CIM's BLOG: UMaine basketball teams week break for exams

Post info or Comments: UMaine Athletics

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby bcbc55 » Sun Aug 14, 2016 11:02 pm

fromthebench wrote:What's wrong with small ball? I think it's a better game, more skill oriented. Portland started four guards and one big last year, (and will likely do the same this year) and that turned out pretty well. Look at the Celts Isiaih Thomas 5'8", etc. you probably would have cut him at John Bapst eh Cim? At the very least you'd have benched him for putting up shots without passing it into the post first? Am I right? :)
Note: I'm not in the least trying to be disrespectful, just want to inspire some debate. :)


John Wooden's coaches best friend was THE BENCH. Which I always used for discipline when my players did not do what I wanted them to do.

Not disrespectful at all. Thanks for the first response to my small ball post. You make some valid points.

It is "just different basketball strokes for different basketball folks or what floats your basketball boat my not float my basketball boat".

I have always preferred size over quickness. Always like to work the mismatches on offense.

Always can use a small guard like Thomas, along with the Bigs, but one of the bigs are going to touch it once on the block before we shoot it unless it is a layup and we had better make the layup.

If used properly size big ball should beat small ball, IF AND THAT IS A BIG IF, the size takes advantage of it's size.

It takes more discipline to play slow and big (less athletic) than it does small and quick (athletic). Big teams can go zone against small ball if they cannot match up defensively with the quickness, especially the 1-3-1 zone. Also especially in the NBA and college ball with the shot clock makes the zone more effective then no clock in high school.

To me it is easier for Bigs to matchup with small then it is small to match up with bigs especially when going matchup zone defense.

Tough for small ball to keep big ball of the offensive boards playing especially zone.

However, again size must take advantage of it's size, which many teams at all levels do not necessarily do as much as they should if they want to beat small ball. Many coaches who do not use their bigs enough, say that you can't grow size. They are right you can't grow it but you can certainly coach it correctly and use it correctly.

Your response please!
bcbc55
 
Posts: 9812
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 5:44 am

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby fromthebench » Mon Aug 15, 2016 11:06 am

Good points, I just don't think it's true anymore because of the three ball. Personally, I would play four guards (of various sizes) and encourage them to put up the three ball whenever they were open or in rhythm. As I have seen from years of AAU, the rhythm three off the dribble is a better option for a good shooter in todays game and should be encouraged at all levels.

I would only one big for rim defense and put backs. I would put players on the bench who can't shoot. This is what Golden State had, I wonder how they will respond without Bogut though Durant should make them undefendable on the perimeter.

I also must commend you for sticking to your guns and saying you would put Isaiah Thomas on the bench if he shot anything but a layup without a big touching it. :) As we know, he has the green light to pull up for three on the fast break, just like Tony Tobin did at Limestone. I would encourage him, or any player that showed me in practice or games they could make 40% to launch the three whenever it was open or in rhythm off the dribble, even, or maybe especially on the fast break. We need to encourage this kind of shot taking if we're ever going to see another guard from Maine play D1. IMO
fromthebench
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby bcbc55 » Mon Aug 15, 2016 4:23 pm

fromthebench wrote:Good points, I just don't think it's true anymore because of the three ball. Personally, I would play four guards (of various sizes) and encourage them to put up the three ball whenever they were open or in rhythm. As I have seen from years of AAU, the rhythm three off the dribble is a better option for a good shooter in todays game and should be encouraged at all levels.

I would only one big for rim defense and put backs. I would put players on the bench who can't shoot. This is what Golden State had, I wonder how they will respond without Bogut though Durant should make them undefendable on the perimeter.

I also must commend you for sticking to your guns and saying you would put Isaiah Thomas on the bench if he shot anything but a layup without a big touching it. :) As we know, he has the green light to pull up for three on the fast break, just like Tony Tobin did at Limestone. I would encourage him, or any player that showed me in practice or games they could make 40% to launch the three whenever it was open or in rhythm off the dribble, even, or maybe especially on the fast break. We need to encourage this kind of shot taking if we're ever going to see another guard from Maine play D1. IMO



To: FROMTHE(John Wooden's coaches best friend)BENCH:

Interesting response:

Are you sure you are not a member of the UMaine Men's Basketball Programs Coaching Staff? If not your philosophy of small ball and the 3 is exactly what they have been trying to do for the past 2 seasons.

How's that worked out for them, let's see 3-27 and 8-22, 11-49, 18.3 winning percentage.

Players transferring out almost as fast as they come in. Vann, Eke, Little, Harewood, King just last spring.

But they are still going right back to it this coming season as they now have 11 guards of the 16 eligible players. 1 guard over 6'5", couple at 6'2" and the rest at 6 feet or under.

You should really enjoy their games this coming season, up the tempo as fast as they can, take the first shot that becomes available by letting the players decide who, when, where and what kind of shot is taken, run and gun and have some fun.

All designed to get as many offensive possessions as they can. How did that work out for them last year, great offensively as they averaged 76 ppg, but wait they gave up 86 points per game.

Looks like the opponents made better use of their offensive possessions then Maine did.

We just have to agree to disagree on our offensive philosophies.

P.S. No question that the success of the small 3 ball game of the Golden Boy's Warriors has had a big influence in people wanting to play small 3 ball. It is entertaining and fun to play (if you are not a BIG) and watch, but not many teams can do it successfully.

Remember; "If you live by the 3, you may die by the 3"! Ask UMaine and Golden State this playoff's against the Cavs especially that last game 7.
bcbc55
 
Posts: 9812
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 5:44 am

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby fromthebench » Tue Aug 16, 2016 7:35 am

My only problem with Maine is they haven't had a floor general since Bedard. Someone, (a player) needs to be running the show and competing to win, as opposed to competing for floor time as the Maine players have been doing. You need a competitor a guy who is skilled and hates to lose, and then you need to turn over the keys to the car. IMO :) Everyone likes to play, everyone likes to win, a special few hate to lose. There's a difference.
fromthebench
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby bcbc55 » Tue Aug 16, 2016 12:26 pm

fromthebench wrote:My only problem with Maine is they haven't had a floor general since Bedard. Someone, (a player) needs to be running the show and competing to win, as opposed to competing for floor time as the Maine players have been doing. You need a competitor a guy who is skilled and hates to lose, and then you need to turn over the keys to the car. IMO :) Everyone likes to play, everyone likes to win, a special few hate to lose. There's a difference.


FTB: Now we can agree on Bedard, and he was from MAINE! Plus haven't had a coach like Bedard's coach Dr. John G. either. If Bedard doesn't get hurt in that semi-final AE game Maine would have made their first NCAA appearance ever his senior year.
bcbc55
 
Posts: 9812
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 5:44 am

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby fromthebench » Tue Aug 16, 2016 1:10 pm

All true! :)
fromthebench
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby bcbc55 » Tue Aug 16, 2016 4:30 pm

fromthebench wrote:All true! :)


FTB: Good discussion, I enjoyed it. Thank you for responding. You are still the only one to respond to my small ball 3 post question!
bcbc55
 
Posts: 9812
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 5:44 am

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby fromthebench » Tue Aug 16, 2016 5:29 pm

Likewise and you're welcome! :)
fromthebench
 
Posts: 373
Joined: Tue Jan 20, 2015 12:44 pm

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby bcbc55 » Sun Aug 28, 2016 5:52 pm

I AM STILL TRYING TO FIND OUT HOW MANY SCHOLARSHIPS D-1 MEN AND WOMEN GET EACH YEAR! Is it 13 or 14? Anyone know and care to TELL me which is correct?
bcbc55
 
Posts: 9812
Joined: Fri May 16, 2008 5:44 am

Re: CIM'S Blog:

Postby wmtwsportsprod » Sun Aug 28, 2016 7:23 pm

a quick google search shows 13 for men and 15 for women
wmtwsportsprod
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Wed Aug 24, 2011 9:20 am

PreviousNext

Return to UMaine D1 Athletics

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: oldfart, thebam and 64 guests