Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2163
Reg: 02-14-06
|
11-23-16 09:02 PM - Post#214008
Army barrels ahead of Columbia in the last few minutes of the first half on outstanding outside shooting by its guard and some dandy interior play by its big men. Columbia is still playing at the same upbeat tempo as Game 1 against Stony Brook and it is showing against a young cadet team that is making Columbia pay for its failure to execute smartly on both offense and defense. For whatever reason,Columbia bigs are reverting to the problematic pitter-patter ball style of some of the less successful Lion teams of the past. Also, for whatever reason the Lions are not using their three most athletic guards--Hickman, Smith and Hunter in tandem. Unless the Lions both step it up and make some personnel adjustments at halftime, Army is likely to win this battle.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2958
Reg: 03-02-08
|
11-23-16 09:53 PM - Post#214017
In response to Columbia 37P6
I frankly thought that except for Hickman we were flat out awful in an ugly, ugly loss against a pretty bad team. No defense and we are very, very soft in the front court. A really poor effort for a home opener. Sloppy passing, terrible defense and no front court game. Why Petrasek didn't eat them alive is beyond me. And when we had a chance to open up a big lead we wilted. Army was much tougher than we were.
|
SRP
Postdoc
Posts: 4894
Reg: 02-04-06
|
11-23-16 10:10 PM - Post#214020
In response to Chet Forte
On the bright side, it would never be a good thing from a broader perspective if an academy team were less tough than its opponent. We kind of need those guys to eat nails in all situations, including when they are physically outmatched.
|
Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2163
Reg: 02-14-06
|
11-23-16 10:26 PM - Post#214022
In response to Chet Forte
Yes, but this was neither a well-played nor frankly well-coached game. Our coaching staff made the two obvious halftime adjustments namely (a) playing Rodney Hunter thereafter in tandem with Hickman and Smith and (b) having Meisner and Petrasek play much closer to the basket, but when the Lions took the lead the team slipped back into his old habits and tried to win the game with its outside shooting rather than using its height advantage. Luke's unsuccessful long three in the last two minutes of the game was a perfect example of what a 6'10" player should not do near the end of a very close game. However, notwithstanding the undeniable strategical errors, there were lots of positive takeaways from this game. First, Hickman was great scoring 30 points and only the inexplicable cold spell in the last eight or nine minutes prevented him from getting over 40 points; I have no idea what happened in the last few minutes of the game, but I am sure he does and will not let it happen again. Second, as noted above, the coaching staff made the obvious change of personnel at the beginning of the second half, namely playing Hickman, Smith and Hunter together. Hunter is our second best offensive guard and must be on the floor with Hickman if this Lion team is going to succeed. Third, Meisner played well in the second half as he stopped shooting threes and went inside where he is basically unstoppable. If Lukas stays inside, he will be an outstanding Ivy League player. If he goes outside, sometimes he will be good, but more likely he will struggle. Fourth, pitter-patter soft outside play by the big men isn't going to win many games. Our guys know that now.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2958
Reg: 03-02-08
|
11-24-16 08:15 AM - Post#214028
In response to Columbia 37P6
I fully agree, especially about getting Rodney on the floor with Hickman. Four consecutive turnovers in crunch time didn't help either.
|
TheLine
Professor
Posts: 5597
Age: 60
Reg: 07-07-09
|
11-24-16 09:18 AM - Post#214030
In response to Chet Forte
I missed the game.
Games against academy teams are excellent learning experiences. You can try to put them away early by using your height advantage - however Luke is the only rotation player who was tall enough to do this so it was unlikely to happen. The other way to beat them is to match their intensity for a full 40 minutes as they are never going to quit. Sounds like that didn't happen. Army had 11 steals to our 3, had 4 fewer turnovers than we did, and came close to matching us on the glass.
From the box score it looks like Hunter had a breakout game - 10 points, 8 rebounds, 3 assists and no TOs in 24 minutes.
|
internetter
Postdoc
Posts: 3399
Loc: Los Angeles
Reg: 11-21-04
|
11-24-16 10:09 AM - Post#214032
In response to TheLine
While I have no disagreement with the analyses, I am convinced that Army's *unexpected* 3-point success was determinative. (Fox had but a few points in their previous game.)
In any case, working through the current personnel will take time and patience.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2958
Reg: 03-02-08
|
11-24-16 10:42 AM - Post#214033
In response to internetter
Hunter should be starting.
|
Murph
Masters Student
Posts: 626
Age: 63
Reg: 09-13-11
|
Army Lead Columbia at Halftime 45-38 11-24-16 11:39 AM - Post#214034
In response to Chet Forte
I made it to my first game last night, and as always I have several observations.
On a general note, our defense sucks. We gave up a couple of 9 and 11 point leads in the blink of an eye, including an 11 point lead with 7:47 to go in the game. And we gave up 88 total points.
Now, on to individual players.
Smith: Quick and aggressive. Great handles, can finish at the rim and a great shooter. Passes well. However, he spends way too much time pounding the ball on the perimeter, eating up the shot clock. While Army was swinging the ball to the open man, Smith was dribbling. Also a defensive liability. Not close to the 5'11 at which he's listed. Needs to fight over screens, not slide under screens.
Killingsworth: Had a nice layup, but look overwhelmed. Should not be starting.
Hickman: A revelation. Fast, athletic, shot lights out, had several amazing drives to the rim, played great D. Where has this Nate Hickman been the last three years? Clearly our MVP.
Petrasek: Was uncharacteristically cold from the perimeter, but still made a big impact on the boards. He played surprisingly good defense, and passes well for a big man.
Meisner: Is developing nicely. Fast, athletic, rebounds well, high basketball IQ. Also displayed several strong post moves, and shoots well from mid-range.
Hunter: Athletic, efficient, good defense, high basketball IQ, rebounds well for a guard. As others have pointed out, he needs to start immediately. That alone would improve our defense significantly.
Coby: Looked rusty and out of sync.
Davis: Looked slow and heavy. Needs to shed some pounds and get quicker. Shoots well.
Adlesh: Aggressive and physical. Took charge and directed the offense well. Shoots well. Lacks quickness for a PG.
McComber: Solid. Went 2-2 from the 3 point line. Very physical.
But unless, Engles figures out the defense, it's going to be a long season.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2958
Reg: 03-02-08
|
11-24-16 12:20 PM - Post#214038
In response to Murph
I agree with Murph pretty much across the board but nonetheless still think Petrasek is underachieving. He should have finished under the basket on a few plays in which he needs to go up stronger. Meisner' also needs to be more physical on the offensive side. I also do not think that the coaches managed the game particularly well. While I admire the way Engels keeps his cool, he should have called a few more time outs when we started letting those leads slip away,
|
cc66
Postdoc
Posts: 2201
Reg: 10-09-09
|
11-24-16 12:57 PM - Post#214041
In response to Chet Forte
In addition to the above, it's worth mentioning that the passing was often rather nonchalant. Those were the passes that were stolen when we lost the lead.
I'm curious, though: why is our defense so bad? True, we don't have a big, powerful interior line; but otherwise, are we just too slow or too inexperienced? We'd cover Army for a while, but eventually, a player who had been left open would receive a pass, and whoever was supposed to be covering him would arrive too late.
|
Columbia 37P6
Postdoc
Posts: 2163
Reg: 02-14-06
|
11-24-16 01:19 PM - Post#214044
In response to Chet Forte
Nice to see a consensus across the Board--great analysis and commentary by Murph. Unless there something we do not know, or may have overlooked, it is likely that our very good coaching staff has made the same observations and drawn the same conclusions as we all have made here. Happy Thanksgiving to one and all!
|
RHunter3
Junior
Posts: 281
Reg: 12-02-14
|
11-24-16 01:22 PM - Post#214046
In response to cc66
Part of the defense is not defending ball screens well. They keep going under and the big isn't hedging out. This leaves the shooter open. They should fight through the top of the screen. The bigs gotta help the guards out.
|
Chet Forte
Postdoc
Posts: 2958
Reg: 03-02-08
|
11-24-16 02:04 PM - Post#214048
In response to RHunter3
When you give up 88 points in 40 minutes, almost equally divided between both halves, you aren't playing much defense. Sure we scored 83, but this is a team that we should have beaten by 15 or 20. I wonder if we are well conditioned. Late in the shot clock count we always seemed to let somebody get an open look.
|
Columbia Alum
Junior
Posts: 247
Age: 38
Reg: 11-15-11
|
11-24-16 05:02 PM - Post#214055
In response to Chet Forte
Why did Tape not play last night?
Join the chorus on hunter starting
|