Ok, now I get it. When we say, "X didn't have good shooters last year", that's blaming the players, and simply ignores that Steele was the cause of the poor shooting.
But when you say, "Loyola doesn't have as good of players", that just stating the facts, and also means their coach did a great job of coaching these less talented players.
And why do you keep saying Loyola's offense was more efficient when the numbers say otherwise? Please note- the higher the number the better the offense.
Results 61 to 70 of 137
Thread: Don James transferring
-
03-26-2020, 11:33 AM #61
-
03-26-2020, 11:33 AM #62
-
03-26-2020, 11:46 AM #63
YOU said Xavier didn't have good shooters. I never said that. I think our shooters were better than what was shown. I have clearly said that they were never put in the best positions to make shots. Is that clear?
And the fact is that Loyola's players were not as highly recruited as Xavier's. Fact, based upon all the recruiting gurus that so many ascribe to. Plus they were less experienced than Xavier's. That also counts for something. But even with that, they ran in a good system that won 20 games. Yes, in a lesser league, but not chopped liver.
Loyola's offensive system has carried them to a Final 4, despite having less highly regarded players. Xavier has never been and is farther away now than when Steele took over. Case closed Counselor."I Got CHAMPIONS in that Lockerroom!" -Stanley Burrell
-
03-26-2020, 11:54 AM #64
Or maybe Naji just didn't listen to the coaches. Maybe they should have just benched their most gifted player. I mean Paul shot 30% from three as a freshman under Mack to 37% under Steele the last two years. Tandy and Free both were at 35% this year. Naji and Q both at 28% but they combined to shoot 8 threes a game compared to the combined 9 that Scruggs, Free and Tandy shot. Maybe if Naji and wasn't such a ball hog we could have gotten more looks for Tandy and Scruggs. Maybe Steel's biggest mistake was not benching Naji until he got the message on how to make his team better.
-
03-26-2020, 12:06 PM #65
-
03-26-2020, 12:08 PM #66
I'd say our players were in good positions to make shots.
Most of the time they were wide open....he went up late, and I was already up there.
-
03-26-2020, 12:21 PM #67
Work with me here - how is 103 points per 100 possessions (Loyola) more efficient than 106 points per 100 possessions (Xavier)? Generally you want to score more points.
To put it more plainly - based on KenPom's adjusted offensive numbers, Xavier had the 103rd best offense and Loyola had the 159th best.
-
03-26-2020, 12:23 PM #68
For the most part, I tend to agree with you. Take the Creighton home game- Q went 0-6 from the three.... in the first half. But those were WIDE OPEN shots, and he wasn't even coming close. Other than Tandy, who was hot and cold, X didn't have any other good deep shooters. Scruggs can shoot threes, but he needs some room and some time to get his shot off.
-
03-26-2020, 12:24 PM #69"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
-
03-26-2020, 12:26 PM #70
Yep- they weren't even bothering to guard him on the perimeter. It was kind of incredible. I got to the point where instead of hoping he would make one, he would have one at least go in and out. Baby steps.
But he was so open that you would think he would at least make a couple of those. Instead he missed them, and badly.
Bookmarks