Uneblinstu's post game chatter: vol 6, ed 3 - W. Illinois

OK, well that's a relief.  The way the officials were calling the game last night, it seemed as though the defensive players weren't allowed to hold their position and had to move out of the way if an offensive player came charging at them or they'd be called for a blocking foul. 

I understand wanting more offense but that shouldn't come at the expense of preventing teams from playing defense.

OK, well that's a relief.  The way the officials were calling the game last night, it seemed as though the defensive players weren't allowed to hold their position and had to move out of the way if an offensive player came charging at them or they'd be called for a blocking foul. 

 

I understand wanting more offense but that shouldn't come at the expense of preventing teams from playing defense.

I think they over corrected to some degree this off season.  I think you'll see them try and balance it out some next year.

I think the foul on Pitchford was because it was a legitimate flop.  That call isn't going to get called anymore.  He was just simply overmatched by a guy who was probably 30 lbs bigger than him or more.  Teams are going to have to find a more creative way to defend the post than fall to the ground when the offensive player makes contact.  That's what Peltz and Pitchford both did last night.  Webster's guy had that spot for at least 3 steps before he got there.  We're going to have to adjust our expectations on what constitutes a charge now because it's going to look different.  Flops aren't going to get called anymore, and I like that.  I would like to see them insititute some sort of lowering the shoulder foul, because we've already seen that where the offensive player can just ram in there and draw the foul, but simply getting to the spot and falling backwards like in the past isn't going to do it anymore.

You miss the point.  It was a flop.  No question it was a flop.  But the issue is not that the other guy wasn't call for charging; it's that Pitchford was called for blocking.  But how is that a foul when the only contact that occurs is made by the offensive player, and the defensive player is stationary?  Is flopping now a foul?  In my mind, that should be at most a no-call.  And, as ajb explained, that was just a bad call.  And I agree.

 

I think the foul on Pitchford was because it was a legitimate flop.  That call isn't going to get called anymore.  He was just simply overmatched by a guy who was probably 30 lbs bigger than him or more.  Teams are going to have to find a more creative way to defend the post than fall to the ground when the offensive player makes contact.  That's what Peltz and Pitchford both did last night.  Webster's guy had that spot for at least 3 steps before he got there.  We're going to have to adjust our expectations on what constitutes a charge now because it's going to look different.  Flops aren't going to get called anymore, and I like that.  I would like to see them insititute some sort of lowering the shoulder foul, because we've already seen that where the offensive player can just ram in there and draw the foul, but simply getting to the spot and falling backwards like in the past isn't going to do it anymore.

You miss the point.  It was a flop.  No question it was a flop.  But the issue is not that the other guy wasn't call for charging; it's that Pitchford was called for blocking.  But how is that a foul when the only contact that occurs is made by the offensive player, and the defensive player is stationary?  Is flopping now a foul?  In my mind, that should be at most a no-call.  And, as ajb explained, that was just a bad call.  And I agree.

So far, yes, flopping has been called a foul, as far as I can tell.  Every time.

Sadly, Pitchford's 5th foul (which came shortly thereafter) was a legit call.  His hands were extended forward, not straight up, as the offensive player went up to shoot.  That wasn't a smart foul. 

But let's play this flop thing out a bit.  Offensive post spins into the lane, lowers his shoulder and rams the stationary defender who stands his ground and doesn't flop.  Is that a blocking foul?

But if he does flop, it is a foul?

Sadly, Pitchford's 5th foul (which came shortly thereafter) was a legit call.  His hands were extended forward, not straight up, as the offensive player went up to shoot.  That wasn't a smart foul. 

 

But let's play this flop thing out a bit.  Offensive post spins into the lane, lowers his shoulder and rams the stationary defender who stands his ground and doesn't flop.  Is that a blocking foul?

 

But if he does flop, it is a foul?

So far, I've only seen it called as a blocking foul.  If the offensive player is in that spot before he makes his move to the basket, as I understand the rule, that'd be an offensive foul, but if the defensive player has to readjust his position at all, it's a blocking call.  It's not about whether or not he stays upright or falls to the ground, it's about when he establishes his position. 

Norm, the 4th foul on Pitchford you are talking about, I feel was a 50/50 call, in the UMASS-LSU game I was watching during the Tip Off Marathon, the LSU player did the exact same thing and he was credited with a charge taken. 

Norm, the 4th foul on Pitchford you are talking about, I feel was a 50/50 call, in the UMASS-LSU game I was watching during the Tip Off Marathon, the LSU player did the exact same thing and he was credited with a charge taken. 

Hasn't been a 50/50 call so far this year. 

 

A lot of selfish basketball being played by the Huskers in the second half.

 

Not impressed.  Not happy.

 

And can someone please learn how to post up properly?

We are one quality big away. Remember?

 

Miami Heat have no true post up player either, so we can be good without a true post player.

 

There's a difference between having a guy who's a true post player and having guys who can post up.

It's not a rare skill that few possess like being able to thread the needle on a long bounce pass catching a teammate streaking to the basket on a fast break.  It's a skill that can be learned.  Fairly easily, really.  Just takes time and practice and repetitions so that the footwork becomes ingrained and you can just rely on instincts once you're in a post-up situation in a game.

Petteway can post up somewhat well.  He got too deep under the basket once, though, but was at least able to draw a foul.

Listen, if you can learn how to line dance, you can learn how to post up.  Posting up is probably a lot less complicated than the electric slide. 

Highlights from the game...would Kent and Matt also consider doing the TV work?

http://www.snappytv.com/landing/b1g-network?s=162838

The students on the end aren't as close as they were at Devaney.  I think the students on the ends aren't going to feel like they can be heard by and influence opposing players nearly as much because of the added separation between the court and the seats.  Plus, they now have a row or two of premium floor seating between them and the court.  That's nowhere near the same kind of environment that made Noah famous.

I agree Norm but would also point out that the sides are not as close as they were at Devaney either - certainly not anywhere near as close as they were in the old days when Devaney had bleachers on the sides.  I won't go into the "intimacy" discussion but obviously other than the courtside chairs none of the seats at PBA are as close to the court as they were at Devaney - especially compared to Devaney as it was originally set up.  That isn't going to change.

Just going off of the choices at PBA - as I said I can understand how a student who just wants to watch the game might prefer to sit on the side.  But assuming we have rowdy students who want to impact the game it seems to me they have a much better chance of doing that if they are on an end.  (Obviously if the end seats were closer to the court would help a great deal - but unfortunately those are the cards we have been dealt.)   Maybe people think the students can impact the game on the sideline and I welcome someone coming forward to try to convince me of that - but so far I just don't see it.

We spoke with quite a few of our players over two years looking for ways to better distract teams. It didn't matter what school you were playing at, the "behind the hoop distractions" don't really do anything. The players are too focused to care about waving arms.

The thing that works are things that make you stop, think, and wonder "why?" Having people behind you questioning your choice of meal on Tuesday. People in costumes that make no sense at all. 

We've already had more players acknowledge us over two games than all of nonconference last year when we sat behind the hoop next to the opposing teams. Once they acknowledge us, we know we have them. They can't help but listen to what we have to say then, and that's were we make our money.

I think the only time an opposing player truly heard the students last year was when the Purdue player had his shorts on backwards. *Sigh* Fond memories.

I think the foul on Pitchford was because it was a legitimate flop. That call isn't going to get called anymore. He was just simply overmatched by a guy who was probably 30 lbs bigger than him or more. Teams are going to have to find a more creative way to defend the post than fall to the ground when the offensive player makes contact. That's what Peltz and Pitchford both did last night. Webster's guy had that spot for at least 3 steps before he got there. We're going to have to adjust our expectations on what constitutes a charge now because it's going to look different. Flops aren't going to get called anymore, and I like that. I would like to see them insititute some sort of lowering the shoulder foul, because we've already seen that where the offensive player can just ram in there and draw the foul, but simply getting to the spot and falling backwards like in the past isn't going to do it anymore.

I agree that flopping has to go but the problem for years has been that if you did not flop and held your ground, there's going to be contact, and most likely they are going to call it on the defense. I think Smith was called on one of these last night. He stood motionless with two arms straight in the air, no leaning or anything, and was called for a foul.

We spoke with quite a few of our players over two years looking for ways to better distract teams. It didn't matter what school you were playing at, the "behind the hoop distractions" don't really do anything. The players are too focused to care about waving arms.

There have also been studies on this proving the same thing.

We spoke with quite a few of our players over two years looking for ways to better distract teams. It didn't matter what school you were playing at, the "behind the hoop distractions" don't really do anything. The players are too focused to care about waving arms.

 

The thing that works are things that make you stop, think, and wonder "why?" Having people behind you questioning your choice of meal on Tuesday. People in costumes that make no sense at all. 

We've already had more players acknowledge us over two games than all of nonconference last year when we sat behind the hoop next to the opposing teams. Once they acknowledge us, we know we have them. They can't help but listen to what we have to say then, and that's were we make our money.

I agree the standard behind the basket hand waving is pretty meaningless to the shooter (although FWIW no player on any team would ever admit that bothered them even if it did).  I would say that the 2 girls kissing last year had an impact though - and the Andy Enfield head at the FGCU game was pretty creative and I am sure the FGCU players noticed that.

By the same token being acknowledged by a player sitting on the bench may be cool but I think it is also pretty marginally effective.  A player who hears you while he is on the court is never going to acknowledge you - but it still might impact his game.  More importantly - if you are good at it the ones you really want to hear you are the ref's and they are on the floor not the bench.  Maybe you feel you can be "heard" in that way just as easily from the side - and with the end seats so far from the court maybe that is true I guess.

But none of that is really my point.  I think the students can bring energy to the entire building and pump up the crowd.  That is where they have the biggest impact.   They do that best by being active in an area where the rest of the crowd sees them.   Standing, waving hands or doing other things behind the basket are not just intended to bother the shooter - those things show the rest of the crowd that they should be "doing something" also - or at least making some noise.  As a member of the "crowd" I barely notice the students on the sides - the ones I see are those on the end.   Think of the student section as "cheer leaders" not just as hecklers.  Although I will say as a former heckler - I wanted to heckle a ref or a player on the court - not one sitting on the bench.

I think the two girls kissing might cause me to miss a free throw or two...if you know what I mean!

Post defense and rebounding is an area that we will struggle with. Agau would likely be starting this year. I think getting Biggs healthy is key. This guy is gonna put up some large numbers. I think we can put out a line up that can draw fouls as a way to thin a teams post quality. U can get Biggs and Webster to the rim and draw fouls.

Post defense and rebounding is an area that we will struggle with. Agau would likely be starting this year. I think getting Biggs healthy is key. This guy is gonna put up some large numbers. I think we can put out a line up that can draw fouls as a way to thin a teams post quality. U can get Biggs and Webster to the rim and draw fouls.

Is there any thought that Biggs isn't healthy?  He has been suspended, not injured.  Not sure what the basis is on here for expectations of "large numbers".  Unless he has dramatically improved his outside shooting.  And dramtically reduced his turnovers.  Good teams, i.e. Big 10 teams, aren't just going to let Biggs and Webster take it to the rack if they don't shoot it well enough to require defenses to guard them away from the bucket.  Time will tell, but defenses adjust at this level. 

The point is just getting to the rim is enough w the new rules. You can put teams and players in foul trouble causing a mismatch. You put a few on craft early and it changes the game. They switch to a zone then u can adjust with shooters. Miles thinks Biggs could go to the line 25 times a game. Biggs is fast enough to break down a zone and we have guys that can shoot. We could have nights where we r running Biggs Webster ray and shields and pitchford or smith and do well.

The point is just getting to the rim is enough w the new rules. You can put teams and players in foul trouble causing a mismatch. You put a few on craft early and it changes the game. They switch to a zone then u can adjust with shooters. Miles thinks Biggs could go to the line 25 times a game. Biggs is fast enough to break down a zone and we have guys that can shoot. We could have nights where we r running Biggs Webster ray and shields and pitchford or smith and do well.

I appreciate the well-thought out response.  Not sure we have enough shooters, especially from long range.  Other than Pitchford, and Ray when he is hot, who can stroke the long ball fairly consistently?    I saw some lineups tuesday where there were no shooters, or maybe one being generous.   Too many guys you don't have to guard.  We can get by with that against lesser talent, but despite the new rules, I think "just getting to the rim" will be harder in the Big 10 than we think--some aircraft carriers and big, physical guys in there.  If Tai can shoot it better from 15+ than he has looked so far, it will help him and us tremendously. 

 

I think the foul on Pitchford was because it was a legitimate flop. That call isn't going to get called anymore. He was just simply overmatched by a guy who was probably 30 lbs bigger than him or more. Teams are going to have to find a more creative way to defend the post than fall to the ground when the offensive player makes contact. That's what Peltz and Pitchford both did last night. Webster's guy had that spot for at least 3 steps before he got there. We're going to have to adjust our expectations on what constitutes a charge now because it's going to look different. Flops aren't going to get called anymore, and I like that. I would like to see them insititute some sort of lowering the shoulder foul, because we've already seen that where the offensive player can just ram in there and draw the foul, but simply getting to the spot and falling backwards like in the past isn't going to do it anymore.

I agree that flopping has to go but the problem for years has been that if you did not flop and held your ground, there's going to be contact, and most likely they are going to call it on the defense. I think Smith was called on one of these last night. He stood motionless with two arms straight in the air, no leaning or anything, and was called for a foul.

 

I'm not disagreeing with you or Norm, I'm just saying that's how they're calling things this year.  It was probably an over correction that will need to be adjusted going into next year.  They tried to eliminate the play by Aaron Craft that drew so much attention in the tourney vs. ISU last year and in doing so they basically eliminated the charge call completely.  They'll have to address that next season, I'd assume, but this year, this is the game we've got.

 

The point is just getting to the rim is enough w the new rules. You can put teams and players in foul trouble causing a mismatch. You put a few on craft early and it changes the game. They switch to a zone then u can adjust with shooters. Miles thinks Biggs could go to the line 25 times a game. Biggs is fast enough to break down a zone and we have guys that can shoot. We could have nights where we r running Biggs Webster ray and shields and pitchford or smith and do well.

 

I appreciate the well-thought out response.  Not sure we have enough shooters, especially from long range.  Other than Pitchford, and Ray when he is hot, who can stroke the long ball fairly consistently?    I saw some lineups tuesday where there were no shooters, or maybe one being generous.   Too many guys you don't have to guard.  We can get by with that against lesser talent, but despite the new rules, I think "just getting to the rim" will be harder in the Big 10 than we think--some aircraft carriers and big, physical guys in there.  If Tai can shoot it better from 15+ than he has looked so far, it will help him and us tremendously. 

 

Shields led the team in 3pt % last year. I think others have said Nate Hawkins is a smooth shooter from outside as well.

 

I would say that the 2 girls kissing last year had an impact though

Calling you out.  Photo evidence required.

I don't see the rules changing, nor do I see them stopping the call. The NBA eliminated the hand check in the earl 90's and it helps immensely. It does create better flow and movement to the game to improve scoring. That's why I'm dissappointed in a guy like Fuller red shirting because he is a shooter. I feel like we have very few good shooters, and we will need ray and Walt to step up, for sure those are our 2 best.