uneblinstu's Post Game Chatter: Vol 8, Issue 22 - @ Purdue

[uneblinstu]

- Purdue wasted no time trying to get the ball inside. Some full court pressure, too. Does PU typically do that?

- Brought extra help down low early. 

- Jacobson missed a couple jumpers, need him to hit those a bit more.

- 6 fouls before the first media? No bueno.

- Thought we might see some Hammond today. But 2 really quick fouls, goodness...

- Parker's really become a pretty good player. I like seeing that hard work pay off.

- AW3 hitting shots early, that's good to see.

- The pressure works to get a 10 second call.

- Haas is a load.

- Tai takes one to the beak. Ouch.

- There's just not much we can do inside. Wonder if we see some of Borchardt.

- Jacobson's just a touch off on his shot.

- I don't know why we ever took the press off.

- Hammonds can name his scoring line tonight. Just no answer.

- That driving shot by McVeigh that fell off the side of the rim, as he gets bigger, stronger and more experienced, that shot will fall. 

- I like the sweater. Not sure about paring it with the navy slacks, though.

- Oof, really tough way to end the half. To be down 9 after battling is really frustrating. Feels like they should be closer than that.

 

- 3rd foul for White right out of the break. Yeesh.

- Looked like Watson wanted or thought they were supposed to be pressing, but nobody joined him.

- Not really trying to shoot when we get to the rim, just sorta flipping it and hoping it goes in.

- Webster and Shields are really, really good in transition.

- Purdue is just a different team when Hammons isn't on the floor.

- It's no coincidence that our two biggest runs came when Hammons wasn't on the floor.

- And now Purdue's starting to hit from deep. That's not good for NU.

- Webster's taken a beating today.

- With 10 minutes to go in the game, amazingly, NU's been to the line the same amount as Purdue.

- NU's better than a Hammons-less Purdue team. Unfortunately, they're not.

- NU's staying within striking distance...

- Well, maybe not...

- Purdue, a 35% team from 3, shot a lot better than that from behind there tonight.

- NU had a couple opportunities to make things really interesting and had shots rim out. Purdue had a couple chances to put NU away and hit theirs. 

- Tough way for Shields to go out. He had a great 2nd half. Purdue really had trouble defending him.

- The outcome really isn't a surprise, right? This is what was "supposed" or "expected" to happen. I thought they played hard for the most part but their inexperience showed at times, to go along with their lack of size in the front court. I think NU might have a shot in Lincoln. I like the moxie of this team, but this was almost an impossible matchup and they gave it about as good a shot as could be expected. Another tough matchup awaits on Wednesday. 

[Huskerpapa]

This came down to one BIG thing.  We had no answer for Hammonds.  Otherwise everything was sort of peachy keen.

[atskooc]

Melo Trimble is the player I fear most in this conference.

[HuskerFever]

Melo Trimble is the player I fear most in this conference.

 

Hey, hey, hey... one game at a time! Oh, wait.........

[brfrad]

The turning point we went to zone, started forcing turnovers, and made a run.  Cut it to 6.  Watson misses an open 3, and then Raphael Davis, who was 6-26 from 3 in conference play, drains 3 in a row and goes 4-5 from 3 for the game.  We still had a chance even with Hammonds going for 32 (at least it wasn't a freshmen playing in his 2nd game) until that point.

 

I know it wouldn't have mattered.  I think we were down 12 with 2 minutes to go, but I thought the rule changed that the 10 second count didn't reset this year.  They had one second to get the ball over half court.  He held it for 2 seconds + and got fouled, and they called the foul?

 

Defense and 3 point shooting let us down today.  Can't give up 89 points and expect to win.  We also only shot 7-21 from 3.  Needed to hit some of those shots.  I don't think very many weren't open looks.

[REDZONEDAN]

I'm not upset with how we played. We just don't have anyone to match up with their 7 footers. Hopefully we can get the big guy visiting next month to commit.

[brfrad]

Another big killer was Shields only playing 23 minutes.  During his 23 minutes, he scored 16 points on 9 shots.

[demone]

I thought the effort was good throughout the game. We can find things here & there that we could have done better, but this loss is squarely on the coaches. This team gave their all today but the coaches' inability to find someone to provide not only size, but strength, is why we got beat. A common theme, I know, but I actually felt bad for the team today - they did all they could do but asking them to hold up against that size/strength is borderline unfair.

[brfrad]

I thought the effort was good throughout the game. We can find things here & there that we could have done better, but this loss is squarely on the coaches. This team gave their all today but the coaches' inability to find someone to provide not only size, but strength, is why we got beat. A common theme, I know, but I actually felt bad for the team today - they did all they could do but asking them to hold up against that size/strength is borderline unfair.

 

That would be alright if teams that have our similar size didn't either stick with them (Minnesota lost by 4 to Purdue) or beat them (Illinois won by 14).  The keys were missing 3's, Shields in foul trouble, and them hitting 3's from guys who don't normally make them.

[jason2486]

Great effort by the guys today. Like most have said, our inability to stop the interior did us in. Take away their bigs, Purdue scores 27.

[MichHusker]

Stopped watching at 52-40. This game pissed me off

[brfrad]

Great effort by the guys today. Like most have said, our inability to stop the interior did us in. Take away their bigs, Purdue scores 27.

While Hammonds and Haas dominated us, the one that put the nail in the coffin was Rafeal Davis hitting 4 3's.  We went to zone to try to shut down the middle, and he hit some dagger 3's.

 

Purdue isn't going to lose many games when they go 7-12 from 3.

[Fullbacksympathy]

We played really hard and competed the whole game.  With a legitimate center, I think we're quite a bit better than Purdue, which is encouraging.   

 

I was glad to see Jake get some minutes.  I wasn't sure why he was pulled and sat the rest of the game.  It seemed like he competed.  I really, really like Mike, but he's about as 4 as a 4 can be, defensively.  We needed more length out there against legit centers.  

 

Overall, I remain impressed with the effort this season and the talent we have here to develop.  The lack of a true 5 was stark this game, as we all knew it would be.  Hopefully we can snag one soon.  

[aphilso1]

I thought the effort was good throughout the game. We can find things here & there that we could have done better, but this loss is squarely on the coaches. This team gave their all today but the coaches' inability to find someone to provide not only size, but strength, is why we got beat. A common theme, I know, but I actually felt bad for the team today - they did all they could do but asking them to hold up against that size/strength is borderline unfair.

I read some of the Spartans' internet commentary right after we beat them.  All the talk was about how they needed to recruit guys that were quicker and can stretch the floor, since our small/athletic lineup ran circles around their tall/bruising lineup.  I thought that was a misplaced comment on their part, just like I find your comment misplaced.  Any time you have such a clash of styles, the losing side's fans seem to want to emulate the other team.

[HuskerFever]

I thought the effort was good throughout the game. We can find things here & there that we could have done better, but this loss is squarely on the coaches. This team gave their all today but the coaches' inability to find someone to provide not only size, but strength, is why we got beat. A common theme, I know, but I actually felt bad for the team today - they did all they could do but asking them to hold up against that size/strength is borderline unfair.

I read some of the Spartans' internet commentary right after we beat them. All the talk was about how they needed to recruit guys that were quicker and can stretch the floor, since our small/athletic lineup ran circles around their tall/bruising lineup. I thought that was a misplaced comment on their part, just like I find your comment misplaced. Any time you have such a clash of styles, the losing side's fans seem to want to emulate the other team.

You said it better than I could. I agree. It is hard to ignore, however, that there is a missing piece in our roster that certainly would have helped us a little bit during this game.

[demone]

I thought the effort was good throughout the game. We can find things here & there that we could have done better, but this loss is squarely on the coaches. This team gave their all today but the coaches' inability to find someone to provide not only size, but strength, is why we got beat. A common theme, I know, but I actually felt bad for the team today - they did all they could do but asking them to hold up against that size/strength is borderline unfair.

I read some of the Spartans' internet commentary right after we beat them.  All the talk was about how they needed to recruit guys that were quicker and can stretch the floor, since our small/athletic lineup ran circles around their tall/bruising lineup.  I thought that was a misplaced comment on their part, just like I find your comment misplaced.  Any time you have such a clash of styles, the losing side's fans seem to want to emulate the other team.

I said nothing about "emulating the other team" - I really like our roster and would prefer a quicker pace overall. But you have to be able to provide a better challenge to an inside presence.

[NUtball]

and then Raphael Davis, who was 6-26 from 3 in conference play, drains 3 in a row and goes 4-5 from 3 for the game.

 

Seems like on a pretty consistent basis, NU finds a way to let a relatively poor 3-point shooting team or very poor 3-point shooting individual light it up.  I don't know what the answer is, but you'd think that eventually, some of that shooting would tend to go more towards NU's side of the ledger.

 

Hammons, over his career, has been very spotty with his intensity level.  Unfortunately, he was dialed in today.

[doc1394]

Coming into this game, Purdue was the only team in the B1G that I didn't think we had a chance against. I'd rather the 'skers play Maryland than Purdue (May be because Melo Trimble is so much fun to watch). Just have to hope we don't run into them during our deep B1G tourney run.

[Huskerpapa]

Tai is likely one bruised dude tonight.  I am not about to blame the refereeing for our loss today, but geez, it seemed Purdue was allowed to play much more physically than us.  Add to that the ability Purdue had to simply camp in the lane created a bunch of problems for us.

 

But let me bring up one play.  We were trapping Purdue and they had not crossed the center line when the Purdue player called time out.  21 seconds remained on the shot clock, meaning 9 of the 10 seconds had ran off the possession clock.  I THOUGHT that the new rule was that a team only had 10 seconds to advance the ball EVEN if a time out was called.  Purdue inbounded the ball in the backcourt, another two or thee seconds ran off (should have been a ten second violation) and then Shavon picked up his fifth foul.  Why wasn't a ten second violation called???  Am I missing something or am I misinterpreting the rule?

 

This is a newspaper snippet regarding the change I was referencing:

 

In other changes, coaches will no longer be allowed to call timeouts during live ball situations and, with only a few exceptions, teams will get just 10 total seconds to advance the ball past half court instead of resetting the clock if there is a stoppage.

 

Also:

 

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is chaired by Belmont head coach Rick Byrd, also decided the 10-second backcourt clock will not reset when a timeout is called and they eliminated a coaches’ ability to call live-ball timeouts.

[AuroranHusker]

Besides the fact that was about as ticky-tack a call on Shavon for a fifth foul. Lame, all the way around.

 

And, yes, Hammons is a good player & all (at 7'-0" 290# with fine motor skills, you should be!) but why is that big dude allowed to treat the defender lke a rag doll. And their other PTPer Swanigan was kind of the same way, the dude pile-drives Benny in the ground, and there is 'no call.' Wut

 

Overall, the Huskers just didn't have quite enough fire-power. But, IMHO, the D is not great right now. Looking at the past few games & the opponent has hit 11-16, 11-21 & 7-12 on three's. That's not going to cut it in the B1G (or anywhere, really). Gotta close out under control, too. Post defense can be better (even giving up 5-7" in height & 70# in girth!!).

[Ron Mexico]

Please remember that Hammons is a senior and his backup Haas is sophomore. They were going up against 2 true freshman and a rarely used true sophomore. Very few, if any, teams will be able to match up against Purdue's size. I like our chances in Lincoln on March 1. We all knew this was going to be a tough stretch of games. The team overall played very well. Shields getting into foul trouble and Purdue shooting 7-12 from the 3 was the difference in the game. The lessons that Jacobson and Morrow have learned this season will make them really good for us next season.

 

I really like the press that we have been running as of late. It's been very effective. Benny Parker and Tai Webster are night and day better from last season. McVeigh is going to be a lot of trouble for teams to handle once he gets a bit stronger. 

 

We are not very good at running the zone and our defense, overall, has been very up and down this season. Help defense is a matter of communication and teams that don't consistently run it can struggle especially with younger players.

 

We still have a chance to come out of this 4 game stretch winning 2 games if we beat Maryland on Wednesday which is about as good as we could have hoped for.

[49r]

[Bugeaters1]

Tai is likely one bruised dude tonight.  I am not about to blame the refereeing for our loss today, but geez, it seemed Purdue was allowed to play much more physically than us.  Add to that the ability Purdue had to simply camp in the lane created a bunch of problems for us.

 

But let me bring up one play.  We were trapping Purdue and they had not crossed the center line when the Purdue player called time out.  21 seconds remained on the shot clock, meaning 9 of the 10 seconds had ran off the possession clock.  I THOUGHT that the new rule was that a team only had 10 seconds to advance the ball EVEN if a time out was called.  Purdue inbounded the ball in the backcourt, another two or thee seconds ran off (should have been a ten second violation) and then Shavon picked up his fifth foul.  Why wasn't a ten second violation called???  Am I missing something or am I misinterpreting the rule?

 

This is a newspaper snippet regarding the change I was referencing:

 

In other changes, coaches will no longer be allowed to call timeouts during live ball situations and, with only a few exceptions, teams will get just 10 total seconds to advance the ball past half court instead of resetting the clock if there is a stoppage.

 

Also:

 

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is chaired by Belmont head coach Rick Byrd, also decided the 10-second backcourt clock will not reset when a timeout is called and they eliminated a coaches’ ability to call live-ball timeouts.

Kent said the same thing that the timeout wouldn't save them from a10 second call. the refs blew that call.

[Silverbacked1]

Tai is likely one bruised dude tonight.  I am not about to blame the refereeing for our loss today, but geez, it seemed Purdue was allowed to play much more physically than us.  Add to that the ability Purdue had to simply camp in the lane created a bunch of problems for us.

 

But let me bring up one play.  We were trapping Purdue and they had not crossed the center line when the Purdue player called time out.  21 seconds remained on the shot clock, meaning 9 of the 10 seconds had ran off the possession clock.  I THOUGHT that the new rule was that a team only had 10 seconds to advance the ball EVEN if a time out was called.  Purdue inbounded the ball in the backcourt, another two or thee seconds ran off (should have been a ten second violation) and then Shavon picked up his fifth foul.  Why wasn't a ten second violation called???  Am I missing something or am I misinterpreting the rule?

 

This is a newspaper snippet regarding the change I was referencing:

 

In other changes, coaches will no longer be allowed to call timeouts during live ball situations and, with only a few exceptions, teams will get just 10 total seconds to advance the ball past half court instead of resetting the clock if there is a stoppage.

 

Also:

 

The NCAA Playing Rules Oversight Panel, which is chaired by Belmont head coach Rick Byrd, also decided the 10-second backcourt clock will not reset when a timeout is called and they eliminated a coaches’ ability to call live-ball timeouts.

Kent said the same thing that the timeout wouldn't save them from a10 second call. the refs blew that call.

I also,think that the bench called the timeout, which they can't do this year unless it is a dead ball correct?

Also I think they reset the shot clock to 30 if I remember correctly. I think that was a total SNAFU all around.

[jason2486]

Please remember that Hammons is a senior and his backup Haas is sophomore. They were going up against 2 true freshman and a rarely used true sophomore. Very few, if any, teams will be able to match up against Purdue's size. I like our chances in Lincoln on March 1. We all knew this was going to be a tough stretch of games. The team overall played very well. Shields getting into foul trouble and Purdue shooting 7-12 from the 3 was the difference in the game. The lessons that Jacobson and Morrow have learned this season will make them really good for us next season.

I really like the press that we have been running as of late. It's been very effective. Benny Parker and Tai Webster are night and day better from last season. McVeigh is going to be a lot of trouble for teams to handle once he gets a bit stronger.

We are not very good at running the zone and our defense, overall, has been very up and down this season. Help defense is a matter of communication and teams that don't consistently run it can struggle especially with younger players.

We still have a chance to come out of this 4 game stretch winning 2 games if we beat Maryland on Wednesday which is about as good as we could have hoped for.

I disagree about the zone defense comment. Our best stretch of defense was when we went to the 2-3 zone. Unfortunately they hit some 3s they hadn't been hitting recently. I expect to see 2-3 more often against them in Lincoln. From a coaching standpoint, I like the zone packing it inside. Make teams beat you from the outside.