Jump to content
SiouxSports.com Forum

NODAK13

Members
  • Posts

    380
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Posts posted by NODAK13

  1. 47 minutes ago, geaux_sioux said:

    Of course he doesn't shoot them. But free throws have cost his teams a lot of games over the years. They aren't that hard and we don't have anyone other than Shanks who has any size excuse for sucking at the line.

    Yeah but it seems when we have a bad ft shooting game and lose because of it , its Jones fault.  Watched the other night were Duke shot like 12-24 from the line.  Guess that was coach K's fault.  Its just a lost art anymore and why some games we shoot ft's so good and the next game we can't make a ft.  Im sure coaches wish they had the answer but nobody does.

  2. 1 hour ago, geaux_sioux said:

    He needs to emphasize free throw shooting. Our team is not good enough. They're free points and if we were better at them we would have had a better chance at a win last night. Arizona pulled away thanks to their free throw dominance. 

    Jones does not shoot the free throws and believe they do practice free throws over and over.  The entire nation for the most part is lacking in good free throw shooting.  The emphasis is for super athletic players and the art of free throw shooting is being lost.  Jones has developed and learned as a coach and no doubt deserves a nice increase and extension. 

  3. 58 minutes ago, darell1976 said:

    Two other games were over 16,000;  16,300 in 2011-2012 at Kansas, and 16,553 at Wisconsin in 2013-14.  13,280 is the record at home (REA) 2001 Kansas at UND.

    UND vs Arizona 16,341...second largest.

    We have a new winner.  2010 game at Wisconsin the attendance was 17,230 when Huff, Anderson, Webb, Schuler and Brekke were all freshmen with 3 of them starting.

    • Upvote 1
  4. 1 hour ago, Nodak78 said:

    Q had a lot of influence on team play.  He is not selfish and it rubs off.  That was not the case with Huff and team. 

    So true.  Jones tried and tried to make Huff more of a team player and he just could not.  Q was a team player from day one and the others followed.  I believe you recruit team players even though they may not be the absolute top athletes but if you get 7-8 solid team players you can overcome the more athletic selfless players everytime.  TEAM play wins.

    • Upvote 1
  5. 30 minutes ago, BarnWinterSportsEngelstad said:

    Agree, his past teams weren't that overly talented that he under coached them. This is the most talented team he has had, he now deserves a short extension and a raise, short meaning, being what happened here at UND with Musselman's extension. Go Hawks!

    Most talented could be debated.  Brekke at the 5, Nash at the 4, Huff at the 3, Anderson/Schuler at the 2 and Webb at the 1, with Schuler/Anderson first off the bench against the current team would be one hell of a game.  Problem with the team mentioned above was the chemistry and selfish play. If this team from a few years ago moved the ball and hit the open player like this years team then that would have been special.  At the time Weber and Montana were very solid teams and Huff and company lost to them in the finals minus Brekke, Schuler and Webb at Weber.  Full strength and at a neutral site I believe UND would have danced that year.  Maybe Jones learned a thing or two after coaching that team.

    • Upvote 1
  6. 7 minutes ago, siouxfan512 said:

    Question regarding selection to the NCAA Bball Tourney.

    Obviously in the Big Sky, you have to win the tourney to get the bid. BUT could statement wins, or basically dominating the tourney impact our seeding?

    For example, lets say we walk through the tourney, playing the toughest competition possible, or somehow end up playing SUU in the finals and just squeak out a win. Does that impact our seeding between a 16 or 15 at all?

    At this point I don't believe it makes any difference who we play or how we win.   Unless there are a lot of upsets in the other mid major conferences we will be in the play in game in Dayton,Ohio and so far there have not been big enough upsets.

  7. 16 hours ago, teamsioux said:

    Westgate LV odds:

    UND, EWU and Weber 3/1

    Montana 4/1

    Idaho 8/1

    Field 4/1

    So If I understand this the field (seeds 6-11) have the same odds as Montana and slightly worse than UND.   This clearly shows that this tournament is WIDE open.  Wish I had a warm and fuzzy feeling for us but I don't.

  8. More than any other Big Sky tournament UND has been in I believe this one is more wide open than ever before.  There is not one dominant team this year and would not surprise me if a 5-10 seed wins this year.  UND needs to play ( less the turnovers) and shoot like they did Saturday night to go dancing and not duplicate Thursdays effort or the tournament will be over for them early.  I believe most games will be under a 5-6 point margin regardless who plays.  The favorite is of course UND but don't count out anybody else.

     

  9. 1 hour ago, UND Fan said:

    BWSE - I have added the three coaches' records and winning %s.  It is interesting that Mr. Jones will surpass both Gunther and Glas in losses yet this year!  His teams would need to win 110 games straight for him to attain a winning % of .600.  Your thoughts on this, 44?  I would like your honest thoughts instead of name-calling, etc.  

    Not sticking up for Jones in any way but obtaining a winning% like the prior coaches was made very difficult transitioning into the D1 era and playing every year a very difficult non conference schedule.  

    • Upvote 1
  10. UND will be fine as I was at the first 2 games and they played very well both games against competition rated much better than them.  I like the personnel they are playing and every game they played very unselfish and moved the ball and found the open man. A play here or there and they could have gone 3-0.  They are very solid 7-8 deep and as long as they play those players they will be very solid in the Big Sky and would expect and 1 or 2 seed from what I saw.

    • Upvote 1
  11. I liked what I saw from Cashman in this game. I have been liking what he provides a lot more than Shanks lately. Better rebounder and does not seem to force his offensive game nearly as much as Shanks does.

    I have to agree as Cashman is much more physical and shoots a much higher percentage.  With what we will have at the 1 thru 4 next year if we have a post that can score around 8-9 points a game and play physically on the defensive end and rebound is all we should need.

×
×
  • Create New...