Hmmm.

Well, here we sit at 0-2 after 2 WCC home games against mid level WCC teams (where we thought we would be).  

It is now abundantly clear to me that we are losing the recruiting battle--not only are we not closing the talent gap, I think we are slipping further behind.  We have a veteran team this year, and have played against teams that have had significant turnover (thus many new recruits).  The players that USF and SCU have are faster, more athletic and more talented.  

How can we be losing the recruiting battle to Walters and Keating??  (IMO, those 2 guys leave a LOT to be desired).   Not to mention the other teams in the conference...

I am not sold on the incoming recruiting class(es) as being game changers, either.

I completely disagree. We have as much talent at the guard positions as SC and SF. The difference is they value their guards and run plays to get them going. We view guards as pieces who's job is to get the ball to the bigs. The Van Der Mars post play that we rave about here on PN is fools gold. He's not effective enough to demand a double team. He's not savvy enough to pass when the double team comes. Our bigs hold the ball for 2/3's of the shot clock and then clog the lanes and force us to shoot contested jumpers.

Other programs must love our stagnant, slow play. Our guards cant get in rhythm. We dont create mismatches. Our offense is so predictable.

What's most bizarre is that we went out and recruited athletic, quick guards but we would rather play slow-it-down, low post basketball. The coaches have to decide what their identity is and commit to it on the recruiting trail.

Buckle up. It's gonna be a loooooooong season folks.

I cant disagree with your thoughts on plays... and I didn't mean to state that we were across the board lacking in talent... just that we are not closing the gap.

Our perimeter defense was really bad tonight... and we knew that SCU scores from outside. What was the game plan there? I am going to go listen to the pre-game show, and see what Rev mentioned.

Think about it. If Bailey, Pressley and Wintering played for SCU we would be on PN talking about how talented SCU is.  That trio should be an offensive juggernaut. Instead we're picked to be next to last in the conference.

newpilotfan wrote:Think about it. If Bailey, Pressley and Wintering played for SCU we would be on PN talking about how talented SCU is.  That trio should be an offensive juggernaut. Instead we're picked to be next to last in the conference.

We'd be talking about how we held Pressley and Wintering to 7 and 5 points, respectively, and how we took advantage of their inability to get out defending the  3 better,  and how their young point needs to take care of the ball better, wouldn't we?

PurpleGeezer wrote:

newpilotfan wrote:Think about it. If Bailey, Pressley and Wintering played for SCU we would be on PN talking about how talented SCU is.  That trio should be an offensive juggernaut. Instead we're picked to be next to last in the conference.

We'd be talking about how we held Pressley and Wintering to 7 and 5 points, respectively, and how we took advantage of their inability to get out defending the  3 better,  and how their  young point needs to take care of the ball better, wouldn't we?

That's the point exactly PurpleGeezer. They wouldn't be limited to 7 and 5 points because on that team someone would be setting screens and double screens to get them open looks, they would plays designed to get easy lay ups, they wouldn't have bigs clogging the lanes when they drive. Instead in our system they spend the first 15-20 seconds of the clock working the ball around the perimeter looking for an entry into the post. When they do get it back, late in the shot clock, they're forced to take bad shots.

I hate to say this but it seems like we're coaching like we still have Stohl and Sikma. Our guys are athletic. They're at their best when they're playing uptempo. Bryce in Vegas. Bailey against UC Davis. Van Der Mars at USF last year. In that system everybody wins because Ryan thrives in hustle situations. No one is going to outwork him. When we're in transition the other teams bigs have to come out on help which creates more opportunities for our bigs. Wintering is as quick as any guard in the conference and (for a freshman) he usually makes good decisions with the ball. In an uptempo offense he's hard to defend. In a half court set his size becomes a liability. (It's hard to make clean, accurate passes when the guy guarding you has 3-4 inches on you)

I'm not knocking Rev's style. He knows how to win with his offense. What's baffling is the recruiting decisions over the last few years. Bringing in Bailey, Wintering, Presley, Douglas, Aitor, etc. speaks to his claim that he wants to get out and run. However, I suspect that the adage, it's hard to teach and old dog new tricks, probably applies here. I think the new recruiting class is reflective of a desire to get back to what was working. Less athleticism, more fundamental, inside-out, basketball.

You are completely missing that it was DEFENSE or the lack of it that cost UP those games.we gave up an average of almost 82 points this weekend.

Reveno does not coach uninspired defense. That's on the players and it was a big part of the loss the last two games.

And I find any suggestion that rev coached Wintering into a 3:6 assist:turnover ratio somewhat curious. The kid can and has done much better than that. He had a bad game. I don't think that's Rev. At some point players have to account for their performances. The conference season is a step up in intensity that players aren't matching.

If you blame rev for the losses, you have to acknowledge him as a genius in Las Vegas.

Making a big deal about a call in the last three seconds of a game that lots of great coaches have made both ways as the root of all evil in coaching is also silly. The team had a huge leads they squandered with sloppy defending and a letdown in intensity in the USF game. In the SCU game I saw any defensive intensity only rarely. These players aren't good enough to sleepwalk though games and expect to win. They aren't that good.

PilotNut wrote:I am not sold on the incoming recruiting class(es) as being game changers, either.

Based on your repeated viewings of both commits, I'm assuming?

PurpleGeezer wrote:And I find any suggestion that rev coached Wintering into a 3:6 assist:turnover ratio somewhat curious. The kid can and has done much better than that. He had a bad game.

He did have a bad game on Monday and I don't think there's any denying that. He's had a fine rookie season, and having the pleasure to watch him all season I find it hard to agree that the Pilots are "losing the recruiting battle" - though I will obviously concede that Brownridge was a fantastic find for Santa Clara.

The big reason for these two losses is obvious and it was the same problem in both games - the massive runs that the opposition started out the second half with. USF went on a 15-5 run to turn an eight-point deficit into a two-point lead, and Santa Clara's 12-0 run turned a three-point lead into a 15-point lead. I'll leave it to the greater basketball minds in here to hypothesize whether these were due to halftime adjustments made by Walters/Keating or simply a case of players coming out flat in the second half.