PDA

View Full Version : Where was Barham?



thespywhozaggedme
03-08-2014, 08:48 PM
Was he hurt? All of a sudden Few really tightened up the rotations after going 10-11 deep all season.

Just_An_Old_Zag
03-08-2014, 08:49 PM
good question his 3 point shoot would have opened things up

raise the zag
03-08-2014, 08:54 PM
could have used him.

none of our guards could hit an open 3pt shot this game.

Pangos hit a couple, yet whiffed most.

We needed his shooting this game just as we've needed it all season.

In games we've won by double-digits this season, Barham has played double-digit mins and made at least 2 three's...

More than coincidence. Play him.

thespywhozaggedme
03-08-2014, 08:57 PM
Like I said in the op, all season Few goes 10-11 deep, Barham has been instant offense many times, and then all of a sudden, come tourney time, he breaks tendencies all season and only goes three deep off of the bench, not utilizing our, and one of the nations best 3 point shooters. If he's not hurt, it's inexcusable.

MDABE80
03-08-2014, 08:58 PM
Drew sat. When our guys could only make 2-11, one might think Drew would see court time. It's been dwindling since the last 6 games or so. Not sure why a kid who's shooting 48% from 3 is not getting more minutes. I thought he was in for a few minutes tonight. Not much time for him though.

McZag
03-08-2014, 09:00 PM
Drew proved a poor matchup on d against the small quick SCU guards.

Birddog
03-08-2014, 09:01 PM
I might have missed it, but I didn't see DB in the game. I'm guessing his absence was based on matchups, but who knows.

kitzbuel
03-08-2014, 09:02 PM
We shot over 53%. The problem was SCU was shooting 50%. We needed defense and Drew is not a strong defender.

Bogozags
03-08-2014, 09:04 PM
Drew proved a poor matchup on d against the small quick SCU guards.

Agree, having to face the quicker guards would of eliminated his ability to get his shot off...tough choice by the Staff but we will never know if they were right and it's a mute point now...WE WON!

Hats off to SD and DS...

Just A Zag
03-08-2014, 09:04 PM
like others have said, it came down to defense.

DixieZag
03-08-2014, 09:06 PM
Drew proved a poor matchup on d against the small quick SCU guards.

I'm not really sure I buy that argument but I don't know the most BB on this board.

I need someone to help out, I asked the on gunit thread - I thought SCU's defense is the reason they play us so tight, not their scorers that could not miss (which they had also), we would get occasional stops but the TOs and brutal shooting is more a testament to the defense SCU can play against us. I just think it is a young inconsistent team that when focused can play high level ball.

I do wonder if some threes - even if deep threes might have made a difference, our bigs were routinely doubled in the middle and I have to think a big part of that is that we had no answer out on the line. There was no risk to doubling down low. Outside Barham, I really don't think this is a good shooting 3 pt team on the road.

thespywhozaggedme
03-08-2014, 09:06 PM
The same Drew that scored 8 and pulled down 4 rebounds against them in the first match up? Besides why let the opponent dictate your lineup? Again, we were 10-11 deep all season, why break tendencies now?

sullyzag66
03-08-2014, 09:10 PM
I might have missed it, but I didn't see DB in the game. I'm guessing his absence was based on matchups, but who knows.

He was in for a few minutes, but didn't attempt a shot.


Sent from my iPhone

Zagdawg
03-08-2014, 09:19 PM
The last match up against Santa Clara Drew went 0-3 with a board and a foul in 6 mins.

ZagaZags
03-08-2014, 09:21 PM
Drew was in the 1st half.

Birddog
03-08-2014, 09:24 PM
Box Score http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400542955
Drew played 4 mins but it was straight line 0's, I guess that's why we missed him. Sam and Kevin both played 38 mins.!

thespywhozaggedme
03-08-2014, 09:28 PM
Box Score http://scores.espn.go.com/ncb/boxscore?gameId=400542955
Drew played 4 mins but it was straight line 0's, I guess that's why we missed him. Sam and Kevin both played 38 mins.!

Interesting, that same box score, 30 minutes earlier, didn't list him; hence my 3 sub comment. Thanks

TacomaZAG
03-08-2014, 09:33 PM
Like I said in the op, all season Few goes 10-11 deep, Barham has been instant offense many times, and then all of a sudden, come tourney time, he breaks tendencies all season and only goes three deep off of the bench, not utilizing our, and one of the nations best 3 point shooters. If he's not hurt, it's inexcusable.

Unfortunately, this is exactly Few's tendency as the games mean more, in both the WCC Tourney and the Dance. The rotations shrink and the game plan gets cripplingly conservative. You could see it as the second half played out, tighter and tighter as the clock ticks down. Playing more and more not to lose as the game goes on.

Get used to it, this is ZAG Tourney basketball.

Go ZAGS

DixieZag
03-08-2014, 09:56 PM
That to me is what is taking a lot of the glow away from this game.

I know anyone that opines that is going to get tomatoes thrown from all over the place, but I am actually ready to give the Zags a pass on some of the problems. I thought SCU's defense was as good as we've seen this year - period. They would have been tough on anyone tonight.

But, the "conservative" head case Zags reappear at just the point I would expect them to. We played six guys in the second half (and some of that was b/c of foul trouble late) when I can think of 2 or 3 that really needed a few moments to sit and look at how the game was being played out. We have some real talent that is forced to sit and do nothing for a lot of games and it frustrates me to death.

And it is also frustrating that when we win a game we were down by all game, by two, needing a guy going 16/16 from the FT line and win a game over the 9th place team in the conference, sub .500 team and we're supposed to call it a "great win"? Well, it IS great to win, for sure, but to it's hard to not see the other side of the coin.

hooter73
03-08-2014, 10:04 PM
Unfortunate he didnt get something dont in his few minutes early on in the game. If he had Im guessing he would have come back in the second half and made it a lot less close at the end.

Also, when Pangos is playing(scoring) as poorly as he is, can we really not try our shooters at least once per half?

Baseline
03-08-2014, 10:51 PM
In my opinion Santa Clara has the best guards in the WCC and they match up as a team very well against the Zags. SCU could finish dead last in the league, but would be a tough game for the Zags with the whole match up issue.
You can't win or win going away when your shooters don't show. The nights we hit 3's we can play with anyone. The nights nothing falls the games are tight and we go to the pound it inside, but teams realize this and start sagging on the bigs to shut that down. The games become grinders and are won and lost n intangibles. If the Bigs get in foul trouble it gets real tough to win. I bit my nails waiting to see if the 3's will foul or if we can make the 10 minute mark without having to set Sam or Shem because of fouls.

2wiceright
03-08-2014, 11:08 PM
That to me is what is taking a lot of the glow away from this game.

I know anyone that opines that is going to get tomatoes thrown from all over the place, but I am actually ready to give the Zags a pass on some of the problems. I thought SCU's defense was as good as we've seen this year - period. They would have been tough on anyone tonight.

But, the "conservative" head case Zags reappear at just the point I would expect them to. We played six guys in the second half (and some of that was b/c of foul trouble late) when I can think of 2 or 3 that really needed a few moments to sit and look at how the game was being played out. We have some real talent that is forced to sit and do nothing for a lot of games and it frustrates me to death.

+1 Dixie.... My wife and I were talking about the exact same thing tonight. (my poor dogs get treats after I'm done yelling at the TV!!!).

sittingon50
03-09-2014, 01:03 AM
Pretty sure we'll see plenty of Drew on Monday.

Match-ups.

Birddog
03-09-2014, 07:37 AM
Barham has always needed just a little more time to get his shot off. I can't describe it very well, but I'm sure you've seen it. He turns down a lot of shots when he doesn't get that extra split second to set himself. Santa Clara was playing tight defense and although I actually missed Barham when he was in, I'm guessing he just wasn't getting the looks. If I can see that Barham needs just a little extra time, then I'm sure the staff is aware of it too. Just wasn't a good situation for him.

bigblahla
03-09-2014, 07:52 AM
"Head Case Zags"...more like head case Zag fans....worry ...worry...worry...about something you have no control over....and then post like you do...I will miss this season when it ends but not the long drawn out constant but....but....but...that goes on here from those that self proclaim they really don't know the game but it doesn't stop them from penning non-stop self contradictions from game to game depending on the outcome.

Message board....I get it say what you want.

Want to discuss actual issues from the game start talking about how Shem seems to lose the ball every time it goes below his waist and hasn't learned from it all season.....now that's a topic not why Barham didn't get minutes. IMO Bird hit it on the head DB43 needs room to get his shot off and there wasn't any...bad matchups for DB43 simple as that.

Just my opinion.

Go!! Zags!!!

Zagger
03-09-2014, 08:45 AM
Drew has a knack of being able to get open for many of the 3s he shoots. We got to the game a little late so .... I didn't notice Drew in the game after mid-point in the 1st half. I figured he was injured or sick. Yes, SCU played pretty darn good defense. Zags stepped that up too as the game went on. What was the most frustrating was watching the Zags turnover the ball so much - roughly double the SCU turnovers. As well as SCU was shooting it was only how well the Zags did at the free throw line that won this game. If Mt. K had been his usual self at the free throw line ....... we'd have lost. Sam was also one poised shooter at the line! Hat's off to Dower. It was an 'exciting' game to watch in person. The Zag fans near us really came alive - we really made one heck of a racket stomping our feet at the SCU end of the court during the 2nd half.
Go Zags! Can't wait for Monday. At least it's an hour closer due to Daylight Savings :-)

TexasZag
03-09-2014, 09:21 AM
Was he hurt? All of a sudden Few really tightened up the rotations after going 10-11 deep all season.

It's not at all uncommon for coaches to shorten their bench come playoff/tournament time. Many coaches (at all levels, including the NBA) do it. It helps with preserving chemistry and continuity on the floor. And presumably, limiting your rotation also provides some level of assurance that you also have your best players on the floor, theoretically giving you the best chance for success. Coaches seem to have found that an eight-man rotation provides the best balance.

thespywhozaggedme
03-09-2014, 09:42 AM
It's not at all uncommon for coaches to shorten their bench come playoff/tournament time. Many coaches (at all levels, including the NBA) do it. It helps with preserving chemistry and continuity on the floor. And presumably, limiting your rotation also provides some level of assurance that you also have your best players on the floor, theoretically giving you the best chance for success. Coaches seem to have found that an eight-man rotation provides the best balance.

I disagree with virtually everything that you wrote. Essentially you're advocating doing the exact opposite of what made your team successful all season. It's over thinking things, i.e. paralysis by analysis and coaching not to lose. As another poster put it, come post season, we get "tight". That's what made Florida Gulf Coast so exciting last season, they played fast, loose and full of joy. They had no fear.

TexasZag
03-09-2014, 09:47 AM
I disagree with virtually everything that you wrote. Essentially you're advocating doing the exact opposite of what made your team successful all season. It's over thinking things, i.e. paralysis by analysis and coaching not to lose. As another poster put it, come post season, we get "tight". That's what made Florida Gulf Coast so exciting last season, they played fast, loose and full of joy. They had no fear.

You can disagree with the philosophy, but to disagree with my post is a bit nonsensical, isn't it? All I said was that shortening benches come playoff time (e.g., to an eight-man rotation) is pretty common. If you care to take issue with my statement, then post something that refutes my statement. What you posted is in essence arguing with me for something that I did not say.

DixieZag
03-09-2014, 11:31 AM
"Head Case Zags"...more like head case Zag fans....worry ...worry...worry...about something you have no control over....and then post like you do...I will miss this season when it ends but not the long drawn out constant but....but....but...that goes on here from those that self proclaim they really don't know the game but it doesn't stop them from penning non-stop self contradictions from game to game depending on the outcome.

Message board....I get it say what you want.

Want to discuss actual issues from the game start talking about how Shem seems to lose the ball every time it goes below his waist and hasn't learned from it all season.....now that's a topic not why Barham didn't get minutes. IMO Bird hit it on the head DB43 needs room to get his shot off and there wasn't any...bad matchups for DB43 simple as that.

Just my opinion.

Go!! Zags!!!

Bull ####. "Worry worry worry over something you have no control over?" - Then you get to criticize Karno? a college kid who is an amateur? b/c I guess you have control over that? but when some of us criticize a grown man making millions for not finding a minute in the last 30 to see if maybe the best road three pt shooter on our team might be able to get going a bit? Just like Memphis? BTW - a lot of those entry passes to Karno were terrible.


Maybe Barham does need room to get his shot - but seeing as how he's just about the best 3 pt shooter in the WCC and our best on the road, please forgive some of us who believe that it quite possibly takes more than four minutes to establish that fact, especially if we could actually run a couple screens for him and since I'm not sure how we're losing all that much on the floor when Kevin is being doubled (often) all over the floor.

It is a message board - boards are where we praise and critique - those that happen to critique an ongoing tendency that looks awfully fishy, should have others put separate facts put in their face, (like the can't get space) not called "head cases" - not get called "haters" - not be told we need to confine our critique to something we can "do something about" (I'm having trouble finding one of those), and most certainly, not question a tendency that looks a lot like tightening up in the late season.

To the absolute joy of many, I'm sure, there's no question I'm out of here very soon if a person MUST acknowledge Few's genius and NEVER question line ups or be called haters or head cases, or the lack of aggression by the team at times, much longer, and you all can stand around and see who can praise the coaches and team better.

FieldHouseFishHouse
03-09-2014, 11:36 AM
I disagree with virtually everything that you wrote. Essentially you're advocating doing the exact opposite of what made your team successful all season. It's over thinking things, i.e. paralysis by analysis and coaching not to lose. As another poster put it, come post season, we get "tight". That's what made Florida Gulf Coast so exciting last season, they played fast, loose and full of joy. They had no fear.

I think there is another element. The postseason is typically win-or-go-home. Over the course of the season coaches have to think about fatigue and injury of their best players. They also have to get their young players in when games are NOT close, to get some level of experience for the future.

However, in the post-season the present and very near future are way more important than the next 5/10/20 games. Down big, the starters stay in to try for the improbable comeback. Up big, the starters stay in to prevent the huge collapse (and the other guys are players their best players too, so there is a kind of arms race going on).

From a different angle - "what made your team successful all season" might not be the same thing that makes a team successful in a single game or a short string of games. Playing certain players (9/10/11th guys on the roster) may very well help make a team successful over the course of a long season (or over several seasons), but may not help in the short stretch of post-season games.

MJ777
03-09-2014, 11:55 AM
I am hoping Drew didn't play much just because of what some have said - it was a bad match up because going forward Zags could use a dead eye shooter. I kept hearing the announcers say that SCU is a match up problem for the Zags. I guess that is because their guards are quicker than our guards. But the Zag's Bigs are bigger and more skilled than theirs so Zags are a match up problem for SCU. I guess that balances out which is why all 3 games were close.

hooter73
03-09-2014, 12:18 PM
Bad defensive match up aside, seeing as how none of our other guards can seem to get open to even want to attempt a 3, why not try it with a 50% shooter?

bigblahla
03-09-2014, 12:40 PM
Bull ####. "Worry worry worry over something you have no control over?" - Then you get to criticize Karno? a college kid who is an amateur? b/c I guess you have control over that? but when some of us criticize a grown man making millions for not finding a minute in the last 30 to see if maybe the best road three pt shooter on our team might be able to get going a bit? Just like Memphis? BTW - a lot of those entry passes to Karno were terrible.


Maybe Barham does need room to get his shot - but seeing as how he's just about the best 3 pt shooter in the WCC and our best on the road, please forgive some of us who believe that it quite possibly takes more than four minutes to establish that fact, especially if we could actually run a couple screens for him and since I'm not sure how we're losing all that much on the floor when Kevin is being doubled (often) all over the floor.

It is a message board - boards are where we praise and critique - those that happen to critique an ongoing tendency that looks awfully fishy, should have others put separate facts put in their face, (like the can't get space) not called "head cases" - not get called "haters" - not be told we need to confine our critique to something we can "do something about" (I'm having trouble finding one of those), and most certainly, not question a tendency that looks a lot like tightening up in the late season.

To the absolute joy of many, I'm sure, there's no question I'm out of here very soon if a person MUST acknowledge Few's genius and NEVER question line ups or be called haters or head cases, or the lack of aggression by the team at times, much longer, and you all can stand around and see who can praise the coaches and team better.

"those that happen to critique an ongoing tendency that looks awfully fishy, should have others put separate facts put in their face,"

You have self claimed a lack of understanding of the game in more than one post yet you do get it. What you don't seem to comprehend is Mark Few's coaching philosophy as you complain about the same thing over and over as if you expect it to change. Why? It's a winning philosophy! Not perfect but awfully good. So if you have a system and it works many more times than not why would you change it? IMO..Barham didn't play because as stated above... bad match-ups. IMO Coleman didn't see the 2nd because of ball handling and turnover liabilities. IMO Nunez was in long enough to make a bone headed turnover and rode the bench for the rest of the night...trust factor...why was the last play drawn for Stocks....trust factor. Some of us trust coach and some of you don't it's as simple as that........

What criticism of Shem? Just commenting on what I see. Quit being so knee jerk responsive to everything..... games included.....take a breath, sit back and enjoy what has been a really good season. OT but as it seems I've hit a nerve here's my thoughts on Shem..... Lots of room to grow..needs to learn to keep the ball up... when receiving the ball learn to pivot quickly facing up his defender and giving him a good pump fake which will allow him the advantage of countering whatever the defenders move is. It will free him up for more open looks. He needs to stay in Spokane off season and get in better condition. The only reason Shem can't look like Dolph Lundgren or more closely a ripped GBJ is if he doesn't put in the work. He is very gifted on the offensive end and learning daily on the defensive end. He has yet to get the fact he is the biggest guy on the court and therefore should be the baddest but it should come in time. Getting in better shape should be his first and foremost priority in the off season.

Not picking on you Dixie but I do take exception to the term "head case" being used to describe the TEAM I love after a hard fought victory over an SCU squad that left everything on the floor.

Just my opinion.

Go!! Zags!!!

Lewey
03-09-2014, 04:15 PM
I watched Drew some when he was in during the first half. At the time I thought he didn't have the quickness to keep up with the SCU guards. Also it seems he usually is brought in as a four when Karno or Dower go out. At the end of the first half Few decided to bring Angel in that role instead of bringing Drew back. I'm guessing Angel in instead of Drew was due to the defensive quickness. But I don't think either got a chance in the second half.

ZagsGoZags
03-09-2014, 10:50 PM
Barham has always needed just a little more time to get his shot off. I can't describe it very well, but I'm sure you've seen it. He turns down a lot of shots when he doesn't get that extra split second to set himself. Santa Clara was playing tight defense and although I actually missed Barham when he was in, I'm guessing he just wasn't getting the looks. If I can see that Barham needs just a little extra time, then I'm sure the staff is aware of it too. Just wasn't a good situation for him.

This. I assumed he was not in because their perimeter defense was so quick. I also thought our game plan was to not win by shooting threes. I can remember twice when GBJ and once when Drew was standing right behind the 3 pt line, with plenty of time to get a shot off, and all three times it did not enter their mind, they just looked to keep whipping the passes around the perimeter. I thought during the half if we focused a little more on finding 3's, it would make it harder for them to collapse on our bigs, and Pango's immediately three coming out of the halftime I expected would herald more an attack from 3-land in the second half, but it did not develop that way. You would not know we were a good 3 pt shooting team if you only had this game to look at. GBJ is a little this way also, IMO, if he can't have that extra split second to set his feet properly, he seems to be an average shooter.

Zags11
03-09-2014, 11:14 PM
Bell has been cold from 3 in his last 9 games I believe besides 1 game. It will change.

michaelak
03-10-2014, 12:19 AM
Let me guess "Zag for Life." Good surmising that Barham needs more time. Still Few's decisions are puzzling. You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. It had faculty and Jesuits and a coach who really believed in "cura personalis." You say you are a Zag for life, yet you don't have much experience at the University beyond your recent four year degree. Otherwise, it would be upsetting to you that GU is more interested solely in recruiting big money from alumni (have you received "your call" yet?) and getting our hopes up for a deep run in the tournament that doesn't materialize than it is to engage alumni in real life things such as health and fitness. How much of your life is spent roaming websites to adjudicate? And how often does your twenty something body need exercise that you don't provide it? Jesuit Universities are more than their hit and miss basketball programs, at least they are every where else but Gonzaga.

Birddog
03-10-2014, 05:47 AM
Let me guess "Zag for Life." Good surmising that Barham needs more time. Still Few's decisions are puzzling. You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. It had faculty and Jesuits and a coach who really believed in "cura personalis." You say you are a Zag for life, yet you don't have much experience at the University beyond your recent four year degree. Otherwise, it would be upsetting to you that GU is more interested solely in recruiting big money from alumni (have you received "your call" yet?) and getting our hopes up for a deep run in the tournament that doesn't materialize than it is to engage alumni in real life things such as health and fitness. How much of your life is spent roaming websites to adjudicate? And how often does your twenty something body need exercise that you don't provide it? Jesuit Universities are more than their hit and miss basketball programs, at least they are every where else but Gonzaga.

Not sure who you are referring to since "Zag for Life" is not a handle but a symbol of how many posts one has made i.e., you are a "reshirt". I see that you just joined here and that in most of your posts you are grumbling about GU policies. If you are referring to me in the quoted post then this excerpt
You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. couldn't be much more incorrect. GU has been a Corporation for as long as I can remember and my memories of GU go back to the early 50's. If you want to complain about GU's policies then I suggest you use the regular channels to GU or perhaps you want to make a spectacle in the Review's editorial pages. If you are here to complain about GU basketball, coaches decisions, etc, then you are probably in the right place as there is a lot of that going on here lately.


There is a segment of the public apparently compelled to undermine any achievement

bartruff1
03-10-2014, 06:28 AM
For a board made up of college students and graduates, there are a awful lot of straw man arguments (false logic) in here. No one has ever said the Coach was perfect and no one with a lick of sense would ever say that about anyone.

For whatever reason, there are people in here that actually think their opinions are facts and get upset when not everyone agrees with them.

Here is a fact...the Coach is not perfect.

Here is a opinion...just a opinion...just my opinion .... He doesn't need to be perfect to know more about who should play and how to win than the entire collective wisdom of the board...he just needs to be awake and sober...... maybe just awake. He knows his players and the matchups better than you do.....opinion again.

Now of course.... you are welcome to your opinions and this is a excellent and mostly harmless place to express them. So have at it..... but it would be better (imo) if you had a little humility and gave him the benefit of the doubt.

I know that just because I don't understand something doesn't mean that it is stupid or wrong..... it just means, for example,..... "I don't understand why Drew didn't play much".

Bing
03-10-2014, 07:24 AM
Let me guess "Zag for Life." Good surmising that Barham needs more time. Still Few's decisions are puzzling. You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. It had faculty and Jesuits and a coach who really believed in "cura personalis." You say you are a Zag for life, yet you don't have much experience at the University beyond your recent four year degree. Otherwise, it would be upsetting to you that GU is more interested solely in recruiting big money from alumni (have you received "your call" yet?) and getting our hopes up for a deep run in the tournament that doesn't materialize than it is to engage alumni in real life things such as health and fitness. How much of your life is spent roaming websites to adjudicate? And how often does your twenty something body need exercise that you don't provide it? Jesuit Universities are more than their hit and miss basketball programs, at least they are every where else but Gonzaga.

I'll throw $5 into a fund. Hopefully others will join me and get you a gym membership somewhere.

I "got" your point about Gonzaga University not being a "real" Jesuit school because at present, there isn't a program for Alumni to use the gym facilities.... and that you'd surveyed the other 27 Jesuit Colleges and Universities and discovered that they all have such a program. FWIW I missed the free gym membership for Alumni in the Mission Statement and Statement of Affirmation.
http://www.gonzaga.edu/about/mission/missionstatement.asp

But, as I said, I got your point the first time I saw it. I got your point the 2nd time you made it. I understood your point the 3rd, 4th and 5th time you posted it. And now, I continue to understand your point the 6th time you've made it.

But I'm "Bing" in Roslyn ..... "Birddog" in Oklahoma has responded to you immediately above. Not sure what "Bing" and "Birddog" can do for you ... other than me saying I'll throw $5 bucks into a fund to buy you your gym membership.

Here's an idea .... have you spoken to Thayne? Written him? If so, did he say "No"? Finding out what GU actually says about this once it's brought to their attention would be more meaningful to me than seeing a diatribe over and over and over and over and over. I'm wondering what Bob Finn had to say?

Your letter to the editor was a good step. But the SR isn't in a position to make changes at Gonzaga. Thayne, and the folks working with Thayne are.

EEzag
03-10-2014, 07:42 AM
I'll throw $5 into a fund. Hopefully others will join me and get you a gym membership somewhere.

I "got" your point about Gonzaga University not being a "real" Jesuit school because at present, there isn't a program for Alumni to use the gym facilities.... and that you'd surveyed the other 27 Jesuit Colleges and Universities and discovered that they all have such a program. FWIW I missed the free gym membership for Alumni in the Mission Statement and Statement of Affirmation.
http://www.gonzaga.edu/about/mission/missionstatement.asp

But, as I said, I got your point the first time I saw it. I got your point the 2nd time you made it. I understood your point the 3rd, 4th and 5th time you posted it. And now, I continue to understand your point the 6th time you've made it.

But I'm "Bing" in Roslyn ..... "Birddog" in Oklahoma has responded to you immediately above. Not sure what "Bing" and "Birddog" can do for you ... other than me saying I'll throw $5 bucks into a fund to buy you your gym membership.

Here's an idea .... have you spoken to Thayne? Written him? That's "Bing's" advice.

DB wasn't in because Few is terrified of what SC's guards could do. That Brownrige (sp?) has a little Kevin Foster-itis. We didn't need to improve spacing, we needed to limit turnovers and lock down the D. We were going to be able to score (look at the stats in the paint) without DB. KD's skillset was more valuable that game.

Vanzagger
03-10-2014, 08:34 AM
Karno and Dower make up for a lot of sins.

vandalzag
03-10-2014, 08:40 AM
Let me guess "Zag for Life." Good surmising that Barham needs more time. Still Few's decisions are puzzling. You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. It had faculty and Jesuits and a coach who really believed in "cura personalis." You say you are a Zag for life, yet you don't have much experience at the University beyond your recent four year degree. Otherwise, it would be upsetting to you that GU is more interested solely in recruiting big money from alumni (have you received "your call" yet?) and getting our hopes up for a deep run in the tournament that doesn't materialize than it is to engage alumni in real life things such as health and fitness. How much of your life is spent roaming websites to adjudicate? And how often does your twenty something body need exercise that you don't provide it? Jesuit Universities are more than their hit and miss basketball programs, at least they are every where else but Gonzaga.

So Few sat Barham because you are not allowed access to the campus pilates class? That is just wrong.

Zagdawg
03-10-2014, 09:34 AM
Talk about entitlement.......darn pilates strikes again.

zagfan1
03-10-2014, 10:07 AM
Few needs to go 10-11 deep. Otherwise, we will see what we always see - a loss due to conservatism. We almost saw it on Saturday night. How much longer does Few need to do this before he learns? So frustrating to see this. I want to fly there and have a chat with him (lol). I would rather lose going 10-11 deep big than to lose by a few points going with a short bench. At least this shows Few is changing from his old and usual ways. We beat St Marys by attacking the basket and bringing people in with almost recklass abandonment. Lets continue this progress. I am all eyes tonight. Go Zags!

gonzagafan62
03-10-2014, 10:09 AM
Barham will be playing plenty tonight. Just watch.

zagfan1
03-10-2014, 10:18 AM
One other thing to add. When you include more people in the game you increase engagement of the members of the team. Everyone needs to be focussed and thinking they may need to go out there to contribute. I think this is a huge mis-conception that a small bench will increase your chances of victory. I really don't think so. Every team that I can think of recently have used a deep bench: Wichita State; Butler; Florida Gulf Coast; and even Florida. Quite frankly, our first five players are not as solid as expected which means we need someone to step out of the shadows and make plays to win the game. Go Zags!

gamagin
03-10-2014, 10:30 AM
+1


So Few sat Barham because you are not allowed access to the campus pilates class? That is just wrong.

Among the S.W.A.G.s on this thread, this is my favorite. And in this poster's defense, if true, it does have a direct affect on his potential physical well being.

The other, more outrageous posts, tend to have to do with imaginings (hallucinations?) and the potential mental well being of several people.

So perhaps psychiatric help AND pilates should be offered to alums, not just pilates. fwiw.

But to the OP, the only thing we know for a fact is DB was on the bench.

cjm720
03-10-2014, 11:56 AM
Few needs to go 10-11 deep. Otherwise, we will see what we always see - a loss due to conservatism. We almost saw it on Saturday night. How much longer does Few need to do this before he learns? So frustrating to see this. I want to fly there and have a chat with him (lol). I would rather lose going 10-11 deep big than to lose by a few points going with a short bench. At least this shows Few is changing from his old and usual ways. We beat St Marys by attacking the basket and bringing people in with almost recklass abandonment. Lets continue this progress. I am all eyes tonight. Go Zags!

I think most coaches shorten the rotation when every win counts, not the opposite.

ZagsGoZags
03-10-2014, 12:55 PM
Let me guess "Zag for Life." Good surmising that Barham needs more time. Still Few's decisions are puzzling. You have no idea what
Gonzaga was like in the old days. It was not a corporation. It had faculty and Jesuits and a coach who really believed in "cura personalis." You say you are a Zag for life, yet you don't have much experience at the University beyond your recent four year degree. Otherwise, it would be upsetting to you that GU is more interested solely in recruiting big money from alumni (have you received "your call" yet?) and getting our hopes up for a deep run in the tournament that doesn't materialize than it is to engage alumni in real life things such as health and fitness. How much of your life is spent roaming websites to adjudicate? And how often does your twenty something body need exercise that you don't provide it? Jesuit Universities are more than their hit and miss basketball programs, at least they are every where else but Gonzaga.

Hi Michaelak, welcome to the board, I only see six posts by you so far. The "Zag for Life" identifies at least five of us who have posted on this thread. So I don't know which poster you are addressing, but I will have to assume it is not me because none of your other assumptions fit me.

Once and Future Zag
03-10-2014, 01:11 PM
Hi Michaelak, welcome to the board, I only see six posts by you so far. The "Zag for Life" identifies at least five of us who have posted on this thread. So I don't know which poster you are addressing, but I will have to assume it is not me because none of your other assumptions fit me.

6 posts, 5 of which include whining about lack of access to facilities.

Someone has a drum to bang, and bydamn he's gonna bang it.

BobZag
03-12-2014, 02:58 PM
Ron Perlman

Virginia Zags Fan
03-12-2014, 03:15 PM
Drew is a super young man and had a great game yesterday. What I have noticed is that they do use Drew in the 4 slot. Against St. Mary's, SMC would run screens to isolate Waldow on Drew. This is not even close to a fair matchup as Drew was giving up 60 pounds and several inches. Against BYU he matched up very well and when he is on, he is deadly. When attending games, I love to get there early to watch shoot-arounds. I am a firm believer that guys who are hot in shoot arounds are going to get some run.

Disclaimer - All of this is just my opinion and I am not perfect. Just a simple fan.