Review: Pros and Cons from the game

Donate To GopherHole
M

mnsports255

Banned
Joined
Apr 8, 2012
Messages
527
Reaction score
0
Points
16
Pros

An awesome substitution strategy by Tubby
Inbounding the ball and inbounding plays
Clutch performances when the game mattered most
A good combination of inside scoring, floaters, mid-range, and perimeter shots
All starters contributing
ELLIOT ELIASON IS EFFICIENT! He looks like he's On is game finally!

Cons

Still a few too many turnovers (would like to get it in single digits)
No bench scoring
Failure to grab loose balls
That dang foul shooting
Guarding the 3-ball

*What did you guys pull out of the game?
 

How about:
Con - Rodney Williams appearing to be totally disinterested again!
 

Great game by Austin. Good game by EE. Mixed bag from Coleman. Horrible from Rodney. RSIII is making you look disinterested. Pulled it out in the clutch. That has been way too rare the last 3 years.
 

I thought, at times, we moved the ball around very well. Andre Hollins had 8 assists and 1 turnover.
 

mnsports255 said:
Pros

An awesome substitution strategy by Tubby
Inbounding the ball and inbounding plays
Clutch performances when the game mattered most
A good combination of inside scoring, floaters, mid-range, and perimeter shots
All starters contributing
ELLIOT ELIASON IS EFFICIENT! He looks like he's On is game finally!

Cons

Still a few too many turnovers (would like to get it in single digits)
No bench scoring
Failure to grab loose balls
That dang foul shooting


*What did you guys pull out of the game?
Click to expand...

Terrible Gopher play both playing against the zone AND playing zone themselves
A team that looked shaky/scared/unsure of what to do coming down the stretch with terrible plays like Joe Coleman turning it over and strange plays like Mbakwe coming up to set a screen against the top of a zone?
Decision to put Mo Walker in the game
Giving up 3 point looks
Getting a 14-3 lead at home against a marginal team and somehow only being up one at half.
No scoring from the bench...and some of these guys are going to need to play major roles next year

Pros:
The one second on the shot clock in bounds where Coleman scored
"The shot" from Austin Hollins
Andre Hollins strip with 4.5 seconds remaining
A 3 point win counts just as much as a 25 point win in the standings

Officiating gripe: Twice we lost possession of the ball under after a defensive rebound due to an uncalled foul and that accounted for 5 Iowa poiints (we did seem to get a break on the out of bounds on Gessell call after Hollins late strip).
 


Joe Coleman's FIVE turnovers, specifically the ball that he threw up for grabs underneath the Iowa basket that turned into a three point play.

The pro was how ticked Andre got after that play, he slapped the floor hard three times in anger. Wish he would have used those three slaps on coleman's face
 

I forgot to add Julian Welch's 2 turnovers in 6 minutes. What a pick up this guy has been.
 


My thoughts:

1. Turnovers seemed a bit more under control today.

2. I liked the substitution pattern by Tubby today, at least in the first half. In the second half, the guys seemed a bit tired and a few of them could have used a breather. Tubby put Mo Walker in at the end of the first half and immediately a defensive rebound flew through his hands. He shouldn't get any more minutes this season unless the rest of the team fouls out. Hopefully he'll get his act together by fall.

3. Rodney was out of it again. That play with the medium defensive rebound hitting the floor (ending in a jump ball): Rodney was the closest man to the ball, the rest of the team was at least boxing someone out; and he didn't even try to grab the ball. Weird. He had many opportunities to use his amazing athleticism to trap Iowa defenders in corners, and didn't take them. At the end of the game before Dre's last free throw, when Tubby was addressing the bench Rodney just stared ahead calmly, no emotion. Again, weird - you'd think one would appear excited at that moment.

4. At what point does Tubby decide that the team should guard the 3-point line? This started already his first season here. In way too many games the Gophers either give up their lead or let the other team go on a big run; almost always from the 3-point line. Iowa wasn't going to beat the Gophers inside - not with Eliason and Mbakwe in there, especially. So why not guard the 3 - give up the mid-range jumper if necessary, but don't give up the 3.

5. Poor shooting today; while Iowa seemed to shoot quite well - at least from outside. This seems to be a recurring theme of late, including in their two victories (Neb. and Iowa).

6. The refs weren't terrific, but I thought they gave the Gophers more calls than Iowa - the first B1G game this season in which I saw the Gophers with an advantage in this area.

7. Loose balls - Iowa wanted the ball more, and got to most of the loose balls. Same as Indiana, same as Michigan, same as Northwestern. The Gophers' athleticism should enable an advantage in this area - are the players simply too tired or don't want it enough?

8. Defensive rebounding - the Gophers got outrebounded this game, according to the announcers. At what point does Tubby address their scheme of leaving their position to extend for the block; this ideology does get you more blocks, but I don't think it is effective in the defensive goal of giving up fewer points. The Gophers are tops in the B1G in steals and blocks, but near the middle in points given up. This is an odd combination, in my opinion enabled by poor defensive rebounding positioning. The players don't box out well or often enough, either.
 



They won it with a three. But, we just can't depend on the outside shooting. Iowa made a lot of uncontested shots from the outside and they got a lot of offensive rebounds. They also beat us to most of the loose balls. That can make our team look pretty bad.
 

JimmyJamesMD said:
I forgot to add Julian Welch's 2 turnovers in 6 minutes. What a pick up this guy has been.
Click to expand...

Without Welch last year, we may have won just 2 or 3 in the conference. This year has been very disappointing though.

EG#9 said:
Decision to put Mo Walker in the game
Click to expand...

Not sure why that's a big deal. He didn't really do much, good or bad.
 

+
Shot 2FG reasonably well (54.5%) - especially Joe (6/6) and Rodney (5/9).

Marble seemed off today... first time being blanked since he was a freshman.
 

Missed a lot of open 3's today. A little too sloppy. Glad to escape with a win.

We got some nice minutes from Elliot but the rest of the bench was a non-factor. Better enjoy the competitiveness this year.
 



I'm starting to become a fan of Tubby's motion free offense. Watching one guy pound the ball and four guys stand there watching him used to infuriate me. Today I began to recognize its subtle effectiveness. On the last two possessions, when there was a little bit of motion, Iowa was completely lost. Tubby had 'em right where he wanted 'em.
 

Overall, I agree with OP, but also with others talking about Rodney. I've always been a bit lower on him than many, so I know I'm not exactly unbiased, but I thought most frustrating play of the game was when he turned it over on their press and just lay there while Iowa missed two short range shots and then was "rewarded" with a dunk because he didn't hustle back (and was therefore behind the defense). Statistically, his game was okay, and he did make a few jumpshots, which is something you don't expect from him, but when you watch closely.... he's not exactly inspiring.

I think he will get it together and get back to doing what he had done for us in the nonconference. But he needs to do so quickly because, in my opinion, he should be really close to losing minutes.
 

JimmyJamesMD said:
Dr. Don,

1. What is the goal of this season? Do you think we're closer to reaching that goal after today's performance?

2. What is the point of a message board?

Thanks,
JG
Click to expand...

I agree on number 2. On number 1, we are exactly one win closer (which is all the closer we could be). Fair criticism of our weaknesses after a win is a good use of a message board, so long as it comes from people who also give fair acknowledgment of our strength after losses. I don't spend a lot of time talking about the bad after wins, because I don't talk about the good after losses. I'm a pretty simple guy, I'm happy with a win, upset with a loss.
 

JimmyJamesMD said:
Joe Coleman's FIVE turnovers, specifically the ball that he threw up for grabs underneath the Iowa basket that turned into a three point play.

The pro was how ticked Andre got after that play, he slapped the floor hard three times in anger. Wish he would have used those three slaps on coleman's face
Click to expand...

I thought on that one he was falling/pushed out of bounds and maybe throwing it up was better than just taking the ball out of bounds with him.
 

bleedsmaroonandgold said:
I agree on number 2. On number 1, we are exactly one win closer (which is all the closer we could be). Fair criticism of our weaknesses after a win is a good use of a message board, so long as it comes from people who also give fair acknowledgment of our strength after losses. I don't spend a lot of time talking about the bad after wins, because I don't talk about the good after losses. I'm a pretty simple guy, I'm happy with a win, upset with a loss.
Click to expand...

I agree with you 100%. I've only made two minor negative comments, as I usually keep my thoughts to myself. But a message board is meant for people to come on and lose a little steam after a loss or a close win. Yes, many people are way too over the top and its annoying. But my buddy Dr. Donny believes only people he has deemed appropriate should be allowed to say something negative.
 

Cayman said:
I thought on that one he was falling/pushed out of bounds and maybe throwing it up was better than just taking the ball out of bounds with him.
Click to expand...

I believe the rule of thumb is to chuck it as far away as possible
 



Coleman did have some awful turnovers but his mid range game saved us multiple times during scoring droughts too.
 


This game was concerning to me - more so even than the Northwestern game. The troubling part is that Iowa didn't do anything extraordinary. The have an offense and they executed it. Period. The Gophers were a combination of slow to follow their players around the court and also seemingly disinterested. Sorry, but when you say you're going to play some variant of a man-to-man defense, you do have to do something along the lines of guarding your man. On defense, Iowa played fairly vanilla defenses, but they again executed them well and made few mistakes.

It's clear Iowa is a well coached team. On offense they operate fluidly. When something doesn't pan out they move on to the next thing seamlessly. Their screen and rolls are executed fluidly without a lot of wasted motion and wasted time. On defense they know what they're doing and where they're supposed to be. In order to beat them, you have to beat them.

So the disturbing part is that Iowa didn't play out of their minds. They just did their thing efficiently, and the Gophers couldn't keep up very well. I'm glad we got the win and glad we're not going to be swept by them again, but I don't like our chances on the 17th.

By the way, you're my hero today, Austin. Thanks.
 

It was a bit too much of a nail-biter. We should have won handily at home against Iowa. Still, give the guys credit for a W.
 

Bad Gopher said:
This game was concerning to me - more so even than the Northwestern game. The troubling part is that Iowa didn't do anything extraordinary. The have an offense and they executed it. Period. The Gophers were a combination of slow to follow their players around the court and also seemingly disinterested. Sorry, but when you say you're going to play some variant of a man-to-man defense, you do have to do something along the lines of guarding your man. On defense, Iowa played fairly vanilla defenses, but they again executed them well and made few mistakes.

It's clear Iowa is a well coached team. On offense they operate fluidly. When something doesn't pan out they move on to the next thing seamlessly. Their screen and rolls are executed fluidly without a lot of wasted motion and wasted time. On defense they know what they're doing and where they're supposed to be. In order to beat them, you have to beat them.

So the disturbing part is that Iowa didn't play out of their minds. They just did their thing efficiently, and the Gophers couldn't keep up very well. I'm glad we got the win and glad we're not going to be swept by them again, but I don't like our chances on the 17th.

By the way, you're my hero today, Austin. Thanks.
Click to expand...

You raise a couple of interesting points.

The reason that the B1G is the best basketball conference in the country is that it has the best group of coaches. College basketball is "coachcentric." The B1G has terrific coaching talent: Crean, Boelin, Painter, Izzo (of course), Bo (of course), Carmoudy, McCaffrey. We have Tubby. These guys can recruit and coach at high levels. Tubby hasn't shown that here.

Coleman dribbling a ball of of his knee is secondary. It's about getting the best players and putting them in positions to succeed. The best coaches in the B1G at those two functions are Izzo, Ryan, Crean, Painter and Boelin. Tubby is in the second division.
 

jamiche said:
You raise a couple of interesting points.

The reason that the B1G is the best basketball conference in the country is that it has the best group of coaches. College basketball is "coachcentric." The B1G has terrific coaching talent: Crean, Boelin, Painter, Izzo (of course), Bo (of course), Carmoudy, McCaffrey. We have Tubby. These guys can recruit and coach at high levels. Tubby hasn't shown that here.

Coleman dribbling a ball of of his knee is secondary. It's about getting the best players and putting them in positions to succeed. The best coaches in the B1G at those two functions are Izzo, Ryan, Crean, Painter and Boelin. Tubby is in the second division.
Click to expand...

Not sure what Carmody has done that Tubby hasn't. He went .500 in the Big Ten once, giving him a tie for 5th place in the conference, which was also his only conference finish higher than 7th, and of course he's also been at Northwestern about twice as long as Tubby has been here. So I guess his highest finish is higher than Tubby's, but Tubby's also gone .500 twice already in half the time, and made the tournament twice (could have been three or four times without all the injuires IMO), which Northwestern obviously hasn't done.

You also say "of course" after Bo Ryan, and while he's done well for sure, he sort of seems to have plateaued. He has four Sweet Sixteen finishes and an Elite Eight finish, as well as three Big Ten titles. Two of those Big Ten titles were in his first two years though, and we all know big accomplishments aren't as impressive when you do them with the previous coach's players. :) That Elite Eight was eight years ago now, and it just kind of seems like Bo Ryan is good for a given level of success, a Sweet Sixteen, and not much more than that, consistently good, but not great. He also inherited a program that made the tournament the previous three years to his arrival, and only two seasons removed from a Final Four, much better than what Monson and Tubby found when they got here.

Tom Izzo has 7 Big Ten titles to Bo's 3, and has more Final Fours than Bo has Sweet Sixteens, and of course a national title. I think Bo has a better regular season record than Izzo does, but I'd definitely take some 5th, 6th, and 7th place conference finishes in exchange for more conference titles and those Final Fours. Even if you only look what the two have accomplished since Bo got to Wisconsin, they are still equal in conference titles with 3 each, and Izzo has 5th, 6th, and 7th place conference finishes in that time period, but of course much more post-season success. Izzo and Bo are both good coaches, but I'd take Izzo over Bo any day of the week.

As far as single season success goes, it also looks like Beilein and Crean could both accomplish more this season than Bo has, at least in the post-season. The Big Ten is very strong this year, so I doubt either of them will match Bo's best Big Ten record of 16-2.
 

Biggest Pro - a Win.

IN 6 weeks when drawing the field the only thing that matters is that they won this one.
 

jamiche said:
You raise a couple of interesting points.

The reason that the B1G is the best basketball conference in the country is that it has the best group of coaches. College basketball is "coachcentric." The B1G has terrific coaching talent: Crean, Boelin, Painter, Izzo (of course), Bo (of course), Carmoudy, McCaffrey. We have Tubby. These guys can recruit and coach at high levels. Tubby hasn't shown that here.

Coleman dribbling a ball of of his knee is secondary. It's about getting the best players and putting them in positions to succeed. The best coaches in the B1G at those two functions are Izzo, Ryan, Crean, Painter and Boelin. Tubby is in the second division.
Click to expand...

What about Matta?
 

Con: Announcers, in particular Eddie Johnson. They did Illinois too, right? They are terrible!
 

You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom