Greenhorn
Senior
Posts: 321
Reg: 11-24-04
|
12-23-04 05:48 AM - Post#1535
The good:
(1) David Gardner outplayed Stanford's well regarded frontline. He showed excellent footwork around the basket. Gardner/Bode/Arnold outscored the Cardinal big men by a considerable margin, and played strong interior defense throughout.
(2) Showed heart. Got down 7-0 and I thought the rout was on right there. Nevertheless, they came back to within one and somehow hung with Stanford for the entire first half.
(3) Ball can create his own shot (although not too many went in) and showed excellent athleticism throughout the game (including a block into the stands on 6'10" Rob Little).
(4) Ball, Lang, Arnold all look like threats behind the arc and the team moves the ball around fairly well.
(5) Dartmouth outscored Stanford's second team throughout, but that says more about Stanford (which probably will not finish in the top half of the Pac 10)
The bad:
(1) They can't get the ball up the court. For several minutes at the start of the game, folks in the crowd were thinking that a shut-out was a real possiblity. The Green had only one shot in the first four minutes and Stanford wasn't pressing. Had it done so throughout the game using its starters, Stanford would have won by 35.
(2) Giovacchini isn't strong enough to fight through screens yet. As a result, Stanford opened up the second half with back to back, wide open threes. Mike also doesn't look like he can get a shot off inside the arc, so he doesn't create chances for others when he penetrates. Cuttica plays solid D, but isn't an offensive threat and doesn't handle the ball like a point guard. With Pattman on the floor, this would have been a fun game to watch.
(3) Other than Gardner, the big men are not strong with the ball (lots of takeaways and weak passes), rarely face up, and don't look to score.
|
d92
Freshman
Posts: 23
Reg: 11-24-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-23-04 04:44 PM - Post#1536
In response to Greenhorn
Nice analysis...I was at the game as well and would add the following:
Point guard play was the biggest factor in the loss, our 2 primary point guards combined for 2 asts vs. 8 turnovers...Giovacchini was physically overmatched against Stanford's Hernandez (who's one of the best point guards in the nation, no shame there) and had some freshman jitters. I think he has good point guard instincts and has some nice upside potential, but his lack of size is an issue. Cuttica was very turnover prone and I don't think he has a true point guard mentality. Hopefully it was just a bad game.
When we avoided the turnovers and ran a good halfcourt set to get guys open looks, they knocked them down-very encouraging. Lang, in particular, looked very confident from deep, reflecting his recent play.
Our reserve big men, Bode and McMillan, showed some decent post moves, but need to finish better...hopefully that comes with experience. All of our big men, Gardner included, need to do a better job on the defensive boards.
The zone defense needs work...did a poor identifying Stanford's best shooters and allowed wide open 3s. The man-to-man D was more effective, especially in the 1st half.
I was amazed at how frequently Dunn rotated guys in and out...I think the announcer had problems following all the substitutions. Almost the entire roster got meaningful minutes. I can understand it given that Dunn is new and wants to see what the guys can do. But I also thought it made it difficult for some guys to get into the flow of the game; I've got to imagine that the bench gets shortened when league play starts.
There's no question that the team is clearly improved from last year, even without Pattman. The question is how much: improved point guard play, defensive rebounding and perimeter defense were the primary issues that I saw, based on this game.
|
DCAJedi
Masters Student
Posts: 582
Age: 40
Loc: Somewhere.
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-24-04 03:34 AM - Post#1537
In response to d92
How does the renovated Maples look?
| "Here will be an old abusing of God's patience, and the king's English." |
|
Balmer Parton
newbie
Posts: 5
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-24-04 01:01 PM - Post#1538
In response to d92
Interesting comment about the minutes....a look at the box score shows a 7-8 man rotation against UC-Davis and then all hands on deck against Stanford.
My thought is Dunn felt UC-Davis was a winnable game and that's what we'll see when the games matter. Stanford was a chance for lots of kids to play in front of 5,000 people.
|
Rob
maximus
Posts: 327
Reg: 11-21-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-24-04 01:24 PM - Post#1539
In response to Greenhorn
As has been noted earlier on this board, the key to your season is getting more touches for Gardner.
|
Greenhorn
Senior
Posts: 321
Reg: 11-24-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-24-04 03:16 PM - Post#1540
In response to DCAJedi
The hanging central scoreboard is certainly an improvement, but it's not state of the art. The resolution on the video replays is pretty poor.
There are also a lot more seats with backs (a tribute to older alums) which makes it look less like a high school gym. Still, the acoustics in the upper level aren't improved and those sitting there must feel far away.
They moved the food stands to an arcade outside the arena and added several. So no bake sale environment at half time.
If you ask the team, I'd bet they say it feels pretty much the same (except for the top notch locker rooms/video center/weight rooms -- which is where the money went)
|
Green Ghost
goober
Posts: 74
Loc: New York, NY
Reg: 11-22-04
|
Re: Eyewitness Account of Dartmouth v. Stanford
12-24-04 08:43 PM - Post#1541
In response to Greenhorn
Having watched on TV, this is my take:
-Bode is a lot further along than we were led to believe...certainly racked up the "Tommy points" out there, including a nice dive that led to an easy basket underneath for one of the 'shmen (I think it was Macmillan). BDG is still the man down low, but Bode is going to be good when he learns to finish.
They miss Callahan badly. Cuttica had some good moments out there, and I can definitely see the potential for Giovacchini, but with everything that's been going on, this team needs a steady, guiding hand on the floor. On that note, I was surprised we didn't see the most experienced PG available - Liddy - until garbage time. Not that I think he's a longterm option, but some of those turnovers were nerves, especially on Giovacchini's part. The sooner Cally's thumb heals, the better.
Lang should be starting. Maybe he's being used off the bench because of injuries, but when he's healthy, he's got the mix of athleticism, guts and experience to make it happen on the floor. With Leon gone, Lang needs to step up and be the inside/outside scoring threat.
BDG needs to pass less and shoot more. He's finishing better than he has his entire career...he just needs to do more of it. Everything will need to start with him, and the bigger a threat he is, the easier it'll get for Lang, Meyer, Ball, Callahan, etc.
I was definitely bothered by the turnovers, but I was actually generally encouraged by what I saw, especially in terms of prospects for the Ivy season.
-The Ghost
| The preceding opinion is my own, and is not necessarily representative of the opinion of anyone else, but it could be, it should be, and it probably is. |
|
|
