Xavier v. Villanova (January 10, 2017) Big East Game #4

[KabeX]

I think those saying Nova wasn't THAT good were more upset than anything. Rational minds can see that banner hanging in their rafters and Brunson is already as good or better than Arch IMO. They are indeed that good. But we did indeed play that bad last night. Anyone remember what happened after we got drilled last year in Philly? Now granted it's on the road this time and Butler is better but I'll take the same result. I'm actually a little more concerned with Creighton at home on Mon.

[KsMuskie]

A few things that trouble me with this team:

1) Little mental toughness. When things begin to unravel, we have no one to stop the bleeding.
2) Poor team defense. Last night, we were continually schooled by Nova when we hedged on their ball screens and didn't quickly recover or have any weak side defense (Kaiser was abysmal). This has to stop.
3) Individual defense isn't great and we have no defensive stopper. JP can't guard anyone. Malcolm is no Remy Abel.
4) the 1-3-1 defense shouldn't be used often as Gaston or O'Mara can't defend the inside.
5) Post play is extremely inconsistent. Gaston has trouble finishing. Sean is too predictable and too slow against more athletic bigs.
6) If we don't bury the three, we will lose.

Mack has plenty of things to work on. I hope he can coach us through this.

[GoMuskies]

I assumed there would be some overreaction here, but I didn't expect "Nova isn't that good" to be part of it.

They just won a national championship, including a Final Four win by 44 points. Their main loss was their PG, and they have a better PG this year. Is there something I'm missing?

I'm pretty sure it's not "Nova isn't that good." It's more, "Nova isn't THAT good." As in, they shouldn't be able to outscore us by 33 over the last 28 minutes.

[muethibp]

Reynolds and Farr were condors. They were big who played even bigger because of their wingspan and physicality. We don't have anything close to those two.

This is so true. In the run up to this year, and all the optimism and lofty rankings, I have always thought we were understating the level of losses off last year's team. Reynolds and Farr were HUGE, literally and figuratively. And Remy was an important defensive cog. Their replacements - and I don't mean this critically, just trying to be objective of it - are just not as physical or talented or athletic. I have a few concerns that the season could kind of get away.

[Xville]

I think those saying Nova wasn't THAT good were more upset than anything. Rational minds can see that banner hanging in their rafters and Brunson is already as good or better than Arch IMO. They are indeed that good. But we did indeed play that bad last night. Anyone remember what happened after we got drilled last year in Philly? Now granted it's on the road this time and Butler is better but I'll take the same result. I'm actually a little more concerned with Creighton at home on Mon.

yeah for those saying that "nova is not that good" Not sure what you think is good then. They are that good...maybe not as good as last year because I think Arc meant so much to that team. However, they are a legitimate top 5 team again.

Anyways, as far as the bolded part...i remember having a great regular season but then a flameout in the tourney. I really don't want to do that again. Though maybe that wouldn't be that bad, because my expectations for this team are nowhere near what they were for last years.

[Caf]

This is so true. In the run up to this year, and all the optimism and lofty rankings, I have always thought we were understating the level of losses off last year's team. Reynolds and Farr were HUGE, literally and figuratively. And Remy was an important defensive cog. Their replacements - and I don't mean this critically, just trying to be objective of it - are just not as physical or talented or athletic. I have a few concerns that the season could kind of get away.

Speaking strictly about Remy, I think Malcolm Bernard has done a sufficient job at replacing him. His stats are very comparable to Remy's last season and he's a much better rebounder.

[KabeX]

Agree but it was a fade away 3 ... Who knows what happens if that one missed. But your point is well taken. The expectation is certainly higher now. Anything less than a Sweet 16 is disappointing. And we're all wondering when that Final 4 door will be blown open. I will say this - while we have recruited really good players prior to joining the BE, we have a better shot at getting MORE of them now. Multiple 4 stars like this year and even (hopefully) some 5 stars. BUT - what is needed most are STEEL BALLS. You just can't replace that. And we need more than 1 player with STEEL BALLS. I know crap about recruiting but I think there should be a category for SBF - or STEEL BALL FACTOR. The higher STEEL content the better.

Wow that response quickly went off the STEEL rails. I do feel better though.

[GetUp5]

Did anyone REALLY think we'd win last night? I mean, REALLY, legitimately think we were going to win?

The first 10 minutes were great. The last 30, not so much. Nova is better. Very concerning that we GAVE UP the last 15 minutes of the game.

Beat Butler Saturday, beat Creighton Monday and all is right in the world. No one is going to hold a loss at Nova against us.

[Muskie]

This team get's frantic and their shot selection goes out the window. That's the difference between Baylor (along with missed lay-ups and 3 footers) and Villanova. You can't go 1-15 against a Top Ten Team. Part of that is horrible shot selection.

[mirabilelectu]

I'm pretty sure it's not "Nova isn't that good." It's more, "Nova isn't THAT good." As in, they shouldn't be able to outscore us by 33 over the last 28 minutes.

Couldn't agree more. I get that we console ourselves in different ways, with different rationales, but I don't understand how claiming that Nova is a top team (they are, not doubt) is any consolation. Maybe I was, and still am, too high on this team's potential, but this line of thinking seems to be "losing by 25 is okay because we aren't close to the caliber of these top teams." FWIW, we've played two top teams this season, albeit on their home courts, and have been completely dismantled. I guess I don't understand it because I think we have the talent to compete with those teams, at home or on the road. Just venting a little bit after that loss, no disrespect to anyone who takes solace in that rationale.

Onto the game; does anyone else think one of our biggest problems is that our offense (to a great extent) and sometimes defense (to a lesser extent) are too rigid? An example from last night's game; we run a good offense for the first few minutes, got a few open looks, got out in transition, and then Nova switched to zone (match-up and some traditional), and from there on out continued to switch up their defensive looks every so often. But we did not respond (seemingly, maybe someone saw something I didn't?) by switching up our offensive set, just kept running the same patterns very far out from the basket. I thought we played very good defense in the first half, they hit a couple of contested and tough shots, but for the most part our intensity was there. Nova adjusted at half. Even when we deployed the 1-3-1, they torched it, almost like they were licking their chops waiting for it.

IMO, Farr and Reynolds were our safety nets last year; not only did they eat up rebounds on misses, we also ran our offense through them a lot. Gaston and OM haven't filled that facilitating void (though I'm not sure we've seen our team give them an opportunity to do so FWIW), and unless Ed is getting into the middle (and our best opponents clog it up) we settle for contested jumpers.

Maybe Mack doesn't trust our guys to run other offensive sets? I just don't understand how a team with a few very good scorers is so rigid in its offensive philosophy.