Big East Statement

[quote="mjmaherjr" post=311080][quote="Marillac" post=311079][quote="NCJohnnie" post=311065]Ponds & Simon are both playing 4 mpg less than last year, Clark 2 mpg less. However, as Chicago pointed out, they all played well above their average in Hall game and looked drained towards the end. Between Keita providing some minutes soon, Williams getting more minutes & Trimble & Dixon playing some, hopefully we can keep the key guys down to 33 minutes or less in most games.[/quote]

They didn't look drained to me at all. Ponds had his lunch eaten by McKnigt and wasn't given inch all night in the half court. Clark was strong all night and only sat for foul trouble and Simon did what Simon always does at the end of close games...freezes up. They had a full week of rest before that game. Tired legs is too easy of a fall back.[/quote] Possibly but possibly not. Those last 8 minutes being at the game it was clearly visible everyone stopped moving. Now part of that was hero ball but its definitely possible guys got gassed. Or a combination. I wouldn't say it's definitive either way

The only thing I know for certain is we froze those 8 minutes and played like an entirely different team than the rest of the game[/quote]

Because Ponds couldn't get going. McKnight is twice the defender of anyone Ponds faced all year. I suspect Ponds will grow from this as great players tend to do, but McKnight was magnificent. I'm really surprised he isn't given more props for that in here.

The only difference between this and our other close games is that McKnight was defender than Ponds was on offense. The other guys cleared out or offered screens like they always do late in close games.
 
[quote="Marillac" post=311079][quote="NCJohnnie" post=311065]Ponds & Simon are both playing 4 mpg less than last year, Clark 2 mpg less. However, as Chicago pointed out, they all played well above their average in Hall game and looked drained towards the end. Between Keita providing some minutes soon, Williams getting more minutes & Trimble & Dixon playing some, hopefully we can keep the key guys down to 33 minutes or less in most games.[/quote]

They didn't look drained to me at all. Ponds had his lunch eaten by McKnigt and wasn't given inch all night in the half court. Clark was strong all night and only sat for foul trouble and Simon did what Simon always does at the end of close games...freezes up. They had a full week of rest before that game. Tired legs is too easy of a fall back.[/quote]

It’s difficult for me to believe that McKnight is the secret weapon who can stop Ponds—a guy who has romped on most nights against ‘whomever’ when he wants to.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that fatigue had something to do with our collapse the last 9:45 of the game.
That we still managed to be able to ‘win’ the game—sealed by Figgy’s very heady play, until the ref stole it, says much about our grit and our talent, but I think both Ponds and Heron were bushed at game’s end.
 
As MJM said, we can argue whether breakdown over last 8 minutes was from tired legs or something else. However, our coach, who presumably knows better than us, made a huge point in a preseason interview about the fact that one of the reasons we lost close games last year was tired legs from playing too many minutes and he hoped to avoid that this year with increased depth. He specifically mentioned Keita & Williams in that interview. Hopefully they both get some minutes tonight and the starters are fresh at the finish.
 
Last edited:
[quote="mjmaherjr" post=311074][quote="Logen" post=311071][quote="Chicago Days" post=311070]I think this team is better than perceived. We were up by 12 points 30 minutes into the first BE game of the year away.
If we found ways to keep the guys fresh for all 40 minutes—watch out.
Which is why Keita’s Return is key, as well as playing Williams and Dixon more and give Figgy 30 minutes a game in BE play.[/quote]

So 4 extra minutes left a man in his early 20’s who has played ball all his life “drained”. Don’t buy it for a second. All I know is you and others are over analyzing to the point of absurdity. Have any of you ever heard of adrenaline?[/quote] So then why did you kill Matt Harvey in the world series at home when he had adrenaline and wanted to go into the 9th inning and pitch when he had dominated the entire game ?[/quote]

Good memory. Mostly because Harvey was not a nine inning pitcher so it was virgin territory for him. Plus the Mets had not developed a “complete game” mindset with their young pitchers, in fact they had cultivated the exact opposite culture by babying them. An aspect of “go with what got you there.” Add in Harvey was always a “me, me, me” guy and being honest I never liked him. I didn’t think he had any real seeds, if you will, and it turned out I was right. On topic, because several posters have commented on our players playing too many minutes, I couldn’t help but wonder why the 4 starters that played 35 minutes or better didn’t get “drained” tonight.
 
Last edited:
I know it’s all moot now, but does anyone understand why the clock was brought down to 3.1 seconds and the ball was given to SH on the sidecourt? It would seem to me that if the whistle was inadvertently blown away when the ball was inbounded, shouldn’t have SH been given the ball back with 3.9 seconds left on the baseline? I know the extra time wouldn’t have benefited us, but inbounding the ball in from the baseline corner is a lot harder than from the sideline.
 
Last edited:
[quote="Monte" post=311318]I know it’s all moot now, but does anyone understand why the clock was brought down to 3.1 seconds and the ball was given to SH on the sidecourt? It would seem to me that if the whistle was inadvertently blown away when the ball was inbounded, shouldn’t have SH been given the ball back with 3.9 seconds left on the baseline? I know the extra time wouldn’t have benefited us, but inbounding the ball in from the baseline corner is a lot harder than from the sideline.[/quote]

It's a valid question with only one answer......they even screwed the cover-up.
 
[quote="JohnnyFan" post=311325][quote="Monte" post=311318]I know it’s all moot now, but does anyone understand why the clock was brought down to 3.1 seconds and the ball was given to SH on the sidecourt? It would seem to me that if the whistle was inadvertently blown away when the ball was inbounded, shouldn’t have SH been given the ball back with 3.9 seconds left on the baseline? I know the extra time wouldn’t have benefited us, but inbounding the ball in from the baseline corner is a lot harder than from the sideline.[/quote]

It's a valid question with only one answer......they even screwed the cover-up.[/quote]

When the whistle was blown that is where the ball was. Additionally, they did take time off the clock so there was a period of time the ball was live.
 
On the subject of playing time Mullin told an anecdote at a gathering I was at. He said last season towards the end of a game Simon came up to him and asked for a rest. Mullin's response to him was "Are you kidding me? You came here because you were playing 4 minutes a game in Arizona. And now you want a rest? You're in college. Get back out there."
 
[quote="RJGBOOTSY" post=311326][quote="JohnnyFan" post=311325][quote="Monte" post=311318]I know it’s all moot now, but does anyone understand why the clock was brought down to 3.1 seconds and the ball was given to SH on the sidecourt? It would seem to me that if the whistle was inadvertently blown away when the ball was inbounded, shouldn’t have SH been given the ball back with 3.9 seconds left on the baseline? I know the extra time wouldn’t have benefited us, but inbounding the ball in from the baseline corner is a lot harder than from the sideline.[/quote]

It's a valid question with only one answer......they even screwed the cover-up.[/quote]

When the whistle was blown that is where the ball was. Additionally, they did take time off the clock so there was a period of time the ball was live.[/quote]

According to the ref and the league’s story, he blew the whistle when he did not see the clock start(at 3.9). Putting aside the fact that some time ticked off after the whistle was blown and before the scorekeeper had a chance to stop the clock, wasn’t everything null and void after the whistle was inadvertently blown at the (supposedly) 3.9 second mark? Therefore everything should have reverted back to where it was at the 3.9 second mark. At least that’s the way I see it.
 
[quote="Chicago Days" post=311084][quote="Marillac" post=311079][quote="NCJohnnie" post=311065]Ponds & Simon are both playing 4 mpg less than last year, Clark 2 mpg less. However, as Chicago pointed out, they all played well above their average in Hall game and looked drained towards the end. Between Keita providing some minutes soon, Williams getting more minutes & Trimble & Dixon playing some, hopefully we can keep the key guys down to 33 minutes or less in most games.[/quote]

They didn't look drained to me at all. Ponds had his lunch eaten by McKnigt and wasn't given inch all night in the half court. Clark was strong all night and only sat for foul trouble and Simon did what Simon always does at the end of close games...freezes up. They had a full week of rest before that game. Tired legs is too easy of a fall back.[/quote]

It’s difficult for me to believe that McKnight is the secret weapon who can stop Ponds—a guy who has romped on most nights against ‘whomever’ when he wants to.
I could be wrong, but it seems to me that fatigue had something to do with our collapse the last 9:45 of the game.
That we still managed to be able to ‘win’ the game—sealed by Figgy’s very heady play, until the ref stole it, says much about our grit and our talent, but I think both Ponds and Heron were bushed at game’s end.[/quote]

I didnt know McKnight from a hole in the wall before the game. What I saw that night would make me take a long look if I was an NBA scout. The kid played low, he has excellent change of direction and lateral speed, long arms, and he looked confident...sometimes picking Ponds up 35 feet from the basket.

I haven't seen anyone plays Ponds as well and that includes Khyri who I labeled a 1st rounder before anyone based on his defense.

I think this can be good news for us long term as Ponds now knows there are levels to defensive ability even as a junior.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top