Scrimmage tonight

rangermarkb · Post by **rangermarkb** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:25 pm

I dont think anyone would say that last year was any good but following this board for the past couple of years i dont see how you could say the year before was shitty!! 18 wins is shitty!!! How many 18 plus win seasons have you had in the past 20 years. You really ought to no the facts before you start putting things on the board. 18 wins at the mid-level is like winning 22-24 in the Big-Ten. Hell Coach L had like 2 18plus win season in 11 years and has had like 6 in the last nine at George Mason. I think Dakich has had 4 in the past nine and BG has had 7 in the past 21!!!
I guess that is shitty huh!

Falconfreak90 · Post by **Falconfreak90** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 9:54 pm

And you should know the facts, too.

Thanks for the honest reports everyone. It should be an interesting season.

GO HOOPS

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 10:38 pm

With the pathetic OOC schedule we usually play, no I don't give that much credit for a whopping 18 win season. I guess we were actually mediocre that year, I apologize. Still we did nothing in the conference tournament, and were just barely above .500 in conference play. I don't celebrate mediocrity, sorry.

I don't see how 18 wins against the level of competition we play equals 22 wins by a big conference school, but it's your theory.

We were awful last year, and not much better than awful for the 3 seasons preceding that one. For 4 years I've been going to almost every game knowing we had almost no chance at competing for or winning a conference championship.

This team definitely has some young talent, I'll be anxious to see how they develop.

commonsense · Post by **commonsense** » Sun Oct 15, 2006 11:40 pm

in 2004-2005 we had a good team. We just had no depth. We basically were playing with 6 players. When Fitch got hurt, I believe we were 12-4 and 6-2 in the conference in first place, coming off the big Toledo win. When we lost him, we lost our chance at a MAC championship. However, on the last day of the season we were competing for the MAC west Championship, and we laid an egg against Central Michigan I believe. However, we bounced back 2 days later and beat Ball State, before falling to the top seed in the tournament, Miami. And I think that was just about a week after defeating them. That team had a real chance to be great, and they were fun to watch. I, personally, would consider that a successful season. I do agree that last year was a disaster though.

Dayons_Den · Post by **Dayons_Den** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:04 am

rangermarkb wrote:I dont think anyone would say that last year was any good but following this board for the past couple of years i dont see how you could say the year before was shitty!! 18 wins is shitty!!! How many 18 plus win seasons have you had in the past 20 years. You really ought to no the facts before you start putting things on the board. 18 wins at the mid-level is like winning 22-24 in the Big-Ten. Hell Coach L had like 2 18plus win season in 11 years and has had like 6 in the last nine at George Mason. I think Dakich has had 4 in the past nine and BG has had 7 in the past 21!!!
I guess that is shitty huh!

Yikes no need to get so darn defensive. If you have been lurking around the board for the past couple of years I would think that you would recognize some of the posters and their willingness to support the team. Hammb isn't some dude who signed up last week to trash Dakich and the program. He agonizingly sits through nearly every home game and posts his honest opinion of the team.

You mention heading in to war and feel that coaches/players really only can have an opinion, I would hope that would lead to more constructive talk about the team.

I'll get it started- Dakich has 'his' system. Motion offense and man-to-man defense. He has begrudgingly it seems gone to a zone defense out of necessity- when our numbers have been down due to injuries and what not. Our offense seems to be the same motion offense- sometimes it seems we try to slow it down, but sometimes we have adapted and ran up and down the court.

Do you think coach needs to be more flexible to his personnel? Do we need to adapt to the kids on the team rather than stick to our guns?

My opinion- that motion offense is so painful to watch if you don't have a good point guard and at least one true playmaker off the ball making stuff happen.

Jacobs4Heisman · Post by **Jacobs4Heisman** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 10:18 am

Agree about the point guard, DD. The motion offense NEEDS a quality point guard to "work". We haven't even had a legit D-1 point guard since BP. Hence, ugly offense. Couple that with a lack of athleticism and discipline on defense, and you have the product we've spit out recently.

In college basketball, I don't think you really see much tailoring of the offense to suit kids' talents, unless you have a legit superstar you want to run the offense through. I think you see the best coaches out there put their system in place, and then recruit kids to play in that system. I think with all the defections lately, Dan has had a very difficult time finding kids that will fit into how he wants the game to be played. This is the key. You have to find kids who can play in the system, and you have to make them buy into the system. Coach has struggled mightily the past few years making this happen.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 11:31 am

I agree with both DD & J4H. As I have said on here MANY times the past few years, we will never win until we get a legit PG. The defections have stunk, no doubt, but we haven't lost a good PG yet either.

We have NOT had a legit D1 PG in a BG uniform since Pardon graduated, and he was a transfer.

Has Dan ever brought in, from HS, a legit D1 PG? I'm trying to remember, but cannot think of any. That is a shame, given that we all seem to agree a PG is the biggest key to this offensive system.

Rollo83 · Post by **Rollo83** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 12:47 pm

What has made it worse is that the MAC has been a "guard league" in recent years...especially from the point guard position. It makes our deficiencies even greater when you have to go up against the likes of Haynes, Stovall, Ingram, Battle, Cage, Davis and others night in and night out.

God I wish we had David Greer running the point again!

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:44 pm

Interesting to hear this afternoon on 1470 the Ticket with DD and Norm Wamer talking about the team, DD made a stab at the possiblilty that you dont' really need a pg for the style we run. Who knows, I always thought you need a good pg period but I could be wrong. DD made a comment about one time he conversed with Coach K. of Duke and K said he hasn't had a real true pg for years supposedly. Thing is I guess Duke can maybe get away with cuz of thier massive assortent of talent.

HoustonFalcon · Post by **HoustonFalcon** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 5:56 pm

I don't know exactly what offense BG is running with their motion, I haven't been able to watch them in a long time, but Duke runs a four out and one in offense most of the time, and so you really don't need a true pg in that offense. The point guard only gets the offense going. If you enter into your offense fast enough, and they don't walk the ball up the floor and dribble until someone gets open, then the PG is really not a big necessity. Duke's offense uses a lot of screens to get players open for jump shots, ie Reddick coming off screens for catch and shoot 3's. But there are also a lot of ball screens, rubs, and hand offs where they use their quickness to get to the basket. I think Duke probably spreads the floor better in Coach K's offense then Coach Dakich does. If you think back to the last few years of Duke basketball, they have only had one or two good post players, the bulk of their talent is at the guard position. I taped the Duke/UNC game a couple of years ago because I wanted to study the Duke offense and get some ideas when we were changing our offense to more of a guard oriented offense. It has really opened up our offense. It also helps that Duke can go out and recruit McDonalds all-americans year in and year out.

theziggies · Post by **theziggies** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:07 pm

How many people were at the scrimmage?

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Mon Oct 16, 2006 6:14 pm

theziggies wrote:How many people were at the scrimmage?

I dont' know, maybaye 70-90 people tops. On a related note, ther'es going to be another public scrimmage this Fri. at 12:30 I'm guessing noon not midnight but I'm not entirely sure about that. It could very well be midnight as noon on a weekday might not be easy for people but neither is midnight but I guess better on a Fri midnight than anyother.

collegedropout · Post by **collegedropout** » Thu Oct 19, 2006 12:45 pm

Just got time to post my views on the scrimmage last week. This team has potential especially when Nate become eligable to play(tourney time+fresh legs) We still will not light up the scoreboard but that is not because we cant score, we just will never take quick shots and seems to me we will look to samarco everytime down then shoot if hes not open(not a bad strategy by any means) But my only real concern and I know you cant say his name on this board, but Floyd would be a great addition to this team. WE HAVE NO PG. Bland should be playing at Findlay not BG people on here only like him bc he is more athletic then floyd but by no means even a tenth of the player, Guerin is scrappy but I do not want to have a walk on as my savior PG, The fact is we needed Floyd this year more then any of the others. The MAC is totally a guard league now and if you think Floyd got killed last year (which i disagree with) our PG trio this year will be a joke. Take a look at the box scores floyd outplayed Haynes a number of times in his career and never was the reason we LOST games in my mind. In my mind I think with Millers fresh legs coming in midway though the season (when we notoriously die) I think we are a PG away from a MAC title. Let me also preface my comments on the fact I watched these guys practice all summer during summer school and I would just walk by scrimmages so I have seen a little more of this overall unit.

factman · Post by **factman** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 3:05 pm

I just got back from todays scrimmage, and it was quite different from last Friday night's. They played with few stoppages and there was a lot more flow to the game and guys looked like they have made a lot of improvement in a week.
From my point of view, you can put Nate Miller down right now as an All-MAC player, in the near future. He adds so much with his hustle, rebounding, scoring and PASSING. He is a VERY good passer and sees the court well. I thought Ryne Hamblet was also impressive today, and I wouldn't be suprised to see him running from the PG position a large share of the time this year.
I am really looking forward to this year, and think it will be a fun team to watch.

hammb · Post by **hammb** » Fri Oct 20, 2006 4:09 pm

Thanks for sharing, factman. Last week I was very impressed with Miller's play as well...I wish he were eligible to play right away, but we'll get him soon enough.

I agree with collegedropout about our total lack of PG play, from what I saw at last week's scrimmage. I disagree that this team needed Floyd and that we didn't lose games because of him. He was, IMO, the worst PG in the MAC, so I really don't see how we can be much worse than that this year, can we? He had some value as an off guard, but was really bad at PG. I really wish someone else would emerge as a good distributor at the PG spot, but I don't hold my breath.

Scrimmage tonight

PG In Motion Offense......

Toedy's scrimmage 10/20