on d, need to keep the ball out of the paint. once its there you can count the bucket. id like to see a lot of pressure on the ball---full court press, traps. and on o, the shots will have to be falling because i'll bet they focus on making it tough for tas and 2nd chance points will be hard to come by. how about playing cj and quentin together? cj is much better as help. i dont remember seeing that lineup. no chance. might as already crown uk champs.
Well, I haven't seen Kentucky this year, so I can't really judge them. But just looking at the SEC this year...if there was a year for a new coach to come in and win it all, this would likely be it. I'm not saying they will. But if they keep playing like they have the past three games then they definitely can. I mean, UK lost to VIRGINIA MILITARY. Put that in the column of teams I've never heard of. I know it was the first game and everything, but when Virginia Military posts 111 points on you, your susceptible to getting beat by other teams with lesser talent. I didn't even hear about that when it happened. I mean, that's big for a program like UK to lose to a team like that. I guess anything can happen after seeing Bama go 12-0 in the regular season this year...
last year they lost to a worse team, Gardner Webb, at home. at least this was on the road. besides UK ended up 12-4 in the SEC anyway. gillespie coaches pretty good D. that and patterson and meeks (maybe the two best players in the conference) = SEC title.
Yeah, I read about the Gardner Webb one as well. Strangely, I had actually heard of Gardner Webb before. Not that it makes it any less embarrassing. You know who came very close to losing to Gardner Webb this year? Georgia Tech - In football! I think the final was like 14-7 or something. That was the first raised flag I saw when thinking that LSU had a shot in the bowl game. But if I had a question with a list of teams that said circle the one that is not a team...I would have circled Virginia Military. My bigger question is what was UK doing going to Virginia Military to play??? Actually, I like that they aren't too snotty to go there and play.
Good debate here for sure. But, I have to say, this LSU team was predicted as a NCAA bubble team, anywhere from 1st to 3rd in the SEC West. Now, you're finding the need to compare them to Xavier, which was a I believe a sweet 16 (maybe elite 8?) team from last year, and this year with many folks back and probably arguably another sweet 16 or elite 8 team this year. That's a pretty high comparison point for this team, which essentially finished 6-10 last year WITH a NBA lottery pick. I think it's realistic to think that they hit a lull yet in the year. With the style they play and the reliance so much on playing intense every night, you've got to think that the euphoria will catch up to them. I agree the tough teams are always going to be UK, Tenn, Vandy (if it's at Memorial), UF. Don't forget as well Arkansas, which also creates match up problems for us. I think that if they go 10-6 or 11-5 in the SEC, with a decent showing in the SEC tourney, they have a pretty good chance of going to the dance, and that would have been great for CTJ's first year. But, I think that depending on the matchups in a tournament the Tigers could surprise. Afterall, while there's some deficiencies on this team, you don't blow out OM, Miss St, and USC (who beat UF) by 20-30 points without having some pieces to the puzzle. Let's not forget that the strength of this team is 3 wing players, who are all 6-4 to 6-7, lean and athletic. and are experienced. The inside combo of Tas and Bo and Marcus on the outside is a decent scoring punch. Also, as we are sure to see (like Utah game), teams always have off nights. A "good" team can have trouble with the Tigers if their perimeter players can't deal with CTJ's sticky man to man, and can't get past Temple and Thornton locking down on defense. The lack of bigs obviously hurts, but honestly, look at most college teams' size. A 6'9" center is the norm, Utah is the aberration, and very few folks outside of UNC, maybe GTown, maybe some others have a front line that is bigger than 6'11" (CJ), 6'9" (QT), and Tas at 6'7". The beauty of Tas is that you can move him to SF and have QT and CJ in their for defense. Not saying it would be the most effective way to use them, but possible. A team playing inspired ball, playing together, and playing in your grill d, can make up for a lot of personnel issues. I think that if LSU gets hot at the right time, they can win a few games in the tourney and getting to the Sweet 16 by matching up with guard oriented teams, is not out of the realm of possibility. In any case, this team is great to watch and deserving of support, as the program can only go up as CTJ builds a recruiting base for the future. :geauxtige:geauxtige:geauxtige PACK THE PMAC.
well im not comparing lsu to xavier just because they are a good team, but also because they are next. we were debating tourney chances, and i think unless something is shown against one of the good teams on the schedule (X, UT, UK) then chances are slim for anything more than one a one and done. yes this team can surprise if they get a favorable matchup, but it is not likely. unless they win the SECW AND win a couple in the SEC tourney AND get a couple signature wins they will be lower than a 7 seed. and because of the makeup of the team, the matchup problems will almost always be in the other teams favor---post D, undependable outside scoring, perimeter quickness. the last two are particularly interesting. bo is really starting to show signs that he can stick to quick guards (the achilles heel of temple and the tiger perimeter D in recent years). also, he's scoring a bit (10 ppg in SEC). if bo can consistently do this, it takes the team to another level. you have to have a third scoring option---temple, johnson and martin havent been able to do it.
Well, I'm trying to figure out what you're saying. I think we're talking about two different things, their chances getting INTO the tournament, and then what they might do after they get there. I think that most fans would be thrilled to see the Tigers even make the tourney, given their weak non-conference schedule and the SEC. Thus, I think if the Tigers make it we've got to be happy, considering the last two years. If the Tigers make it, I agree that odds are against them making a ton of noise. I guess where we may differ is that I think this team can be competitive without a true big man. Look at all of the cinderellas of years past that did not have true bigs... Davidson, Southern Illinois, George Mason, etc. My point is that perhaps this team, if it can continue to improve and learn to play at a high level for 40 minutes, can surprise some teams. I agree we'll see how they've really improved since the A&M and Utah game against Xavier. I'm looking for them to be very competitive even if they don't win. How much have QT/CJ improved as a low post defenders, has the team learned to play help d better in that situation? Should be a very interesting game.
i consider it no great feat to get the team in the tourney given the talent and experience in spite of the roster's deficiencies. i am only happy with them if they play well, regardless of the outcome.
Hmm. If this is true, then you would agree Brady underachieved the past few years? if you're second line is true, then you were happy with this weekend or no? :yelwink2:
depends. last year is tricky to call because tasmin was out, cjb was let go early, and the players quit on him. the year before they "underachieved" relative to where the LSU program should generally be, but the players were not there. he had 2 1/2 post players (davis, tasmin and lazare) and a young, skinny 3 (temple) playing point. that year, the production was in-line with the roster, or maybe overachieving if you really value guard play. brady's deficiency was in managing recruiting. regarding xs and os id say he was a top coach. in fact, so far i see little difference between the coaching philosophies of him and ctj. the team played well. yes i was happy. unfortunately, the post D deficiency was unavoidable. and the ability of a good D to stop tasmin was predictable. the lack of a 3rd scoring option was glaring.
