PDA

View Full Version : Nice win, but...


El Guapo
01-11-2007, 01:14 AM
28 turnovers??? Holy ****e, we need to improve here or else we are in trouble. We were lucky Duke shot so poorly from the field.

gtfan1147
01-11-2007, 01:31 AM
We only took 39 shots in the game compared to Duke's 59. Now have to beat FSU, then get ready to go on the road and do some damage.

gtfan088
01-11-2007, 01:36 AM
I'd like to think that part of what caused them to shoot so poorly was the good defense of our players. Everyone seems very quick to point out how bad the D was against Miami when they shot extremely well and put up 90, but many are reluctant to give them their due when they come out and play good defense. You're right about Duke shooting poorly, but we've been on the other end of it several times.

The turnovers seem to be the biggest weakness of this team, even with Crittenton playing as well as he is. Too many forced passes and too many times there are players who pick up their dribble and no one does a good job of coming to the ball. Many of the turnovers tonight seemed to be a result of Duke double-teaming men, in particular Dickey, when they got the ball in the paint or poor execution in-bounding. Hopefully the number of turnovers goes down..if not, we may go winless on the road again.

On a sidenote, Vanderbilt beat Tennessee on a buzzer beater and Miami went into College Park and came out with the W over the Terps. I'm not saying this validates our losses to these teams, but it shows that they are capable of beating good competition and that should work in our favor come March.

ContactBuzz
01-11-2007, 10:41 AM
I'd like to think that part of what caused them to shoot so poorly was the good defense of our players. That's not what I saw. Duke missed a bunch of open 3's and our interior defense was lacking - there were too many easy passes to the interior leading to easy buckets. Now Roberts and Zoubek are pretty tough to defend and have good hands so defending those passes on the backend is difficult. We just don't seem to disturb the passing lanes like our '04 F4 team did (this year's Clemson team reminds me of us in '04).

I'm amazed that we won the game - I guess the ultimate difference is our 3 pt shooting compared to theirs and the FT shooting differential.

I still don't have high hopes for the team (we'll be tough at home, but poor everywhere else) but I'm really impressed with Ra'Sean - I hope he continues to play with the same intensity as he did last night. Even without the points and the excellent free throw shooting, he hustled on defense and after loose balls all night.

76tornados
01-11-2007, 11:45 AM
Duke had a very high TO margin as well. I feel due to our defense. They didn't shoot well either. I thought our interior took care of post play. Whether or not the drives to the bucket were defended is another story.

GTWannaBee
01-11-2007, 11:45 AM
I still don't have high hopes for the team (we'll be tough at home, but poor everywhere else)

My hope got a sudden resurgence last night. Currently, we're second in the ACC in PPG at 84.4 (as of last night of course). This team can be great, but right now, they're just good. I expect a better than average finish to the year.

Also, I'm not entirely convinced Young won't be back next year. He's done well, but I haven't seen NBA material yet.

nedleeds
01-11-2007, 06:15 PM
Also, I'm not entirely convinced Young won't be back next year. He's done well, but I haven't seen NBA material yet.

I agree. This "offense" really doesn't showcase him either. He's a good kid and a good student also, so that might bode well for him staying another year.

GTFanJeff
01-11-2007, 07:28 PM
I wish they had the 2 year rule in basketball, too. IMO I would make the rules minimum of three years college for everyone (football, basketball, and baseball). The players grow up a lot in three years of college and I think it will make them better overall players in the next level. I cannot imagine going pro with only one year of experience outside of HIGHSCHOOL.

GTROY
01-11-2007, 10:27 PM
I agree with your turnover arguement. However, a few of those turnovers came on horrendously bad calls by the officials. Now, I'm not usually one to bash refs, but there were a few head-scratchers out there last night.

When I saw the stats on ESPN, I noticed how few free-throws Duke had. Of course, I thought, "Where did all those bad calls hurt us statistically if it didn't send them to the line?" My theory is that the culprit was the turnover statistic.

Now, that being said, even with some poor calls, the number still would have been rather high. Let's hope that number will decrease as these guys get the chemistry going.

goldmember
01-12-2007, 12:37 AM
The defense has turned the corner and we are starting to see better defined roles for everyone offensively. However, we were just plain sloppy last night and played much better in our loss to Clemson. We will not beat many ACC teams playing like that, Duke is in trouble this year.