Started By
Message
re: Texas A&M Basketball 2015-2016 - Sweet Sixteen Edition!!
Posted on 1/13/16 at 1:38 pm to tmc94
Posted on 1/13/16 at 1:38 pm to tmc94
quote:
But....we've barely touched our potential - Hogg and Gilder especially. Hogg just needs a kick in the arse. He needs to work harder to find his shot and play defense. He looks effortless but I watch him at times and he's exactly that. House is out there moving to find a shot and DJ seems to be content to just let it come to him.
Gilder is different. That dude's an animal but so far he has that freshman look in his eyes. When he gets that Donald Sloan killer instinct, he's going to take off like a rocket. He's already an elite defender but he hesitates too much on offense. He's afraid to put up his shot at times and he looks to pass too much when he drives to the hole. He just needs the confidence of one big game imo
I agree with this. I am so excited about our freshman. By the end of the year we may be better than we are playing now.
0
Posted on 1/13/16 at 1:42 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
I was incorrectly judging based off of past seasons as well 
Posted on 1/13/16 at 1:42 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
January 26, 2013: Georgia 59, Texas A&M 52
February 9, 2013: Georgia 52, Texas A&M 46
February 8, 2014: Georgia 62, Texas A&M 50
February 11, 2015: Georgia 62, Texas A&M 53
If we hold them to 59 (~their avg) then I am feeling great about this game.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:04 pm to tmc94
quote:
holy shite. missed this one. As someone who has posted total bullshite as unassailable fact on this board over and over, you really have no room to talk bro. I've given you a total pass because I'm sure you honestly believed it, but now you are taking shots at me for poking fun? LOL
I have given multiple very thorough breakdowns of the team and offense to support my positions, and your response is that I'm bitching about not being able to beat the 1996 Chicago Bulls.
It's a defense mechanism, an attempt to dismiss my posts with sarcasm and hyperbole to avoid the fact that you either can't or won't actually offer an intelligent response.
I don't have anything against you personally, calm down.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:10 pm to tmc94
quote:
At this point, it's clear you don't enjoy things. I don't mind that I do nor will I apologize for it. So please leave your straw men at the door
I enjoy winning a lot, I'm just not so passive and weak willed to cave to the idea that complaining about certain aspects of a team while that team is winning makes one a bad fan.
Objectively, Billy Kennedy is a poor offensive coach. That is true whether this team few knocked out in round one or wins the whole damn thing. The ability to acknowledge that we are both a good team and one with inherent flaws in certain areas isn't a bad thing.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:23 pm to Roger Klarvin
Regardless of it being coaching or not. We are a good offensive team this year.
Off Eff: 1.104, 31st
PPG: 79.5, 47th
Effective FG%: 53.6%, 45th
And on D too.
Off Eff: 0.917, 30th
Opp PPG: 66.0, 51st
Opp Effective FG%: 47.1%, 89th
Off Eff: 1.104, 31st
PPG: 79.5, 47th
Effective FG%: 53.6%, 45th
And on D too.
Off Eff: 0.917, 30th
Opp PPG: 66.0, 51st
Opp Effective FG%: 47.1%, 89th
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:49 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
quote:
I don't even know what this is. Kennedy has beaten every single team in the conference except for Georgia.
The reason is Mark Fox likes the 3-2 matchup zone, which is kryptonite to a Billy Kennedy offense. In four games against them we have scored 46, 50, 52 and 53 points.
We struggle so much against it because it not only brings out our usual ineptitude against zone defenses (due to our scheme lacking movement and penetrating opportunities) but also limits what little ability we have had in years past to shoot over it. The 3-2 matchup zone results in shooters taking more contested jumpers than you see against a typical zone because it doesn't sag.
So what ends up happening is we swing the ball around for 25 seconds or so then jack up contested jumpers. What might make a difference this year is we have more shooters and a great offensive rebounder in Davis.
This post was edited on 1/13/16 at 3:51 pm
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:56 pm to Farmer1906
quote:
Regardless of it being coaching or not. We are a good offensive team this year.
Off Eff: 1.104, 31st
PPG: 79.5, 47th
Effective FG%: 53.6%, 45th
We are a good transition team, which is an important distinction. Our team is very good at pushing the ball up court. If you count just posessions in which we shoot in the first ten seconds of the shot clock, our offensive efficiency is an incredible sixth nationally. When we shoot later than that, our efficiency drops to a pedestrian 68th. Given our borderline elite offensive talent, that's much too low IMO.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 3:59 pm to Roger Klarvin
Wouldn't a 3-2 zone be vulnerable inside?
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:05 pm to CGSC Lobotomy
In theory, but a combination of traditionally mediocre post play and poor scheme has prevented us from taking advantage of it.
Davis could be the biggest difference between the past and this year.
Davis could be the biggest difference between the past and this year.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:11 pm to Roger Klarvin
Transition is still offense. Most good transition team aren't as good in the half court unless you're the Spurs from a few years ago.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:12 pm to Roger Klarvin
What has happened lately is that we cannot hit our 3s. When we aren't hitting our 3s then the zone isn't forced to over extend and can prevent entry and betting double the post play. We knock down shots and they either spread the zone out or they give up on zoning all together.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:23 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
I have given multiple very thorough breakdowns of the team and offense to support my positions, and your response is that I'm bitching about not being able to beat the 1996 Chicago Bulls.
I neither responded to you nor mentioned you. Narcissism is a terrible thing. I likely did no more than skim your posts Roger as you have an awful tendency to repeat yourself over and over. And whip this board with post quantity
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:24 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:I'm very much on record of not being a BK fan. However, I think you need to learn meanings of words before using them. Your opinion is not now, nor has it ever been, objective fact.
Objectively, Billy Kennedy is a poor offensive coach.
As farmer rightly points out, our OE is 31/351 according to KenPom. That's objective. So while your opinion that BK is not a good offensive coach may in fact be correct, the objective data does not actually support it at the moment.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:27 pm to Farmer1906
quote:
What has happened lately is that we cannot hit our 3s
this is true. What concerns me is that maybe we aren't as good at shooting 3s as we appeared earlier.
I think part of the problem is that House has just been cold. But we need Hogg and Gilder to shoot like I think they are capable of. They've both had an awful lot of good looks though so you have to think one of them breaks out soon
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:28 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
In theory, but a combination of traditionally mediocre post play and poor scheme has prevented us from taking advantage of it.
Davis could be the biggest difference between the past and this year.
Very solid last couple of posts, and this is spot on. Our biggest problem so far against the zone is actually getting the ball inside to Davis, which to your point does go back to coaching, as well as Davis being young. We have even Tried Caruso at the top of the key, but we just haven't been able to get the pass inside. Caruso Is by far the best at actually penetrating against the zone and making the right pass when it collapses on him. Problem is we just haven't been able to do it enough effectively. I'm hoping that gilder has that game where it just clicks for him, because I think he can also effectively penetrate the zone.
I really thought this year we would have the shooters to just kill it against the zone, and we still might. It's been a relatively small sample size. Hogg would be my player to watch. Either we are hitting our open looks against Georgia and win big, or we aren't and are expecting another miss. st. type game. And that's the biggest difference between this team and previous squads, we can win ugly.
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:48 pm to tmc94
quote:
Your opinion is not now, nor has it ever been, objective fact.
The difference between seeing it as opinion vs fact is dictated solely by one's knowledge of the game.
To people with a thorough understanding of the game, it's an objective fact. As much as saying running base 4-3 defense against a four wide set in football is bad coaching. If you don't know what a 4-3 defense is, one can see how that might be perceived as opinion. It is nevertheless a fact.
Your claim that it is opinion is effectively an argument from incredulity.
quote:
As farmer rightly points out, our OE is 31/351 according to KenPom. That's objective. So while your opinion that BK is not a good offensive coach may in fact be correct, the objective data does not actually support it at the moment.
And I've already addressed that. There are lies, damn lies and statistics. Very frequently stats are used in a subjective manner. The proof is in the analysis of the film.
This post was edited on 1/13/16 at 4:52 pm
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:51 pm to Roger Klarvin
Is that where the guy with the ball thingy tried to throw it to one of the other guys that want to catch the ball thingy?
Posted on 1/13/16 at 4:52 pm to Old Sarge
Your attempts at humor are always appreciated sarge
Posted on 1/13/16 at 5:15 pm to Roger Klarvin
quote:
Your attempts at humor are always appreciated sarge
Old Sarge is always funny. You, on the other hand, are just idealistic and irrelevant.
Page 60 of 160
Latest Texas A&M News
Popular
Back to top
Follow SECRant for SEC Football News