NCAA Basketball March Madness Discussion

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 1:42 pm

blueduke wrote:Oh I agree, PK. He had open looks and didn't knock the shot down. he also found himself double teamed 5 feet behind the three point arc as well. Other than Sheldon Williams and briefly from Josh McRoberts he got no help at all. He avg playing over 36 minutes a game every single game this season. Too much court time for a jumpshooter.

But on the next level he's not going to have to fight off double teams 5 feet behind the 3 pt. line. JJ's been facing this for 4 years. I honestly feel worse for Sheldon Williams. He avg a double double for the season and didn't get near the ink as Redick.

I think Williams will be a better NBA player than Redick. Nearly every guard in the NBA is big, athletic, quick and strong -- exactly the kind of players who trouble Redick.

Redick is a great college basketball player. But I don't think that brilliance will translate well in the pros.

Take care,
PK

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:00 pm

Cinderellas are skanks?

www.slate.com/id/2138548/?nav=tap3

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:12 pm

fsquid wrote:Next season, JJ will come into his first NBA game, be called for the hooking he usually does, and his career will be over in 11 seconds.

I don't think the career will be over that quickly. More than likely, he'll be a journeyman like Steve Kerr.

When you can shoot well, you can carve out a career for awhile.

Alford was ill-prepared for the NBA because the Indiana system wasn't anything like what he'd see in the NBA. Nobody was going to design their offense around a catch-and-shoot player.

Reddick has a very quick release. If he can develop some off the dribble moves, he could be an effective PG. He's not as athletic as Hinrich, who's slightly bigger. He's about on par with Mark Price, who was underrated for his quickness before injuries.

Nash's effectiveness starts with his shooting ability. You can't give him any daylight nor can you put him on the line and because of his range, they have to defend him out to 25 feet which opens up lanes. Reddick seems to be quicker than Nash but doesn't have Nash's hesitation/change-of-pace handles (or the NBA dribble of cradling the ball on those change of pace and crossover moves). Nor will Reddick have the protection of the officials which prevents players from defending Nash physically.

But if Reddick lands on the right team with a big inside presence, he could make a living for awhile. The question for him is going to be defense.

You figure he put out feelers about coming out early and didn't get a good enough response to declare for the draft earlier.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 2:54 pm

pk500 wrote:
blueduke wrote:Oh I agree, PK. He had open looks and didn't knock the shot down. he also found himself double teamed 5 feet behind the three point arc as well. Other than Sheldon Williams and briefly from Josh McRoberts he got no help at all. He avg playing over 36 minutes a game every single game this season. Too much court time for a jumpshooter.

But on the next level he's not going to have to fight off double teams 5 feet behind the 3 pt. line. JJ's been facing this for 4 years. I honestly feel worse for Sheldon Williams. He avg a double double for the season and didn't get near the ink as Redick.
I think Williams will be a better NBA player than Redick. Nearly every guard in the NBA is big, athletic, quick and strong -- exactly the kind of players who trouble Redick.

Redick is a great college basketball player. But I don't think that brilliance will translate well in the pros.

Take care,
PK

Again I have to agree. Redick will in no way turn into a dominate scorer in the NBA. Just doesn't have the size, strength, or speed to put up monster numbers. I see him more as having a Steve Kerr-like career (I notice wco beat me to this) though I think he'll end up being a bit better than Kerr. Williams I think will be a solid double double guy who brings a solid effort to his team every night. Won't be a HOF in no way but will be an asset to the team that picks him. He reminds me alot of another Duke baller in Carlos Boozer

sportdan30 · Post by **sportdan30** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:30 pm

One NBA scout's view on the upcoming draft. He doesn't sound all to enthusiastic about any of them.

http://www2.kusports.com/news/2006/mar/ ... ?ncaa_2006

wco81 · Post by **wco81** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:44 pm

Yeah it's suppose to be a weak draft. There are a couple of high school players who'd be at the top if not for the minimum age thing.

Duke gets all these McDonald's All-Americans every year in the recruiting class.

I can't think of too many underclassmen who left early in the last couple of years though.

Yet they only have 2 recognizable players? And they're seniors meaning if they were really good NBA prospects, they'd have left a year or two ago.

b_assassin · Post by **b_assassin** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 3:53 pm

sportdan30 wrote:One NBA scout's view on the upcoming draft. He doesn't sound all to enthusiastic about any of them.

http://www2.kusports.com/news/2006/mar/ ... ?ncaa_2006

I like the line about JP Batista, that is pretty funny. For the players I know about, I would have to agree with him to some extent. The sentiment that Redick and Morrison are guaranteed stars in the NBA is bizarre to me. Sure, they are excellent scorers and collegiate players, but against more athletic and talented competition in the NBA, they seem average at best in my eyes. Couple that with the fact that neither of them are going to get the preferential treatment from the officials that they got in college in the NBA. Redick might get away with hooking, but Morrison has turned hooking and pushing off into an art form this season.

I agree with Redick having a Steve Kerr-like career, maybe slightly better if he lands with the right team and the right system. I don't quite know what to expect from Morrison, other than the fact that he won't be Larry Bird, in spite of what all the moronic talking heads on TV say about him.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 5:03 pm

Being a McDonald's AA means nothing once you get to college. It only means you were very good in high school. As for players leaving early Duke has recently lost Luol Deng (played 1 year at Duke), Shaun Livingston (signed with Duke but went pro out of high school), Mike Dunleavy (2 years college), Elton Brand (2 years), Corey Maggette (1 year), William Avery (2 years), Jay Williams (3 years), Carlos Boozer (3 years) and Shavlik Randolph (2 years with 1 of those being lost to injuries).

McD's is to college what college AA's is to the pros........it's a crap shoot. Sometimes you right in your projections and sometimes you're not. NBA teams have the luxury of individual workouts for college players but college coaches have limited contact and no individual workouts for players they sign.

Yet they only have 2 recognizable players? And they're seniors meaning if they were really good NBA prospects, they'd have left a year or two ago.

Up until last season Redick was a spot-up jumpshooter and noth else. He can now create his own shot and he can take people off the dribble to an extent. Up until this season Williams was a very good shot blocker but he was also a foul machine. He got whistled as soon as he stepped off the bus. Through hard work he's developed a decent inside game

pk500 · Post by **pk500** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:46 pm

Wow, what an exciting finish in the BC-Nova game.

But what the hell were Skinner and BC thinking by not even playing a half-court trap on 'Nova's final fullcourt possession in OT? OK, there's always a risk of a foul, and BC only was up by one. But damn, BC let 'Nova just waltz across halfcourt.

Odd. But what do I know? It's just good to see an original Big East school prevail over the Benedict Arnold of the conference.

Take care,
PK

XXXIV · Post by **XXXIV** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 10:50 pm

Im so sad to see BC lose....

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Fri Mar 24, 2006 11:06 pm

That was a hellova game...I just don't understand why you don't make them take a jumper to win it. Just lettin' them get a layup to win it is ridiculous...especially when Nova didn't have a timeout to set up that play. Unreal. My bracket is f*cked now. Oh well...at least BC put up a fight.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 12:48 am

XXXIV wrote:Im so sad to see BC lose....

Where's Parker when you need him?

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:38 am

Why teams don't foul when up by 3 with under 10 seconds left is BEYOND me...UConn shouldn't have even had a shot to tie. I woulda fouled that guy before they crossed half court. UW has better foul shooters by far. Unreal games tonight.

Teal · Post by **Teal** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:58 am

great day of games today, for sure...NBA can't touch this...

Sudz · Post by **Sudz** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:15 am

duke wasn't going to win it...but that was just a terrible performance...

mcroberts going pro?

ummmmmmmm no way.

Zlax45 · Post by **Zlax45** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 2:57 am

dbdynsty25 wrote:That was a hellova game...I just don't understand why you don't make them take a jumper to win it. Just lettin' them get a layup to win it is ridiculous...especially when Nova didn't have a timeout to set up that play. Unreal. My bracket is f*cked now. Oh well...at least BC put up a fight.

You have to zone off that inbound play instead of playing a man to man defense. It cost BC the game.

You really do have to foul with less then 10 seconds left right when they cross half court when u are up by 3...no idea why Washington let them tie to the game up.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 10:30 am

Sudz wrote:duke wasn't going to win it...but that was just a terrible performance...

mcroberts going pro?

ummmmmmmm no way.

Duke did stink up the place real good didn't they? I couldn't believe my eyes. I thought I was watching Clemson clang one shot after another. Couldn't believe what GM did to the Heels either.

As for McRoberts going pro, sites such as nbadraft.net has him as a freakin' lottery pick. NO WAY that kid is ready. Unreal. Not only that Tyler Handsbrough isn't even on the board. Matter of fact he's not even on their 2007 mock draft board. Sometimes I wonder if these guys touting certain players as lottery picks aren't on that player's rival school payroll.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:03 am

tealboy03 wrote:great day of games today, for sure...NBA can't touch this...

If you mean the excitement then I'll give you that. The NBA could match it if the playoffs were single elimination though. That's the main charm of the NCAA tournament. It's kind of tough to compare a format with best of 7 to single elimination. Those last second buzzer beaters probably occur at the same rate in the NBA.

If you are comparing the play on the court then I'm not so sure. The teams last night shot a combined 41% (about the average in NCAA tournament play) from the field (only Uconn hit at least half their shots and a couple teams were around 33%) and 70% from the line. For the talk of team play in college basketball, you still for the most part had individual players making the difference. Foye gets 29 for Villanova and nobody else gets to double figures. Williams and Roy with 27 and 20 for Washington and the next highest is 11. Williams with twice as many points as any other starter for Uconn. A total of 5 points were scored from the bench for both teams *combined* in the GTown/FLA game. If you throw out Washington, which had 5 players foul out and another with 4, the starters scored 84% of the points last night.

I like all forms of basketball. In fact, I was at a high school game last night (Franklin High School PA AAA Champs!!!). I'm not convinced one form is inherently better than another. When you get the NCAA tourney or a high school basketball playoff down to the same size of the NBA, the statistics are remarkably similar in relation to field goal percentages, points scored by teams top 2 players, assists/fgs, etc.

tjung0831 · Post by **tjung0831** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 11:37 am

tealboy03 wrote:great day of games today, for sure...NBA can't touch this...

We aren't watching the same thing then because I don't think i've ever been more disapointed in college basketball. Undisciplined play, bad shots, bad decisions, bad fundamentals. How many turnovers did UConn have last night? And they are supposed to be the #1 team in the country??? A stupid foul by Jensen when Washington is up by 4 with just seconds remaining? Then Washington knows who's going to shoot the 3 for Uconn at the end and they still let him get the shot off? that's just bad basketball and that wasn't the only game. Then again...thats why it is college basketball.

blueduke · Post by **blueduke** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 1:32 pm

tjung0831 wrote:
tealboy03 wrote:great day of games today, for sure...NBA can't touch this...
We aren't watching the same thing then because I don't think i've ever been more disapointed in college basketball. Undisciplined play, bad shots, bad decisions, bad fundamentals. How many turnovers did UConn have last night? And they are supposed to be the #1 team in the country??? A stupid foul by Jensen when Washington is up by 4 with just seconds remaining? Then Washington knows who's going to shoot the 3 for Uconn at the end and they still let him get the shot off? that's just bad basketball and that wasn't the only game. Then again...thats why it is college basketball.

When UConn takes things seriously they are the best team in college ball this year. The Wash. Huskies choked if you ask me. IMO they should have fouled in the closing seconds of regulation than risk someone making a trey to tie it up which is what happened. I'd have fouled as soon as the ball crossed midcourt

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 6:52 pm

Ugh. Two of the best teams in college basketball shooting 31% and 39% in the first half of a regional final.

Dave · Post by **Dave** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 7:17 pm

Here's a good one from Jim Calhoun:

"I just hope we have enough time to recover. It's going to be nice playing an away game, too. I'm really looking forward to that. That pod system is really working out to protect the 1s, right?"

Jim, I don't think they take too many #11 seeds into consideration when planning where the top seeds go.

Just play the f-ing game.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sat Mar 25, 2006 8:52 pm

Dave wrote:Here's a good one from Jim Calhoun:

"I just hope we have enough time to recover. It's going to be nice playing an away game, too. I'm really looking forward to that. That pod system is really working out to protect the 1s, right?"

Jim, I don't think they take too many #11 seeds into consideration when planning where the top seeds go.

Just play the f-ing game.

I can't believe he said that. He should be watching UCLA play a quasi-home game against #1 Memphis.

Leebo33 · Post by **Leebo33** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 9:04 am

I hate to beat a dead horse, but I'm surprised there's not more discussion on this. UCLA shot 35% and Memphis 31.5% in a regional final. They weren't much better from the line either at 51.3% and 60%.

Half of the regional finalists yesterday couldn't even hit a *third* of their shots from the field and three of them couldn't hit more than 35%. The *best* shooting team shot 42%. They shot a combined 59% from the free throw line. Even worse, they shot a combined pitiful 8/50 from the 3pt. line, but continued to heave them up at an alarming rate.

The problem is that this is not an isolated incident. This has been happening for a few years now in the NCAA tournament, but I haven't heard much discussion or complaining. During the regular season against weaker competition teams can pad the stats to look good, but when you get the field down to 32 in the tournament (close to the size of the NBA) you are seeing plenty of ugly, ugly "Detroit/NJ" type games with shooting percentages in the 30s.

I'm not trying to make this an NBA vs. college basketball discussion because I want both to be good. Let's forget the NBA. Are you guys enjoying these games? The UCLA/Memphis game was a travesty unless you were a fan of one of those team. There's a difference between drama and good basketball. All we are getting is drama. The basketball in this tournament (and the past few for that matter) has been very poor by any standard. I think tjung it the nail on the head.

dbdynsty25 · Post by **dbdynsty25** » Sun Mar 26, 2006 2:33 pm

That pretty much explains my feeling of college hoops Leebo. It's not good basketball usually. The tourney provides the drama and that's why I watch...but as a product of basketball it's not that good. The NBA is moving away from the isolation stuff (at least my team is anyway) so it's becoming a lot more fun to watch. The Suns as a team, shoot like 48 percent and 39 percent from downtown. Quite a bit better than most of the college games we've seen so far and it's against a lot better competition...except maybe the Hawks and Knicks.

That doesn't detract from how great this tourney has been. Major upsets all around and some really dramatic games...but that's really all it is. Last night was one of the best examples in the UCLA game...It seemed as though neither team really wanted to win it. Poor coaching is another thing that has me perplexed. I can't remember the last time I questioned college basketball coaches as much as I have this tourney. Some truely ridiculous dicisions have been made, or not made...the biggest blunder to me being BC not fouling up 3 with one of the best college 3pt shooters on UCONN definitely getting the ball. Unreal.