Pilots vs. Pepperdine, Saturday at 1:00 pm, on Root Sports

newpilotfan wrote:

PurpleGeezer wrote:It had nothing to do with moving the ball. Barker had about five seconds to shoot in ovetime, and if Dicau or Stohl had the time Derek had on the perimeter they would have lit up the place for 50

Again, Stohl was a spot up shooter. He couldn't put the ball on the floor and attack the rim. He would run off screens, get open and knock down the three. He was special. Criticizing our guys for not being Stohl is absurd. They're not the same type players. Which is why it doesnt make sense that we would run the same type of offense.

Except for David Carr, which of these guys was considered a great shooter in HS? That's not what the coaches recruited. Watch Gonzaga, SDU or SCU... They move the ball. They run guards off screens and make the defense chase them around. There's no standing around. Everyone is moving without the ball. Our offense is stale, predictable and clearly what the coaches want to run. You can't put that on the players. They're giving coach what he wants. It just doesn't work. It's embarrassing.

What is embarrassing is when a player stay untouched at the top of the key for five seconds because the opponent knows he won't shoot. I get the idea these guys have never practiced just shooting.

Seriously, anybody can develop the skill to shoot with no pressure. It's just practice.

Stohl was different in that he could do a catch and shoot. That's not what these guys had to do. They had NO one guarding them.

DoubleDipper wrote:Yes, I agree, UP was outplayed and out-coached today.

PU was picked to finish last in the WCC; if I'm a PU fan, I'm very happy with the job Marty Wilson has done....he certainly made better moves down the stretch today than Rev did.

It's a lot easier to make good decisions when you're ahead and in the double bonus.

newpilotfan wrote:Again, Stohl was a spot up shooter. He couldn't put the ball on the floor and attack the rim. He would run off screens, get open and knock down the three. He was special. Criticizing our guys for not being Stohl is absurd. They're not the same type players. Which is why it doesnt make sense that we would run the same type of offense.

Except for David Carr, which of these guys was considered a great shooter in HS? That's not what the coaches recruited. Watch Gonzaga, SDU or SCU... They move the ball. They run guards off screens and make the defense chase them around. There's no standing around. Everyone is moving without the ball. Our offense is stale, predictable and clearly what the coaches want to run. You can't put that on the players. They're giving coach what he wants. It just doesn't work. It's embarrassing.

Absolutely correct that our guys aren't Stohl, or anything remotely close to the caliber of shooter he was. And you bring up a great point as to the type of player we've recruited.

As to what the coaches want to run: Rev in the pregame radio interview had the same damn criticism of the offense that everyone here does. He went in depth discussing how the team had spent considerable time practicing, even to the detriment on working on defense, moving the ball, cutting, screening, etc. etc. etc., and not allowing the offense to stagnate. He mentioned that there were especially certain lineups where possession seemed to just die in people's hands, although it wasn't limited to just these. Everyone was and is doing it. Rev kept talking about spacing, and how poorly our offense is at creating it. So the coaching staff is well aware of the issue. With Rev's off-hand knowledge of KenPom stats, it's no secret to him that we're 322nd or whatever in points per offensive possession, a ranking made all the more appalling considering our decent-to-good offensive rebounding rate. It doesn't help spacing when you have wiiiiiiide open players who won't take the shot and instead try to force it into a double-team.

Let's allow the coaches and players to keep working on 1) improving spacing and 2) hitting open shots so we can stop losing games where we dominate the boards and free-throw line.

"SHOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOT" - me yelling at the TV when there's no one within 10 feet of Derrick Rodgers and he's in shooting position.

I'll freely admit to never playing the game of basketball (at any level) and not knowing the finer points of the game. I just enjoy watching the college game, so please take a rare attempt at an analysis post from me with a big grain of salt:

The scouting report on Rodgers must read "don't even bother guarding him beyond three" which opens up a whole range of options for the opposing team's defence, including the ability to throw double-teams on our posts without fear of a kick-out to a wide open Rodgers. Makes it tougher for the entry pass to even happen and tougher on the posts when they do get the ball. Leaving a Division I point guard in the country wide open should not be an option for any defence, but it is for teams playing the Pilots because of Derrick's unwillingness to shoot the ball. It must be terribly easy to game plan for this....someone tell me why I'm wrong here, I'm dead serious about being an idiot regarding the technical aspect of the game so fill me in.

The frustrating part for me is that I've seen him hit threes before and I believe he can continue to hit the shot especially given the amount of space he often has. Hell, he's 3-for-9 on the year. It's not like he's 2-for-25 or something and a historical lack of success is preventing him from at least attempting a shot when he's wide open.

I like Derrick as a player and he for sure brings value to the team that won't show up on the scoresheet...I just think he'd be infinitely more effective if he'd shoot the damn thing when he's open (see Pooh Jeter - not the greatest three-point shooter I've ever seen, but you at least had to guard him on the perimeter).

DeanMurdoch wrote:The scouting report on Rodgers must read "don't even bother guarding him beyond three" which opens up a whole range of options for the opposing team's defence, including the ability to throw double-teams on our posts without fear of a kick-out to a wide open Rodgers.....

I like Derrick as a player and he for sure brings value to the team that won't show up on the scoresheet...I just think he'd be infinitely more effective if he'd shoot the damn thing when he's open (see Pooh Jeter - not the greatest three-point shooter I've ever seen, but you at least had to guard him on the perimeter).

The PU plan was to leave Derrick alone on the perimeter and collapse the defense inside on Thomas/Riley/Ryan…..the UP staff knew that was the plan…..but it still worked.

The UP coaches continue to encourage Derrick to shoot, even if he’s lacking the confidence to make it, because the chances are better than 50/50 that UP will get the rebound or a put-back.

Yesterday’s plan was to play more deliberately than was the plan against LMU, but it doesn’t matter what the plan is if no one takes the open shot.

Re: Riley’s miss late, he’s hit that shot a number of times in practice, and has done it in games too, but his shot yesterday was “wide left,” not even hitting iron. Of more concern to me than the miss was his reluctance to take the shot.

It appears only Tanner and Ryan have the confidence/green light to shoot…..which worked against LMU, but with Tanner hitting nothing by iron yesterday (except the one that ultimately didn’t count), there was no one else ready/confident enough to step-up.

I guess “Just shoot the ball” is NOT a good chant, but I heard it a lot yesterday.

Regarding the discussion of blaming coaches or players. I point to the women's team. they have now won 4 of their last 5. Yes, against the bottom of the league, but two on the road. The coaching has not changed. The players are playing better.

Interesting to hear about Rev's comments of possessions seeming to die. That's what I see. Saturday night we watched on possession with the shot clock running down, the ball swinging around the perimeter, and the player with the ball started to make the pass, and obviously thought, "oops, can't throw it to him for the shot."

These guys are running out of time for figure it out for this year.

What I saw in the Pepperdine game was a concerted effort to get the ball to VDM. I would think that is directed from the bench. When a team forces the issue to the post it does a couple things. First it eliminates a lot of cutters becasue they dont want to jam up the lane for the post pass and not wanting to draw the easy double team from the wing. The other thing it does it stagnates the offense around the perimeter as the ball is passed around to try to find a better angle for the entry pass. I have wondered in this offense why Nicholas and Thomas dont ever set screens for each other. Block to block, high-low that sort of thing.

Another thing that was lacking was the inside out factor. Not that getting 17 shots from your post is a bad thing but when only 6 are makes it leads me to think the ball could have been passed back out more. This is the second straight game the staff has gone to this strategy and it worked against LMU because the ball was entered and then passed back out allowing Tanner and Ryan to hit some Stohlesque shots.


In OT, Thomas took the only FG attempts until 8 seconds left and they were all misses. The only points UP scored were on free throws.

The other notable was the lack of attempts by Nicholas. Thomas and Bailey combined for 32 attempts when Nicholas only had 7. Why isnt the staff working on getting their leading scorer more touches? He hits the tying FG in regulation and doesnt get a shot attempt in OT. Did get three offensive boards and one loose ball though.

After watching the game twice I will say that it was a combination of strategy and execution that resulted in the loss. In other words yes the shooting percentage was down but in part it was a result of what the bench wanted to emphasize.

You can't run inside out when the outs won't shoot.