Mick Cronin

[bendcats]

Let's face it Mick Cronin is no more qualified to coach UC basketball than I am.
But I know my limitations but the UC athletic director doesn't re Cronin. How many years do we have to suffer with this loser before a change is made? No one can tell me that UC does not have better players than a lot of teams that are still in the tournament. Cronin can't recruit top players because the better ones know better than to sign with UC.

[HarryBosch]

Originally Posted by bendcats

Let's face it Mick Cronin is no more qualified to coach UC basketball than I am.
But I know my limitations but the UC athletic director doesn't re Cronin. How many years do we have to suffer with this loser before a change is made? No one can tell me that UC does not have better players than a lot of teams that are still in the tournament. Cronin can't recruit top players because the better ones know better than to sign with UC.

No change will be made as long as Mick wins 20-25 games a year and makes the Big Dance. UC has gone as far as Mick can take it. Sadly, this is the current state of Bearcat basketball.

[sedziobs]

Originally Posted by cincyguy13

Did we change anything? I could be wrong but it looked like we kept doing the same thing the whole game.

We started fronting Garza with Scott in the 2nd half. We also doubled him with a guard at times, especially when we had a four guard lineup. Didn't really matter what the defense was, Garza was hitting everything (4-4 from midrange and 2-3 from three). If your plan was to go straight 2-3, I think that would have failed miserably since we haven't done that all year.

After the 10 second violation we started to dribble into the double and passed it forward to Scott in a 3 on 2 situation. Scott doesn't have the skills to attack the basket. The one time he did he travelled. The rest he just turned around and waited for Jenifer.

In halfcourt offense we were able to get Cane in the corner a lot with a big on him. He had a decent game, but not the best considering his opportunities. He went 0-4 from three and travelled at least once trying to drive by Garza too quick. Cane had our highest usage rate, but the lowest ORtg among players with 10+ minutes. If he had made those shots, would we be praising Cronin for his great coaching? I doubt it.

Objectively, we did make adjustments, but our players didn't perform as well as Iowa's. Seems like everyone wants the adjustment to be as simple as "score more points" and "play better defense". Basketball doesn't work that way.

To me the biggest problem is that we were out-rebounded in a game where we should have owned the glass. Jarron, Cane and Trevor had a combined 4 rebounds in 67 minutes. That really hurt us.

[cincyguy13]

Hypothetical, if we didn’t have a coach at all in the tournament games the last nine years, the players coached their selves. Would our record be better, worse, or the same. I honestly don’t know. We should accendentally win every once in a while. Kevin Ollie has a championship and he is terrible.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

We started fronting Garza with Scott in the 2nd half. We also doubled him with a guard at times, especially when we had a four guard lineup. Didn't really matter what the defense was, Garza was hitting everything (4-4 from midrange and 2-3 from three). If your plan was to go straight 2-3, I think that would have failed miserably since we haven't done that all year.

After the 10 second violation we started to dribble into the double and passed it forward to Scott in a 3 on 2 situation. Scott doesn't have the skills to attack the basket. The one time he did he travelled. The rest he just turned around and waited for Jenifer.

In halfcourt offense we were able to get Cane in the corner a lot with a big on him. He had a decent game, but not the best considering his opportunities. He went 0-4 from three and travelled at least once trying to drive by Garza too quick. Cane had our highest usage rate, but the lowest ORtg among players with 10+ minutes. If he had made those shots, would we be praising Cronin for his great coaching? I doubt it.

Objectively, we did make adjustments, but our players didn't perform as well as Iowa's. Seems like everyone wants the adjustment to be as simple as "score more points" and "play better defense". Basketball doesn't work that way.

To me the biggest problem is that we were out-rebounded in a game where we should have owned the glass. Jarron, Cane and Trevor had a combined 4 rebounds in 67 minutes. That really hurt us.

We started fronting Garza because we were smaller. This isn’t an adjustment. It’s how you play defense when you are smaller. You don’t have a choice. If you are smaller and try to play behind him, you’re done.

[sedziobs]

Originally Posted by cincyguy13

We started fronting Garza because we were smaller. This isn’t an adjustment. It’s how you play defense when you are smaller. You don’t have a choice. If you are smaller and try to play behind him, you’re done.

You literally said "it looked like we kept doing the same thing the entire game." We didn't, whether or not you think we had a choice.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

You literally said "it looked like we kept doing the same thing the entire game." We didn't, whether or not you think we had a choice.

This isn’t different. This is fundamental basketball if you are smaller. I’ll give you the other ones but fronting a bigger player is something that happens the whole game. Unless brooks was doing it

[cincrulz11]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

In halfcourt offense we were able to get Cane in the corner a lot with a big on him. He had a decent game, but not the best considering his opportunities. He went 0-4 from three and travelled at least once trying to drive by Garza too quick. Cane had our highest usage rate, but the lowest ORtg among players with 10+ minutes. If he had made those shots, would we be praising Cronin for his great coaching? I doubt it.

the thing i never really understood with the usage of cane and jenifer together was they seemed to play the wrong role. cane just isn't a corner 3 shooter, most of his makes are from up top. yes we got him open looks, but he just rarely makes them. plus cane is better on the ball than jenifer at creating. jenifer is clearly the better catch and shoot guy. even when he could catch and penetrate from the corner he just seemed uncomfortable there as well. he definitely did better with a straight on angle, maybe that was just his comfort zone.


im sure somebody will say something about turnovers, but its not really based on fact. since conference play started cane had a lower turnover rate and a much higher assist%.

[cincyguy13]

Originally Posted by sedziobs

We started fronting Garza with Scott in the 2nd half. We also doubled him with a guard at times, especially when we had a four guard lineup. Didn't really matter what the defense was, Garza was hitting everything (4-4 from midrange and 2-3 from three). If your plan was to go straight 2-3, I think that would have failed miserably since we haven't done that all year.

After the 10 second violation we started to dribble into the double and passed it forward to Scott in a 3 on 2 situation. Scott doesn't have the skills to attack the basket. The one time he did he travelled. The rest he just turned around and waited for Jenifer.

In halfcourt offense we were able to get Cane in the corner a lot with a big on him. He had a decent game, but not the best considering his opportunities. He went 0-4 from three and travelled at least once trying to drive by Garza too quick. Cane had our highest usage rate, but the lowest ORtg among players with 10+ minutes. If he had made those shots, would we be praising Cronin for his great coaching? I doubt it.

Objectively, we did make adjustments, but our players didn't perform as well as Iowa's. Seems like everyone wants the adjustment to be as simple as "score more points" and "play better defense". Basketball doesn't work that way.

To me the biggest problem is that we were out-rebounded in a game where we should have owned the glass. Jarron, Cane and Trevor had a combined 4 rebounds in 67 minutes. That really hurt us.

Also the 2-3 thing was simply to change it up and protect brooks. If you think it would have failed terribly, maybe it would have. But they scored 48 point and shot 50% from 3. Nevada did something similar. It couldn’t get much worse than those, I wouldn’t think. Maybe you think they would have scored 80

[Alum2013]

Originally Posted by HarryBosch

The track team has many athletes but I doubt they could win many basketball games.

Idk man, there was a guy or two from the track team that would break Dion Dixon down on the reg over at the rec.