Show Posts

This section allows you to view all posts made by this member. Note that you can only see posts made in areas you currently have access to.

Messages - rwd5035

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 161
Penn State Basketball / Re: @ Illinois IGT
« on: Yesterday at 07:15 PM »
We are not NIT bound atm. We are 2-7 in conference, a pace for 4-14 would not get NIT. It is arguable that 6 doesn't even cut it. 7 to guarantee it.

This is a response to PSUChamp saying that we are NIT bound barring a collapse. Winning 2 in 9 is pretty collapsey and we are not on course for it today.

Penn State Basketball / Re: BT
« on: Yesterday at 12:53 PM »
Get well soon BT.

OT / Re: Sixers draft
« on: January 30, 2015, 07:06 AM »
Sixers have 9 wins and play the Timberwolves tomorrow night. Could they exceed my expectations?

Yes they could, they also could not.

As I said, this team wasn't going to end up with < 10 wins.

I was pointing toward my guess of getting win #10 on 2/7. They have a chance to get it a week earlier.

I know, that's why I said they could, they also could not. ;)

OT / Re: Sixers draft
« on: January 30, 2015, 06:42 AM »
Sixers have 9 wins and play the Timberwolves tomorrow night. Could they exceed my expectations?

Yes they could, they also could not.

As I said, this team wasn't going to end up with < 10 wins.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 29, 2015, 12:40 PM »
The first half of basketball we played (mind without BT as well), was very impressive I thought. I did wonder if it would see us share the ball better and we did.

I applaud your attempt to make the game more aesthetically pleasing, all I'm saying to you is it's not an easy thing to fix.

It isn't an easy fix but there are certainly some things that can be done to make it flow better. A few quick rule changes, and a change in the way they handle TV timeouts would go a long way.

OT / Re: Sixers draft
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:18 PM »
To be fair to MCW, he might be a lot better with some better players around him. Give him a chance once this roster is rounded out better.

I expect he would be but wouldn't that by definition make him expendable? That's what applies to role players, better team makes role players play better.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 10:17 PM »
Very happy with the win today over a team we've struggled with. Nice to see that ChambersEra has finally decided to show up now that the team has won two in a row.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:41 PM »
Guys are just in the right spot now offensively, guys aren't afraid to share the ball. The help defense has been there. Very happy so far. 

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:40 PM »
18-2 run.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:39 PM »
Really good stretch of basketball from us here.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:38 PM »
Very good run from us here.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:35 PM »
It's amazing how much better of a team we look on offense when we start sharing the ball.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:21 PM »
That press is going to undo us if we aren't smarter with the ball.

Good point.  What causes the shot clock to reset?  Hitting the rim with a shot, foul, kick ball?  Doesn't the NBA reset the clock to 15 seconds when there is a violation on the defense?  College could do something similar. 

Resets to :14.

I'm still not sure if it's fair to the team that gets fouled to have to rush their shot though. Why shouldn't the offense get a new shot clock if they are fouled?

Because it makes the game more fun to watch since one team doesn't have a chance to hold the ball for a minute. That's what the whole point of this debate is. To make the game more aesthetically pleasing.

In CFB or the NFL, if the defense commits a foul, like pass interference or defensive holding, the offense gets an automatic first down. A "fresh set of downs" in football is somewhat similar to a "fresh shot clock". What you are suggesting would be like forcing the offense to start at "2nd down" instead of "1st down" after the defense commits a foul like PI.

But not all penalties get you a first down, only some do. So this isn't even a relevant comparison. Stop making cross-sport comparisons that aren't relevant.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Minny IGT
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:09 PM »
Even game early, this is one we need to have if we want to salvage an NIT bid.

OT / Re: Sixers draft
« on: January 28, 2015, 07:08 PM »
All those players you listed are role players. They are always turning over in the league. If Furkan, Sims and Wroten are all here I'd be surprised. Furkan maybe as a rebounding, energy guy off the bench. But there's not really a need for Furkan, Grant, Sims, Saric, Noel and Embiid. One of Furkan and Sims is gone in that scenario and since Sims is the one with the smaller contract, that question is already answered for us. I haven't seen much from Furkan though that makes me think he's a long term guy.

I don't think a Noel, Embiid or Saric trade is on the table for the foreseeable future, at least not for another two years. KJ seems like a starting 2 guard to me. Grant might be a bench guy but his length and athleticism are valuable.

I just don't see the same MCW that you do. He's a good player but his limitations are there to see. He turns it over too much and doesn't make good decisions, nor is he a good shooter. Until he figures out the offensive part of his game, he's expendable.

That's why we have maybe 1/2 of the roster here that could be here for a future playoff run. If 9 of these players could be here for a future playoff team, why aren't we close to it now?

There are lots of creative ways to improve end game situations, I have some ideas, but the idea of lowering the shot clock is not one of them. If you reduce the shot clock, then make CBB even more like the NBA, which is not a good thing.

What's wrong with it becoming more like the NBA? I've already seen quite a few misconceptions ITT about what the NBA game even is anymore.

College teams, especially lower level college teams, need 35 seconds to run motion offenses. They need that time to set up their offense. Take Princeton for example. A backdoor cut might not materialize in the first 20-25 seconds. A 35 second shot clock has been a standard for so long, it seems silly to even consider lowering that. That is not the problem with college basketball.

Who cares what this does to Princeton and other like boring, motion offenses? Sure, the :24 shot clock has its disadvantages for certain offenses, but it also creates a greater flow to the basketball game. If you want to make it :28 or :30, I'm fine with that, but :35 is way too long. I don't care about the effects this has on these types of offenses that aren't fun to watch.

But if you don't think a lower shot clock = more flowing game, then you are quite simply incorrect. There are many things that need to be done to improve college basketball. For one, when someone fouls with :05 left in the shot clock and a team isn't in the bonus, the clock resets to :35! That is ridiculous, there needs to be some kind of compromise with this if :35 is here to stay.

The idea though that we should stay with the :35 shot clock because it's been here a while is a strict adherence to stare decisis and completely ignores some of the major problems in college basketball. The women's game has a lower shot clock, why can't the men's at least match it? It took the game almost 10 years to realize that the :45 shot clock was too long, why can't we accept :35 is too long?

If a team built up a lead throughout an entire game, why should they be forced to take quick shots to give the other team more chances to come back?

This point doesn't even make sense. So the team built a lead using the :24 shot clock ALL GAME and this will somehow come to their disadvantage at the end of the game? How does that even make sense? Your comparison to the NFL and college football is irrelevant because teams aren't intentionally committing penalties so the other team can attempt extra points in an attempt to get the ball back.

College basketball games are taking way too long at the end because of fouls and timeous. We were supposed to have a game on ESPNU against Rutgers on January 3rd air at 7 PM. Virgina/Miami went to two overtimes and PSU didn't get on until about 1/4th of the half was remaining iirc. Two OT periods + 40 minute college basketball game = over 2 1/2 hours of game time. It took almost 40 minutes to play 10 minutes of basketball.

A shorter shot clock (can even be :30 or :24 or somewhere in between for all I care), removing a full shot clock reset once the shot clock reaches a certain threshold when a foul occurs (say it's a :30 shot clock, if foul occurs :15 or under, clock resets to :15 instead), are just a couple of ways to help improve the flow of the game and not turn it into a boring slugfest.

we had like 3 different 'stall' sets on my jr high and high school basketball teams.  :)  winning at any cost, even at 13 years old.

This is my biggest problem with developing basketball players. Developing skills is 100% more important than winning a basketball game from ages 8-15/16. I can accept winning in varsity high school is actually important.

Take German soccer's development. The players don't play competitive tournaments until they reach the age of 15. It's all skill development and now it is the richest in talent country in world soccer.

EDIT - I'm trying to find an article for the Germany point but I can't find it. I remember hearing it from someone during a sportscast. May have been wrong.

Reducing the shot clock is a good idea to help reduce end game fouling. If a team is down 2 possessions with :50 seconds left, trailing team now has to foul instead of let the :35 play out. But if it's a :24 shot clock, the trailing team still theoretically would have :26 on the clock if the other team winded it down and the D managed to secure the rebound. There's still time to defend, force a turnover. Now, if a team is in that situation, they would have :15 left, large difference.

Penn State Basketball / Re: Thank you Ed Dechellis
« on: January 27, 2015, 03:08 PM »
Let's see where we end up before we claim the season a failure. It doesn't look promising but I'm not going to say it yet.

I do not like the idea of a shorter shot clock, just means teams have less time to actually run a play.  Who wants NBA style iso game.
2.  for whatever reason, you do not see teams fast break anywhere near as much as they used to and that was a fun game to watch. i have no idea why and would love to hear some reasons.  but very little full or three quarter court real in your face press defense and limited times i see any team really push the ball.  and almost never the old secondary fast break that Dean Smith ran where you at least pushed ball up court after a made shot to see if you could get a defensive breakdown.
3.  AAU ball.  has been said many times but players coming up do not know the fundamentals like they use too.  remember the Bruce Parkhill curl and elbow shot that he ran to perfection with Deron Hayes and Rashon Carlton.  You almost never, every see any plays run that free guys up for a mid range jumper as nobody can shoot them.  Way too many teams just relying on throwing up the 3 ball and hoping they make it (PSU included) and not enough real motion offense being run looking to free guys up.

You obviously don't watch much NBA basketball if you think most teams run ISO ball.  The only teams in the NBA who base their offense around that are awful (Knicks, Lakers).  Seriously, go watch the Spurs, Hawks, Warriors, or Mavericks.  They play absolutely beautiful offensive ball.

Teams don't play quickly for a few reasons, but the main one is that coaches have become control freaks.  They don't trust players to play the game, so they want possessions to be slowed down with the most input possible from them.  The 35 second clock makes this more apparent.  You don't want teams to run ISO, but all the 35 second clock does is encourage that.  Cutting it to 24 seconds would get rid of 10 seconds of waiting for a set to begin and force teams to start their offense more quickly.

And finally, people can shoot mid range jumpshots.  They're simply easy to defend and horribly inefficient.  I was reading an article the other day stating that wide open mid range jump shots have a lower expected value to a team than contested 3's.  The mid range jump shot "died" because the game evolved.  If this (or any) team centered their offense around that thinking they would be awful offensively.  In fact the Lakers tried something similar this year, and are off to the worst start in team history.


Penn State Basketball / Re: Newbill
« on: January 26, 2015, 05:39 PM »

Still not in their top 50 seniors ranked on

OT / Re: Sixers draft
« on: January 26, 2015, 05:38 PM »
Only thing I can see as proof of a turnaround or a plan, is that they have a lot of long, athletic players.  Few defensive mismatches.  I currently see 9 players who could be on the rebuilt roster altough I suspect 2-4 will get traded if they continue to take the best player and not force a fit positionally in the draft.

You see 9? I see five, maybe six.

Embiid, Noel, Covington, McDaniels, Grant, and maybe MCW.

Everyone else is expendable.

Penn State Basketball / Re: vs Rutgers IGT
« on: January 24, 2015, 02:17 PM »
Not to toot my own horn in that regard, but after the Michigan State game I said this:

I like that you want to toot your own horn after one win. Let's see if this works against better teams before you start tooting man.

Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 ... 161