PDA

View Full Version : I wasn't that impressed



LongIslandZagFan
11-18-2007, 12:40 PM
I was actually a tad disappointed with the Zags last night. If they go out and make the silly mistakes, poor shot judgments, and general sloppy play that was displayed in the 1st half and they will be hard pressed to hang with WKU up in Alaska.

Not playing the doom and gloom game here, I really didn't like what I saw last night.

KSTATEZAG
11-18-2007, 01:13 PM
I was actually a tad disappointed with the Zags last night. If they go out and make the silly mistakes, poor shot judgments, and general sloppy play that was displayed in the 1st half and they will be hard pressed to hang with WKU up in Alaska.

Not playing the doom and gloom game here, I really didn't like what I saw last night.

I agree with you LIZF.
I'm a huge Pargo fan. I think being our leader and point he needs to be a little more careful with the ball.
There are only a few people playing within the system now (micah, pendo, and kuso).
I don't want a smarter team to pick us apart and unfortunately a team like butler (or a Knight coached Texas Tech team) might really take advantage and be uber-opportunistic.

Fonebone
11-18-2007, 01:21 PM
You have good points, but the other side of the story is that, unfortunately, most teams tend to play down to the opponent sometimes, and dont have the sharp focus they want to have. The reason this does not worry me too much at this point is because these Zags have done something I don't recall happening for a long time - they consistently blow away teams that they should. I would guess that a high percentage of the times in the last five years that we played teams like Idaho, Montana, UC Riverside, we would win by 8 to 12 points. This years team is clearly different. So in light of that, while their performance in some of the first halves has not been impressive, I am still very happy with their performance, especially for as young as they are.

wkuhilltopperfan
11-18-2007, 01:43 PM
You guys seem to play much like us at WKU. We ware on the opponant until they are just worn down and we pull away in the second half. If you jump on us early I think you win but if we are in the game still after 10 mins. I think things will be our favor. Late starts have been our down side in the past were we have played down to the other teams levels to often. We done better this past game but GU will be our first true test.

Go Tops!

ZagsGoZags
11-18-2007, 01:46 PM
This first half impressed me more than the other two. We went to the locker room up 38-24. That is a decent lead, and I was actually surprised it was that large, because emotionally, the game felt closer than that to me. We did not seem to panic or hurry our plays in response to their two runs, when they closed the gap. Pargo and Matt stayed within themselves and kept running the system. After the GU timeout when the gap was closed 24-29 our guys came out and expended even greater energy on defense. Our offense and defense seemed more consistent and disciplined than against Idaho and Montana. We kept our cool.

Sacre is getting into the system more, and I hope we will dish off to Downs and Austin for putting up more 3pt attempts, and let Pargo and Matt take a few less, and only when they are wide open.

The Alaska shootout will be a heck of a lot of fun, and will answer some of the questions raised in the blog this week.

MDABE80
11-18-2007, 02:30 PM
ZagsGoZags..........focus. LIZ isn't talking about the score or the result. He's talking about HOW the Zags got to the score. I happen to agree with him.
True Sacre was a very bright spot but the rest of the team was "iffy" and sloppy. Run and gun offenses spell doom . It's not the flashy stuff we need. GU needs to be a bit more thoughtful and deliberate....and run it's offense carefully to even learn it in gametime situations.

With all the "RAH RAH" "DID YOU SEE THAT!!!!!" comments we're getting, I wonder if anyone ( well a few) has noticed the type of play. Borders on schoolyard or playground stuff IMO. Fast, sloppy, non methodical play isn't going to win games with the higher end opponents. HUGE give backs ( ie turnovers) , poor assist/turnover ratios ( Pargo's is 0.7.when it should be 2 or higher) are terrible!

Word to the wise: we're winning games but the style of play leaves a lot to be desired. After 3 games, I've not seen a lot of progress..just "oooohs" and "awwwwws". Makes me nervous as we approach Alaska. Not doom and gloom.......the figures are there and they scream CAUTION!

BobZag
11-18-2007, 02:41 PM
Pargo can play better, and Matt can hit threes, and Micah can score more, and Pendo can shoot more, and Kuso can finish stronger...

But will they, and when?

KSTATEZAG
11-18-2007, 02:43 PM
ZagsGoZags..........focus. LIZ isn't talking about the score or the result. He's talking about HOW the Zags got to the score. I happen to agree with him.
True Sacre was a very bright spot but the rest of the team was "iffy" and sloppy. Run and gun offenses spell doom . It's not the flashy stuff we need. GU needs to be a bit more thoughtful and deliberate....and run it's offense carefully to even learn it in gametime situations.

With all the "RAH RAH" "DID YOU SEE THAT!!!!!" comments we're getting, I wonder if anyone ( well a few) has noticed the type of play. Borders on schoolyard or playground stuff IMO. Fast, sloppy, non methodical play isn't going to win games with the higher end opponents. HUGE give backs ( ie turnovers) , poor assist/turnover ratios ( Pargo's is 0.7.when it should be 2 or higher) are terrible!

Word to the wise: we're winning games but the style of play leaves a lot to be desired. After 3 games, I've not seen a lot of progress..just "oooohs" and "awwwwws". Makes me nervous as we approach Alaska. Not doom and gloom.......the figures are there and they scream CAUTION!

My sentiments exactly. It's a proven system, use it.

TheZagPhish
11-18-2007, 02:49 PM
LIZF, Abe, BZ - agree. Also, I expected a clearer display of leadership on the floor. I've not seen Pargo or Pendo really demonstrate start-to-finish command of the floor. Seems a little pell mell at times. Derek was usually pretty good about controlling tempo and discipline, and maybe it's just that I'm missing it this year.

Slightly OT... Looks like a bevy of new hand signals on the floor. Is this a Ray G. addition? Could it be in relation to Grier's departure? Is it all in my head?

roxdoc
11-18-2007, 02:51 PM
Couldn't agree more Abe. The defense looks pretty good most of the time (at least when we are in "man"). But, as I have said before the efficiency (or maybe just the process) of the offense does not look good to me. Toward the end of the last game we had a little of the Zag "flow" going, but UCR was really beaten down by then.

There are a lot of new guys learning the system, and a (Plan B) systemone that probably had to be thought up at the last minute because of Josh and Stevens problems. The potential is there, and there will be the Oh and Au individual peformances, but I fear there are going to be some speed bumps along the way until we get more experience. What ever we can get now is gravy, its performance at the end of the regular season that counts.

pbriz
11-18-2007, 03:12 PM
This team has shown flashes of the fire needed to be great. The talent, coaching and ability is all there. Guys like Pendo, Pargo, Daye, Micah, LG.... alot of fire and they have shown glimpses.... but haven't sustained that for 40 minutes yet. To steal a quote that reborn uses... "the best is yet to come" and i think we will see alot more of it when our guys get pumped up for the GAS.

UberZagFan
11-18-2007, 03:31 PM
I wasn't that impressed


A common reaction to teams that become defensive minded and have a lot of new faces learning the offense. Uber will take the improved defense if it means that the O is lacking for awhile.

MoJoZag
11-18-2007, 03:46 PM
A common reaction to teams that become defensive minded and have a lot of new faces learning the offense. Uber will take the improved defense if it means that the O is lacking for awhile.

Agreed. Although the offense has been lacking at times, it is sure nice to see more blocks, stops and steals. (Too bad those don't get the crowd as pumped as the dunks) Micah's D is coming along nicely as well as Kuso's. The freshmen are holding their own on the D end, also.

zag67
11-18-2007, 03:52 PM
I agree with Uber. I think that the effort on the defensive end of the court and in the "loose press" has been super. This is by far the best I have seen (especially this early). Remember the opponents are averaging about 48 points a game. And as far as the zone part of this defense, there will be times that we will need this. But every person out their has to recognize how they are suppose to attack the 3 point line and still be able to help the inside.

The offense leaves some work to be done. But look at what has happened. Josh is down. We have 3 new people ( Austin, Robert, and Ira) that they are trying to teach the flex offense and 2 others that are coming back from redshirt (Theo and LG). That means that many people are playing by the numbers and are not using their full atheletic ability as they are going through the offensive sets. That also means that people like Pendo, Jeremy, Matt and Micah are trying to work them into the offense and might not be as "free flowing" as they will be later on. And folkes remember when Josh and Steven come back there will probably be some drop off to get them into the flow, but that does not mean we have to panic. We just need to remember that this is a very young team and they are learning how to use the best skills of each of their team mates.

.

Nevtelen
11-18-2007, 05:12 PM
Even though the offensive numbers overall have been really good, it has looked a little sloppy. Part of that is, I think, players still getting used to the system/slightly different roles from last year - remember after the Montana game Few talked about how he hadn't seen any of that in practice. The learning curve appears steeper this year. I think part of it, like people have pointed out is the loss of Heytvelt and Gray, which forced some changes in the offense I'm sure.

Also, the D is improved a lot, but that didn't just happen overnight. I would bet that a lot more of practices are taken up with defensive work which means players aren't spending as much time/effort on the offensive end, which translates to picking up the offense more slowly. Another part of the 'streetball' look is the opponents - after a horrible half against Idaho and a forgettable 1st half against Riverside (both teams you have to believe the team wasn't really 'up' for, no matter what anyone says about '1 game at a time').

Will we play better at the GAS against better compeition? I predict yes. Will it be good enough to win? I hope so, but we'll see.

Ziggy
11-18-2007, 05:43 PM
LIZF, the previous two games completely support your argument, however in the most recent match against Riverside, we actually saw some of the crucial
elements begin to come to fruit,namely: freethrow shooting and turnovers. Granted, amidst the 11 turnovers that we did have there were some questionable moves. Still, all in all, a more mature game. Theo is on the verge of the real thing! The FT% was very Zag-like. Bravo! And then there is the defense. Times with defense will get you through times without offense better that times with offense will get you through times without defense, to paraphrase a great philosopher.

Zag By the Bay
11-18-2007, 06:10 PM
Finally we have some posters who have stopped drinking that damn over optimistic cup of Zagade. Look forward to the GAS and the month of December.
It is really silly for some to anoint or predict Daye will be the next Zag to make it big in the NBA...The kid has played 3 college games that have counted.
The competition we have faced thus far has been weak and we have played them all at home. Yes the defense has been solid and IMO the offense has plenty of room for improvement.
The Hilltoppers game will be fun to watch. GO Zags!

former1dog
11-18-2007, 07:38 PM
It's all pretty much a work in progress.

On the defensive end, I think we're already a much better team than last year, heck the last several years.

Offensively, we've got a lot of work to do, but there are some new faces and some new roles AND Few run's a complicated offense. We might not really hit our stride offensively until later in the season. Is that such a bad idea, though? ;)

LongIslandZagFan
11-18-2007, 08:08 PM
I don't know how anyone could look at the first half and take away anything positive. The Zags shot 33% from the field. If UCR doesn't turn the ball over as much (many were unforced TOs) then the Zags would not have opened what lead they had.

IMHO it was more UCR beating themselves in the first half.

sittingon50
11-18-2007, 09:03 PM
Zags shot 44% in the 1st half LI (& 64% in the 2nd). Other than the 1-6 from deep & some goofy shots from Pargo I didn't think it was as bad as you do.

BTW, in the post game, Few said he was happy with only 11 TO's (compared to the Idaho game) saying that was a good # based on the number of possessions they usually have in a game. Hadn't heard it put that way before & it made some sense.

Doktorkev
11-18-2007, 09:17 PM
You have good points, but the other side of the story is that, unfortunately, most teams tend to play down to the opponent sometimes, and dont have the sharp focus they want to have. The reason this does not worry me too much at this point is because these Zags have done something I don't recall happening for a long time - they consistently blow away teams that they should. I would guess that a high percentage of the times in the last five years that we played teams like Idaho, Montana, UC Riverside, we would win by 8 to 12 points. This years team is clearly different. So in light of that, while their performance in some of the first halves has not been impressive, I am still very happy with their performance, especially for as young as they are.


You took the words right out of my mouth. It seems like that this is the way that GU has played over the last 3 or 4 years, finding their A game against marquee opponents and struggling with lesser known teams.

kitzbuel
11-19-2007, 03:29 AM
A common reaction to teams that become defensive minded and have a lot of new faces learning the offense. Uber will take the improved defense if it means that the O is lacking for awhile.

I think the fact that this team seems to have bought into the defensive system bodes well. The players definitely are willing to be coached. It will be interesting to see how the offense pans out once H-velt and Gray get back in the line up. I don't think we have had the opportunity to see Pendo's leadership because the team really hasn't had to face much adversity yet. They have blown everyone out. GAS could be the fire that really forms this team.

ZagsGoZags
11-19-2007, 06:26 AM
After reading these posts, I have to say I still disagree with most of you. On the radio pre-game show, the announcers talked about keeping the plays simple and basic when the other team is running on you. That there is no need to get fancy or make complicated shots - like we did, esp. Pargo, in the first half of the Montana game.

Dear MDAGE80. What I said was

"We did not seem to panic or hurry our plays in response to their two runs, when they closed the gap. Pargo and Matt stayed within themselves and kept running the system. After the GU timeout when the gap was closed 24-29 our guys came out and expended even greater energy on defense. Our offense and defense seemed more consistent and disciplined than against Idaho and Montana. We kept our cool."

This is a focus on HOW we played, not only the score.

While watching the game I remember thinking to myself, in the first half, that we were not taking many fancy shots, that we were not allowing ourselves to get in a hurry to shoot. I don't remember us taking many bad shots. Matt threw up 2 or 3 three-pt bricks, but they were not bad shots, he had a good look. He just failed to execute. That cost us a couple of possessions. We kept passing the ball a lot. Now I wish I could see the first half again after reading all the disappointment with our offense in that first half. UC at Riverside had had strong first halfs in their other three games before us, and they did it again against us.

My memory of the post game radio show is praise for Pargo and Matt for keeping it simple, running our plays, not getting rattled, keeping the turnovers low in the first half. I don't claim to be an expert. This is my opinion and my memory.

jpwils
11-19-2007, 06:30 AM
Injuries to Heytvelt have been mentioned, along with Gray.

Also, it seems Downs has had an injury to his left hand and maybe other injuries. Pendergraft is coming back from an injury. These two are significant
pieces of our offense...seems like sound defense is creating some opportunities. Either way, we will know alot more about this team in the
upcoming period.

It will not bother me to see the Zags lose one or two-that's one way these kids learn. Senior leadership will come with increased minutes. Right now Few has been seeing what players can really do with their minutes.

He knows what Pendergraft can do and also pretty much has seen what Downs can do over the last 10 months. Daye and Sacre are building a body of work for Few so that he knows by WCC time exactly when and where to play them.

Sacre will not replace Heytvelt but perhaps at times they can be effective together. Davis needs to show what he can do in the next 3 weeks or so.

It will be tough for Gray to contribute much offensively immediately upon his return. But if Downs and Daye can coexist on the court, watch out opposing
teams!

So we have nowhere to go but up offensively. Defense wins close games
with top competition. Stops, blocks, steals, and altered shots and the vaunted three-point perimeter D will be the difference-maker in this team.
Austin Daye has been impressive but when the shots
aren't falling, defense shows up large to win games on off-nites.

DixieZag
11-19-2007, 09:21 AM
I for one am not worried about any offensive sluggishness, as stated previously, it takes time for a young team that has lost a focal point on offense and a big time back-up to reinvent the offense. Even so, I have been so frustrated over the years watching the Zags be clearly more talented and a better shooting team than an opponent and yet lose by being out "althleted" and not able to play the defense that prevents easy shots and does not get easy converts off the fast break. I am guardedly optimistic that this team possesses a missing element that has held us back from that "last hurdle" over the years. We will learn a lot in Alaska.

Go Zags

Dixie

Reborn
11-19-2007, 10:13 AM
:lmao: :lmao:

I have to laugh at all negative posters......:D

I think the Zags are playing quite well on offense and are doing what Coach Few demands (which is probably NOT what the fans want to see). First off, I think our passing overall has been great. I have not seen any team that is as Team Oriented since 99-2000. These kids we have now play team ball (which means they are not going to get to go one on one all the time (like most of the other teams in the country are doing at this time of year). The Zags are not constantly forcing the break, as I am sure many would like to see, but are mostly trying to run their offensive sets (the flex and High low offenses). For this time of year (early November) I feel they're running these set playes (their offense) better than any other team I've seen play on TV.

The Zags have excellent passers in Bouldin, Downs, Pendo, Pargo, LG and yes even Daye. There have been tons of assists in every game. I LOVE THAT KIND OF BASKETBall. I've said it before, the art of passing the ball is becoming a lost art, but Mark Few and this year's Zags are resurrecting this art. Yes, there have been some games (one) where Pargo had too many turnovers.....should we hang him?

About our poor shooting. Yes, we are not shooting the 3 ball well at this time of year. Is it a concern? NO!! Should it be? NO. I believe Few hasn't been emphasizing the shot from the 3 yet. The way I see it is that he's been emphasizing: setting good picks, rolling to the hoop, back door cuts, high low offense, AND PASSING. Our passing right now IS ahead of our shooting, and I think it's because Few wants it to be.

Is see Coach Few using these first 3 games more as practices than games. He is emphasizing running the sets. And running the flex through at least 4-5 passes. I think it's important to remember that when we get to the GAS that we will be facing much better opponents, and that Few has been preparing the Zags for that. GU will win the GAS. Their offense, in my opinion, will be ahead of most of the other teams accept for Butler. Our toughest opponent will be Butler because they have so many guys returning. They do have a new coach and that will cost them some points, imo. Enough for us to win. Yes, Western Kentucy will be a very good opponent, but they are not as good as the Zags.

It's also obvious that we've been working the most on defense this year. Our defense has been great, and it will be a problem for opponents in the GAS. We are deep, very deep. And our depth gives us the ability to play all out defense for long periods of time. Who else in the GAS has the depth that GU does?

Have some confidence in the Zags folks.

ZagsGoZags
11-19-2007, 10:34 AM
I agree so much.
I am thrilled to see our defenders chase their guards farther out by the 3 pt line, and have the quickness to get away with it. We used to give other teams those long threes, to some extend, so when a team was hot, like sometimes WCC teams can get against us, it would hurt us. LG is the man. Pargo always could have, I think it just wasn't our defensive game plan.

LongIslandZagFan
11-19-2007, 10:56 AM
Assist numbers are no difference or slightly below last year's average. Currently it is 13.3 last year was 14.2. Take out Emporia State and focus on D1 schools and it drops to 12.7. If you focus on Idaho and Montana which are a step above UCR and the average is 11.5 assists per game.

Just a little FYI. But those numbers are not what I would qualify as a ton of assists.

Like I said. I felt the game was very very sloppy. We got lucky with the fact that UCR didn't take advantage of that sloppiness like a top flight team would. The game play was not tight, plain and simple. They will lose games like that against real competition if they play that way. Sorry if the truth hurts, but it is what it is. You are welcome to laugh at me... but don't say you weren't warned when the Zags get pummeled for playing a game like that.

Zag By the Bay
11-19-2007, 11:06 AM
Assist numbers are no difference or slightly below last year's average. Currently it is 13.3 last year was 14.2. Take out Emporia State and focus on D1 schools and it drops to 12.7. If you focus on Idaho and Montana which are a step above UCR and the average is 11.5 assists per game.

Just a little FYI. But those numbers are not what I would qualify as a ton of assists.

Like I said. I felt the game was very very sloppy. We got lucky with the fact that UCR didn't take advantage of that sloppiness like a top flight team would. The game play was not tight, plain and simple. They will lose games like that against real competition if they play that way. Sorry if the truth hurts, but it is what it is. You are welcome to laugh at me... but don't say you weren't warned when the Zags get pummeled for playing a game like that.


Nice rebuttal by breaking down the assist stats and I agree with you about the truth hurts line Long Island.

We all hope the best for the Zags, but the reality is that there are going to be some bumps in the road to success.

LongIslandZagFan
11-19-2007, 11:43 AM
Thanks Zag_BTB... that is all I am trying to say. I love this edition of the Zags, especially on the defensive end... but the Montana game and Idaho games were far better played by the boys IMHO than the UCR game.

The things I saw wouldn't show up in the stats per se... but saw mishandled passes, half hearted drives in the lane and poor shot selection.

To those who pointed out Matt's missed trey... THAT is not poor shot selection... that was just a missed shot the he should take any chance he gets, miss or not. I'm talking about passing those shots up to drive weakly to the lane and the dish out for a less than stellar shot by someone else.

Sorry, I just didn't get any kind of warm fuzzy out of that game... and I really feel like if they do play like that against tougher teams they WILL get beat.

former1dog
11-19-2007, 11:48 AM
The things I saw wouldn't show up in the stats per se... but saw mishandled passes, half hearted drives in the lane and poor shot selection.

Agreed. No more 1 on 3 fast breaks, please.

rennis
11-19-2007, 11:55 AM
Pargo can play better, and Matt can hit threes, and Micah can score more, and Pendo can shoot more, and Kuso can finish stronger...

But will they, and when?

my thoughts exactly. We need to hit our threes. we're missing wide-open looks. Scary.

When the game comes down to the line, and the leaders BZ mentions are on the floor, is someone going to step up and make the big shot? Can Pargo not force silly passes and push tempo unnecessarily in close games? Can Matt hit a wide open 3 pointer in the final 30 seconds when we are down by 3? Can Micah? Can Pargo?

All questions we have yet to see come to the surface.

The good news is we are playing great D. That's something to be very proud of so far.

jim77
11-19-2007, 12:09 PM
I thought the 2nd half was the best half played this year.(UC) We picked them apart and almost scored at will. I have no idea what will happen In Alaska but, I feel the team is playing great considering everything.

Nevtelen
11-19-2007, 12:41 PM
I thought the 2nd half was the best half played this year.(UC) We picked them apart and almost scored at will. I have no idea what will happen In Alaska but, I feel the team is playing great considering everything.

Yeah, but that was because UCR had stopped playing, basically. It wouldn't have been that easy if they'd still been doing more than going through the motions (beyond maybe 1 or 2 players).

Reborn
11-19-2007, 01:02 PM
Nice reply, LIZF. I've been warned. But youve been notified (not warned...that sounds like an attack) as well that the Zags will win the GAS because of their passing, ball handling and offensive discipline. As well as defense of course. If we only had 12 assists against U of Cal Riverside then the person taking stats doesn't know what an assist is. Obviously we saw a different game.

Nevtelen, U of Cal R stopped playing because the Zags tore their hearts out. That's what teams do when dominating teams like the Zags kill their opponents. Zags could have scored 100 quite easily believe me. In at least the last two games. I appreciate Few NOT running up the scores, and demanding that the team practice their offensive sets as he prepares them for a more demanding opponent.

Sure there will be better teams. Dah!!!! And the Zags will play better too. Like someone said, Is their A game going to be as good as ours.

gonza
11-19-2007, 01:09 PM
OK, here's my challenge, LIZF vs. Reborn.
If the Zags win the GAS, LIZF can't post for a week.
If the Zags do not win the GAS, then Reborn can't post for a week.
You guys up to it ??

Reborn
11-19-2007, 01:43 PM
a great idea gonza. any other ideas? I'm up for anything.

It's funny because everyone seems to think we're worthy of our #14 place ranking, and yet when it comes to playing a couple teams who are ranked below us, but in the top 25 than all of a sudden fear sets in and we begin to panic and make irrational statements based on fear. I am NOT afraid, nor am I cocky. My prediction is factual...logical in you need it. Wait until the over/under predictions come out...I don't depend on them though, in fact they are wrong sometimes....I just like the hell out of this Zag team. I've liked them all summer and I've liked them all Fall. I like them more now that I've seen them play. I, for one, can hardly wait to see them play in the GAS because you'll see some things you haven't seen yet.

gonza
11-19-2007, 01:49 PM
You know I love your enthusiasm, but whan people say "my prediction is factual", I get scared. I love the team, but they are young at this point. We saw them trip in the first half of the Montana game because they thought they had so much game that they wouldn't need to try real hard. We saw a replay in the Idaho and UCR game. I would rather they learn that they have to play hard every possession NOW than later. I think they are in for a surprise, but it will make them stronger later. Of course, my predictions are usually way off the mark.

lothar98zag
11-19-2007, 04:03 PM
I don't know how anyone could look at the first half and take away anything positive. The Zags shot 33% from the field. If UCR doesn't turn the ball over as much (many were unforced TOs) then the Zags would not have opened what lead they had.

IMHO it was more UCR beating themselves in the first half.
says here - http://gozags.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2007-2008/gonmb02.html - that GU shot over 50% in the 1st half. wondering where you got your stats.


btw, I know where u r coming from, but am not as "down" as you about where they are @ right now.

UberZagFan
11-19-2007, 04:11 PM
Lothar: why must you insist on wrecking a good post with facts?

Everyone knows that GU shot 52% for the game, outrebounded the opponent by 11, assisted half of its made field goals, and kept the opponent under 40% from the field.

All you are doing is denying the doom and gloomers their moment in the sun.

LongIslandZagFan
11-19-2007, 04:13 PM
That was the stat shown on TV... perhaps before the run at the end, but I was fairly sure it was at the end of the half.

I'm fine with that wager. I'm fully capable of lurking for a week and I hope I will be. But take heed that a game like the one they played against UCR wouldn't fly against the WCC let alone stiffer competition.

Zag By the Bay
11-19-2007, 04:14 PM
says here - http://gozags.cstv.com/sports/m-baskbl/stats/2007-2008/gonmb02.html - that GU shot over 50% in the 1st half. wondering where you got your stats.


btw, I know where u r coming from, but am not as "down" as you about where they are @ right now.

Wrong game, the link you have is the Idaho game...in the UC Riverside game we shot 43% from the field in the 1st half, which included a 1-6 from behind the 3-point arc. For the game vs UCR we made 52.6%.of our shots as we shot 64% in the second half.

lothar98zag
11-19-2007, 04:30 PM
Wrong game, the link you have is the Idaho game...in the UC Riverside game we shot 43% from the field in the 1st half, which included a 1-6 from behind the 3-point arc. For the game vs UCR we made 52.6%.of our shots as we shot 64% in the second half.

:confused: wtf. don't know how that happened. nevermind...

zag67
11-19-2007, 05:08 PM
First I want to say that I agree with Reborn. They have to run the flex offense many times before they can start reacting versus just going through the motions. I believe the coaches wanted them to work the offense as much as they could to get the younger players up to speed.

Also LongIsland, if you consider that they are now getting 12.7 versus last years 14.2 (by the way the 12.7 is the same as last year for the first 3 games), I think that this is a plus. We also have 7 less turnovers.

Last year they started with 6 out of the top 7 players having played in the system the previous year. When you understand that we have lost Josh and have new players of Daye, Sacre, and LG that they are trying to work into the flow of the game, then these stats should be thought as very good. You also have Theo, Foster and Ira that are looking for minutes.

You can also see that the emphasis this year is going to be on D. Last year Eastern, Baylor and Rice averaged 62 points a game for the first 3 games (48 points this year). I think that they probably have spent more practice time here and therefore again might not be as far along on the offensive end as they would like.

Again let them grow. We are going to have some set backs, but they do have some super potential. But in order for potential to grow, they have to play and make errors. But I will go with Reborn and say we should win the GAS.

LongIslandZagFan
11-20-2007, 09:03 PM
:confused: wtf. don't know how that happened. nevermind...


Gozags website is flakey when it comes to clicking on the box scores.

TheBunnieRancher
11-21-2007, 03:30 AM
The start of this season has been different from the past few years in a couple of ways. This is a really green team. Pargo has produced from the backcourt as expected, but we have yet to establish a consistent low post threat. So much of our offensive consistency the past of years has started with pounding the ball down low and then coming back outside for open shots.

We've had some success with Sacre and Kuso the first couple of games but not enough convince me we're ready for top flight opponents. I believe our outside shot is going to be slow to develop this year with a solid low post threat. That being said, anything we've lost to inexperience and injury will be more than generously compensated for by our increased athleticism, depth, and desire on the defensive end. As long as we strive to out work our opponents on the defensive end, we can overcome our offensive learning curve. :cheers:

ZagsGoZags
11-21-2007, 06:35 AM
I wish Reborn and LIZ did not have the agreement that one of them not post their thoughts for a week after the GAS. I like reading them. Why can't the loser have to buy his friends a round of drinks at the next game or something.

LongIslandZagFan
11-21-2007, 07:45 AM
I can't speak for Reborn but look at it this way... I get so tied up with family stuff anyhow that the first four days will be a breeze. It will be when I get back to work that I'll have a problem. You may have noticed that I rarely post on the weekends. Way too busy with soccer and such.

Reborn
11-21-2007, 10:42 AM
I agree with ZagsGoZags. He says, "I like reading them. Why can't the loser have to buy his friends a round of drinks at the next game or something." I like reading LIZF as well. He's one of my favorite posters even though we disagree sometimes. I am withdrawing from the bet. And I almost lose everytime I bet on something so I don't want to jinx the Zags....I hope LIZF agrees to withdraw as well. If he doesn't than I'll accept that.