Stop the bandwagon, I want to get off.

kollege stewdent · Post by **kollege stewdent** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:33 pm

[quote="BGGrad01"][quote="kollege stewdent"]The problem, as I see it, is that in the 4 MAC games minutes are being given to some of our players that are not playing well. Moton, Larson, Sims, Bland Leifield and Dusan are struggling right now. They represent over 26% of our total playing time per game, .07% of our points, 25% of our turnovers and only 10% of our assists. I’m not saying that our 1 and 3 start is the fault of only these 6 guys. But I feel that DD needs to give more playing time to the other guys that are producing.[/quote]

As I said last night after the game, I do not understand what is so difficult about throwing Hamblet, Samarco, Miller, Marschall, and Polk onto the floor. Keep those guys out there until they need a break or until things start going really sideways. When that happens, coach them up on the sidelines and get Moten, Clements, Lefeld, and Larson some minutes. It just makes way too much sense to me.

I can't stand the quick hook method of substitution that Dakich has. Moten jacked up a shot in the two minutes that he was out there in the first half last night. He watched the rest of the game from the bench. If he had missed his first shot at UW-GB would DD have pulled him for the rest of that game? I guess we were lucky that he made his first shot and ended up making the all-tournament team.[/quote]

I think Guerin should get some major minutes too
He has led our team in assists 3 of the last 4 games with only 4 turnovers, 3rd on the team in scoring, 4th in rebounds and VS Ohio U tied for the most RB's for the game.

I know he's only a walk-on but he's playing well.

BGGrad01 · Post by **BGGrad01** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 12:48 pm

kollege stewdent wrote:I think Guerin should get some major minutes too
He has led our team in assists 3 of the last 4 games with only 4 turnovers, 3rd on the team in scoring, 4th in rebounds and VS Ohio U tied for the most RB's for the game.

I know he's only a walk-on but he's playing well.

I forgot about Guerin. He has definitely earned his minutes. When he is in the game, he has an impact on the offensive end, whether it is from passing or making the open shots.

BleedOrange · Post by **BleedOrange** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:01 pm

ZiggyZoomba wrote:I did not see the game, nor do I have any "insider info" on this, but I don't think any of this is directly related to Martin's "shots" per se. I think it has more to do with a team "vision" of offense.

Martin Samarco is a great shooter and a great scorer. As the old adage goes, "Shooters shoot." He thinks points first... HIS points. That's just how it is and it's what we've needed sometimes.

It's my guess, and I believe it was evidenced in the second half last night, that Dan feels we're a better offensive TEAM (and maybe a better team altogether) when the TEAM has a common goal of scoring as opposed to a player scoring. It's a subtle difference, but one I think I get. It's like my signature below... it should ALWAYS be team first. Even if Martin was taking (and MAKING) OPEN shots that weren't what the offense was supposed to produce then that wasn't leading to the overall team goal.

Maureen's story had a few telling quotes IMO:

Dakich said of the second-half efforts, "We didn't jack shots, we didn't quick-shoot, we threw the ball inside, we got after it on defense."

Charlie said, "They still ran motion but got to the basket a lot quicker... They were a passing team in the first half, and a driving team in the second half."

And, Nate Miller said, "I guess you could say it's a big step, because we're doing what coach wants us to do," Miller said. "Once we start playing like that on a consistent basis, we're going to be a tough team."

When a team starts looking to an individual as opposed to an offensive scheme, it's doomed to failure. Look at the first 8 years of Michael Jordan's career. He scored 37 freaking points a game in the '88 season... did the team win a championship? Nope. Not until the supporting cast and the Triangle offense came along... not the Michael offense, the Triangle...

I'm really behind Dakich on this. I'm not sure if we're going to be winning a whole lot of games, but I totally agree with his thinking and his team philosophy.

Grant, I think you're 100% on the money on this.

I've said again and again that Samarco has been shooting too much and forcing too much. He's not consistent or athletic enough to be taking 40-50% of our shots. Our offense can't revolve around him, and it has been for better (Buffalo) or worse (OU). Can't live that way. It's not a winning formula.

I don't to be anti-Samarco. What we need is Samarco shooting less but still shooting. With a team approach, the looks he gets will be OPEN looks.

Off topic, but I still want to mention that I'm very enthralled with Nate Miller's CONSISTENCY in scoring and rebounding. He's been by far our most consistent player.

orangeandbrown · Post by **orangeandbrown** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:10 pm

hammb wrote:I'm gonna enjoy the ride, whether we win or lose.

Me too.

RobbyFalcon · Post by **RobbyFalcon** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 1:16 pm

I was there last night and here's what I saw.

MU can shut down any one scorer and they shut down Samarco in the first half. DD shut him down in the second half.

Miller was very impressive with his hustle and his play. Polk had some real nice moments as did Maschall. The rest of the cats were just guys running up and down the court. Sometimes they played well, sometimes they didn't.

BG seemed shocked that Miami liked to go backdoor. MU has been running those sets for years and I've never seen them work so often as they did last night. MU got a lot of passes to wide open guys on the blocks.

We threw the ball out of bounds with no one touching it at least three times. And there were a lot of times when a pass was made to an open Falcon and the BG player slightly fumbled the pass just enough to let the RedHawk get back. We lost a lot of open shots that way.

MU had nice balanced attack. With about 2:00 left in the game and BG down by 7 or so, the 5 players we had on the court had accounted for only 18 points.

Still we had a chance to win. MU hit some shots down the stretch and we couldn't get over the hump.

There were about 112 people there last night. Millet is dark and warm and drowsy.

GO BG!
Beat KSU!

Falconboy · Post by **Falconboy** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 4:54 pm

RobbyFalcon wrote:
There were about 112 people there last night. Millet is dark and warm and drowsy.

GO BG!
Beat KSU!

The box score had the attendance at around 3500.

Flipper · Post by **Flipper** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:15 pm

I hate Millet Hall...although when Grant went to Miami I think it was called Mullet Hall.

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 5:22 pm

BG seemed shocked that Miami liked to go backdoor.

I'm not

BleedOrange · Post by **BleedOrange** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:32 pm

kdog27 wrote:
BG seemed shocked that Miami liked to go backdoor.
I'm not

WHAMMMMM!!!!!

(*** you, flat on the floor and completely discombobulated ***)

KDOG27! Now, you KNOW you can't be bringing that filthy talk in my family message board C'mon man! Are you out of your mind? WOOO WOOO WOOO WOOO. You better get your act togethor, or you're gonna be in a world of HURT. MY world, kdog27, MY WORLD.

Post by **ZiggyZoomba** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 7:45 pm

Flipper wrote:I hate Millet Hall...although when Grant went to Miami I think it was called Mullet Hall.

That's good stuff, right there!

kdog27 · Post by **kdog27** » Thu Jan 18, 2007 9:38 pm

Sorry BO, I'm on my way to confession right now.