SMC game, by the numbers.....

[TacomaZAG]

OK, lots of talk/opinions about why we lost, so let's look at the numbers.

SMC has two "stars", Delly and Jones. Delly went off last night (26 points)but Jones did nothing on the scoring end (2 during garbage time). Delly had 6assists and Jones had 11 boards. Looking at those two in the aggregate, they were right at their averages for the year (about 14 points apiece, 6+ assists for Delly, 10+ boards for Jones. We held their two "stars" to their aggregate average. No problem.

The two SMC "bigs" (Waldow and Young), on the other hand, did this in the aggregate: 29 points and 16 boards, when their aggregate averages are around 7 and 6. There's the ballgame folks.........

Holt had a good game (14 points), attacked the rim over and over and our "bigs" did nothing. Our "bigs", Rob and Sam, weren't in any kind of foul trouble, they just didn't get it done on the defensive end.

We can talk all day about scheme, adjustments, whatever, but sometimes it just comes down to beating your guy one-on-one on the defensive end. We didn't do that in the paint, either one-on-one or on help defense on the opponent's guards, or on the boards (SMC 36, GU 30). They did...........

Our TO's were OK (12), so that's not the issue either. We just didn't get stops when we needed them (see above).

We laid an egg last night, on effort more than on talent to me. I didn't see this coming, and from the board this morning, neither did a lot of others.

Not the end of the world, the WCC championship still runs through Spokane. Gotta win on Saturday..........

Go ZAGS

[gamagin]

+1

there's a whole thread of geniuses blaming the guards for this loss.

They must have been standing around with the bigs last night and missed the game, too.

[cjm720]

Waldow was certainly the difference. Unexpected to say the least. I think Jones ended up with 8 assists too. Holt and Delly = best guard combo in league.

We need Bobby back at full strength soon.

[U Zig, I Zag]

there's a whole thread of geniuses blaming the guards for this loss.

They must have been standing around with the bigs last night and missed the game, too.

To be fair, on the defensive end it is up to the guards to switch screens and hedge to keep all that penetration into the key from happening in the first place. Then it is the responsibility of the bigs to hopefully send messages to the guards if they get close (blocks, solid contact, etc).

This is a separate component than the bigs getting out hustled and allowing second chance points and (relatively) easy attacks at the rim off the oldest play in the book: the pick and roll.

On offense, the passer needs to be the eyes on the back of the head of the big - don't pass your guy right into a double team and away from his best distance/comfort zone when his back is to the basket, even if they are calling for it.

Our better plays were dynamic plays with one or two screens, guard penetration and then drop offs to bigs for easier points (basically Pangos/Stocks to Harris last night).

Pangos the sophomore probably senses the lack of success down low with our traditional back to the basket plan and starts more action up top and goes for penetration and passes with everyone in motion. He only did that a few times yesterday, it should have probably been 75% of the time instead.

[Mantua]

Not enough fouls

Sacre - 1

Harris - 1

Carter - 1

Landry - 0

We needed to slow SMC down and disrupt their rhythm. There is a case to be made for some intimidation.

In the the half court, not enough assists. So many shots were premature without any black uniforms anywhere close to rebound position.

[JPtheBeasta]

Thanks, Tacoma, for the objective data from last night's game. It should be required reading before someone rants about whatever they are concerned about from the game. It confirmed for me what was subjectively lacking. In our first tough WCC road game (perhaps the first, in general) we needed our bigs to step and carry us. This didn't happen. They misplayed screens, resulting in guards defending the post. They were late to help on drives. They didn't enforce their will. Your mention of foul trouble shouldn't be missed- they didn't lay the lumber or make SMC nervous at all about going to the hoop. If we really cared about defending the post we would have fouled more. We made Waldow look All-WCC.

If you told me that Jones would have one field goal, Holt would have 14 pts and we would only have 12 turnovers I would have projected a victory for us, even with Delly's 26 (or whatever).

[cjm720]

Sacre - 1

Harris - 1

Carter - 1

Landry - 0

We needed to slow SMC down and disrupt their rhythm. There is a case to be made for some intimidation.

In the the half court, not enough assists. So many shots were premature without any black uniforms anywhere close to rebound position.

Excellent point. I figured we'd try to hammer them all night long, but it didn't happen....

[Coach Crazy]

Rob is the problem right now, he isn't playing with any passion. We can't afford to have him emotionally and mentally checked out during a game. Really disappointed in him right now.

[bartruff1]

It is just that simple..

Rob is the problem right now, he isn't playing with any passion. We can't afford to have him emotionally and mentally checked out during a game. Really disappointed in him right now.

I am concerned that he has a more serious health issue. He has not been himself since the Illinois game.

[FlyZag]

OK, lots of talk/opinions about why we lost, so let's look at the numbers.

SMC has two "stars", Delly and Jones. Delly went off last night (26 points)but Jones did nothing on the scoring end (2 during garbage time). Delly had 6assists and Jones had 11 boards. Looking at those two in the aggregate, they were right at their averages for the year (about 14 points apiece, 6+ assists for Delly, 10+ boards for Jones. We held their two "stars" to their aggregate average. No problem.

The two SMC "bigs" (Waldow and Young), on the other hand, did this in the aggregate: 29 points and 16 boards, when their aggregate averages are around 7 and 6. There's the ballgame folks.........

Holt had a good game (14 points), attacked the rim over and over and our "bigs" did nothing. Our "bigs", Rob and Sam, weren't in any kind of foul trouble, they just didn't get it done on the defensive end.

We can talk all day about scheme, adjustments, whatever, but sometimes it just comes down to beating your guy one-on-one on the defensive end. We didn't do that in the paint, either one-on-one or on help defense on the opponent's guards, or on the boards (SMC 36, GU 30). They did...........

Our TO's were OK (12), so that's not the issue either. We just didn't get stops when we needed them (see above).

We laid an egg last night, on effort more than on talent to me. I didn't see this coming, and from the board this morning, neither did a lot of others.

Not the end of the world, the WCC championship still runs through Spokane. Gotta win on Saturday..........

Go ZAGS

+10000000000

The POST play was the deciding factor at BOTH ends. No question.

[bballbeachbum]

there's a whole thread of geniuses blaming the guards for this loss.

They must have been standing around with the bigs last night and missed the game, too.

Hey gamagin,

Plenty of 'blame' to go around last night if that's the angle. I simply respect what SMC did, my 'genius' take

The paint was under more pressure from dribble penetration than faced all year. Pretty hard for me to deny that the team's inability to handle the high screen at the point of attack lit the fuse for the rest of the defensive problems, all the way to giving up offensive boards as a result of having to scramble and help, to allowing Waldow great position for his buckets. It's not like other teams haven't tried to do the same things to GU this year, w/ high screen action, it's just that no other team succeeded so well doing it, my opinion. The difference is the GU perimeter D snuffed it out most of the time this year on the perimeter, up until last night, when for the first time this year that table turned and the dribble drive dominated GU.

It's not blaming guard play or GB2, it's recognizing how Bennett attacked, again, with the relentless high screen action, and how it worked this time better than it ever has before against the whole team, and respecting it. Bennett appeared to gameplan his team to attack a freshman ruthlessly with his best player with the high screen early and often and continuously. Defending that is a team thing, yes, but I hope Gary never forgets this and burns to answer that challenge vs. SMC forever with the same respect SMC already shows him by gameplanning him so hard.

Also cannot deny that Rob didn't play well for whatever reasons, Sam perhaps only marginally better.

That's my 'genius' take

[gamagin]

Bbb

it's never too late to reconsider, given the stats, and an extra 12-24 hours, which, imo, point where the problem was fairly (exasperatingly) constant, even with time.

The guards did their jobs, got beaten at times, but never gave up. SMC aided greatly in the disruption, but the breakdowns were totally on us.

The bigs, except perhaps Hart (did you notice he led in rebounds ?), & EH at times, did not.

But mainly, these big Zags are mostly the vets, the ones that should have been encouraging and leading the newbies with words backed up with intelligent action, instead of too much seeming complacency (SD & RS, etc.,), when the team needed them most.

that kind of letdown runs pretty deep unless it can be explained somehow. And, imo, has little to do with the guards, who did their best to play three on five on both sides of the ball.

[bballbeachbum]

it's never too late to reconsider, given the stats, and an extra 12-24 hours, which, imo, point where the problem was fairly (exasperatingly) constant, even with time.

The guards did their jobs, got beaten at times, but never gave up. SMC aided greatly in the disruption, but the breakdowns were totally on us.

The bigs, except perhaps Hart (did you notice he led in rebounds ?), & EH at times, did not.

But mainly, these big Zags are mostly the vets, the ones that should have been encouraging and leading the newbies with words backed up with intelligent action, instead of too much seeming complacency (SD & RS, etc.,), when the team needed them most.

that kind of letdown runs pretty deep unless it can be explained somehow. And, imo, has little to do with the guards, who did their best to play three on five on both sides of the ball.

As always, your points are valid. My recollection of Delly's night, and his stat line, point to things too. I'll still hold to my earlier considerations.

On Hart, 6 boards in 11 minutes, pretty darn good indeed; E had 11 per cbs.