Ay-Ziggy-Zoomba.com

For seven years we have heard Orr preach defense, defense, defense. But during his tenure at BG (which has felt more like 20 years than seven), the one thing we have seemed to always lack, both as a team and in terms of individual players, is a team or multiple guys who are scorers/shooters. I'm not saying defense isn't important, it clearly is. But SO is offense. Just look at the MAC East alone over the last 5-10 years as to who the best teams were and you'll see Ohio, Kent State and Akron. Those teams could all score, and had guys who could shoot/score. In Orr's tenure at BG, the #1 must frustrating thing to me about his teams (and there's been a lot of things to be frustrated about) has been teams year after year with many guys with little or no ability to shoot and score. I don't mean to single him out (but I'm going to), but I think Luke Kraus was the epitome of Louis Orr basketball. Hey, look, it wasn't Luke's fault. He was given a scholarship and given a starting spot on a D-I team. What was he supposed to do, say no to it? But that was THE problem. For a couple years we started a two guard who simply couldn't shoot or score, and all Orr ever wanted to do was talk about Kraus' defense. That example in a nutshell is Louis Orr basketball. And no matter how much anyone wants to defend his type of teams, that type of formula has failed and it is backed up by his record (which has produced just one winning season, and that was with Dakich's upperclassmen). The numbers don't lie. BG isn't, hasn't and won't be a factor in the MAC again until this changes. The game of basketball produces a winner when you outscore your opponent, and that is something we have struggled to do for years now. You gotta put the ball in the hoop. Period.

Saw the preview of Arkansas/Gonzaga yesterday. Gonzaga is all about the great offense with nice sets. Arkansas is all about a disruptive defense that is in your face anywhere if not everywhere on the court. The problem with our defense is that it does not force enough turnovers which leads to transition offense. I believe defense first works when it leads to those easy transition baskets but we play a defense that works better with a team that runs a good set offense.

It just seems pieces are missing. I see college teams with point guard offenses that are based on point guard penetration first but the rest of the team moves.

Unfortunately we have never seen the offensive or defensive philosophies fully developed.

Unfortunately I think the biggest problem is talent. Now that tale t is here due to the philosophy you outlined 33, but unfortunately we're still stuck with it even when we get a new coach.

Until we get some players that actually have an offensive game I don't think it matters what systems we try to run. Louis has been recruiting athletes with size regardless of hoops skills for his entire tenure. That's why we have nobody that can shoot, pass, or finish around the Tim. It hasn't been a priority for Orr and he hasn't shown any ability to coach those skills either. Taking pure athletes is fine if you've got good fundamental coaches but we're awful in that regard too.

I did see them trying to execute a play yesterday.

I don't think the problem is talent, with one exception. A true point guard or a leader to facilitate the offense. I think if you put Pardon-Stacy or Nate Miller on this team it wouldn't be above .500. I think that it's a collection of good athletes, better athletes then basketball players in some cases, that could be really good if you saw some consistent work at developing them.

hammb wrote:Unfortunately I think the biggest problem is talent. Now that tale t is here due to the philosophy you outlined 33, but unfortunately we're still stuck with it even when we get a new coach.

Until we get some players that actually have an offensive game I don't think it matters what systems we try to run. Louis has been recruiting athletes with size regardless of hoops skills for his entire tenure. That's why we have nobody that can shoot, pass, or finish around the Tim. It hasn't been a priority for Orr and he hasn't shown any ability to coach those skills either. Taking pure athletes is fine if you've got good fundamental coaches but we're awful in that regard too.

Parker, Henderson, Holmes and Clarke can all finish. I think you are overstating this weakness. Could it be better, yes. Would I love to see more development, absolutely. But Parker's best skill is finishing in traffic and Clarke and Henderson are very aggressive taking it to the basket.

No question we are lacking talent. But the beauty of basketball is, you can offset some of those talent gaps by: one, playing a variety of defenses (man-to-man, box-and-one, triangle-and-two, 2-3, 3-2, 1-3-1, etc), and two, simply scoring the ball (make shots, hit free throws). That is one of my favorite things about the sport of basketball. You can thrive with superior talent, especially one on one, but as a team, much weaker or under-advantaged opponents can counter with schemes to defend against it. How many times have we seen a team, on paper, with a skill-set off the charts over another team, but when they play, the other team upsets them. We see it in the NCAA Tournament every year, time and time again. We've also seen it in the Olympics when teams that looked like those old foreign teams colleges used to play exhibition games against in the preseason took down a team of NBA players. The other night I just watched a McDonald's All-American star-studded team in Kentucky at home struggle its ass off to comeback and beat an average Cleveland State game the other night. CSU knew UK was struggling to score outside, they threw a zone at them, and almost won. Line those guys up individually and it isn't even close.

My point to all of this? I actually think our teams under Orr have played good defense. Just about every year I feel no matter who our players are we've been steady defending. However, we have never been good shooting or scoring teams under Orr. Hence, games like last night and the type of seasons we've had under him. We need to score also, it's not only about defending and rebounding.

He's not listening 33.

I think we have a collection of guys with the athletic make up to be decent players. I think we have a coach who is incapable of turning them into actual basketball players. We don't seem to have a coherent sytem we recruit to....look at John Beilein at Michigan. He runs a system based on having bigs who can pass and move the ball and perimter athletes who can run the floor and spot up for threes. He recruits to that system. Can anyone discern what our staff looks for in a recruit? Look at Clawson and the football program..we have a bunch of 6-0" 200Lb or so athletes running around on our back 7 making plays. Look at the recruits we've signed the last few years...have we taken a DB under 5-11? It's easier to find guys if you know what you're looking for and where they'll fit....I honestly cannot tell you what Orr is trying to do here...

Flipper wrote:I think we have a collection of guys with the athletic make up to be decent players. I think we have a coach who is incapable of turning them into actual basketball players. We don't seem to have a coherent sytem we recruit to....look at John Beilein at Michigan. He runs a system based on having bigs who can pass and move the ball and perimter athletes who can run the floor and spot up for threes. He recruits to that system. Can anyone discern what our staff looks for in a recruit? Look at Clawson and the football program..we have a bunch of 6-0" 200Lb or so athletes running around on our back 7 making plays. Look at the recruits we've signed the last few years...have we taken a DB under 5-11? It's easier to find guys if you know what you're looking for and where they'll fit....I honestly cannot tell you what Orr is trying to do here...

This is exactly what I see.

Our collection of players looks to me like we want athletes but there isn't much of a discernible skillset outside of innate athleticism. It looks mostly like we'll just take whatever athletes are willing to come here moreso than a distinct recruiting philosophy.

I didn't agree with Dakich's philosophy on building a basketball team but at least it looked like he had one!

Me too. It's kind of like. Orr is the Matt millen of recruiting. Keeps drafting the same position and ignores all the rest. Kind of like mike brown too. He is convinced he can make very raw decently athletic big men into capable players. There doesn't seem to be a thought of how the player fits with the offensive scheme or the current squad

IMHO, this is the most athletically gifted team Orr has had, and by a good margin. Annnnnd...this is the year that Orr's ineptitude as a coach really stands out in sharp relief.

Sealey, Clarke, and Henderson should have been molded into D1-ready players by now instead of sitting being Kraus, Erger, Brown, and Crawford. Instead, they are upper classmen who are STILL making freshman mistakes, STILL learning to play together, and STILL catching up skill-wise. Holmes, in his 2nd year under Orr's tutelage, should have more have an offensive game in the low post and a reasonable 15' jumper.

Gone is the John Thompson era of "defense wins championships" and "our offense comes from our defense". Also, soon gone will be a passive coach who is content to leave things in "God's hands" and wait for divine results.

Perhaps Orr should step down and let LaMonte Stone finish the year out as coach. At least then Stone would have some head coaching experience under his belt when he leave BGSU after 10 years of loyal service. Chauncey's probably going to redshirt this year, and there is really nothing positive that will come from Orr finishing out year.

303rd in the country in points per game. Obviously, still in the beginning stages of the season that may be skewed, but still. 303rd?

We simply cannot shoot or score. This is pathetic! EMU is daring us to shoot outside and we don't stand a prayer of a chance. We're now shooting 25% for the game and, shocker, are struggling again from the free throw line and three-point arch.

Best offensive movement I've seen from any of our teams in a couple of years. Passing is suspect and the evidence on shooting is overwhelming. We certainly play well considering two major offensive ingredients are poor.

On the other hand the I really like the defense, shot blocking and rebounding.

With depth this team could be a difficult game for everyone in the conference. Without depth...................it doesn't look good.

Watching this team try and score (take your pick between an open shot, a three-pointer or a free throw) is like trying to get milk from a bull. Just isn't gonna happen.