Interesting Post on Evansville Board

[Teamwork]

This sounds like the voices heard around here before the last couple of wins....................(the post was made last night after the Aces lost at lowly Bradley):

Post subject: What will it take to turn the corner? Posted: Sun Feb 13, 2011 12:47 am



Joined: Fri Sep 17, 2010 12:09 am
Posts: 99 It seems to me that this program has been here before...we make a run, win some games we're not expected to win, and start playing pretty good basketball...and then, right when we think we've turned the corner...we're facing backward again!

Tonight's poor showing, especially in our lack of rebounding, poor free throw shooting - actually miserable offense all around, and so many lay-ups missed against competition that we proved a few weeks ago that we could beat, all make me wonder about our mental toughness. Is is there? Are we only PAPER Aces? Were we all excited about nothing?

What do you who are more expert at this game than I (as I said before, I'm a "girl" and I believe strongly in attitude, effort, and practice, practice, practice.) feel is the answer to our "stuck at the corner" mentality? And what can be the push that gets us truly on our way ?

Aces, If you read these posts...I will say that there are many of us fans who believe in your abilities and talents...at home and on the road...if you have to lean on someone's belief that you can excel and win these games...then lean on all of us fans. ... and play like _ _ _ _ (even a lady can realize that is the only word that effectively describes how you guys are gonna have to play!

 

[BankShot]

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/feb/12/aces-face-bradley/

Obviously, there's a few threads here to connect the ISU experience. Ironically, we BOTH employ similar hoop philosophies and suffer hardship if a single phase of the "system" breaks down.

I'm not a fan of the "motion offense," but given inherent recruiting limitations, this style seems popular for many mid-majors who seek to capitalize off of "team" v. "individual" play, while in the OTHER World of NCAA hoop, McDonald's All-American's thrive in NBA-like offenses.

I don''t see much light at the end of the tunnel for UE/ISU-like squads...unless an unknown superstar bloosoms over night (i.e. LB '77-79). But this seems to be a once in a lifetime deal, doesn't it?

 

[sycamore tuff]

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/feb/12/aces-face-bradley/

I'm not a fan of the "motion offense," but given inherent recruiting limitations, this style seems popular for many mid-majors who seek to capitalize off of "team" v. "individual" play, while in the OTHER World of NCAA hoop, McDonald's All-American's thrive in NBA-like offenses.

I love the motion offense. I think ours is a work in progress. The motion offense in my opinion is for players who are smart, not just talented. Renn, Menser and the gang were smart basketball players. They knew when to drive, when to shoot the 3, when to backdoor, etc.

 

[Teamwork]

I love the motion offense. I think ours is a work in progress. The motion offense in my opinion is for players who are smart, not just talented. Renn, Menser and the gang were smart basketball players. They knew when to drive, when to shoot the 3, when to backdoor, etc.

It looks to me like all of the local players and three or four of the other players thrive and will continue to thrive in this offense. Sorry for those who aren't buying in. Spacing, passing for the best shot not just the next shot, and limiting turnovers can bring back the good time days of Renn, Menser, Green and Company for the next few years.

 

[Jon]

The thing is, pretty much every offense in basketball is a "motion" offense. Some of you may be talking about the traditional motion offense - two guards, a swingman (high post/cutter), and two low posts - and ya, those days are dead or close to it. The spread, whether it's four around one or five out, are still motion offenses. They rely on players making decisions based on the movement of others. Screening and cutting are still an integral part of these offenses. Even the dribble drive is can be utilized within a motion style offense, though you don't see as much screening off the ball in that style as you do in other styles of motion offense - unless the screen comes as the cutter moves past another player.

To me, the biggest difference between this year and last year is that Lansing wants to see more screening away from the ball along with a low and high post player, while last year we saw a lot of ball screens and four around one play. It definitely takes a change in mindset when you switch between these offenses, but it's not like it takes a huge change in skill sets from your perimeter players. If anything, the interior players would have a harder time with this style change. Perimeter post players, like Tunnell became his senior year, will probably thrive more in a four around one than a traditional two post offense where there is more traffic in the lane. Perimeter players just need to understand the difference in philosophy. The lane will be more crowded in a two post offense - such as the one Lansing seems to prefer - and will therefore have less room to make plays. Mid range jumpers become more important in this style of play, as does being able to make an entry pass into the post. Guys like Carl, who is "undersized" for the 4 in this style of play, should have the MOST difficulty with the change, and yet he's taken a huge step forward this year.

IMO, it's not the style of offense...it's the stubbornness of players who don't want to learn it because their more concerned about "getting theirs".

 

[Chief_Quabachi]

I played high school ball in a very structured offense;guards through, guards around, weaves up top and then set unsuspecting picks, pick and roll between guards and forwards, between forwards and the center.

Seldom was anything run that wasn't structured and if executed correctly with precision there wasn't much the defense could do about it.

One instance I remember clearly was against our county rival in the sectional where our warm ups was running our offensive sets directly in front of the opponents bench with their coach watching what we were doing.

We won taking the sectional favorite out. Unfortunately, we lost to Clinton, a school 3-4 times our enrollment, in the championship game that evening by three points in overtime.

I firmly believe that a highly structured offense can even the playing field.

 

[sycamorebacker]

http://www.courierpress.com/news/2011/feb/12/aces-face-bradley/

Obviously, there's a few threads here to connect the ISU experience. Ironically, we BOTH employ similar hoop philosophies and suffer hardship if a single phase of the "system" breaks down.

I'm not a fan of the "motion offense," but given inherent recruiting limitations, this style seems popular for many mid-majors who seek to capitalize off of "team" v. "individual" play, while in the OTHER World of NCAA hoop, McDonald's All-American's thrive in NBA-like offenses.

I don''t see much light at the end of the tunnel for UE/ISU-like squads...unless an unknown superstar bloosoms over night (i.e. LB '77-79). But this seems to be a once in a lifetime deal, doesn't it?

I, frankly, don't understand how ANY basketball fan would not like motion. ALL good team basketball involves player motion and ball motion.
I really don't get your point. Do you want us to play alley ball?

 

[bluestreak]

Gentlemen, these were some of the best friggin' posts on this board in many months.