Embry-Riddle (Exhibition)

[jacobkdoyle]

Originally Posted by UCBearcats

I don't think you can claim we have a "new style of play" because the team has played 2 exhibition games against inferior opponents. Last year we averaged 77 PPG in our first 6 games and then played Iowa State and scored 54 in OT. In the next 5 games after that we averaged 93 PPG until we opened up the conference against Temple and scored 56.

Mick's teams have a tendency to change their style of play based on the opponent. The better or more physical we perceive the opponent is the more Mick looks to grind it out. I don't think that changes this season, regardless of who is running the point.

I think we are on the same page here. I mean, we did score 119 in a game last year. And as you mentioned, had other stretches with very high scoring, more uptempo games. Basically, we ran teams out bc we could. So it's not like we scored 101 vs Embry-Riddle and suddenly Clark and Evans were dropped into a foreign land and left to their own devices. They've been apart of plenty of these kind of games. And it simply proves nothing for them to go all out. And at the end of the day, even if we are a little faster, it's still basketball. And these guys still have tons of experience. The only difference will be maybe subbing out more often for a breather, if it really is that much of a change. But Washington was as much of a reason last year why we didn't always play faster. And he got in foul trouble yesterday, so fatigue wasn't a concern there. So idk why he'd be off the hook if we're really wondering about a faster style have an impact on anyone.

At the end of the day though, I just don't think things are going to be all that different. When there's a huge talent gap, we're going to slaughter teams and get the younger guys some very valuable experience. In closer games, we won't be scoring in the 90s. Like you though UCB, I just hope it isn't in the 50s. So in the grand scheme of things, it's a pretty subtle difference imo. I don't see this year's team as something completely different than anything we've ever seen before. It's been a work in progress for a couple years now and the only difference is the PG...which could have an impact...but not enough to make our brand unrecognizable. The UC Staples will always be demanded out of our players. If yesterday was a regular season game, our bench guys would've been pulled out of that game so fast they wouldn't have even known what happened. But they weren't pulled bc the whole idea of the game was for their benefit. So they can learn. Not so our vets can learn. There's nothing to be gained for them.

Cayman Islands will start to tell us. The games up until then are more or less just extra exhibition games. Against tough D1 teams, we might not even see some guys play. And we all agreed that they looked good yesterday in a lot of ways. But that's just the nature of the beast. The starters will obviously play a lot. Brooks and Jenifer will too. Scott and Williams will probably be in the rotation. I don't think anyone else should expect 10 minutes per game.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

That said, I do think we are playing different. I notice on every single rebound, we look to immediately advance the ball. We never did that before.

Also, while ER was undersized, they actually were decently big for a Small D2 school.

They had 6 players who were 6'6 or taller. Their leading minutes guys were 6'2, 6'6, 6'4, 6'7, and 6'9

Usually in these kinda D2 games, your bigs look overwelmingly better then they are because of the size matchups. UCONN bigs look pretty damn good so far this year against 2 D2 teams but more than likely they will struggle against even low level D1 teams

It’s so hard to tell against any of these teams, even the D1 awful teams. We could literally roll the ball out there without plays and win by 30. I get the excitement but think it’s hard to tell anything from these games

[jacobkdoyle]

Originally Posted by WAITE HOYT 2

I don't disagree with your post but I think the two guys running the point are polar opposites from TC. We may not be a showtime Laker offense but I suspect we will be into our offense much sooner this year then last. Should be a lot less forcing shots with clock running down and I expect us to shoot a bunch more free throws. Also Micks teams will always have to guard.

Agreed.

[jacobkdoyle]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

That said, I do think we are playing different. I notice on every single rebound, we look to immediately advance the ball. We never did that before.

Also, while ER was undersized, they actually were decently big for a Small D2 school.

They had 6 players who were 6'6 or taller. Their leading minutes guys were 6'2, 6'6, 6'4, 6'7, and 6'9

Usually in these kinda D2 games, your bigs look overwelmingly better then they are because of the size matchups. UCONN bigs look pretty damn good so far this year against 2 D2 teams but more than likely they will struggle against even low level D1 teams

I think we've slowly been improving there. A couple years ago, Clark would get a board, hang on for dear life, wait for everyone to clear out, then find Caupain. We've moved away from that with Evans and Cumberland emerging as transition players who can handle the ball. And Clark himself has even started to dribble himself a couple times to at least be going up the floor while he's finding the primary ball handler.

My issue in the past was mostly after made shots. Caupain would stand 1 foot from the baseline and walk it all the way up. And even if the other team wasn't pressing, he'd stand and wait for one of our guys to come back and throw it in to him, rather than just do it himself, get it back, and get going. I don't think Broome or Jenifer are wired that way in any way, shape, or form. They'll be up the floor in the time it would take for Caupain to even start his 9.99 second journey across half court.

[UCBearcats]

Originally Posted by jacobkdoyle

I think we are on the same page here. I mean, we did score 119 in a game last year. And as you mentioned, had other stretches with very high scoring, more uptempo games. Basically, we ran teams out bc we could. So it's not like we scored 101 vs Embry-Riddle and suddenly Clark and Evans were dropped into a foreign land and left to their own devices. They've been apart of plenty of these kind of games. And it simply proves nothing for them to go all out. And at the end of the day, even if we are a little faster, it's still basketball. And these guys still have tons of experience. The only difference will be maybe subbing out more often for a breather, if it really is that much of a change. But Washington was as much of a reason last year why we didn't always play faster. And he got in foul trouble yesterday, so fatigue wasn't a concern there. So idk why he'd be off the hook if we're really wondering about a faster style have an impact on anyone.

At the end of the day though, I just don't think things are going to be all that different. When there's a huge talent gap, we're going to slaughter teams and get the younger guys some very valuable experience. In closer games, we won't be scoring in the 90s. Like you though UCB, I just hope it isn't in the 50s. So in the grand scheme of things, it's a pretty subtle difference imo. I don't see this year's team as something completely different than anything we've ever seen before. It's been a work in progress for a couple years now and the only difference is the PG...which could have an impact...but not enough to make our brand unrecognizable. The UC Staples will always be demanded out of our players. If yesterday was a regular season game, our bench guys would've been pulled out of that game so fast they wouldn't have even known what happened. But they weren't pulled bc the whole idea of the game was for their benefit. So they can learn. Not so our vets can learn. There's nothing to be gained for them.

Cayman Islands will start to tell us. The games up until then are more or less just extra exhibition games. Against tough D1 teams, we might not even see some guys play. And we all agreed that they looked good yesterday in a lot of ways. But that's just the nature of the beast. The starters will obviously play a lot. Brooks and Jenifer will too. Scott and Williams will probably be in the rotation. I don't think anyone else should expect 10 minutes per game.

Couldn't agree more, that said I do believe this will be Mick's best team yet. I'm cautiously optimistic for a team that sticks in the Top 15 throughout the year and sees itself playing in the second weekend of the NCAA's. Anything less than that is going to be a big letdown.

[waterhead]

Originally Posted by UCBearcats

People setting unreasonably high bars for freshman based on summer leagues and scrimmages and getting unreasonably bent out of shape based on the play of experienced guys in scrimmages is nothing new. It's about as reliable every year as a first round exit in the NCAA's (I'll be here all week).

Let this be the year we break the trend, everyone stop freaking out about scrimmages. For all intents and purposes the season doesn't start until we get to the Caymans. Try not to freak out until we get there. The established guys will do what they need to do between now and then to get themselves ready for the real games. Hopefully we'll get a good sense between now and then of what the newcomers can bring. No reason to freak out yet, let's hope our first real test comes against Iowa down in the Cayman finals.

My posts in particular have not been about frosh. They have been about experienced vets. Example I have mentioned Washington and Cumberland vs Evans and Clark. I have seen Washington and Cumberland score 50+ total points each in scrimmages and exhibitions while Clark and Evans haven't scored half that much.

I am not concerned with how good they are at all (Evans and Clark). I am concerned with how aggressive they will be this year and how they will fit in with other aggressive players or a new offensive scheme. A LOT of fans were hoping Evans and Clark would be more aggressive this year...a LOT! I am just a little concerned they haven't thus far.

Perhaps everyone is right and there is nothing to worry about. Perhaps the aggression will come out when we hit a tougher schedule. Forgive me if I have my doubts right now. It's definitely early and exhibition is not always the best barometer of what will come. I was just looking for a sign that a light had come on for them. I guess we shall see.

I think each of them could duplicate last years numbers (and that would be great) but I was hoping to see more than that. If I am wrong I will be very happy about that. Maybe they are just waiting to show a change in their philosophy until real games start...I guess I would have just expected to see a sign of that up to this point.

[Garybearcat]

Originally Posted by UCBearcats

Couldn't agree more, that said I do believe this will be Mick's best team yet. I'm cautiously optimistic for a team that sticks in the Top 15 throughout the year and sees itself playing in the second weekend of the NCAA's. Anything less than that is going to be a big letdown.

One thing nobody really mentioned is the fact we will be pressing much more often. Mick admitted he didn’t press with Troy because that did not fit his defensive skills. Not the case with his roster this year. There are 2 ways to speed up the pace either by pushing the transition game or by pressing your opponent. I believe this year we get a double dose in both phases which will lead to a visibly different style of play. Whatever style we play there is no doubt this is Mick’s best team. Should be a fun year.

[UCBearcats]

Originally Posted by waterhead

My posts in particular have not been about frosh. They have been about experienced vets. Example I have mentioned Washington and Cumberland vs Evans and Clark. I have seen Washington and Cumberland score 50+ total points each in scrimmages and exhibitions while Clark and Evans haven't scored half that much.

I am not concerned with how good they are at all (Evans and Clark). I am concerned with how aggressive they will be this year and how they will fit in with other aggressive players or a new offensive scheme. A LOT of fans were hoping Evans and Clark would be more aggressive this year...a LOT! I am just a little concerned they haven't thus far.

Perhaps everyone is right and there is nothing to worry about. Perhaps the aggression will come out when we hit a tougher schedule. Forgive me if I have my doubts right now. It's definitely early and exhibition is not always the best barometer of what will come. I was just looking for a sign that a light had come on for them. I guess we shall see.

I think each of them could duplicate last years numbers (and that would be great) but I was hoping to see more than that. If I am wrong I will be very happy about that. Maybe they are just waiting to show a change in their philosophy until real games start...I guess I would have just expected to see a sign of that up to this point.

You're a fan who's impatient and wants the season to start so you can chat UC Hoops, there's nothing wrong with that. I think you just need to take a step back, take a deep breath, drink a beer, and relax. You're not going to be able to get a whole lot of substantial feedback until we get to the Caymans, then things escalate pretty quickly from there.

[justinhub2003]

Originally Posted by UCBearcats

Couldn't agree more, that said I do believe this will be Mick's best team yet. I'm cautiously optimistic for a team that sticks in the Top 15 throughout the year and sees itself playing in the second weekend of the NCAA's. Anything less than that is going to be a big letdown.

But keep this in mind and Brendel mentioned it on the Oh Varsity Podcast. When SI did their predictions for best defenses of this season, the AAC had 6 teams in the top 25 I believe.

This league gets out recruited on talent and a lot of these teams will hang their hats on defense.

SMU, WSU, UCONN, UCF and even Tubby's Memphis team are all going to defend the crap out of you. And UC's was one of the better PPP in transition teams last year so the book is out on them that you absolutely have to get back and not crash the boards on offensive.

I mean, the one piece that has changed in a meaningful way is: Troy Caupain. I truly believe that Troy wasn't built for playing fast. He is gone, we haven't had a healthy fast set of PG's in multiple years nor have we had this much depth. So if things are going to change, this is the year that personnel wise we are made up differently.


Also, I believe we will also score even more in the half court than we did last year. Cane is just an effective in the half court as he is in the open court.


Last year we took 18.7 seconds per offensive possession, I'm betting we can cut this to 17.2 or so, which would put us in the top 150 in offensive pace. But our overall game Tempo will always be 300+ because of how hard we defend and how long it takes other teams to get shots off against us.

[UCBearcats]

Originally Posted by justinhub2003

I mean, the one piece that has changed in a meaningful way is: Troy Caupain. I truly believe that Troy wasn't built for playing fast. He is gone, we haven't had a healthy fast set of PG's in multiple years nor have we had this much depth. So if things are going to change, this is the year that personnel wise we are made up differently.

Losing Troy is the one big worry I have about this team coming into the season. Usually the biggest thing that separates the good teams from the REALLY good teams is a star PG.

I know many of you seem to think losing Troy will have a positive impact on our team, and I agree that it will probably help pace. IMO, losing an experienced leader like Troy who limited his TO's is going to hurt us way more than any benefit of increased pace will help us. Especially if Cane doesn't live up to the hype (which i'm not certain he can or will), I think JJ will struggle against quality competition if thrust into a starting role due to Cane's lack of effectiveness. This team really needs Cane to not only be average but be very good if we want to go far.

To me, this is the biggest question mark of our season, how far will Cane's play take us when it matters?