Someone said there were no complaints, so I'll throw something out there. (Cup on. Helmet on. Asbestos on. Soapbox, on. Mouthing off.)
I watched the replay last night. While we won, I think that if the team play like this going forward they are an 8-10 seed, and don't make the second weekend.
The good:
The team seemed to be "a team". The around the horn play was beautiful. There should be multiple of those per half. The give/go from Goode on the break at the 3 pt line showed some thinking and team play.
Amani will be a player. Kudos to BU for giving him a few minutes to get his !!! kicked and learn why he isn't ready yet first hand. Harris makes me smile. TSJ is likely going in the 1st round.
The unknown:
Coleman was hard to evaluate. He got burned repeatedly. He was also playing center without any help defense support. There is only so much he could do. His shot looked better. His attitude looked good. He was certainly trying hard. He was staying calm, even when things went wrong or when he got hit hard. That is a great sign.
I kept mixing up QG and Domask mentally, so I have no idea which did what, when. (Such incompetence must invalidate everything else said, right?)
The bad:
Defense:
A steady stream of layups were given. Some were on well designed plays. Many were from a lack of help defense. It was nowhere to be seen. Dickenson looks really good in the 2nd half on the pick and roll plays. Multiple easy layups and lob finishes.
Harmon could not stay in front of his man. He couldn't (didn't) do it in Italy either.
General:
Luke had a horrible game. Cold shooting and defensive lapses. If both don't improve dramatically, I start to get worried about our rotation depth. A real shame since I was 60% sure he was going to be a starter for shooting and defense. I liked what I saw his freshman year.
Offense:
Many of the possessions seemed to be without designed plays, or broke down quickly. We often drove, and then when stopped went to a 2-man game on one side of the court where the ball never really moved. The 2-man game was being defended by 3 players; the two assigned, and a rotational helper. The offense died on those possessions.
As we repeated plays, KS started picking up on them, so the offense was degrading as the game went on. What happens with a little scouting?
The cuts were not crisp and the few that were were not rewarded. (Glass half full: At least some people were moving and trying to cut.)
The following while "PG" related, are on the team: No ball handler seemed be able to handle hard 1:1 pressure. (Playing against their equivalent of Sencire.) When the ball handler was under pressure, and thus not able to start the play, people just stood in their starting positions waiting, often 3-5s. When the ball handler got in trouble or picked up their dribble, help was very slow to arrive. There will be 5s calls unless this changes. There were multiple TOs or near TOs handling the ball outside of the 3pt arc. People were looking to initiate a play and forgetting to protect the ball. The team was lost when they held the ball until the last 10s of the clock. KS knew to sit on TSJ.
Free throws. If I'm the opposing coach, I'm going to play some variation of hack-an-illini, especially in the last 5 minutes. At least one of my lower rotation players is fouling out, possibly three or four.
My takeaway [pulling out my pipe and settling back into my overstuffed armchair]:
I suspect this team needs to be coached and play very differently than prior BU teams. This set of players should do very well given strong structure; they seem to have the "team" mentality to accept it. Imagine WI under Bo with athletes like these. I'd drill a set of offensive plays that emphasize cuts until they can do them in their sleep. Don't think. MOVE (Demetri).
I do not think this is a deep rotation team. There are 12 scholarship players. 3-5 of which are not ready (severe defensive liabilities). Another player is at best spot minutes.
Prediction: If the offense shifts to almost 100% designed plays, with heavy emphasis on cuttting, and clear fallbacks if the first play stalls, then team is likely 2nd/3rd in the BT and a 3-4 seed who makes the second weekend. [Hey, who splashed this orange !!!! on my glasses.] Otherwise they are 4th to 6th in the BT and anywhere from a 6-10 seed. Either way, I think it is "what seed" vs. "do we get an invite."
[Stepping down from the soap box. I'm not foolish enough to take off the protection.]
My next viewing is Marquette. I wish they never scheduled bottom 1/3rd teams (Sagarin rank 250+). We don't get useful reps or learning. Mistakes need to cost for people to learn. If anything, I think these games encourage bad habits.
