Northern Iowa vs. WSU game thread

[SHOXAAC]

[quote="Snapshot9"]

Kyles adds dimensions to our Offense, and good Defense sometimes.quote]

He is a specialist...a 3-point shooting specialist. That's all he does. 9 of his 11 shots tonight were 3's, which is about his season ratio. He did hit 4 of them, but several of the ones he missed were ill-advised at best. Am I the only one that see's Kyles as a liability on offense. I think most people got caught up in the phenomenal start to the season he had, which was an anomaly. He went from averaging about 19 points a game & shooting 60-some % from 3 - to averaging 11 points and 44% from 3. That means in the last dozen games or so he is averaging about 7 points and about 30% from 3. He is a good defender, but is a liability on offense IMO.

I disagree with you a whole lot. He is not a specialist, but he has a good shot, and has helped us several games when we needed it, and even sparked runs after he made a 3 or so. He also dribble drives to the basket sometimes, hits dunks sometimes, and makes some terrific blocks sometimes. He is NOT 1 dimensional, like say, Sean Ogirri was.
I would say he makes us more dangerous Offensively than we would be without him.

See response to proshox.

[SHOXAAC]

[quote="ShockerFever"]

Kyles adds dimensions to our Offense, and good Defense sometimes.quote]

He is a specialist...a 3-point shooting specialist. That's all he does. 9 of his 11 shots tonight were 3's, which is about his season ratio. He did hit 4 of them, but several of the ones he missed were ill-advised at best. Am I the only one that see's Kyles as a liability on offense. I think most people got caught up in the phenomenal start to the season he had, which was an anomaly. He went from averaging about 19 points a game & shooting 60-some % from 3 - to averaging 11 points and 44% from 3. That means in the last dozen games or so he is averaging about 7 points and about 30% from 3. He is a good defender, but is a liability on offense IMO.

It's just you.

The same could be said tenfold about Murry but yet you never seem to mention him.

Rome wasn't built in a day. And trust me...I'm not the only one. In the world outside this board, many are saying the same thing about Kyles. And as far as Murry goes...major disappointment as well, especially lately.

[Dan]

DK is not a go-to player. I'm not sure we have one, especially if Durley is hurt. That's the main problem with our team. That said, DK is playing better that Murry and should be starting at the 2. I'm not sure what Murry's deal is, but he has totally lost focus. Maybe he needs to take a backseat for a while. I'd like to see the starting lineup this weekend as follows:

Joe, DK, Ben, Gabe, Durley (if he's healthy). If not, I guess Stutz at the 5 but he's no shoe-on either.

[pinstripers]

Maybe Toure' should start at the 3, or not at all.

[proshox]

ShoxMVC - he could be a better player, but to say he only shoots threes and that 4 / 9 somehow hurt the team last night is wrong IMO. I would have agreed with criticism if you had mentioned that the biggest play of the game was when he got abused by #11 with about two minutes left (Gabe was called for a block).

Bottom line: His effective field goal percentage is above 50% for the season, he has hit 45% of his threes in the last three games (nevermind the fact that at least three misses were "desperation heves at the end of shot clock") and his effective field goal percentage on those shots is 68%. He is ranked statistically by Ken Pomeroy as the 75 best offensive player in the nation without including another good performance.

He had a horrid and undefendable stretch of games to start the MVC which leads to your often quoted 30% three point percentage that has nothing to do with last night's game. To me that stat illustrates players slump.

Kyle could shoot more free thros, but the whole team doesn't draw many fouls - I am not sure why, but another post mentioned that we clog the lane with bigs and that driving the ball doesn't look like a good option. I don't know, but the problem seems to be bigger than DK...

I think you should start to look at the consistency of no-shows from some of the other experienced shockers...

[SubGod22]

Officiating didn't cost us. Jansen didn't have his best game last night.

I did get pissed at a couple of calls that are made by many at all levels but are simply wrong. I believe Rags got called once and I know Durley did. The offensive player gets close to the basket and the defenders jump STRAIGHT UP and the offensive player jumps into them creating all contact. UNI got the benefit of that call at least twice. I'll know more when I finally watch the DVR. That call makes me sick as an official. It's piss poor and is simply wrong.

With that said, our defense sucked last night. Absolutely sucked.

If Murry starts Saturday I'll be disappointed.

If we lose Saturday I'll be taking an extended leave of absence from this board. Losing at home to UNI is unacceptable. Losing to the Trees even more so.

This team needs to get its act together or they will be one of the biggest disappointments I can recall.

[Ricardo del Rio]

Maybe Toure' should start at the 3, or not at all.

If Ben Smith started, it would not hurt my feelings. Not spectacular, but just so solid. Ben scored 10 last night and I would have never guessed it.

If Demetric played more minutes, it would not hurt my feelings. He is a load to guard.

If Gabe Blair played more minutes, it would not hurt my feelings. I have mixed feelings about this statement, but the offense just seems to run better, when he is on the floor. Yes, I know he did not have his best game last night.

I do not think Kyles is anywhere near being a one dimensional player. The steal, which he made early in the game and on the east side of the court, was special. Very special.

[Good News]

Random thoughts:

The reffing was not noticeable in either direction, which is how I prefer it.

I'm surprised that no one has brought up the one call that really hurt us that could have gone either way - Toure's near-steal in the press at the end of the game. The TV replay (I only watched it once) seemed to clearly show that the ball did not bounce on the line. However, since the ball was so close to the ref's foot, from his angle I can completely understand how he'd call it out of bounds.

Also, when Durley backed down O'Rear with 3 or 4 bumps, O'Rear finally went down trying to draw the call, JT dropped the ball in and then - just for a split second - stood over O'Rear, staring at him. At the time I remember thinking that (1) it was close to a charge but they didn't call it, and (2) it was close to a T and they didn't call it, and that the sum of those two meant the refs might be watching JT a little closer from that point on. If memory serves, he got an immediate foul on the next defensive possession, and then his 4th a couple minutes after that on a questionable reach.

The cumulative effect of non-calls resulting in a makeup call or a tight call is something that I've enjoyed discussing with friends who ref - I'd be curious what the refs on our board think, particularly in this situation.

The issue of guarding on-ball screens is definitely present. There are multiple philosophies, but the one Marshall appears to have chosen is to get the screener's man over the top of the screen to stop ball for long enough to switch back. What I'm seeing however, is a lack of communication on the switch, which in turn gives an opening to the lane for a guard with a quick first step (which Ahelegbe is).

If that doesn't get fixed, it's going to be a long haul in a league dominated by upperclassmen guards and good coaches that notice things like that.


One last thing thing - give me a break on the "athleticism gap". UNI may not be as athletically deep as we are, but Ahelegbe, Sonnen, and Mohawk can more than hang with our guys. And I'd be willing to bet that O'Rear could match Durley's time in any running distance, as well as his vertical. There's way more than height, weight, vertical, and bench press to making the scoreboard look the way you want it to.

[SHOXAAC]

ShoxMVC - he could be a better player, but to say he only shoots threes and that 4 / 9 somehow hurt the team last night is wrong IMO. I would have agreed with criticism if you had mentioned that the biggest play of the game was when he got abused by #11 with about two minutes left (Gabe was called for a block).

Bottom line his effective field goal percentage is above 50% for the season, he has hit 45% of his threes in the last three games (nevermind the fact that at least three misses were "desperation heves at the end of shot clock") and his effective field goal percentage on those shots in 68%. He is ranked statistically by Ken Pomeroy as the 75 best offensive player in the nation without including another good performance.

He had a horrid and undefendable stretch of games to start the MVC which leads to your often quoted 30% three point percentage that has nothing to do with last night's game. To me that stat illustrates that players slump.

Kyle could shoot more free thros, but the whole team doesn't draw many fouls - I am not sure why, but another post mentioned that we clog the lane with bigs and that driving the ball doesn't look like a good option. I don't know, but the problem seems to be bigger than DK...

I think you should start to look at the consistency of no-shows from some of the other experienced shockers...

Thanks for your classy reply, sorry I was so grumpy.

I'm not talking about DK just last night, but his trend this year is disturbing to me. Don't you think 3's represent 70% of DK's shots hurting this team overall? As I said in my earlier reply 1.5 assists, 11 games with no FT's...he is no Reggie Chamberlain. He is big (for a guard), athletic, fast and explosive. All I am asking him to do is utilize those gifts for the benefit of this team.

I don't fault DK for being abused by #11. Nobody can guard that guy. Between he and James, our guards looked like zombies. I fault HCGM. Although James can shoot it from the perimeter, #11 is not as comfortable out there. How did this team not zone more last night? Let UNI prove they can hit shots from 22 feet vs. the layup drill. It was reasonably successful when Marshall used it in the small quantity he did.

I agree with you about the other no-shows. Don't have the time or energy right now to go into that. Thanks for the discussion.
:wsu_posters:

[SHOXAAC]

Maybe Toure' should start at the 3, or not at all.

If Ben Smith started, it would not hurt my feelings. Not spectacular, but just so solid. Ben scored 10 last night and I would have never guessed it.

If Demetric played more minutes, it would not hurt my feelings. He is a load to guard.

If Gabe Blair played more minutes, it would not hurt my feelings. I have mixed feelings about this statement, but the offense just seems to run better, when he is on the floor. Yes, I know he did not have his best game last night.

I do not think Kyles is anywhere near being a one dimensional player. The steal, which he made early in the game and on the east side of the court, was special. Very special.

I have said Kyles defense has been good. HE IS ONE DEMINSIONAL ON OFFENSE. It's hard to argue based on the numbers.

[wu_shizzle]

I disagree that Kyles is a one dimensional offensive player, but for the sake of argument let's say he is.

Right now I only see 2 "dimensions" in our entire offensive scheme.

1) Throw it inside and don't expect it to come back out and 2) Chuck up the 3.

This is about COACHING.

[ShockTalk]

I watched the game again late last night. It was a totally different game from the MSU loss where the Shox just plain didn't play well. Against UNI, our offense generally clicked. If all you watched was us on the offensive end, I think you would fairly impressed.

Then, there was the defensive end. I'm going to take a general fan approach to this. It appeared we were trying hard enough and I'm sure for defensive technique it lacked. However, the one thing I noticed was that we had bigs and/or those somewhat slow of foot trying to stay with those waterbugs. I looked at the box score minutes. Koch, O'Rear, and Rank played only 65 of the available 80 minutes for the 4/5 positions. I believe that means that for at least 25% of the game, UNI was going with 4 guards, 3 of whom were 6'2" and under. In fact, the 4 of 5 guards of that height and under, played 116 minutes or almost all of the 1/2/3 position minutes.

I don't know how it might of affected our offense, but maybe we should have played more of Smith/Murry, Kyles, Ragland, DWill at the same time. Yes, play 2 bigs when both Koch and O'Rear were in, but not otherwise. Even if those 2 were in, but the other 3 were the smaller UNI guards, I might have gone with 3 of the 5 mentioned WSU players. Too many times, I thought, Ellis, Blair, and Hatch were chasing smaller/quicker players. More zone off and on, too. Just a thought.

[SHOXAAC]

I watched the game again late last night. It was a totally different game from the MSU loss where the Shox just plain didn't play well. Against UNI, our offense generally clicked. If all you watched was us on the offensive end, I think you would fairly impressed.

Then, there was the defensive end. I'm going to take a general fan approach to this. It appeared we were trying hard enough and I'm sure for defensive technique it lacked. However, the one thing I noticed was that we had bigs and/or those somewhat slow of foot trying to stay with those waterbugs. I looked at the box score minutes. Koch, O'Rear, and Rank played only 65 of the available 80 minutes for the 4/5 positions. I believe that means that for at least 25% of the game, UNI was going with 4 guards, 3 of whom were 6'2" and under. In fact, the 4 of 5 guards of that height and under, played 116 minutes or almost all of the 1/2/3 position minutes.

I don't know how it might of affected our offense, but maybe we should have played more of Smith/Murry, Kyles, Ragland, DWill at the same time. Yes, play 2 bigs when both Koch and O'Rear were in, but not otherwise. Even if those 2 were in, but the other 3 were the smaller UNI guards, I might have gone with 3 of the 5 mentioned WSU players. Too many times, I thought, Ellis, Blair, and Hatch were chasing smaller/quicker players. More zone off and on, too. Just a thought.

My guess is UNI practices that smaller lineup, we don't. You can't expect Smith & Murry to automatically play the 4/5 without the benefit of running it in practice. But, to your point...maybe we SHOULD practice it before we play at their place.

[shox1989]

The thing is .. overall .. we didn't play that bad. Like Sub said about the SDSU loss -- isn't that we lost that caused the Shockernet meltdown, it was the way we lost. This was a completely different story.

Last night wasn't the same comedy of errors type loss that gives you that queezy feeling in your stomach.

No loss feels good, but at least we had two players that stepped up and hit very big shots at the end, and there wasn't the complete headcase breakdown.

We just got beat in a hard fought battle. It was a good game to watch, and UNI brought their A game. Dammit.

While I was watching this game, I kept thinking how in the world did Indiana State beat this team 70-45?

Maybe UNI had the team flu when they played the Sycamores.

[ShockTalk]

I watched the game again late last night. It was a totally different game from the MSU loss where the Shox just plain didn't play well. Against UNI, our offense generally clicked. If all you watched was us on the offensive end, I think you would fairly impressed.

Then, there was the defensive end. I'm going to take a general fan approach to this. It appeared we were trying hard enough and I'm sure for defensive technique it lacked. However, the one thing I noticed was that we had bigs and/or those somewhat slow of foot trying to stay with those waterbugs. I looked at the box score minutes. Koch, O'Rear, and Rank played only 65 of the available 80 minutes for the 4/5 positions. I believe that means that for at least 25% of the game, UNI was going with 4 guards, 3 of whom were 6'2" and under. In fact, the 4 of 5 guards of that height and under, played 116 minutes or almost all of the 1/2/3 position minutes.

I don't know how it might of affected our offense, but maybe we should have played more of Smith/Murry, Kyles, Ragland, DWill at the same time. Yes, play 2 bigs when both Koch and O'Rear were in, but not otherwise. Even if those 2 were in, but the other 3 were the smaller UNI guards, I might have gone with 3 of the 5 mentioned WSU players. Too many times, I thought, Ellis, Blair, and Hatch were chasing smaller/quicker players. More zone off and on, too. Just a thought.

My guess is UNI practices that smaller lineup, we don't. You can't expect Smith & Murry to automatically play the 4/5 without the benefit of running it in practice. But, to your point...maybe we SHOULD practice it before we play at their place.

That was half my point. The other half is that they've been doing some of it all season. The 4 "smaller" guards have played 111 of the 120 minutes per game for the 1/2/3 positions. Now that Dunham's back, he's generally playing around another 20 minutes.