UND vs. EWU

[UND Fan]

This is not another "Fire Jones" type comment.  I am simply curious if anyone with better BB knowledge than I can explain our strategy at the end of the first half. 

We called TO after an EWU turnover with 49 seconds left in the half.  It was obvious that our strategy was to hold on to the ball as long as we could (as if we had enough time for us to take the last shot of the half).  With 4 seconds left on the shot clock, Hooker was forced to try to create a shot and was called for a foul.  Fortunately, EWU did not score before the end of the half.

Why would we have stalled (and ended up making a bad play due to the shot clock expiring)?  Wouldn't the normal strategy been to simply go ahead and work for a good shot (my preference) or try to get up a quick shot (either made or missed) so there was 35 or 40 seconds left on the clock.  EWU would have not be able to play for the last shot.  We would have gotten the ball back for the last shot.  In the NBA world, it is simply making sure you have two possessions to your opponent's one.

What am I missing?

 

 

[ArtVandalay]

4 minutes ago, UND Fan said:

This is not another "Fire Jones" type comment.  I am simply curious if anyone with better BB knowledge than I can explain our strategy at the end of the first half. 

We called TO after an EWU turnover with 49 seconds left in the half.  It was obvious that our strategy was to hold on to the ball as long as we could (as if we had enough time for us to take the last shot of the half).  With 4 seconds left on the shot clock, Hooker was forced to try to create a shot and was called for a foul.  Fortunately, EWU did not score before the end of the half.

Why would we have stalled (and ended up making a bad play due to the shot clock expiring)?  Wouldn't the normal strategy been to simply go ahead and work for a good shot (my preference) or try to get up a quick shot (either made or missed) so there was 35 or 40 seconds left on the clock.  EWU would have not be able to play for the last shot.  We would have gotten the ball back for the last shot.  In the NBA world, it is simply making sure you have two possessions to your opponent's one.

What am I missing?

 

 

I disagree. You are nitpicking something in a nice win to get people riled up. Why not talk about the nice adjustment putting Seales at the 4 against the zone instead. 

[Siouxphan27]

7 minutes ago, UND Fan said:

This is not another "Fire Jones" type comment.  I am simply curious if anyone with better BB knowledge than I can explain our strategy at the end of the first half. 

We called TO after an EWU turnover with 49 seconds left in the half.  It was obvious that our strategy was to hold on to the ball as long as we could (as if we had enough time for us to take the last shot of the half).  With 4 seconds left on the shot clock, Hooker was forced to try to create a shot and was called for a foul.  Fortunately, EWU did not score before the end of the half.

Why would we have stalled (and ended up making a bad play due to the shot clock expiring)?  Wouldn't the normal strategy been to simply go ahead and work for a good shot (my preference) or try to get up a quick shot (either made or missed) so there was 35 or 40 seconds left on the clock.  EWU would have not be able to play for the last shot.  We would have gotten the ball back for the last shot.  In the NBA world, it is simply making sure you have two possessions to your opponent's one.

What am I missing?

 

 

You're not missing anything.  Carry on.

[petey23]

12 minutes ago, UND Fan said:

This is not another "Fire Jones" type comment.  I am simply curious if anyone with better BB knowledge than I can explain our strategy at the end of the first half. 

We called TO after an EWU turnover with 49 seconds left in the half.  It was obvious that our strategy was to hold on to the ball as long as we could (as if we had enough time for us to take the last shot of the half).  With 4 seconds left on the shot clock, Hooker was forced to try to create a shot and was called for a foul.  Fortunately, EWU did not score before the end of the half.

Why would we have stalled (and ended up making a bad play due to the shot clock expiring)?  Wouldn't the normal strategy been to simply go ahead and work for a good shot (my preference) or try to get up a quick shot (either made or missed) so there was 35 or 40 seconds left on the clock.  EWU would have not be able to play for the last shot.  We would have gotten the ball back for the last shot.  In the NBA world, it is simply making sure you have two possessions to your opponent's one.

What am I missing?

 

 

I agree to a point but the NBA has the stupid rule that when a team calls one of their 20 allotted timeouts they get the ball at half court so it makes the 2 for 1 more optimal. I think Jones was maybe trying to set a defense for if we scored, maybe some token pressure or a surprise press to try and get a cheap turnover.

[petey23]

11 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

Why not talk about the nice adjustment putting Seales at the 4 against the zone instead. 

This^^^

And I was worried that after Seales missed that 14 footer and we called timeout. I watched the huddle pretty close on that timeout because when we called that timeout I said to the guys I was with that Seales has to take that shot so I was worried that he was going to get some negative energy his way.......I was very happy that Seales got the next 6 points flashing to that spot and shooting with confidence!

[UND Fan]

14 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

 I disagree. You are nitpicking something in a nice win to get people riled up. Why not talk about the nice adjustment putting Seales at the 4 against the zone instead. 

You are correct.  It was a very nice win - the kids played well down the stretch.  I am proud of them and hope it gives them the confidence to continue to play well in close games.  They are young and winning a tough game like this should only help with their maturity and continued improvement.

 

 

[MoSiouxFan]

We played a good game, except for the FT shooting, against Idaho, and lost.  We played a great game, except for the FT shooting, against  EWU, and won.  Except, for Q, all our top players are Freshmen and Sophomores, and they're coming along nicely.  If they continue to develop, it could make for an interesting conference tournament. No comparison between this years team and last years team.  With the lack of talent last year, it's a wonder that we were in as many games as we were, IMO.

[hoops44]

team needs Shanks to quit clanking free throws and Drick to quit bricking free throws, Shanks needs to quit stupid fouls and kick the ball out when doubled.   Team is 10th in field goal shooting and dead last in free throw %....Jones can have them practice shooting til the cows come in ...but he can not make them shoot well in games....Jones gets blame for recruiting too many guys who do not shoot well .  Wins will be very tough to get unless shooting picks up

[sprig]

57 minutes ago, hoops44 said:

team needs Shanks to quit clanking free throws and Drick to quit bricking free throws, Shanks needs to quit stupid fouls and kick the ball out when doubled.   

Every time the ball went inside to shanks in the Idaho game,  the usher next to me and myself thought,  oh no, another missed inside shot or two missed free throws, over and over again. Kicking it out should be coachable

[petey23]

Shanks has pretty good footwork but he is a bit of a black hole once he gets the ball......but I don't put that all on him. Our perimeter guys tend to stay in the same spot when the ball goes into him like they know it's not coming back. They need to move so that when their defender turns his head or hedges towards helping out down low that they have to find our guy again. i.e, if you made the entry from the wing, slide to the corner or if it is a high entry both our wings should slide over a spot.

 

[sprig]

8 minutes ago, petey23 said:

Shanks has pretty good footwork but he is a bit of a black hole once he gets the ball......but I don't put that all on him. Our perimeter guys tend to stay in the same spot when the ball goes into him like they know it's not coming back. They need to move so that when their defender turns his head or hedges towards helping out down low that they have to find our guy again. i.e, if you made the entry from the wing, slide to the corner or if it is a high entry both our wings should slide over a spot.

 

Yes,  and should be coachable

[sioux2013]

I have watched UND basketball for many years and no matter who is in the post the ball is NEVER kicked out.  It doesn't matter who is playing post.  If it is coached then the players are not listening and then again this falls back on the coaches.  Every team we play collapses on the ball when its feed into the post and players are wide open for easy jumpers.  This is once again basic

fundamental basketball and good team play. 

 

[ArtVandalay]

I would think you would want the guy who leads your team in FG% to try and score the ball when he gets it. He has also shown himself to be a willing passer as evidenced in the Idaho game and others as well. Sure, probably should've kicked it out a few times but you can nitpick everyone. Geno should pull it back sometimes. Drick shouldn't shoot outside of 12 feet. Q fades too much at times. Carson should kick it out at times. I don't think their is anyone to blame. Just basketball. 

[hoops44]

Good move pulling shanks late as EW would have put him on the line.  Jones wants an inside out game but shanks not ready to score when doubled. The only time he should shoot vs the double is when clock is running out .

[sioux24/7]

I am surprised at Shanks struggles at the line. Seems to have some good touch on the ball. I believe it was the NDSU game he had a couple nice passes from the post. My main gripes with Shanks are he's a 7 footer averaging under 4 boards a game and his attitude sometimes. 

[Nodak78]

This team is much improved from last year.  Still along ways to go.  FT's will need to improve or we will lose many close games.  One comment from the EWU game, Shanks pulls down a nice defensive rebound and then throws up a 3 pointer.  Like what are you thinking.  I noticed Hoker had some words the next time play stopped.  This team does have talent just needs to play as a team and improve FT's   I don't know if the team practices FT's when they are tired but they definitely need too.

[ArtVandalay]

16 minutes ago, hoops44 said:

Good move pulling shanks late as EW would have put him on the line.  Jones wants an inside out game but shanks not ready to score when doubled. The only time he should shoot vs the double is when clock is running out .

It was a good move. Not for FT reasons though as they both shoot 60% from the line. 

[hoops44]

rather have seales on line as he hit 76% from line last year

[ArtVandalay]

33 minutes ago, Nodak78 said:

This team is much improved from last year.  Still along ways to go.  FT's will need to improve or we will lose many close games.  One comment from the EWU game, Shanks pulls down a nice defensive rebound and then throws up a 3 pointer.  Like what are you thinking.  I noticed Hoker had some words the next time play stopped.  This team does have talent just needs to play as a team and improve FT's   I don't know if the team practices FT's when they are tired but they definitely need too.

Q dropped that pass off to C to let that three fly. Good play. Rimmed it out. 

[Nodak78]

3 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

Q dropped that pass off to C to let that three fly. Good play. Rimmed it out. 

Terrible decision to take that shot.

[ArtVandalay]

Just now, Nodak78 said:

Terrible decision to take that shot.

 Not 1978 anymore. trail three for the big off the board.  Good play. Just gotta make it. 

[Nodak78]

2 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

 Not 1978 anymore. trail three for the big off the board.  Good play. Just gotta make it. 

Not everybody shoots a good 3 point %

[Nodak78]

9 minutes ago, ArtVandalay said:

 Not 1978 anymore. trail three for the big off the board.  Good play. Just gotta make it. 

Carson was 2 for 9 last season and zero for 2 on 3 point shooting this season.   terrible decision.

[GDPritch]

12 hours ago, sioux24/7 said:

I am surprised at Shanks struggles at the line. Seems to have some good touch on the ball. I believe it was the NDSU game he had a couple nice passes from the post. My main gripes with Shanks are he's a 7 footer averaging under 4 boards a game and his attitude sometimes. 

As much as I want to like Shanks and his shooting touch for a big guy, it hurts him too in that he's so weak.  He gets bumped or fouled when shooting even when just under the basket and you can never count on him making the follow thru for a fg.  The reason he struggles as the ft line, despite what appears to be a good touch is his emotional/psychological being.  He's simply too emotional and wears it on his sleeves.  I'm sure he's thinking way too much at the ft line when he shoots, hence likely will only be in the 50% to 60% range at best for ft's.

[niouxsiouxfan]

On 1/4/2016 at 7:59 PM, UND Fan said:

This is not another "Fire Jones" type comment.  I am simply curious if anyone with better BB knowledge than I can explain our strategy at the end of the first half. 

We called TO after an EWU turnover with 49 seconds left in the half.  It was obvious that our strategy was to hold on to the ball as long as we could (as if we had enough time for us to take the last shot of the half).  With 4 seconds left on the shot clock, Hooker was forced to try to create a shot and was called for a foul.  Fortunately, EWU did not score before the end of the half.

Why would we have stalled (and ended up making a bad play due to the shot clock expiring)?  Wouldn't the normal strategy been to simply go ahead and work for a good shot (my preference) or try to get up a quick shot (either made or missed) so there was 35 or 40 seconds left on the clock.  EWU would have not be able to play for the last shot.  We would have gotten the ball back for the last shot.  In the NBA world, it is simply making sure you have two possessions to your opponent's one.

What am I missing?

 

 

I am not going to go into my rant yet either on Jones.  I am very happy with the win.  But I agree with you. The timeout was fine, but the play call was baffling (which seems to happen too often).  Easily could have had a 2-for-1.  I don't think you are missing anything.  Very nice to see them pull out a close win!