Dean Smith

I loved watching Almeida after getting frustrated by Illinois players out jumping him for rebounds resort to getting a run and smashing into them to get position. Never called once last night. Might say more about how the game was officiated.

I could probably guess your age based on that one. The younger generation (I'm old) is way too enamored with the block shot. 90% of the time it goes back to the offense. Greg McDermott told me once he intentionally (or at least claimed so after the fact) got his shot blocked early in some games against aggressive shot blockers. You can then own them with a shot fake for the rest of the game.

I'm not sure how lack of effort by the players can ever be attributed to a coach. If you are a competitor, you shouldn't need to be motivated by a coach or anyone else. JMO. I said that the team did not look well prepared. I provided three categories...perhaps all three are "on" the players, but some of it could have been game plan, or sharpness, or whatever...My point was that you could "argue" for a lower grade. You could also simply chalk it up to the appearence that we came to the horse race with plow horses, and Illinois showed up with thoroughbreds? I have no idea how you could game plan "emotionally, or physically" You can game plan mental because that's what the game plan is all about. The physical is too late to do anything about in the game plan. That's what conditioning, plyometrics, strength and agility training, etc. are about. How you emotionally get someone ready for a particular game idk. I think you hit the nail on the head with the horse analogy. I have read some posts about how tough it was for Shields because he was "game planned for." I didn't see where Illinois did anything different for him than anyone else. It was better athletes being very physical and the refs allowing it to happen. We would try to turn the corner off the dribble and they would physically stop us from doing so. Imo they should have backed off the defensive pressure at the end of the game to keep the clock running. Others say we dogged it so to speak. We weren't necessarily outworked as out-athleted (not a real word). We would be in position for the rebound and they simply had longer reach and higher ups and just took them. Some times the simplest answer is the best. We got beat by a more athletic, better team. It is not so much what we did but who we are. We are capable of beating Illinois but a lot would have to happen in our favor.

I prefer a 3-2 over a 1-3-1 if you are going with an odd front zone. Imo you get better perimeter coverage and it doesn't have as many gaping seams. One reason you don't see a lot of 1-3-1 in the higher levels is because of how easy it is to cause problems offensively with picks and seam penetration. I really like the run and jump/scramble defenses from Dean Smith (of course). This gives you the ability to trap from different levels on the floor (full court, 2/3, 1/2 or any point you want), different angles and with different keys (trapping off the pass or dribble. You can even key the trap based on a particular player's possession). You can also be as aggressive or as safe as a trap can be and mix those up as well. Once you teach the basic principles you then have the ability to start in any zone trap if that's what you want. It just has great flexibility.

Unless they've changed the rules, a flop can be called a technical for simulation.

I'm sure the people in Brooklyn paid extra for the wood with that specific pattern in mind but when you build a floor the longer the board the better the wood. The shorter boards normally are cheaper and lower quality.

Seeing that you brought up officiating and I didn't see anybody else comment on this, I'll bring it up here. When the Michigan State player got the steal then went in for the dunk and had his knee buckel, where was the foul? It didn't look like the Nebraska player (can't remember who it was) touched him and the ref didn't blow the whistle till the player came back down. The reply looked like he was untouched, but then they got two shots out of it. Just curious if anybody else noticed that, or I'm just crazy. That's what I saw. Answering Norm, unfortunately refs are human. Players come in with reputations and the questionable plays are many times decided in their favor. Not a lot a Huskers carrying the "he's a player" tag right now.

There's not much politics on this board, but from just the few jokes you've made I'm surprised you are a Lennon fan. He was far on the other side of the spectrum from Nebraska. Talent must have beaten out ideology on this one.

We have to wait for Shields. I'm sure he is a great kid but watching Menke just run up and down the floor is painful. He runs like me & that ain't no compliment. Peltz works his tail off and doesn't turn the ball over (against the competition we've played so far), but he can't guard anyone. On more than one occasion I've seen him give the two arm push on people diving around him. He knows he is slow, so he tries to compensate by staying closer to his man when they are off ball. That puts him farther from the mid-line and he never gets there for help rotations. Wake's inability to make shots made our defense look better than it was again. It is better to be lucky than good on many occasions. The "D" is getting better but we are still too slow on rotations. Offensively they looked good at times and other times confused. That's the fits and starts Miles is talking about. Motion takes a high basketball IQ. That's why lots of teams are going to the Read and React. It gives motion like movement but with half the thought process. There was one dribble penetration by Talley off the left wing into the elbow. Parker, Almeida, and Ubel all rotated towards the penetration. Needless to say it sort of took away all of the room for a drive. It created a huge 8 man cluster and a TO. All in all making shots makes up for a lot of mistakes. That was the fun part to watch.

Without trying to poke someone with a stick, this is what I meant by some people being too results orientated. Nebraska did not shoot well as a team and the other guys did. There was no real difference in the offense or the defense from the Kent State game to any other game they have played this year and just happened to win. It is going to be a long season and unlike most years, success will not be determined by wins and losses. Personally, I think the defense needs to tighten up by sagging off to make up for the athletic difference they are going to see most nights, but I don't claim to have all the answers. (or any for that matter)

Ray shot terrible but this is the defense that they've shown all year. Rotations are slow and everybody seems to be left on an island to guard their man by themselves. Kent St. made more shots, but these were the same shots Valpo was getting. When Andre is on the floor he steps out a bit and his size discourages penetration all the way to the rim, but without him it is lay-ups. I'm not sure exactly what they are trying to do guarding the low post, except telling the defensive player, "Good luck down there."The big problem is they have to try to play with too many players that are not D-1 players. You can't take everything away. You must at some point pick your poison. Right now I think they need to sag off more to the help line so they at least have a chance to help on penetration. That will open more threes, but you have to take the basket away and work out from there.

And I can say you're really wrong. I've been more wrong on many occasions.

Valpo wasn't stacked with athletes and they were running some weave. Everyone does it at least a little bit. It actually allows less quick players some room to turn the corner that they couldn't do without help. I do think everyone's perspective is clouded by us actually winning the game. I thought the defensive effort was great. On one possession we had three players hit the floor to save a ball. Valpo is a better shooting team than they showed. Whether it was the 7:00 AM game or not, they will usually hit more of those than they did. I think some of the people talking scheme are actually reflecting the outcome, not the game plan. First, Valpo took some horrendous shots they didn't need to. Second, they missed open threes they made last year. And three, the most concerning to me is that they got an inordinate number of uncontested or moderately contested lay-ups for playing a D-1 team. Our defensive rotations were simply too slow in coming to cut off the driving lanes. Count the lay-ups they made and then add 6 uncontested lay-ups I counted on my second viewing (and I wasn't paying that close of attention, my boys wanted to watch the game), and that is way too many. I think we are going to have some fun under Miles and have some success, but against Valpo we got lucky. With a seven minute drought and giving up that many lay-ups you shouldn't win a D-1 college ball game. We can learn from that. It is always better to be given an opportunity to learn what you need to fix and still get the W. Usually those two things don't happen at the same time.

Not talking about shooting anything but lay-ups. He made one drive early and made a three foot shot over a much smaller player. Had more opportunities to do that later, but did not have the inclination to do so. He made lots of dribbles under pressure, but away from the basket. When they realized he wasn't going to the basket, it actually allowed the defense to get more aggressive with him because he made himself no threat. He just needs the experience in the motion and some confidence. One or two dribbles and he's at the basket. You don't need to be a great ball handler or shooter to be successful doing that.

The game is funny. Valpo missed at least 4 or 5 uncontested lay-ups that the defense had nothing to do with. They make those and we lose by eight. Nothing else would have changed but the tone of this board would have been completely different because the lens we would be looking at the game would be completely different. I enjoyed the beginnings of the motion offense. Imo the big problem now is the familiarity and confidence in the offense. The key to motion has to be if the guy guarding you can't, go get a lay-up. There were several times players had lanes to the basket and weren't willing or didn't have the confidence to take them. Rivers was the most obvious. Valpo figured it out and weren't even positionally taking away his driving lanes, they knew after awhile he just wasn't going to go. I appreciated the defensive effort, but there were too many uncontested lay-ups given. If they shoot a normal percentage for them, and the defense looks a whole lot more porous. I really enjoyed watching the game and think that Nebraska will be a fun team to watch in the future.

game thread

What did Doc kill your dog or something? Can you make a post without bitching about Doc? You won, the man was fired. Now let's see if you can get through the rest of the season without mentioning Doc one more time.

On top of that there is a million ways to play a motion. Huge differences between what Bob Knight did and what his protege Coach K do with motion. Dick Bennett's mover-blocker system is closer to Knight's than Duke's version.

Run & gun doesn't have to be undisciplined. The all-time best example of this was Paul Westhead's Loyola Marymount teams. They averaged between 110 & 124 points a game and that was due to their system. The fast break and the secondary break were choreographed down to that last nuance. Everybody had a role and spots to fill, there was never any randomly running it down the floor and chucking it up. You don't get "good" shots in under 10 seconds without them being disciplined. The term "good" means shots from who they wanted and where they wanteded them.

And if you're a Republican in New York voting is not voting and for Democrats in Nebraska voting is not voting due to the electorial college winner take all function. If you don't vote for the winner, your vote does not count for president. How's that for a little election lingo?

http://huskerhoopsce...180428/profile/