Here we go again- RTD

Emit Remmus said:
As much as I hate the f'ing RTD...that wasn't so bad

Uh, it was a one point game. The shot Ed took would have given us the win by 2, not tied the game. Final 75-74.

After David Schneider hit 1 of 2 free throws with 3.1 seconds left to put William and Mary up by three, Larry Sanders took the inbounds pass at the half-court circle and fired off a quick pass to Ed Nixon, the Rams' hottest hand, where a wide-open 3-pointer and trip to overtime was waiting.

Nixon, who led the Rams with a career-high 18 points in 28 minutes as a reserve, got the call for what would have been the game-tying shot, but it didn't fall.
 
You have got to admit, when the whole storyline that you are after was that Nixon played a great game and had the chance to send it to OT was wrong...

OK, the writer made a mistake. Yes, a big mistake, but nobody is perfect. BUT DO THEY HAVE ANY EDITORS OR FACT CHECKERS? I mean, anyone who saw the score and read the article would have seen the difference!
 
I hate the times, but we need to stop blowing 15 and 17 point leads. To me the loss is not the story, the story is how we keep giving up comanding leads. Even in some of the games that we have won, teams were able to creep back and make it closer than it should be. I'm shure this is something coach Smart is working on.
 
Would've been nice for the "reporter" to find out why Theus didn't play.
 
Other than the error at the beginning of the article there was nothing wrong with it. The story of the game was that we had a big lead and yes, we squandered it mightily. Of course it had something to do with W&M. But let's be serious here, we have better, more athletic players and we should have won the game. Coach Smart was outcoached by Shaver in the 2nd half. They went from 16 down to the lead and we didn't make a single, visible defensive adjustment.
 
So this guy drove all the way back from Williamsburg thinking, wow, had Nixon made that shot it would have gone into overtime?

And he said it twice, once in the start and once at the end.

My guess is that he watched it on TV and was switching games. But the score was 75-74, so how could anyone get the fact that the shot (a three point shot!) was for a tie? Why didn't a good editor catch it? "Hey son, this says the three was for a tie, but it was a one point game. How can that be possible?"

Sorry, if I had not seen the game, read the story, then found out that they made a glaring error, I'd have to wonder if anything else was correct. They get PAID to do this. It is not like one of us who sit here and throw out whatever we want. They get PAID to write stories. Is it so much to ask that they get the facts RIGHT?

This is the second story in a row where they got FACTS wrong. It is so much to ask that they do a little fact checking and get editors who actually look at stories with a critical eye? Again, that is what the editors get paid to do- edit.
 
I keep hearing people whine about adjustments, what else was he suppose to do?

He tried just about every conceivable combination of players, even had 5 guys all 6'4" and shorter on the court at one point. He couldn't really go zone because you're playing to W&M's strength doing that because of their outside shooting especially when they were already hot. We were missing shots so that took away our press.

This is where I think our thin frontline finally caught up with us. We only shot 35% from the field and 27% on 3 pointers in the second half (after going 56% from the field & 53% on 3 pointers in the 1st half). When you're off from the perimeter we really only had Larry to get points in the paint and W&M's frontline was there to be abused if we had someone other than Larry to go to. Kirill is really giving us nothing at this point. Heck, even TJ was doing some damage in the paint.

But I don't know how you put this on Coach Smart. What else was he suppose to do given the current roster he has to work with? Instead of this blanket "adjustments" comment give me some examples of what you think he could've done.

The only thing I would be critical of is our defense of the backdoor cuts, but I don't know how you correct that during the game. That's something you have to address in practice and I would bet my life they've gone over this in prep for the game.
Rambunctious said:
Other than the error at the beginning of the article there was nothing wrong with it. The story of the game was that we had a big lead and yes, we squandered it mightily. Of course it had something to do with W&M. But let's be serious here, we have better, more athletic players and we should have won the game. Coach Smart was outcoached by Shaver in the 2nd half. They went from 16 down to the lead and we didn't make a single, visible defensive adjustment.
 
I'm not saying the RTD is great, however the errors they make are visible while the errors most of us make (and get paid for) at work aren't noticed by 500,000 people.

Here's an example for you of what some adjustments might have looked like.

Alternate a 2-3 and man-to-man on successive trips down the court. Extend the 2-3 to be more aggressive on the perimeter. Try 1-3-1 halfcourt trap versus a full court trap which lead to easy perimeter shots - - this would have extended the halfcourt offense some. Get out of a man-to-man D when they are killing you with backdoor cuts. Don't press every trip down the court (where our guys tired?). Call additional timeouts and coach.

These are a just a few suggestions. Instead we saw nothing different to make W&M think and break their rhythm. Maybe I am the only one that sees so few adjustments being made. Overall I like Smarts style of play, but the team's discipline (note Brad's late fouls and Joey's oop) and game management is not there yet.
 
Alternating defense like you're suggesting would've probably caused more confusion on our end than affect W&M. And don't you think we needed those timeouts late in a close game? You can't press every trip down anyway when you're only shooting 35%.

Again, we lost by one point and shot 35% from the field and 27% from three point range and you blame the defense?????

A coach can only do so much. Is it Coach Smart's fault Joey threw that alley opp? Was Joey a prime time point guard before Coach Smart got here and only NOW he's making plays like that?

It sounds like you expect Coach Smart to be Houdini and preform magic tricks from the sidelines. Maybe we don't play those defenses well and Coach Smart decided to win or lose doing what we do best. At some point its the players responsibility to execute.

Rambunctious said:
Alternate a 2-3 and man-to-man on successive trips down the court. Extend the 2-3 to be more aggressive on the perimeter. Try 1-3-1 halfcourt trap versus a full court trap which lead to easy perimeter shots - - this would have extended the halfcourt offense some. Get out of a man-to-man D when they are killing you with backdoor cuts. Don't press every trip down the court (where our guys tired?). Call additional timeouts and coach.

These are a just a few suggestions. Instead we saw nothing different to make W&M think and break their rhythm. Maybe I am the only one that sees so few adjustments being made. Overall I like Smarts style of play, but the team's discipline (note Brad's late fouls and Joey's oop) and game management is not there yet.
 
If you don't make baskets, you can't press....
 
Mistachill said:
Alternating defense like you're suggesting would've probably caused more confusion on our end than affect W&M. And don't you think we needed those timeouts late in a close game? You can't press every trip down anyway when you're only shooting 35%.

Again, we lost by one point and shot 35% from the field and 27% from three point range and you blame the defense?????

A coach can only do so much. Is it Coach Smart's fault Joey threw that alley opp? Was Joey a prime time point guard before Coach Smart got here and only NOW he's making plays like that?

It sounds like you expect Coach Smart to be Houdini and preform magic tricks from the sidelines. Maybe we don't play those defenses well and Coach Smart decided to win or lose doing what we do best. At some point its the players responsibility to execute.

Chill, you have your stats wrong. We shot a hot 45.1% from 3, not 27%. We shot 42.3 % from the field, not 35%. So we shot OK. The problem was giving up 48 points in the 2nd half. 48 points! That's an NBA half. I would say the problem was with defense, yes.

Also, dumb plays on the court over the course of time are a direct reflection on the coach and the level of discipline he instills in the team, but the players do need to own it as well.

Everything will be OK, but we do have some issues to overcome as a team. We will play more consistently against Richmond at home I hope.
 
Rambunctious - in the second half we shot 35% from the field/27% on 3 pts. Isn't this discussion about 2nd half adjustments you didn't feel Coach Smart made? The 2nd half is where the game was lost.

Your stats are overall for the game and inflated by the 56% from the field/53% on 3 pts we shot in the first half (which you had to know wouldn't late the entire game).

Even if W&M scored 48 pts in the second half, if we shoot a below average 40% from the field in the second half we win. Basically you're blaming Coach Smart for not coming up with a defense to offset 35% shooting in the second half?
 
Back
Top