Dagger Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 If we did have just 1 timeout left, I would of still called a timeout but that is just my opinion. I t just seemed like at that point we needed to know what we were going to do. I do think if Shanks can do what I think he is going to be able to do, the future is very bright. It would help if we could get Nash to work a little harder and be more of a factor in the game. He needs to at least make some of those bunnies he is missing. I haven't given up on this year. My mistake apparently, I thought I looked at the scoreboard and saw we had 2 timeouts left. Quote
jdub27 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 I will disagree with a previous post. Granted anything can happen but with 2.5 seconds left after a timeout, it is very possible to get better shot than a half court fling. You can call a timeout and then make a pass towards half court and immediately call another timeout. After that 2nd timeout it is very possible to get a much better shot. It happens all the time in basketball. No guarantees what is going to be the result, but clock management last night was terrible. Correct me if I am wrong, but I do think we had 2 timeouts left. I checked, you were correct and they did have two timeouts remaining. My mistake on that. Personal opinion is that taking a one after the basket doesn't really help you but if you do have two it likely doesn't hurt that much. If you rewatch it (thanks Big Sky TV!), the second the ball went through the hoop, Sac St was sprinting back to prevent anything crossing half court. If you take a timeout, you are going to run into them playing the same defense, with the added bonus of someone probably guarding the guy inbounding the ball as well. Neither scenarios are high percentage but I don't think an open half-court shot is much worse than hoping to catch a baseball pass on the other side of the halfcourt line when that is the only thing being defended and then adding in you hope you can get a shot off the ensuing inbounds. Quote
the green team Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Home games against good competition are lost in little details. Layups/close proximity shots are a concentration thing on the players. I look at it this way, obviously the offense worked well enough in those instances to get us those looks--they just have to be finished. So I'm not sure that that the offense is as much one on one as some here are alluding to. Make those shots and those all would have been results of team play, instead we missed them. We only had 4 turnovers the first half, but the ones we had were dreadful and led to easy ones for Sac St. Rebounding, you can tell the staff has worked with the guys to get themselves positioned right off of misses- either UND's or the opponents, but their just not coming up with the ball. At that point a player has to have a little desire, and attitude to go get the ball. I tend to believe the first 2 items hurt us more last night than did rebounding, in this specific game anyway, as Sacramento State doesn't miss very often for us to get a lot of rebounds off of misses. I'm from the school, that you don't take a timeout at the end and don't give the opponent time to set up. On our last actual offensive possession, not sure I want Nash taking the shot in that set, due to his recent struggles....but that's hindsight. Definitely a tough loss. I saw the women got beat last night too, but I'm not seeing a meltdown over on that thread. Quote
ArtVandalay Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 What to do at 2.5 secs is a toss-up either way in my opinion. I have seen it work both ways and fail both ways. I do hate the call timeout and draw up a 3/4 court pass. That seems to never work. I think a half court shot is actually a better alternative to that. It would have been a nice win but it also isn't a terrible loss. Sac state has nice team this year. Pretty excited about what is to come the next few years. Quote
jdub27 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Rebounding, you can tell the staff has worked with the guys to get themselves positioned right off of misses- either UND's or the opponents, but their just not coming up with the ball. At that point a player has to have a little desire, and attitude to go get the ball. I tend to believe the first 2 items hurt us more last night than did rebounding, in this specific game anyway, as Sacramento State doesn't miss very often for us to get a lot of rebounds off of misses. I thought UND's positioning was better than it has been (doesn't take much) but with Sac St shooting 3's and long range jumpers, there were a handful of long rebounds and weird angles that gave Sac St some second chances. Those are frustrating. Quote
NODAK13 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 its not the coaching that is getting us killed on the boards its the 3 point guard lineup that is killing us...what is so wrong with two point guards (kind of like last year with webb and anderson) and josiah at the three, nash at the four and shanks at the five...so hooker, terrell, coleman, nash and shanks...so six five, six eight, and seven foot at the three four and five.... We have a winner. 3 point guard lineup all 6' and under is insane. Sac State came in as either the worst or 2nd worst rebounding team in the league and we still couldn't out rebound them at home. Coleman needs more time at the 3 and more of a guard rotation so they are strong at the end of the game. Very impressed with Shanks last night so lets try going very big sometimes with Shanks at the 5 and either Salmonson/Calcaterra at the 4. We got a lot of different looks we could throw at teams but continue to settle for something that's not working. This year will continue to be a struggle to win any games but I do like what the next 2-3 years could bring. Quote
sioux24/7 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 I was surprised and disappointed not to see more of Coleman last night. I believe we should start Hooker, De Rouen, Coleman, Nash and Shanks. Estan Tyler seems like a good option coming off the bench rather than a starter. I am really excited for what our guards are going to look like next year. Another year of experience for everyone and throw in Geno and Sealers, that sounds like a talented group of guards. It would be nice if we could add a bruiser down low to compliment Shanks. Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 I was surprised and disappointed not to see more of Coleman last night. I believe we should start Hooker, De Rouen, Coleman, Nash and Shanks. Estan Tyler seems like a good option coming off the bench rather than a starter. I am really excited for what our guards are going to look like next year. Another year of experience for everyone and throw in Geno and Sealers, that sounds like a talented group of guards. It would be nice if we could add a bruiser down low to compliment Shanks. It seems like it's been a really long time since UND has had a truly physical player at either the 4 or 5 position. You might have to go all the way back to the days of Chad Mustard, and that's been nearly 15 years ago. Quote
NODAK13 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 I was surprised and disappointed not to see more of Coleman last night. I believe we should start Hooker, De Rouen, Coleman, Nash and Shanks. Estan Tyler seems like a good option coming off the bench rather than a starter. I am really excited for what our guards are going to look like next year. Another year of experience for everyone and throw in Geno and Sealers, that sounds like a talented group of guards. It would be nice if we could add a bruiser down low to compliment Shanks. Put 10-15 pounds on either Cashman or Richman and they could possibly be bruisers especially Richman cause he already appears to have a descent size body on him. Quote
jdub27 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 I know that in the beginning of the season, watching games was a little tough but I've been kind of underwhelmed from what I've seen so far from Coleman. Guess I'm not sure what expectations from him were but just doesn't seem like he's stood out much when he's been in the game. Maybe I missed something in the first half of the season? Quote
fightingsioux4life Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Home games against good competition are lost in little details. Layups/close proximity shots are a concentration thing on the players. I look at it this way, obviously the offense worked well enough in those instances to get us those looks--they just have to be finished. So I'm not sure that that the offense is as much one on one as some here are alluding to. Make those shots and those all would have been results of team play, instead we missed them. We only had 4 turnovers the first half, but the ones we had were dreadful and led to easy ones for Sac St. Rebounding, you can tell the staff has worked with the guys to get themselves positioned right off of misses- either UND's or the opponents, but their just not coming up with the ball. At that point a player has to have a little desire, and attitude to go get the ball. I tend to believe the first 2 items hurt us more last night than did rebounding, in this specific game anyway, as Sacramento State doesn't miss very often for us to get a lot of rebounds off of misses. I'm from the school, that you don't take a timeout at the end and don't give the opponent time to set up. On our last actual offensive possession, not sure I want Nash taking the shot in that set, due to his recent struggles....but that's hindsight. Definitely a tough loss. I saw the women got beat last night too, but I'm not seeing a meltdown over on that thread. Maybe because the women's team is coming off of a Big Sky tournament title and a trip to the NCAA tournament, while the men are coming off another exciting appearance in the CIT? The jury is still out on the men's team, but you shouldn't be surprised at the frustration from our fans right now. I certainly am not. Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 It seems like it's been a really long time since UND has had a truly physical player at either the 4 or 5 position. You might have to go all the way back to the days of Chad Mustard, and that's been nearly 15 years ago. Ummmmm....Jerome Beasley?!!! Quote
SiouxVolley Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Wow, 2017 or 2018 is shaping up to be a big year for UND sports...newest member of FBS football, beating NDSU in women's volleyball by scores of 25-5 in all 3 sets, and now, a trip to the NCAA tournament in men's basketball! I can't wait! 2016 is the year the Big Sky will make noise to go FBS, after the 2015 season when Idaho is notified that they won't be in the Sun Belt after 2017. Get it right. I guess all the hockey predictions you make should be front page news here? After all, you know everything about UND sports and can't imagine anything but hockey making waves, right. VB and WBB are cleaning up in recruiting against NDSU and it isn't even close. Shanks is a game changer for UND men's basketball. His defensive presence is a major reason why UND could keep it close last night. Marshall Bjorkman and Taylor Braun were an insider outside tandem for NDSU, that if anyone was paying attention, should have made the NCAA's, as they did in their last year. If UND gets another chess piece to go with Shanks, an NCAA bid should be in the cards. So if I'm not right on the Big Sky and UND beginning talking about FBS in 2016, I will resign my posting privileges here. But in return, if I am correct, you have to refrain from any posting on non-hockey forums. You don't much offer anything to football and basketball forum anyway except negative banter. Man up. Its like you're a cardinal of Siouxsports.com and I've committed the unforgivable sin of having aspirations for non-hockey sports! Quote
UND92,96 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Ummmmm....Jerome Beasley?!!! Great player, but I considered him to be more of a finesse guy. I'm talking about what UND used to be known for in the 80's and early 90's--guys like Dan Clausen, Kevin Wilson, Dave Vonesh, etc. Quote
nodak651 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 2016 is the year the Big Sky will make noise to go FBS, after the 2015 season when Idaho is notified that they won't be in the Sun Belt after 2017. Get it right. I guess all the hockey predictions you make should be front page news here? After all, you know everything about UND sports and can't imagine anything but hockey making waves, right. VB and WBB are cleaning up in recruiting against NDSU and it isn't even close. Shanks is a game changer for UND men's basketball. His defensive presence is a major reason why UND could keep it close last night. Marshall Bjorkman and Taylor Braun were an insider outside tandem for NDSU, that if anyone was paying attention, should have made the NCAA's, as they did in their last year. If UND gets another chess piece to go with Shanks, an NCAA bid should be in the cards. So if I'm not right on the Big Sky and UND beginning talking about FBS in 2016, I will resign my posting privileges here. But in return, if I am correct, you have to refrain from any posting on non-hockey forums. You don't much offer anything to football and basketball forum anyway except negative banter. Man up. Its like you're a cardinal of Siouxsports.com and I've committed the unforgivable sin of having aspirations for non-hockey sports! zzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzzz......................................................................................................................................... Quote
GeauxSioux Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Great player, but I considered him to be more of a finesse guy. I'm talking about what UND used to be known for in the 80's and early 90's--guys like Dan Clausen, Kevin Wilson, Dave Vonesh, etc. One of my favorites from back in the 90's was Todd Johnson. The kid could shoot, rebound and defend. 1 Quote
siouxfan68 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 One of my favorites from back in the 90's was Todd Johnson. The kid could shoot, rebound and defend. Todd Rypkema Quote
petey23 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 One of my favorites from back in the 90's was Todd Johnson. The kid could shoot, rebound and defend. And he could absolutely mash a softball, but unfortunately for our team his love of golf superseded softball and he only played a couple years for us. He hits a golf ball further than most people go on vacation. Quote
Siouxperfan7 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Great player, but I considered him to be more of a finesse guy. I'm talking about what UND used to be known for in the 80's and early 90's--guys like Dan Clausen, Kevin Wilson, Dave Vonesh, etc. Chris Gardner. That guy was a beast!! Quote
the green team Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Chris Gardner. That guy was a beast!! This & Quote
the green team Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Solomon Ayinla! This^ he wasn't what a person would consider a "Big Man" He may still be the most athletically gifted player to take the court at UND...at least in my opinion. Quote
SDHornet Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Hell of a game last night. I don’t know enough about UNDs program to really understand all the doom and gloom being posted about your current team. You guys were 1 win away from the Dance last year and even being hard hit by graduation your team is young and yet looks to have the potential to be very competitive in a weak conference. I think UND will be just fine and your record largely reflects the heavy road schedule of the season (last night was only UNDs 3rd home game of the season!?!?!? ). That said both teams played some tough defense. Not many teams are able to stifle BOTH Garrity and McKinney and UND accomplished that. Good teams usually can overcome that with a solid bench and that is exactly what happened last night. Mills and Tiffin really came through and carried the Hornets until Garrity and McKinney were able to land a few shots. IMO UND lost the game on that 10 second violation with under 2 to go. Not sure what the UND player was thinking just standing in the backcourt staring at the defense but it seemed like he didn’t know what to do, or his teammates weren’t doing what they were suppose to do. That turnover allowed the Hornets to have the possession advantage late. As far as the guy claiming the refs cost UND the game…meh. There were a lot of ticky tack calls made on both sides last night and the PF and FT differential was not significant even though UND was in the double bonus with just under 4 to go in the game. Sorry for the long post, see you guys next month in The Nest. 2 Quote
petey23 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Hell of a game last night. I don’t know enough about UNDs program to really understand all the doom and gloom being posted about your current team. You guys were 1 win away from the Dance last year and even being hard hit by graduation your team is young and yet looks to have the potential to be very competitive in a weak conference. I think UND will be just fine and your record largely reflects the heavy road schedule of the season (last night was only UNDs 3rd home game of the season!?!?!? ). That said both teams played some tough defense. Not many teams are able to stifle BOTH Garrity and McKinney and UND accomplished that. Good teams usually can overcome that with a solid bench and that is exactly what happened last night. Mills and Tiffin really came through and carried the Hornets until Garrity and McKinney were able to land a few shots. IMO UND lost the game on that 10 second violation with under 2 to go. Not sure what the UND player was thinking just standing in the backcourt staring at the defense but it seemed like he didn’t know what to do, or his teammates weren’t doing what they were suppose to do. That turnover allowed the Hornets to have the possession advantage late. As far as the guy claiming the refs cost UND the game…meh. There were a lot of ticky tack calls made on both sides last night and the PF and FT differential was not significant even though UND was in the double bonus with just under 4 to go in the game. Sorry for the long post, see you guys next month in The Nest. Good assessment. I thought the calls evened out as they usually do.....one sequence that hurt UND was when we were up 2 and Sac State missed a shot and Dustin Hobaugh was grabbed by the shoulder and thrown to the floor which allowed for the tying put back and then on the ensuing possession, Hooker drove the lane and his shot came off the rim and Nash had a beautiful put back to give us the lead and they called over the back as he made contact at the end of the play with a Sacramento State player who was directly under the rim.....just gets magnified when one was a very obvious mised call followed by a ticky tac call(at best). 1 Quote
jdub27 Posted January 9, 2015 Posted January 9, 2015 Hell of a game last night. I don’t know enough about UNDs program to really understand all the doom and gloom being posted about your current team. You guys were 1 win away from the Dance last year and even being hard hit by graduation your team is young and yet looks to have the potential to be very competitive in a weak conference. I think UND will be just fine and your record largely reflects the heavy road schedule of the season (last night was only UNDs 3rd home game of the season!?!?!? ). That said both teams played some tough defense. Not many teams are able to stifle BOTH Garrity and McKinney and UND accomplished that. Good teams usually can overcome that with a solid bench and that is exactly what happened last night. Mills and Tiffin really came through and carried the Hornets until Garrity and McKinney were able to land a few shots. IMO UND lost the game on that 10 second violation with under 2 to go. Not sure what the UND player was thinking just standing in the backcourt staring at the defense but it seemed like he didn’t know what to do, or his teammates weren’t doing what they were suppose to do. That turnover allowed the Hornets to have the possession advantage late. As far as the guy claiming the refs cost UND the game…meh. There were a lot of ticky tack calls made on both sides last night and the PF and FT differential was not significant even though UND was in the double bonus with just under 4 to go in the game. Sorry for the long post, see you guys next month in The Nest. Hey, only doom and gloom allowed around here!! Quote
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.