@SMU

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by Bcatfollower

Dou barely outplayed Vogt. I’m not a fan of either getting major minutes. Vogt doesn’t have the athleticism and Dou can’t understand how to play basketball/to waiting to happen.

That’s what I was thinking. I would rather play Dou as backup before Vogt but that isn’t saying a lot right now.

[TheLongHaul]

Originally Posted by waterhead

That’s what I was thinking. I would rather play Dou as backup before Vogt but that isn’t saying a lot right now.

it probably just depends on matchup. Neither are very good but if the other team has athletic bigs that can shoot then Dou is better, if the bigs are inside players than Vogt is likely the better choice. Offensively it's a wash since Vogt hasn't really been a factor this year on offense and this team can't stretch the D enough to give him space.

[cincyguy13]

I would like dou to come back next year. If nothing else he can be a backup. We won’t have to change anything for him. Vogt I don’t want to come back. I think I’ve seen enough. Let’s move on from him

[cincyguy13]

I was a big Vogt guy when he was scoring and shooting 70% and getting 6-7 rebounds a game but I don’t know how anyone can justify him playing at all at this point. I get that he is going to play some but over the last 20 games or so, he’s probably averaging about 4 pts, 2 rebs, ( just a guess but I bet it’s around there). Him on the floor is just wasting time at this point. He takes up the driving lanes on offense, can’t get position, we can’t press with him on the floor, can’t rebound, and is a disaster on defense. If a 6 foot guard played the 5 in place of him it might actually be better for us.

[JoeRunner89]

Originally Posted by skyblade

I agree that the small lineup looked very good (maybe not great). Still somewhat worried about the possibility of this being an anomaly.

We had our best three point shooting game of the season. If we shot as well as we did in our second best three point shooting game, we have 2 fewer makes. If SMU shoots their average from three they'd have had 2/3 more makes.

That 12-15 point swing would be enough for SMU to have won comfortably and have UC fans up in arms. Though to be fair 12-15 points would have meant it was close if Brannen didn't spot them 7 points by playing Vogt early. The question is, did we finally just get lucky (or not unlucky) with our three point shooting, or did the offense/defense actually change something. Did MAW shoot 80% (4-5) because he got better looks, or just law of averages.

To my mind we did get better looks offensively, but SMU also missed open looks that we gave up on defense. We probably aren't as good as we looked on defense (or even on offense) last night, but we probably aren't as bad as we've looked in the past either.

Getting Vogt out of the lineup is definitely going to help us. I still expect a lot of close games, but maybe a few more of them will go our way.

I was great they got a win, success helps with development maybe a game like this could loosen them up more. The win def stemmed from missed SMU shots, and what seemed to be them taking thier foot off the gas. We've won 8 straight against them so when it became money time maybe they got tight since the Bearcats hit some shots and put pressure on them towards the end of the 2nd half. Primarily Kieth actually being able produce during money time offensively but defensively with a steal towards the end. It's nice to see Davenport be productive but we certainly cant live off him hes really, just a role player. It was nice to see a win tho

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by JoeRunner89

I was great they got a win, success helps with development maybe a game like this could loosen them up more. The win def stemmed from missed SMU shots, and what seemed to be them taking thier foot off the gas. We've won 8 straight against them so when it became money time maybe they got tight since the Bearcats hit some shots and put pressure on them towards the end of the 2nd half. Primarily Kieth actually being able produce during money time offensively but defensively with a steal towards the end. It's nice to see Davenport be productive but we certainly cant live off him hes really, just a role player. It was nice to see a win tho

Not being sarcastic or anything, but why can’t Davenport be more than a role player. Shoots well, plays hard, and has been great every opportunity he has had. But I’ve heard a couple times now, he’s just a role player. Isn’t there a chance he’s good? He’s a sophomore that barely played last year, and is still further along than Tre and Keith when they were sophomores

[JoeRunner89]

Originally Posted by cincyguy13

Not being sarcastic or anything, but can’t Davenport be more than a role player. Shoots well, plays hard, and has been great. But I’ve heard a couple times now, he’s just a role player. Isn’t there a chance he’s good?

No, not at all hes just a role player. He wouldn't even be getting these minutes if someone more skillful was ahead of him. He's shooting it well right now, he doesn't really handle the ball too well, not a great rebounder, playmaker, or defender. Hes getting shots bc right now, we dont have an identity on offense which is part of the reason we have to play small ball right now. Players arent really in any definitive roles or positions we are just trying to have a respectable 5 on the court. Davenport is in thier due to attrition... I admire his passion and effort but I dont see him ever being all league, or for that matter an NBA guy. If he accomplishes these things he would def prove me wrong and shut me up for sure

[skyblade]

We have essentially replaced Vogt with a guard by starting Davenport and it has worked out.

Vogt played no where close to the same level as Diarra last night. Vogt was a disaster on defense, a non-factor on offense and made our press ineffective. Diarra was solid on defense, improved our press and was a non-factor on offense. Anyone want to guess who has the best TO/40 minute rate on the team? That would be Diarra, who has one TO in 45 minutes of play.

Diarra isn't perfect, but he's not the TO machine that people seem to think. He does have a horrible foul rate (10.7 PF/40), but considering that is almost double his PF rate last year, I expect that to go down with more minutes (5.4/40 that he averaged last year is still bad, but not terrible).

At this point I don't think Vogt should get many minutes even if the other team has a strong/tall big. He just doesn't fit the running/pressing style that Brannen wants to run, we'd need to help Dou/Eason, but it's not that difficult of a defensive adjustment (plenty of teams use it to effective shut down Vogt).

Vogt should pretty much just be the guy who comes in if Eason and Dou both get into foul trouble.

[skyblade]

Davenport seems like the type of glue guy that Cronin loved. Plays hard, defends, rebounds and brings toughness/energy. I think he can develop into more than a role player, but he needs a lot of work.

Right now he's not a guy who can create his own shot and isn't great off the dribble. Also needs to work on his passing. The difference between role player and key player is becoming a creator. Maybe he can get there, but he's not there yet.

[JoeRunner89]

Originally Posted by skyblade

Davenport seems like the type of glue guy that Cronin loved. Plays hard, defends, rebounds and brings toughness/energy. I think he can develop into more than a role player, but he needs a lot of work.

Right now he's not a guy who can create his own shot and isn't great off the dribble. Also needs to work on his passing. The difference between role player and key player is becoming a creator. Maybe he can get there, but he's not there yet.

Yea you can tell he loves being a Bearcat so his hearts been in it from the start. That's going to take him further in his development that and the role he plays on the team right now hes really taken charge so he will get better. he was a turnover machine last yr hes cleaned that up somewhat