Musings from the 1st Row

[pie n eye]

I have to consider the chemistry theory. Senior Perimeter players would look low for shaq or Grady. If that wasn't there they seemed to dribble around until one of the other senior players were open. There was very little ball reversal. It's like the two seniors took it upon themselves to carry the full load and at times seem to ignore anyone else. Unless it was the last option. That can effect overall team rhythm. And offensively rhythm is everything.

Yeah when we all share the load on offense we're much better than relying on one or two guys. Especially when the other team knows who those one or two guys are going to be. When Fred and Ron were underclassmen the seniors trusted them in big situations. Are they doing the same thing? I dunno.

Again, though, I have to give credit to UNI.

[ShockTalk]

Bennett Koch did not play the last 11:10 of regulation nor any of the OT period. This unclogged the lane, made SM or AG guard out on the perimeter and made the lane susceptible for WW to drive at will. The sensible adjustment would have been to help off of the UNI perimeter shooters and hope that WW did not become a high assist man and that those perimeter shooters did not start hitting shots. If HCGM was "stubborn," it was keeping SM or AG in the game defensively. But then what do you do inside offensively if neither is on the floor? My preference would be to have not switched defenders on WW, particularly in those situations where all he and the other UNI guard simply criss-crossed at the top of the circle in a leisurely walking manner.

Interesting. This change also apparently hurt our bigs' scoring as well. Shaq scored all of his points in the 1st half. Anton had 8 points in the 1st and scored another 4 in the first 3:30 of the second with his last bucket midway through the OT. So, without anybody over 6'7" (Carlson played 31 minutes after averaging 21 mpg for the season with 3.5 rpg) and he had 9 points and 9 rebounds, it would appear our bigs were ineffective on both ends of the court when UNI opted for their small lineup. I also didn't see any stats for 6'6" Jesperson during the last 11:10 or OT either. They went Carlson, Morgan 6'5", Bohannon 6'4", Lohaus 6'2", and Washpun 6'1". Wow.

It would sure seem that some sort of lineup with Kelly, McDuffie, Brown, Baker, Frankamp, and VanVleet would have ran out their lineup if our typical lineup wasn't working on either end.

[Shoxfan11]

Yeah when we all share the load on offense we're much better than relying on one or two guys. Especially when the other team knows who those one or two guys are going to be. When Fred and Ron were underclassmen the seniors trusted them in big situations. Are they doing the same thing? I dunno.

In the NCAA Tournament they did. Before that, not so much. In the game against Creighton in the MVC finals that @Play Angry: mentioned earlier, Malcolm took 20 shots. 20! Carl Hall took 14. They combined to take about 51% of the total shots we took that game. For reference, Ron and Fred combined to take about 43% of the total shots against Illinois State. I don't believe that either number is good (unless they're making every single one of them), but this isn't the first time we've seen seniors ignore the other players and try to do too much themselves.

I think this week and a half off helps way too much to ignore. It gives the team some time to rest, get back to the basics, and just practice together. It worked out really well in 2013 - the underclassmen were given the chance to step up in the NCAA Tournament and did. Hopefully we are given a chance this year and the same thing happens.

[SHOXAAC]

Good grief, I leave ShockRef alone with the laptop for a few hours and look at the havoc he's wreaked!

It was ur fault for taking his leash off.

[pie n eye]

It would sure seem that some sort of lineup with Kelly, McDuffie, Brown, Baker, Frankamp, and VanVleet would have ran out their lineup if our typical lineup wasn't working on either end.

Yes! I said after the ILSU loss that I would've loved to see if a small ball lineup similar to that one would have been more effective.

And thanks for the refresher Shoxfan11. So it really just boils down to putting the ball in the hoop more than 8% of the time.

[ShockRef]

Watcher,
A reasonable and well thought out response.
You supplied data, facts and did so with out calling me juvenile, derogatory names.

I agree that if you hold a team to 47, the overall defense was not the problem. My issue was crunch time defense and the inability to adjust and counter the opponent.

Regarding personnel, with the outcome in the balance, Morgan was in the right corner with EW guarding.
When EW turned his head, Morgan pointed down towards EW's head and looked at WW. HCBJ saw it too and immediately crisscrossed his hands.
Morgan immediately took off along the baseline, while Bohannon took off from the opposite corner. EW was a bit late taking off and WW zipped it to Morgan in the corner.

We all know what happened next.

Don't get me wrong. I love me some EW. But he was not the right guy to guard Morgan at that point in the game.

I know Khan is going to love this one, but MM was the better choice to guard him at that particular time.

JMO.

That is all.

[Kel Varnsen]

I'd say that basing one's worth on a tourney outcome as opposed to a season long accumulation of data points is pretty foolish.

[pinstripers]

I'd say that basing one's worth on a tourney outcome as opposed to a season long accumulation of data points is pretty foolish.

I agree, but that's the rules we play by. And we all knew it. And it ain't gonna change.

[ShockTalk]

Watcher,
A reasonable and well thought out response.
You supplied data, facts and did so with out calling me juvenile, derogatory names.

I agree that if you hold a team to 47, the overall defense was not the problem. My issue was crunch time defense and the inability to adjust and counter the opponent.

Regarding personnel, with the outcome in the balance, Morgan was in the right corner with EW guarding.
When EW turned his head, Morgan pointed down towards EW's head and looked at WW. HCBJ saw it too and immediately crisscrossed his hands.
Morgan immediately took off along the baseline, while Bohannon took off from the opposite corner. EW was a bit late taking off and WW zipped it to Morgan in the corner.

We all know what happened next.

Don't get me wrong. I love me some EW. But he was not the right guy to guard Morgan at that point in the game.

I know Khan is going to love this one, but MM was the better choice to guard him at that particular time.

JMO.

That is all.

Looking at the play-by-play it appears that we played very good defense and very so-so defense. For part of the first 10:30 of the first half it looked like UNI wasn't going to score this game and even at the 9:30 mark we held a 17-6 lead. Per 40 minutes, that's 65-23 advantage WSU. Except for the last 30 seconds of the first half where nobody scored, the other 9 minutes were not special on D getting out scored 12-17 or 53-75 per 40.

In the second half, during the first 11.5 minutes, both teams had great D (or bad O) going 9-11 or 31-38 per 40. During the next 6.5 minutes WSU was out scored 9-13 / 55-80 over 40 so, not so good for WSU. Nobody scored the last 2 minutes. During over time, the 5-10 score would be 40-80 per 40. So, there was 15.5 minutes where the defense was giving up points at a rate of 77 points per 40, plus the overtime 10 points (80 per 40 minutes).

In any segment (other than 0-0 during 2 spots totaling 2.5 minutes at the end of each half) WSU never scored at better than a 65 point clip per 40. Take away the first 10.5 minutes of the game (and the 2.5 above), including the overtime, and WSU scored at a 44 point clip per 40, UNI at a 64 per 40.

[shockmonster]

I'm well aware that they blew out some terrible teams along the way. That said, they never felt like the dominant team from the past few years. There is something very wrong with this current group and I just hope it isn't a sign of things to come. I hope it can just be chalked up to terrible chemistry or something along those lines. I don't know that I was changing facts, as you describe. The two tournament games were awful. They were mirror images of each other, each to teams WSU should have dominated. I don't think I ever felt that this team was ever really "back on track" after FVV returned. They have always seemed to be missing something and the last two games have, again, accentuated this. Their offense has been a concern of many on this board all season. The guys stand, don't move, force bad passes, take poor shots; this is all poor execution and it has been evident all year. I guess the real question is; were the blowouts that led up to the tourney the apparition or were the bad games the apparition? Since they couldn't find a way to win even two games in the tournament, in a very sub par conference, I find it difficult to say that my claim of their poor execution is a changed fact.

I went to some of those games and the Shockers looked impressive. My main claim is that it is easy to look back two weeks and five games and then say that you saw this two game collapse coming all along. I agree that our field goal shooting percentage has been suspect all year long, but we usually do so many other little things well that we still play impressively. The second half on Saturday cost us.

[KC Shox]

Why do people keep saying NIU and Illinois St., are bad/key losses? NIU beat UNC and Iowa St., and are a 22 game winning team. Illinois St., is an 18 game winner. I don't get it. If Illinois St., is a bad loss, then I'm a monkey's uncle.

Anyway, I have no faith in the selection committee giving WSU the benefit of anything. We're on the fence in a lot of "experts" minds and if all things being equal, they'll gladly give a power conference team the nod rather than us. It's just the way of life for a mid-major and dollars signs. They'd rather see first draft pick Ben Simmons and name brand LSU over us any day of the week.

The fans see the Shox at what they truly are, a good quality team that can make noise if the match up is right. The "experts" only see what's on their computer screen and our name printed on the front of our jersey. WE WILL GET SCREWED OVER or my name isn't Orville Redenbacher.

[shockmonster]

Someone mentioned earlier that they didn't see a conspiracy by the Valley. Did anyone mention that they thought that the Valley was conspiring against WSU? What I see is the other nine teams fans all cheering for the opposing team to WSU. The Valley giving us the crappiest seats every year, the other Valley teams media voting against most of our guys/coach for All MVC honors. They don't get together to do this but still "hate" (maybe dislike is more politically correct) us.

[SB Shock]

The "experts" only see what's on their computer screen and our name printed on the front of our jersey. WE WILL GET SCREWED OVER or my name isn't Orville Redenbacher.

Depends what they are looking at. According to the CBS podcast they seem to think the selection committee does give some credence to KenPom which does have WSU as #11 team in the nation and the #1 defense that they think will impress the selection committee.

They also brought up the fact that Schaus is on the selection committee and he had hired Marshall when he was the AD. They also said he did not have to recluse himself. Of course they said that will just give all the conspiracy buffs with a lot of fodder if WSU does get into NCAA tournament.

[ShockTalk]

If one is to take the committee's word regarding injuries/losses and only consider the games in Orlando and change nothing else:

1) With FVV, we would have beaten USC (only lost by 3 without FVV, Shamet, and CF), lost to Xavier, and beaten Monmouth, our RPI would be about 23.

2) With FVV, we would have beaten USC, lost to Xavier, and lost to Monmouth, our RPI would be about 29.

3) Do not consider any of the injuries, we're about 48.

In either #1 or #2 scenario, we're in easy, with probably an upper half seed.

As it is, we had only 1 marquee win, but had only 1 loss 100+ and that is around 120. Had they won their first round game, we may not have had any losses outside the top 100.

[ShockerFever]

Why do people keep saying NIU and Illinois St., are bad/key losses? NIU beat UNC and Iowa St., and are a 22 game winning team. Illinois St., is an 18 game winner. I don't get it. If Illinois St., is a bad loss, then I'm a monkey's uncle.

Anyway, I have no faith in the selection committee giving WSU the benefit of anything. We're on the fence in a lot of "experts" minds and if all things being equal, they'll gladly give a power conference team the nod rather than us. It's just the way of life for a mid-major and dollars signs. They'd rather see first draft pick Ben Simmons and name brand LSU over us any day of the week.

The fans see the Shox at what they truly are, a good quality team that can make noise if the match up is right. The "experts" only see what's on their computer screen and our name printed on the front of our jersey. WE WILL GET SCREWED OVER or my name isn't Orville Redenbacher.

Care to make a bet?

Oh hell, never mind. You don't honor those.