Page 11 of 14 FirstFirst ... 910111213 ... LastLast
Results 101 to 110 of 134
  1. #101
    Supporting Member GoMuskies's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    Wichita, KS
    Posts
    34,312
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    I wonder what Jordan Crawford's Xavier Way score would have been and if he would have been held out of the starting lineup?
    He didn't start the Crosstown Shootout.

  2. #102
    Hall of Famer Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    22,867
    Quote Originally Posted by GoMuskies View Post
    He didn't start the Crosstown Shootout.
    He was in within 5 minutes.
    And "disciplinary" is a lot different than "practice points"
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

  3. #103
    Junior IM4X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    3,357
    Quote Originally Posted by Jumpin_Jamal_Forever View Post
    I have same thought. I'm glad to see the move but kept asking myself why so long to try it? I still have lots of questions about Steele but a win removes the pressure.

    I'm hoping Q's benching and watching the entire game from the pines (in his last year) helps him regain his appreciation for the game. For the record, I was at Cintas last night when the team came out to warm-up. Q led the way but he warmed up in kind of a lackadaisical manner. I told my wife while we were watching the team, that his body language told me he was benched. I saw zero evidence of any tweak. Still, I give Steele credit for not rubbing his face in it. Hope Q learns from it. That would be a sign of maturity.
    Why do I feel like this exact thing happened before.

    I could swear that this same situation happened with Q before: Q starts to play awful for a number of games. The team really struggles. Fans become vocal about Q’s poor play, wondering what is going on with him and questioning why he is playing when he repeatedly performs so poorly. Then one game Q does not start (or play) and a report comes out that he “tweaked” his knee.

    Maybe you or someone else can tell me if I am mistaken.

    Your report about him moving around at the game makes me wonder about the knee story. Anyway, I agree that it is acceptable for a coach to allow a senior save face. Q seems like a really nice guy who has the ability to play at a much higher level, but is simply caught in a funk. It would be nice to see his “tweaked” knee get better soon... and see him come back playing some of his best ball.

  4. #104
    Junior Lloyd Braun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    4,197
    Quote Originally Posted by Masterofreality View Post
    So, you go small and replace Carter with Moore to start. Creighton is smaller & quick, so you match that. Alternate Carter & Free if needed during.
    I agree... mostly responding to those that are clamoring for the bigs to play together all the time.

  5. #105
    Supporting Member noteggs's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2018
    Posts
    3,574
    Quote Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun View Post
    I agree... mostly responding to those that are clamoring for the bigs to play together all the time.
    I agree with this too. Think last night we had the most intense guys we have (regardless of position) to start the game who have been playing decent as of late (maybe an overstatement but you get my point and why I left Moore off).

    Just needed to infuse the team at the beginning. Creighton was playing as bad as us a few games ago and our intensity was mia. Can’t blame it all on one thing and may have not change the results of that game but it just seemed to work yesterday.

  6. #106
    Walk-On
    Join Date
    Nov 2018
    Location
    Cincinnati
    Posts
    67
    Quote Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun View Post
    I agree... mostly responding to those that are clamoring for the bigs to play together all the time.
    Question (not an argument): Facing Creighton, a good 3-point shooting team, are you better off going with a smaller, quicker line-up that can stay with the Creighton players who try to slash to the basket but aren't necessarily big enough to discourage Creighton from shooting 3-pointers - or, do you stay with a big line-up that is more intimidating to shoot over but can get beat on drives? Does the big line-up force Creighton to play a different game? Could you argue that it is not a bad strategy to trade 2 pointers for 3 pointers???

    Creighton shot almost 40% on 3's at Cintas; they hit 40% of their 3's against DePaul last night; they are shooting 37% from 3 on the season; most of their guards, including Balleck who shot 5 of 9 at Cintas, are 6'5" or better, so can smaller guards really stop the 3's; Balleck is shooting 3's at a 45% clip in Big East play.

    Finally, by staying with the smaller line-up at Cintas, X was out rebounded 41-37.

    Just a question to consider.

  7. #107
    Administrator Muskie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    Indiana
    Posts
    13,045
    Quote Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun View Post
    I agree... mostly responding to those that are clamoring for the bigs to play together all the time.
    In order for that to work you have to count on neither getting in foul trouble. Early in the season, Free was getting fouls quickly.


    Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro
    "He's a little bit ball-dominant, he needs to have the ball in his hands, and he's not a good shooter." Ball-dominant … isn't that a nice way of calling someone a ball hog? Where is my Jay Bilas Thesaurus?

    Follow XH on Twitter

    Follow XH on Facebook

  8. #108
    Junior IM4X's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2014
    Posts
    3,357
    Quote Originally Posted by American X View Post
    Ask Naji when he is not feeling it?
    good point.

  9. #109
    Junior Lloyd Braun's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Location
    Cleveland, OH
    Posts
    4,197
    Quote Originally Posted by N67ER View Post
    Question (not an argument): Facing Creighton, a good 3-point shooting team, are you better off going with a smaller, quicker line-up that can stay with the Creighton players who try to slash to the basket but aren't necessarily big enough to discourage Creighton from shooting 3-pointers - or, do you stay with a big line-up that is more intimidating to shoot over but can get beat on drives? Does the big line-up force Creighton to play a different game? Could you argue that it is not a bad strategy to trade 2 pointers for 3 pointers???

    Creighton shot almost 40% on 3's at Cintas; they hit 40% of their 3's against DePaul last night; they are shooting 37% from 3 on the season; most of their guards, including Balleck who shot 5 of 9 at Cintas, are 6'5" or better, so can smaller guards really stop the 3's; Balleck is shooting 3's at a 45% clip in Big East play.

    Finally, by staying with the smaller line-up at Cintas, X was out rebounded 41-37.

    Just a question to consider.
    It’s possible that they are a bad matchup for us this year regardless of lineup. If you go small and pressure shooters while switching everything, you better slow it down on offense and feed Jones/post over and over and hope they double while having lots of off-ball movement.

    If you go big as they did against Gtown, you have to outrebound them by 10+ and make it ugly. This is likely what they will try to do, and if they fail I don’t think it’s back to the drawing board. This is likely the style X needs to play to win. Unless we somehow find depth to go 10 deep and pressure the ball some more it will have to be grind it out ugly ball. Which is probably their true identity if you look at the wins.

  10. #110
    Hall of Famer Masterofreality's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    On America's Great North Coast
    Posts
    22,867
    Quote Originally Posted by Lloyd Braun View Post
    It’s possible that they are a bad matchup for us this year regardless of lineup. If you go small and pressure shooters while switching everything, you better slow it down on offense and feed Jones/post over and over and hope they double while having lots of off-ball movement.

    If you go big as they did against Gtown, you have to outrebound them by 10+ and make it ugly. This is likely what they will try to do, and if they fail I don’t think it’s back to the drawing board. This is likely the style X needs to play to win. Unless we somehow find depth to go 10 deep and pressure the ball some more it will have to be grind it out ugly ball. Which is probably their true identity if you look at the wins.
    It actually is a conundrum. I'm not sure what the answer is. Some teams you don't really match up well with, and Creighton is one.
    I'm not gonna kill the staff over this one if we don't win. If they do win, they're getting big props. The only thing I'll be upset about is if we come out with a lousy effort and get outrebounded again.
    "I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •