Hutton, and Gerald M. Loeb. Under their leadership, it became one of the most respected financial firms in the United States and for several decades was the second largest brokerage firm in the United States....(until the) corporation's guilty plea to 2000 criminal counts of federal mail and wire fraud in 1985, that the Hutton conglomerate fell apart. The Firm was sold to Shearson Lehman/American Express, to form Shearson Lehman Hutton. In the 1993, acknowledging that it had failed to create the country's first financial services supermarket, American Express sold Shearson and Hutton retail brokerage operations to Sandy Weill's Primerica. The following year, American Express spun-off Lehman Brothers, forming Lehman Brothers Holdings Inc., a separately traded public corporation."

so even the most venerated "experts" sometimes are wrong. And that, as they say, is what makes a good season great. Or an impossibility possible.

Go TEAM Zags !

dpouley
03-11-2009, 08:32 PM
I think the days are over when the ZAGS NEED TO PROVE themselves. If you don't believe in them now you never will. .

Until the Bulldogs start to preform in the NCAA tournament the way that they preform in the regular season I think there are many that will question GU. And that is just the unfortunate way that the nation perceives teams.

former1dog
03-11-2009, 08:37 PM
It is the nature of sports to have to prove one self over and over and over again. This is something I like about sports very, very much. Frankly, if this weren't the nature of sport, I wouldn't really be all that interested.

NotoriousZ
03-11-2009, 08:54 PM
Hopefully, we'll get to the sweet sixteen this year and get to play what could be a number one seed opponent. I'm praying this happens and we play to our potential. Then we can give all the naysayers "a great big s***burger to eat" -- a great line from "Major League." Bilas definitely gets the first bite!

Reborn
03-11-2009, 09:01 PM
What's there to prove, former1dog? I'm just curious.

dpouley
03-11-2009, 09:09 PM
What's there to prove, former1dog? I'm just curious.

At some point it would be nice to make it back to the Elite Eight or to make it to the Final Four, wouldn't it?

I mean, doesn't everyone agree that past GU teams could have done this yet have had some lackluster attempts?

GU is one of the very best teams in the nation year in and year out in the regular season, in fact I could even make an argument that that Zags are one of the five or ten best teams in the nation in the regular season year in and year out. Yet, come tournament time they have not quite made it over the hump. The next step, or what is left to prove, is getting to the Elite Eight or Final Four.

siliconzag
03-11-2009, 09:16 PM
You needn't ask forgiveness from me. Sometimes I say things that have a double meaning with no intention whatsoever. This was the case with the EF Hutton metaphor. Actually, CDC is a very astute guy. He makes comments that far exceed the babble I hear from Bilas and Phelps. I do think Bobby Knight makes great points, although, when it gets down to picking teams, he is not that great either.

Fortunately the games are played on the courts, not on blogs or Sports Center. I love your enthusiasm for the Zags. You, as your name suggests, are a true evangelical believer. Perhaps those of us who have never been reborn, as George W Bush apparently believed, are less worthy in the Lord's eyes. I have no idea, but I admire you very much and appreciate your contagious optimism.

I was wondering Reborn, when were you reborn, and what calamity brought brought it about?

From Sili's perspective, you are a gentleman, and I accept your apology, and add my own for being occasionally underwhelmed by a very good team. You always believed in their potential, something which I must admit, gave me concern until quite recently. I join your optimistic views at present, but still worry about teams with athletic guards and big bangers.

And to those of you who find yourselves doubting Thomases, Reborn's prognostications have been remarkably prescient.

Sili

former1dog
03-11-2009, 09:20 PM
What's there to prove, former1dog? I'm just curious.

When you step onto the field of sport, you're primarily proving something to yourself. That you can compete. Maybe that means you are competing against your past performance, competing against your own sense of limitation, your fears or naturally maybe it means you're proving to your opponent that you are there to compete with him or her or them.

Secondly, you're proving something to your teammates if you happen to be in a team sport. You're proving that you can be relied upon, that you're competent, that you're a good team mate, a good leader, you're proving you know your role and can accept it.

Thirdly, you're proving all those same things to your coach, or manager or anyone else not directly on the field of sport but who has an influence on you within that field of play.

Fourth, if you have loved ones or friends you're proving something to them through your participation in sport, maybe just that the time away from them is worth it because sport makes you happy. For many of us, their is even more we want to prove to our loved ones through sport like that you're worthy of the pride they showed in your sporting achievements.

If you're involved in sport where there are spectators you're proving something to them as well. If they are your fans, you're proving to them that all the admiration they show is not wasted. That you are going to strive to achieve to the top of your potential so that they too can enjoy the pinnacle of your performance. By winning the race, or the game or the contest or the championship, you are proving yourself you are worthy of the fans love because they live just a little better life or die just a little inside with every win or with every loss.

Finally, if you are the subject of media attention positive or (especially) negative you're looking to prove them right or you're looking to prove them DEAD WRONG.... remember to a man what the motivation of this team was in their dominating performances on Sunday and Monday? Yep, to prove all the doubters in the media wrong. That is what the chip on the shoulder consists of, that need to prove your doubters wrong. A powerful, powerful motivator, isn't it?

Reborn, IMO, that is the essence of sport and that is why I love it.

MedZag
03-11-2009, 09:28 PM
When you step onto the field of sport, you're primarily proving something to yourself. That you can compete. Maybe that means you are competing against your past performance, competing against your own sense of limitation, your fears or naturally maybe it means you're proving to your opponent that you are there to compete with him or her or them.

Secondly, you're proving something to your teammates if you happen to be in a team sport. You're proving that you can be relied upon, that you're competent, that you're a good team mate, a good leader, you're proving you know your role and can accept it.

Thirdly, you're proving all those same things to your coach, or manager or anyone else not directly on the field of sport but who has an influence on you within that field of play.

Fourth, if you have loved ones or friends you're proving something to them through your participation in sport, maybe just that the time away from them is worth it because sport makes you happy. For many of us, their is even more we want to prove to our loved ones through sport like that you're worthy of the pride they showed in your sporting achievements.

If you're involved in sport where there are spectators you're proving something to them as well. If they are your fans, you're proving to them that all the admiration they show is not wasted. That you are going to strive to achieve to the top of your potential so that they too can enjoy the pinnacle of your performance. By winning the race, or the game or the contest or the championship, you are proving yourself you are worthy of the fans love because they live just a little better life or die just a little inside with every win or with every loss.

Finally, if you are the subject of media attention positive or (especially) negative you're looking to prove them right or you're looking to prove them DEAD WRONG.... remember to a man what the motivation of this team was in their dominating performances on Sunday and Monday? Yep, to prove all the doubters in the media wrong. That is what the chip on the shoulder consists of, that need to prove your doubters wrong. A powerful, powerful motivator, isn't it?

Reborn, IMO, that is the essence of sport and that is why I love it.

Well said, f1d.

bballbeachbum
03-11-2009, 09:34 PM
It is the nature of sports to have to prove one self over and over and over again. This is something I like about sports very, very much. Frankly, if this weren't the nature of sport, I wouldn't really be all that interested.

All in!!! Love it, man. I'm cheering like a freak all the way.

this team, these players, have earned my heart and belief, and to me as a fan, proved themselves. I believe.

Our next opportunity to prove it on the floor...we're all looking forward to learning that Sunday, which will be a whole other reason for this board to party!

No team's perfect nor always right, but the good ones continue to bust hiney to get better, to always improve, no matter what...always always always.

I think this team gets that, these players hunger to express it, and it's been a real pleasure as a supporter to ride this train as it's happened.

All aboard!


GO TEAM ZAGS!!!

Reborn
03-11-2009, 09:47 PM
Athletics is pathway to self-actualization, and imo it has nothing to do with a need or a drive to "prove" yourself. Having to "prove" yourself is, imo, a hinderance to reaching your full potential. I think that enjoying the path, and loving everything about it, is more important than the need to prove oneself.

I believe certain people are born with the inner makings for greatness, and what they need more than anything else is a coach or teacher who helps them learn how to create, or make real, everything that is already in them. Greatness is an inner quality that needs to be developed and nurtured. Thats the coaches job.

MedZag
03-11-2009, 09:56 PM
Athletics is pathway to self-actualization, and imo it has nothing to do with a need or a drive to "prove" yourself. Having to "prove" yourself is, imo, a hinderance to reaching your full potential. I think that enjoying the path, and loving everything about it, is more important than the need to prove oneself.

I believe certain people are born with the inner makings for greatness, and what they need more than anything else is a coach or teacher who helps them learn how to create, or make real, everything that is already in them. Greatness is an inner quality that needs to be developed and nurtured. Thats the coaches job.

I'd argue that self-actualization is actually inherently "proving to oneself."

And I'd agree that sport, in its purest form, is an act of self-actualization at a collection of skills.

DixieZag
03-12-2009, 07:12 AM
I just wanted to add one game that I think was a partial turning point in the season and that is the game against the Pilots in Portland. Everything was setup for an upset, the gym was filled with "believers" who thought that this was the time, Portland played their butts off and would have beaten a lot of very good BCS schools, but GU responded by matching their toughness and using their own desire to overcome that adversity. That game of course counted for nothing in the nation's eyes b/c Portand is "just a WCC" team, but again, that "WCC" team would have beaten a lot of people that night, and one that they could not was GU.

Reborn
03-12-2009, 08:56 AM
Well, I finally went to good 'ol Webster's Dictionary to see what prove actually means, and once again I learned something. Proving is like a demonstration or a test of the quality of the thing you are demonstrating. It's a feedback experience where the athletes find out by the experience (the game) what they need to work on. It's a learning experience. It's like a test. So yes, every game is a test or an opportunity to prove or demostrate the quality of what you have or what you are. So who you are must be tested over and over again in order to provide you with the feedback you need in order to get even better. And there is no end to how good one can become.

The experience or experiences (games) are also a way to provide information in order to compare what you have with what others' have; thus more feedback. In essence this is what we are all doing at this time of year. We're involved in comparing the best in America. We're all wondering how our team will match up with others. And that's precisely what the selection committee must do now. And imagine what a tough job that will be this year. Based on all the tests this year of each team they will be ranked and then put in brackets and pods, and the goal is to make it as fair as possible (fair meaning that it's based on the over all work that was exhibited during the year).

So obviously the Zags have proved that they're a very good team this year. They are one of the better teams in America. Are they tough? Of course they are. Can they hit big shots and make big plays? Of course. But do they do these things as well as other teams (and that's the comparison aspect).

One aspect I like to look at when comparing teams is how they play on the road. I'm pretty happy with how the Zags have played on the road overall. I also think the margin of victory or defeat is a good thing to look at. In this area Gonzaga has one bad loss, to Memphis. I agree with Coach Lavin (the announcer of our last two games) that the turning point for Gonzaga was the Memphis game. We got a lot of feedback about where we needed to improve. From what he saw against Santa Clara and St. Mary's he thought Mark Few had addressed these concerns quite well, and that the Zags MAY have rectified those problems.

I will end by what I've said all year. If we get to the Sweet 16 we've done a great job. It's just so very hard to get there. Once there, anything can happen. I've tried not to look too beyond the Sweet 16 all year. At times I've been confident, and at times I haven't been. Probably like most all of us on the board. And like most of you we're probably in a confident mood right now based on the Zags play against St. Mary's and Santa Clara. I think Silicon's post sums it up pretty well. That was a pretty good summary he gave us.

former1dog
03-12-2009, 09:02 AM
So what you're saying Reborn, is that you agree with me. ;) :D

Peace, Bro.

:)

Reborn
03-12-2009, 10:24 AM
Your insight is truly valuable, Former1dog. And actually led me dig a little deeper than I did at first. I do question the "essence?
part of it. I dont think that proving or testing or demonstrating who you are is the essence of sports. It is a necessary experience though to develop the essence which I believe is, as I've said a pathway to self actualization. Sports can help us all identify those inner qualities that are necessary for our development as a person. I've enjoyed this thread because it challenged my thinking. And I enjoy that.