View Full Version : DeCourcy Article

Angelo Roncalli
02-01-2012, 02:50 PM

02-01-2012, 02:56 PM
Good find.

02-01-2012, 03:15 PM
Absolutely one of the best articles on the Zags this year.

We get so caught up in the trees that it is really good to be able to see the forest again. Its nice being reminded that two freshman guard starters is pretty unprecedented and that they should continue to get better throughout the year.

02-01-2012, 03:25 PM
Thought it was good except for this little snippet:

This is an atypical Gonzaga team. It is younger. Three important backups Dower, guard David Stockton and wing Mathis Keita are sophomores.

Read more: http://aol.sportingnews.com/ncaa-basketball/story/2012-02-01/gonzaga-quietly-building-its-most-complete-team-ever#ixzz1lAwBMEhT

Hard to call someone who hardly plays an 'important' backup, no matter how you want to spin it. Not trying to knock on Keita or anything, just thought it was odd to say this.

02-01-2012, 03:32 PM
I just wish CDC respected this writer. :p

As for the article, hmmmmm. Okay.

02-01-2012, 04:14 PM
It's a fair article. Nicely written. Our future is in our own hands. We win, we advance. We lose, well we have young team that'll bounce back. Simple really.

02-01-2012, 04:38 PM
Now Bob, don't be giving away any secrets :)

This is an odd GU team.

This year's team is only averaging 74 PPG and is only shooting 46% from the floor. But they're 17-3. In fact, their defensive efficiency (as of yesterday) at kenpom.con ranks higher (33) than their offensive efficiency (55).

Compare this year's offensive stats to recent seasons:

2010/11 = 77 PPG, 48% FG
2009/10 = 77 PPG, 49% FG
2008/09 = 79 PPG, 49% FG
2007/08 = 76 PPG, 49% FG
2006/07 = 78 PPG, 48% FG
2005/06 = 80 PPG, 48% FG
2004/05 = 79 PPG, 50% FG

They're winning in a number of different ways.

02-01-2012, 05:04 PM
To be honest, I think the 17-3 record shows how a tough schedule can end up much less impressive than originally thought. Our stats are down, and so is the level of competition if you ask me. Butler, WSU, Arizona, Xavier, Western Michigan, Hawaii, Notre Dame, and Air Force are all having down years compared to what we estimated. None of them are even a lock for March. Oral Roberts is the best team we have beaten, and our losses have come against the three ranked teams we have faced. If the big name schools we faced were having typical seasons we might not have the pretty record. That being said, I'll take it. Its probably a blessing in disguise for our young backcourt, a schedule any tougher and we might be on the bubble in a bad way. Considering all the youth garnering such important minutes, it shouldn't be a surprise to any of us that we struggle at times. The rest of our schedule will give us the real answer about how good this team is. Hopefully MC and Rob can keep playing better, I'm excited for where we are is headed.

02-01-2012, 05:25 PM
I would argue Notre Dame is better than advertised and has been getting better with wins against Syracuse and Uconn as of late. It is true, Xavier and Arizona are not what we hoped they would be, but I think the rest of the group are exactly what was expected. Middle tier competition. With MSU, IL, Oral Roberts, LMU and SMC being the meat of our schedule.

02-01-2012, 05:27 PM
Well, I agree with the above on the "strangeness" of our 3 loss season - - I think the missing ingrediant to the team is the lack of offensive flash that we have had in the past and that might be reflected in some of those stats.

I guess we are in a pretty good spot going into tomorrow, lots of confidence and wins, enough of a wet blanket against SMC to keep our heads down.

02-01-2012, 06:28 PM
Is this where I thank Native for a nice find?

02-01-2012, 06:34 PM
Is this where I thank Native for a nice find?

02-01-2012, 08:24 PM
Is this where I thank Native for a nice find?

LOL. Thanks Native. It's too bad LIZF can't come strong with stuff like this.

02-01-2012, 08:35 PM
Notre Dame was horrible when we played them...not the case anymore. Go ND! Love the RPI boost.

02-01-2012, 10:04 PM
Rereading the DeCourcy article, it's really thoughtful...
We REALLY have been winning in unusual ways. Standing back and looking at the first 2/3rds of the season, I'd think we should have 6 losses. 3 for a team with these data is unusual. We had a few harrowing escapes but not many. It must be the defense ...it usually is.
Rob went soft for three weeks...and yet we continued to win. Kind of odd to lose a mainstay and not have a solid "3" for the full year. 3 spot is SO important and yet, we've gotten by. One thing...Hart hasn't contributed much offense but his charge taking, his loose ball hawking, his creation of turns, his defense in general, etc...have made a huge difference. For Mike, it's been the intangibles that have contributed. Guy is obviously a flashier player with more physical skills, but that hasn't translated to better team play.

Oh well...seems like we get what we need most of the time. It's hard to identify a prime mover. PG has been solid....but Kevin needs to get his shot back. Bell's better. ELias surely is..... It's a good team just short of great...and yet only 3 losses. Bizarre.