PDA

View Full Version : What are Zag Teams Built For?



BobZag
04-19-2011, 10:26 AM
For success in...

1. The Nonconference Schedule?

2. The WCC?

3. The Postseason?

4. Other? (Explain)

bullzag23
04-19-2011, 10:29 AM
4. Other?- Zags are built for kicking A$$ and taking names :cheers:

gu03alum
04-19-2011, 10:35 AM
For success in...

1. The Nonconference Schedule?

2. The WCC?

3. The Postseason?

4. Other? (Explain)

Personally, I don't think a team can be built for a 1 and done postseason. There are too many variables in 1 and done that a team would have to account for. If you get good matchups you might get some upsets. If you get a bad matchup you're out in the first round. I think that the only way to build a team is to win in the regular season because that gives you the best chance of controlling your matchups. If you win 30 games then you will get a 1 or 2 seed and control a little bit more of your destiny.

To answer the question I think it is a combination of both 1 and 2. Gonzaga's style has changed to a point where they can get surprised by the little sisters of the poor in the WCC. Gonzaga has more of an interior game that can be exploited by smaller, quicker teams that shoot well outside, but that interior game helps Gonzaga against the nonconference teams that recruit the better athletes.

jazzdelmar
04-19-2011, 10:39 AM
more than anything, the zags need to be tele-appealing. over the past decade, the gutty little bulldogs have built a well deserved reputation as a good team to watch (if not pull for). implicit in that is they will always play hard, they will be a clean program, they will win more than their share of "big" games, and they will field some individual players who are fun to watch.....the whole gu bb program is predicated on this, imo. wins and losses are secondary, tho important...shld the zags drift away and not deliver on these implicit expectations, the program will ebb....

rijman
04-19-2011, 10:55 AM
The BCS teams seem to build for conference success and if they are a top team in their conference they are likely to be successful in their OOC games. However, the Zags are part of a small percentage of teams consistently ranking in the top 25 in non BCS conferences that have to build for OOC success, because it is at a higher level than their conference, knowing if they can compete with ranked OOC opponents they will have a very good chance to win their conference.

MickMick
04-19-2011, 11:00 AM
They are built to compete and win the WCC tournament.


That is how they are always built.

Once you are in, look at VCU for inspiration. You just need to be peaking and a few favorable matchups.

Once and Future Zag
04-19-2011, 11:01 AM
To answer the question I think it is a combination of both 1 and 2. Gonzaga's style has changed to a point where they can get surprised by the little sisters of the poor in the WCC. Gonzaga has more of an interior game that can be exploited by smaller, quicker teams that shoot well outside, but that interior game helps Gonzaga against the nonconference teams that recruit the better athletes.

I would hardly characterize the WCC as the Little Sisters of the Poor.

Yeah, every year one or two teams are among the pits of D1 (SD last year for instance), but as a conference constantly rating between 10th-13th out of 32 conferences, I think it's fair to say that the league is pretty solid across the top 3/4 of it, at least historically.

ZagLawGrad
04-19-2011, 11:53 AM
Easy choice----#2

bballbeachbum
04-19-2011, 05:03 PM
the answer I think is in your signature, BobZag, with 11 straight. the top priority is to win the WCC, so building the team starts there

after that top priority, things have seemingly changed some

The Zags were offensively a load to deal with early in the season in years past; opposing defenses hadn't gelled yet early on in the OOC, and GU would come out and take full advantage. Awesomeness. just love that stuff, part of what enhanced the initial attraction after the Elite 8 run. but peaking that early can be awkward in March, the whole inverted schedule thing also contributing, etc.


I remember Al McGuire saying over and over again that John Thompson trying to build his US Olympic team on defense was going to be tough because it takes longer for that team cohesion on D to develop, and Thompson only had the guys together for like 6 weeks or something before the Games. McGuire kept saying he didn't know if Thompson could build a team like that in that short period of time and succeed. while there were plenty of contributing factors, to me McGuire was proven correct.

best case scenario?

early come out fast offensively to take advantage of these things in the OOC, but realize the key to the season is to enhance that early approach by striving and focusing on developing into a dominating defensive team, which as the season wears on, then can become one united basketball expression, where whatever needs to get done gets done when it's needed, etc.

watching the program evolve is a heck of a ride. serioulsy, what a basketball treat watching and experiencing GU's program journey through all of this (or at least what I perceive it to be ;) )

GO ZAGS!!!

jazzdelmar
04-19-2011, 06:23 PM
The Zags TV Q rating is high.....the top priority (in terms of the college's coffers) is to keep it that way.........in the corridors of power up there, that's what absorbs them....or should :)

Oregonzagnut
04-19-2011, 06:28 PM
I think we are a program in late transition from being a blue collar local boy team like Butler, to a 4-5 star athlete destination spot for those who want to shine in a school with no football and perpetual dominance.

But the staff has not fully adjusted to the shopping of recruits and they still try to use the same coaching philosophy that worked on a different type of athlete in the past. Few has to get stricter and more vocally emotional to keep intensity up. Our early teams could generate that on their own.

We are a "tweener" program that needs a few for juniors and seniors to stick together and get us to a final four. With less senior leadership, and a revolving door of talent, we will never get the chemistry and familiarity the team needs to make it.

Right now we are what we are, 1 and done with an occasional sweet 16 thrown in. But we are built to win and that is translating to conference dominance.

If Harris and Sacre both return. We will be a final four team if we don't collapse like in 2006. But I said that this year.

Our focus has been postseason IMO. And the staff lets the conference victories happen as a consequence of playing with the big boys.

siliconzag
04-19-2011, 09:10 PM
I think we are a program in late transition from being a blue collar local boy team like Butler, to a 4-5 star athlete destination spot for those who want to shine in a school with no football and perpetual dominance.

But the staff has not fully adjusted to the shopping of recruits and they still try to use the same coaching philosophy that worked on a different type of athlete in the past. Few has to get stricter and more vocally emotional to keep intensity up. Our early teams could generate that on their own.

We are a "tweener" program that needs a few for juniors and seniors to stick together and get us to a final four. With less senior leadership, and a revolving door of talent, we will never get the chemistry and familiarity the team needs to make it.

Right now we are what we are, 1 and done with an occasional sweet 16 thrown in. But we are built to win and that is translating to conference dominance.

If Harris and Sacre both return. We will be a final four team if we don't collapse like in 2006. But I said that this year.

Our focus has been postseason IMO. And the staff lets the conference victories happen as a consequence of playing with the big boys.

I completely agree with OZN's firs four paragraphs. ;)

roxdoc
04-19-2011, 09:54 PM
Jazz makes a good point - GU became "America's Team" by putting on a good show - win or loose, for or against them, they play hard and are fun to watch. If they loose that appeal they loose the TV coverage. Loose the TV and the recruiting gets much harder.....

Oregonzagnut
04-20-2011, 02:15 AM
I completely agree with OZN's firs four paragraphs. ;)

True, I should have said "Could be a F.F team."

It COULD happen, right?

ExtremeJim
04-20-2011, 06:19 AM
Jazz makes a good point - GU became "America's Team" by putting on a good show - win or loose, for or against them, they play hard and are fun to watch. If they loose that appeal they loose the TV coverage. Loose the TV and the recruiting gets much harder.....

You could lose your shoes.

FuManShoes
04-20-2011, 07:54 AM
Our own personal enjoyment.

JPtheBeasta
04-20-2011, 08:27 AM
All of the talk from Few and the players is about winning the WCC. I am generally disappointed every year by the lack of statements about the tournament. You often hear players speaking in vague fatalistic language about winning the WCC and seeing how far they can go. Hopefully without sounding too corny, I think attitudes like this mean you have lost before you've begun. This is in sharp contrast to Michigan St and Butler, as two examples, whose kids openly talk about wanting to win championships. Perhaps the Zags talk about it in private, but I would like to see someone actually speak openly like they think they are good enough to win a final four. Please don't get me wrong- it was extremely gratifying to win the WCC this year and see such a great performance against St. John's. But from the perspective of someone on the outside looking in, it would be great to see some outward signs that the players are inspired by Coach to a higher level of greatness.

cjm720
04-20-2011, 08:45 AM
3. Postseason, but first is OOC and conference play, of which Few emphasizes. He recognized(es) a need for more athletic players and overall we have progressively upgraded our roster with taller, stronger players to more effectively compete for a national championship. We're close, just need a solid offseason fostering team chemistry and a few lucky breaks come tourney time.

Bouldin4Prez
04-20-2011, 09:18 AM
4. To win
I honestly can't believe we are actually discussing this, amazing how watered down these boards get in the off season. Do you think Few looks at a recruit but thinks this guy can win in the OOC but not in the WCC or vice versa?

gu03alum
04-20-2011, 10:26 AM
All of the talk from Few and the players is about winning the WCC. I am generally disappointed every year by the lack of statements about the tournament. You often hear players speaking in vague fatalistic language about winning the WCC and seeing how far they can go. Hopefully without sounding too corny, I think attitudes like this mean you have lost before you've begun. This is in sharp contrast to Michigan St and Butler, as two examples, whose kids openly talk about wanting to win championships. Perhaps the Zags talk about it in private, but I would like to see someone actually speak openly like they think they are good enough to win a final four. Please don't get me wrong- it was extremely gratifying to win the WCC this year and see such a great performance against St. John's. But from the perspective of someone on the outside looking in, it would be great to see some outward signs that the players are inspired by Coach to a higher level of greatness.

They think about the Final Four when it comes to hair:

Here's a quote from Bouldin in an ESPN article (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaatourney09/news/story?id=4012105):


We've been talking about if we go to a Final Four, I'll buzz it. But it's hard to get rid of it."


A quote from Mark Few and Jeremy Pargo in a Rivals article (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Jeremy-Pargo-and-the-Zags-are-powered-by-Mohawks?urn=ncaab-125792):


For his part, Gonzaga coach Mark Few didn't seem to care what his star point guard does with his hair, as long he keeps playing the same way. "They're good enough looking guys, they can pull it off," Few said, as a wry smile slipped onto his face, "but, they're not helping themselves."

So what would it take for Few to don a Mohawk? "Never," he told me.

"April," Pargo responded, referencing a possible run to the Final Four

JPtheBeasta
04-20-2011, 10:56 AM
They think about the Final Four when it comes to hair:

Here's a quote from Bouldin in an ESPN article (http://sports.espn.go.com/ncb/ncaatourney09/news/story?id=4012105):



A quote from Mark Few and Jeremy Pargo in a Rivals article (http://rivals.yahoo.com/ncaa/basketball/blog/the_dagger/post/Jeremy-Pargo-and-the-Zags-are-powered-by-Mohawks?urn=ncaab-125792):

Wow! Nice finds. So maybe the team barber is inspiring some to greatness. I think I remember a Sacre interview where he stated he wanted to bring a championship to GU. I've heard enough other interviews, however, that I will stick to the general sentiment of my OP. These few example all feel a little hollow, because there hasn't been any resonence of the ideas or signs that a whole team is buying in.
I vaguely remember some veiled comments the UCLA year that led me to think the staff thought we had a legit shot at a run that year, and that has been the only time recently I had the impression the team had higher aspirations. Most of the time in Few's interviews, however, he seems to be lowering our expectations or making excuses for their performance in the tournament. I realize that he has to do this to an extent and he is being a realist as well, but I would like to hear explicitly some time that he is aiming higher. I hope this isn't revisionist history I'm spewing and I'm not completely off-base here, but this has been my impression for a while now.

ZagLawGrad
04-20-2011, 01:30 PM
... I would like to hear explicitly some time that he is aiming higher.....

I'd settle somewhere between Few and Rex Ryan...maybe a hair closer to Few.

Houston Zag
04-22-2011, 01:05 PM
I don't like having to say this, but given the options this is a must entry on a message board...

Per Charlie Sheen

Duh. Winning!

Houston Zag
04-22-2011, 01:12 PM
Also...The comments I read on this board regarding Mark Few are aweful. I like to think I'm somewhat objective, but give me a break. The guy has won 11 straight WCC regular seasons. I don't think he is having an issue adjusting to new talent or players. I also don't think these players are lacking motivation. They beat a solid Big East team and lost to a BYU team that had the POY shooting lights out. Get off the guy already. We aren't going to find a better more classy coach to come to Spokane. This guy is perfect for us and couldn't be doing a much better job with what he has to work with. If you want to critisize something you better search somewhere else because I promise you are out of your league with Mark Few. Unless you are Tex Winter, Pat Reilly, Coach K, or Phil Jackson please stop posting that Mark Few is short sided in his coaching/motivation tactics.

gamagin
04-22-2011, 01:21 PM
All of the talk from Few and the players is about winning the WCC. I am generally disappointed every year by the lack of statements about the tournament.

here. Few et al, when I hear them talking, refuse to get ahead of themselves when answering questions like how far can this year's team go, etc.

They are not going to talk about the dance or the FF ever, before the WCC season ends. It would be foolish to do so. Besides, that's for all of us to do and you know how that has worked out, over time.

But refusing to get ahead of the program is a first things first, intelligent way to approach any season, imo, encouraging your charges not to look too far ahead.

The goals shift, then, after (for e.g.) the championship, or the conference tourney, and a ticket to the dance is wrapped up.

I am fairly certain the goal inside the team after the WCC and before the dance is to shift to one game at a time (versus concentrating on the first, second or third game of all those three game series we go through in the WCC) , trying to not look beyond the immediate task and risk losing concentration, or the game or the championship.

That's pretty much what all the coaches say & what they try to do, from what I can tell.

What Few and other coaches may be saying inside the locker room, I don't know. But I doubt it is something like, "forget BYU (or SMC), worry about how we're going to do when we get a shot at Butler in the FF."

Or whatever. Don't you think ?

Vanzagger
04-22-2011, 07:23 PM
Also...The comments I read on this board regarding Mark Few are aweful. I like to think I'm somewhat objective, but give me a break. The guy has won 11 straight WCC regular seasons. I don't think he is having an issue adjusting to new talent or players. I also don't think these players are lacking motivation. They beat a solid Big East team and lost to a BYU team that had the POY shooting lights out. Get off the guy already. We aren't going to find a better more classy coach to come to Spokane. This guy is perfect for us and couldn't be doing a much better job with what he has to work with. If you want to critisize something you better search somewhere else because I promise you are out of your league with Mark Few. Unless you are Tex Winter, Pat Reilly, Coach K, or Phil Jackson please stop posting that Mark Few is short sided in his coaching/motivation tactics.

Took the DJIA to 10,000. You may or may not have heard the saying, "the economy was better for Clinton than Clinton was for the economy". It's almost impossible for a president to get fired. Well.

Message....Don't get too cute.

Baseline
04-22-2011, 09:48 PM
I think Mark Few and Gonzaga builds for success and that translates across areas of playing. I don't think you can target one are only, it all has to fit and come together for any aspect of competition. To be honest I'm a little confused by the whole thread, but maybe its me and I'm a bit slow.
As far as Coach Few goes, I don't think most realize how good he is, but some day when he is gone or retired, they will realize what a gem he was.
Me I just love to watch the team work and try!

RenoZag
04-23-2011, 06:31 AM
. . .defense. That weakness has hampered them in the OOC & Post season. It nearly cost them the WCC regular season in 2011.

Given BZ's choices in the OP, the answer is # 4, "Other."

Here's hoping this trend changes in the seasons to come.

Reborn
04-26-2011, 11:59 AM
I believe the Zags recruit the best athletes at each position that they can get. I don't believe that they recruit with winning OOC games, the WCC championship or the NCAA tournament in mind. They simply recruit the best athletes they can get.

I think Few schedules his out of conference games with the NCAA tournament in mind, and that means he tries to schedule as many tough, diverse games as he can. He wants his OOC schedule to prepare his Zags for the many possibilities that they may face in the NCAA tournament in March.

Personally, I do have some concerns about the recruiting, and in particular the number of kids recruited to play at Gonzaga who do not stay. In the last few years we've had a pretty steady stream of kids leaving Gonzaga University to go and play elsewhere. In short, these players could not make it at Gonzaga. Guys like Davis, Poling, GJ, Gibbs. Expectations for these guys at the time were very high. And then we have guys like Arop and Kong who were considered to be great recruits and they left Gonzaga unexpectedly.

My dark horse off the bench from last year is Keita and not Monninghoff. I do think Keita has a good chance of making it at GU. He has a great athletic body and a good offensive game. He just needs to work on fundamentals as Jerry Krause would say. In particular he needs to work on defense. When he gets the ball on offense I think he believes he can score. Unlike Keita, I felt Monninghoff was afraid to do anything on offense but shoot the wide open 3.