Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 26

Thread: Coaching move of the game

  1. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by MU88 View Post
    Coaching move of the game (or lack thereof) was Jay Wright letting his players continue to hoist up threes without bringing them in line. Seems like he wanted to prove a point to his team, namely, if you get away from the game plan, bad things can happen. A game like this should help Wright get his players attention over the next few weeks. I think Wright would have coached more aggressively if this game mattered.

    BTW, MU's defense was just awful last night. We didn't win because we played zone. We won because Nova quit following their game plan and decide to shoot 15 threes in the last 8 or 9 minutes. They tore apart our 1-3-1 all night. Even in the final 10 minutes, most of their shots were wide open and uncontested. VU simply missed. I believe VU was 6-34 from three. At the ten minute mark, I think they were 4-19. To punctuate our defensive failings, we even gave up a fairly uncontested layup on VU's final possession.

    Wojo's best adjustment was on the offensive end when he started to exploit VU's foul trouble. They ran the weave until they got right player, Hart, guarding the ball. As Mac pointed out in the post game, VU tried to give Hart help and it resulted in a either an open three (e.g., Hauser) or a foul. Exploiting a person with 4 fouls is not something MU has done very well during Wojo's tenure. So, it was nice to see.

    Before the game, our group gave MU about a 5% chance of winning last night. After, we all agreed that we would have no more than a 5% chance of winning if the teams met again, maybe less since that game would not be at the BC. It was a nice win. But, we still have a very long way to go to consistently compete with the best teams in the country.
    As I noted in another thread or here, MU went small taking Luke out for the last 6 minutes which helped in attacking the foul-troubled Reynolds and Hart as you note and also made the 1-3-1 more effective. Prior to that, Nova was shredding the zone. After that, Nova was settling for 3s because they were not getting the inside looks.

  2. #12

    Thumbs up

    Quote Originally Posted by MU88 View Post
    Coaching move of the game (or lack thereof) was Jay Wright letting his players continue to hoist up threes without bringing them in line. Seems like he wanted to prove a point to his team, namely, if you get away from the game plan, bad things can happen. A game like this should help Wright get his players attention over the next few weeks. I think Wright would have coached more aggressively if this game mattered.

    BTW, MU's defense was just awful last night. We didn't win because we played zone. We won because Nova quit following their game plan and decide to shoot 15 threes in the last 8 or 9 minutes. They tore apart our 1-3-1 all night. Even in the final 10 minutes, most of their shots were wide open and uncontested. VU simply missed. I believe VU was 6-34 from three. At the ten minute mark, I think they were 4-19. To punctuate our defensive failings, we even gave up a fairly uncontested layup on VU's final possession.

    Wojo's best adjustment was on the offensive end when he started to exploit VU's foul trouble. They ran the weave until they got right player, Hart, guarding the ball. As Mac pointed out in the post game, VU tried to give Hart help and it resulted in a either an open three (e.g., Hauser) or a foul. Exploiting a person with 4 fouls is not something MU has done very well during Wojo's tenure. So, it was nice to see.

    Before the game, our group gave MU about a 5% chance of winning last night. After, we all agreed that we would have no more than a 5% chance of winning if the teams met again, maybe less since that game would not be at the BC. It was a nice win. But, we still have a very long way to go to consistently compete with the best teams in the country.
    GTFO, Buzz Killington.

  3. #13
    The 1-3-1 the way we played it was designed to hem Brunson in......it totally stopped his penetration. Nova mostly shot 3s because they couldn't get to the rim....they still moved the ball well and got lots of open looks....but we got lucky...they missed them all down the stretch. I was surprised that Brunson and Hart took those 3s late early in the shot clock.

    I also thought it was smart for Wojo to go man in the last possession.......he said he was afraid to give up a 3........they were so due to make 1.

    The next time they see a 1-3-1 I'm sure they will attack it better but in this game....on this night......it gave us a chance to get lucky.

    I never thought we were going to win until the last rebound was secured........How about scoring 50 points in the second half against that team? Even with all the missed free throws?

    Duane with the 2 biggest free throws of his life........and Reinhardt is at least the current answer to who gets the ball in a tie game with 30 seconds left.

    Did he actually get fouled on the drive? I looked and couldn't see it for sure.

  4. #14
    Quote Originally Posted by Nukem2 View Post
    As I noted in another thread or here, MU went small taking Luke out for the last 6 minutes which helped in attacking the foul-troubled Reynolds and Hart as you note and also made the 1-3-1 more effective. Prior to that, Nova was shredding the zone. After that, Nova was settling for 3s because they were not getting the inside looks.
    In the last 6 minutes, excluding free throws, here are Nova's possessions and their duration:

    32 sec, missed 3 (maybe shot clock was reset?)
    14 sec, missed 3
    14 sec, turnover
    20 sec, made 17 footer
    26 sec, missed 3
    23 sec, missed 3
    4 sec, layup
    29 sec, missed 3
    15 sec, missed 3
    9 sec, missed 3
    3 sec, layup
    11 sec, missed layup

    With a couple exceptions, not sure VU settled for threes, but they sure kept shooting them. Seems like they hoisted a bunch of shots with plenty of time on the shot clock. Still had 3 layups attempts in the final 2 minutes and 15 seconds. It seemed like they stopped looking inside, even though it was still available.

  5. #15
    Some of those layups were on offensive rebounds...

  6. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by Markedman View Post
    Some of those layups were on offensive rebounds...
    Yup.

  7. #17
    Quote Originally Posted by MU88 View Post
    Coaching move of the game (or lack thereof) was Jay Wright letting his players continue to hoist up threes without bringing them in line. Seems like he wanted to prove a point to his team, namely, if you get away from the game plan, bad things can happen. A game like this should help Wright get his players attention over the next few weeks. I think Wright would have coached more aggressively if this game mattered.

    BTW, MU's defense was just awful last night. We didn't win because we played zone. We won because Nova quit following their game plan and decide to shoot 15 threes in the last 8 or 9 minutes. They tore apart our 1-3-1 all night. Even in the final 10 minutes, most of their shots were wide open and uncontested. VU simply missed. I believe VU was 6-34 from three. At the ten minute mark, I think they were 4-19. To punctuate our defensive failings, we even gave up a fairly uncontested layup on VU's final possession.

    Wojo's best adjustment was on the offensive end when he started to exploit VU's foul trouble. They ran the weave until they got right player, Hart, guarding the ball. As Mac pointed out in the post game, VU tried to give Hart help and it resulted in a either an open three (e.g., Hauser) or a foul. Exploiting a person with 4 fouls is not something MU has done very well during Wojo's tenure. So, it was nice to see.

    Before the game, our group gave MU about a 5% chance of winning last night. After, we all agreed that we would have no more than a 5% chance of winning if the teams met again, maybe less since that game would not be at the BC. It was a nice win. But, we still have a very long way to go to consistently compete with the best teams in the country.

    JHC....just enjoy the win. That's why they play the games.

  8. #18
    Wojo said that in that final huddle, he asked the guys if they wanted to go man or play zone. Players said they wanted to play man so that is what they went with.

    Yes, we went small when we took Luke out, but we went big when we took Rowsey out. Had a 6'6" PG and a 6'8" center.

  9. #19
    Quote Originally Posted by MU_Iceman View Post
    Well...Hmmm, I was one of the loudest advocates for this team playing zone, but as usual was told I was an idiot and it would NEVER work with this team...well lo and behold...Maybe I'm not so stupid after all. Great game, great win..what an atmosphere.
    You keep repeating this, but it is not completely correct. The disagreements with you were with the Wisconsin game. As I recall, Wojo was an idiot for not going zone to beat the Badgers. Any point made against that train of thought was met with some histrionics (which is ironic that you feel people called you an idiot, reread some of the attacks you made on people in that thread).

    I, as many others, disagreed that that was a smart play against UW. Doubling down on Happ might have been better. Employing a zone as a change of pace, maybe. You cited, as your sole proof, Creighton. Well, they doubled down on Happ. That was the difference. After that game, UW changed completely how they played zone. When they played Cuse, they crushed their zone. Handled it so much differently than against Creighton. Hayes was a completely different player and killed the zone with his passing (killed UW at Creighton with his shooting).

    Getting to yesterday, even with a successful finish, MU's zone was absolutely destroyed when they played it for most of the game. Their passing and ball movement had wine open look after wide open look. When they missed, they had easy put backs, because of the zone. It worked out in the last 5 minutes, but that is in large part on Nova, with some to MU. If MU played zone against UW, it would not have mattered. UW was prepared for the zone and had the players on the inside to crush the zone.

    So, no matter what happened yesterday, I still firmly believe you were wrong about UW.

  10. #20
    Reinhardt was definitely fouled by Jenkins. And the problem with zone is that it won't work as our base defense. I don't think anyone has argued that it shouldn't be there as a wrinkle, but not for 40 minutes. Last night Villanova continued to get boards against the zone and got tons of open looks that didn't fall. It confused them, but if teams scouted us and had time to analyze it, they'd make us pay with threes and pass penetration. Nova missed their threes and didn't adjust well enough. I don't think it will work nearly as well if we see them again at MSG.

Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 123 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •