Tough game for LU against Grinnell this weekend. I think this game really showed the big differences in leadership between this year's team and last year's. Obviously the skill of MacGillis and Braier was huge, but LU turned the ball over in so many situations that just should not happen. Things like soft passes back to the top of the three point line that got picked off, lazy post feeds and the like. Not to mention a few full-court inbounds passes that had no chance of being caught.

But really the big difference here is that Grinnell had the best second half I've ever seen them play. Granted, I've only seen them play maybe five times, but this was pretty astounding. There was a point at about 10 minutes left in the game where Grinnell scored on 13 straight possessions. The only shots they missed on those 13 possessions were one free throw and a three that was put back in for a layup. And believe me, most of these shots were contested, it seemed like anything Grinnell threw up went in.

And to be fair, LU didn't do so poorly offensively during that stretch, either, as it was 76-71 at the 10-minute mark and was 97-101 at the 3:15 mark, but that stretch was pretty demoralizing. So all in all, both teams played hard, the System is hard to beat any given game, but when Grinnell shoot 70.6% from three in the second half, I don't know how many teams could beat them.

I could reply with a snide comment, such as:

I would say your perception about Lawrence fans disappearing after a loss is correct. As Vicar said, most posters are students, and taking last year as an example, we did all disappear after every single one of our loss. In fact, our loss coincided with the end of the season and the end of our term. Way to work it through.

But, while I'm not sure I'm one of the Lawrence fans you are accusing of disappearing (considering I only have 27 posts total), it is true I have not posted at all this year. Vicar is again correct in pointing out we go on winter break a week earlier than most, so not only were there few students on campus for two of our three losses, you could even say that our home-court advantage was relatively non-existent against Carthage.

To be fair, has there really been much talk from LU fans at all to start the season? I just think early interests have been focused elsewhere, not to mention the fact that I rarely see Ripon or Carroll fans on this board.

But anyway, now that I'm finished being grumpy about this assault on my fandom (fanhood?), I'll give you my honest view on LU so far this year.

The loss to Point was probably better than a win against Point. We were down early and looked like we had no clue how to get back into it. But then something clicked and our younger guys (Hurley, Kroeger, Rosey) seemed to realize it was their team now. And losing that game, rather than winning, just showed the team that they can't come out that flat anymore and expect to win.

I did see the end of the Carthage game, and while Carthage's big men (and I do mean big meat-heads) inside benefitted from some lax calls from the officials that Braier would have counteracted down the stretch, we still should have won that game. Carthage wasn't better, they just outworked us at crucial times, which is not something that should happen to an LU team. It seemed we either wouldn't play defense hard enough, or if we did they'd grab an offensive rebound which would result in an easy put-back or a foul. But a double OT game, even a loss, is a good learning experience.

I didn't get to see LU - Oshkosh, but it looked like similar to Carthage. Am I right in hearing that Oshkosh scored on something like 14 straight possessions to end the game? That should never happen. Either they were on fire, running their offense to perfection, or LU was out of rhythm on defense. I can see this being a problem for LU the rest of the year if we don't have someone step up who is at least somewhat comparable to MacGillis (you know, the guy who's not Braier).

So there you go, whether or not you read it all, I suppose this should at least make up for the two other post-loss posts I should have made. And all sarcasm aside, I do find it hard to make any sort of analysis of this team this early in the season -- they're young and are in their first year without last year's great senior leadership. I'm sure the number of posts will increase once the MWC season starts. Unless we lose to Ripon -- then you'll never hear from us again.

Quote from: "The Roop" on March 12, 2006, 01:48:32 PM
Do I think Lawrence lost the game, no. IWU won the game. I'm not sure officiating had anything to do with it.

Were you watching the same game I was? I will admit Lawrence's 70% + shooting in the first half was worrisome -- often teams will not know how to get easy baskets on the offensive end after their shots inevitably stop falling. However, considering IWU has been acknowledged as the more physical team, I cannot understand how they took 20 FTs compared to 7 for LU. You would think, even in a game where the officials let the players play, the more physical team would invariably foul more than the 'finesse' team. Not to mention the blatantly terrible calls on crucial possessions down the stretch: IWU knocking either Bradley or Kroeger into the Lawrence fans and being called for a turnover, Braier twice getting a look down low only to be pushed in the back, Kroeger being grabbed by the jersey any time he tried to cross the lane, Hurley getting a foul call for BOXING OUT -- of course the officiating factored into this game.

I will say I would expect a team as good as (I thought) LU was to weather bad officiating, but aside from two three-pointers by IWU, the officials really let this game get out of hand. I'll give IWU credit, they hit the free throws the officials awarded them. I was just hoping that a Lawrence loss would make me feel we lost to a better team. I didn't feel that way on Friday.

I'll take some heat for this whiney-sounding post, but would welcome anyone who disagrees with me to tell me what they saw differently.

The Roop's right, LU has not been the number one team these last couple games. They have come out slow and luckily have been able to make the necessary adjustments around halftime to come back strong in the second half, and it's worked against teams like St. Thomas, Knox and even Carroll, but IWU is gonna be tough to beat even if LU plays its A game, much less a sub-par effort. Looking at what the did to UWW, you can't afford to come out slow against them.

As far as the St. Thomas game, Lawrence looked great after allowing the Tommies to kick our butts for the first five minutes or so. The defense was just fantastic, and that was necessary since the Vikes couldn't hit anything. But to be honest, I think playing a low-scoring, poor-shooting affair is just fine with these guys, just so long as they can force the other team into the same type of game. What it looked like happened to me was there was the perfect combination of time left in the game and a sizeable lead for Lawrence to let St. Thomas back into the game. That is, a 14-point lead with 5 minutes to go with Lawrence seemingly in control made it look as though all the Vikes had to do was hang on until the end. Instead, they were a little lax on defense (and #3 on St. Thomas went insane) and just barely squeaked one out.

I have to say, though, throwing away the first five minutes and the last five minutes of the game, Lawrence played some fantastic defense against a very offensively talented team, and IF we can expand that effort and focus to 40 minutes and IF we can hit the shots we've been hitting all season, Lawrence CAN be the best team in the nation.

No offense to St. Thomas, but I would have been very disappointed and somewhat surprised if Lawrence had lost that game. But I'm not about to predict a winner for this week's game, and feel that if LU loses it will have been to a very talented squad. Let's hope another team is not ready for LU's intensity and we can knock IWU out of their game.

Quote from: Sam Johnson on March 02, 2006, 07:21:34 PM
What is it with LU people and beards? Some of the best beards (oxymoron if you ask me...by best I mean huge Grizzly Adams beard that a bird could nest in) i've ever seen were on LU folks.

This'll be one of the few times I mention non-basketball issues on the board, but I have to say we Lawrence students pride ourselves on our beards as much as our basketball team. Before I left for a term abroad in London earlier this year, I was the two-time defending beard-growing champion of Lawrence, and I can tell you the competition comes from everywhere. We like to think our basketball team took a hint from us bearders: yes, natural talent is nice, but a "Grizzly Adams" beard comes from hard work, hustle, determination, and good three-point shooting. Right Vicar?

Oh yea, congrats to the Tommies, and I'm officially getting nervous again. Hoping for a good game.

Having seen LU play Carroll all three times this year, I simply don't want to play them again. They have an advantage over every other team in the nation because they're familiar with our style of play; you can throw any rankings out the window. I believe Lawrence is a better team than Carroll, but to beat a team four times in one season, not to mention a team as good as Carroll is, is a tough task for anyone. I guess Lawrence keeps surprising me, but I'd rather jump over someone knew, a la Gustavus Adolphus last season.

Were you able to find out why Carroll's fans wear kilts? I've always assumed they've been confused and think they are enrolled at Monmouth...

Good lord, what a game. First of all, I want to say good luck to Carroll on getting in to the tourney, but I sure don't want to play you guys a fourth time this season. What a solid team.

Ok here is my warning: this is probably gonna be long, and I don't know how to edit my posts after posting them.

I think the difference in this game was the level of intensity each team had. Carroll came out ready to play and wasn't intimidated by Lawrence at all, hitting big shots and playing really solid defense. Lawrence didn't help it's own cause my missing gimme lay-ups and free throws, but Carroll played a great first half.

In the second half, however, Lawrence answered everything Carroll threw at them, and then some. I dunno if Tharp gave his players a butt-whuppin' at half or what, but the Vikes came out looking to set the tone on the defensive end. I can't remember how many times it felt like the momentum was there for the taking for either team, but each defense forced a turnover or a bad shot. LU just looked more composed than Carroll; they worked the ball around, were patient, and took what the defense gave them. Carroll seemed to rely too much on their big three of Drury, Scheper (who is a load and fantastic at fouling without getting called) and Toshner, and they forced things when those players were out/locked down on defense.

Speaking of which, MacGillis was simply superb guarding Drury. Drury is not a guy to take stupid shots, but MacGillis and the rest of the team were frustrating him all day: 4-16 shooting, 1-9 on threes and scoring only 9 points.

There was a play towards the end that I felt really represented the differences between the two teams perfectly. Klekamp was fouled by Drury and made two FTs with 1:13 left in the game. This was Drury's 4th foul, and Carroll sprints down the court and Drury nails a 3 to make it 54-51 with 1:04 to go. Tough play, clutch shot right there -- not gonna lie, I was scared. Then as Braier is inbounding the ball to MacGillis, Drury aggressively goes for the steal, in the process knocking MacGillis out of the way. He's called for the foul, his fifth. It goes from being a great play to a real momentum-killer. Carroll was playing great, aggressive basketball, but sometimes you have to be able to step back and pick your spots.

Fantastic game, and it's too bad that Carroll's ideal first half ran into maybe the best second-half of basketball I have seen Lawrence play. They just did everything they needed to do. Let's keep it rolling.

Since Sam did such a good job summarizing the LU - Carroll game, I won't add too much more.

To reiterate, what an amazing game. It was interesting because I didn't get the sense that either team played even close to their potential. Maybe you could credit that to the other team's defense and intensity, because both of those were there for the Vikes and the Pios the majority of the game, but neither team would go away.

The officiating was a little inconsistent, as in a ref would call a little bump on one end, then a player would get hammered on a lay-up the next play down, but nothing would be called so long as it went in. This happened both ways, though, so I don't think either team had an advantage in that respect. And I have to give the officials credit for really improving and not deciding the end of the game.

As a Lawrence fan who has gone to every home game that was scheduled while I was in this country, I can say the team is good enough that the only way we were going to lose was to either a team nearly as good as us, or by having one of those nights where not a whole lot goes right. This was one of those games -- MacGillis and Kroeger got in foul trouble early, not only handicapping our offense but allowing Drury a little more room when Carroll had the ball, and we had a poor shooting night from Braier (actually, the same happened against Carroll at Alex. Scheper is a big body down low, but Braier missed some shots he will normally make). Prime position for Carroll to score the upset (if you could call it that) but they had just enough issues of their own to keep the game close almost the entire time.

As far as the final plays go, I had just about the same view as Vicar (actually was right behind him) and yea, we got lucky to retain the ball, but not because of the call, just because it so happened to bounce off a Pioneer shoulder. And that last shot... beautiful inbound, beautiful pass from MacGillis back to Bradley, what can you say? Certainly could have had a different outcome, so we'll see what happens in the conference tourney.

Just my moment to gripe: Lawrence chartered a bus to take the fans from Appleton to Carroll; not sure if it was the weather or what, but the bus driver didn't know where we were going, we showed up about 5-10 minutes into the half, and the stadium was so packed already we almost weren't let in. Would have been tragic. So I apologize to any of the Carroll/Lawrence fans whose view we were blocking, but we crammed as many as we could into the small "Lawrence section" as we could. It seriously was maybe 1/8 of the gym they had for us. Ah well, that's the way it goes. Great game anyway.

Just heard this from a credible source close to the Lawrence basketball team:

Lawrence isn't even game-planning for Carroll. They might not play Braier, Tharp isn't even coming to the game. Not only are they totally looking ahead to St. Norbert next week, they actually don't care if they beat Carroll or not.

As good as Braier is, not many people know he is leading the league in another stat other than rebounds. While his freethrow percentage is barely above 50%, he is at an unbelievable 94% accuracy when calling coin-flips, at one point this season calling an amzing 1,056 right in a row.

So Carroll, bring it on. You probably are even favored at your own gym. But I heard Drury, who is shooting a healthy 40% from three, barely gets 20% of his coin-flips right. And that's on a good day.

Quote from: kbanya30 on February 12, 2006, 06:10:34 PM
I don't think words can describe how pumped I am about wed nite Carroll is on a roll and LU has to come to Van Male the hardest place to play in the confernce, and it will be rockin!!

Yeah I too am excited about the game one Wednesday, and might even allow that Carroll is the favorite what with them being at home. I am curious, though, about your claim that Van Male is the hardest place to play in the conference (or confernce). Are you saying that because you actually think it's true, or are you saying that to try to convince yourself it's true? Either way, Carroll's max attendence at a game this year was just above 800, with the average closer to around 520, while Lawrence's low attendence this year was 1209, with the average closer to around 1300. I know fans aren't everything, and I have been to Carroll and I'll give you guys credit, you are a vocal, vulgar bunch. Not to mention big -- does everyone at Carroll play football? But still, with an average far less than half the crowd that shows up at Alexander, maybe you should save the thoughtless comments for the game this Wednesday.

Unless you guys are playing on tall hoops in Waukesha... that could make a difference. Either way, I look forward to being insulted by your fan base for being skinny and puny and you should look forward to me shying away from most physical confrontations because many of you could, quite literally, eat me for breakfast. Oh yea, yay basketball!

So I have a quick question concerning the MWC tie-breaking rules. Obviously, if two teams have the same records, you first look at head-to-head records, then common opponents within the MWC. But say Carroll beats Lawrence this Wednesday and they go on to have the same conference record -- am I understanding this correctly that, since they are 1-1 against each other and both undefeated against the rest of the league, it goes straight to a coin flip?

It seems kind of silly to me that there are two fairly legitimate tie-breakers that could be used, at least in this specific case. First of all, Lawrence would have a better overall record. I can't believe the MWC doesn't take that into consideration before a coin flip. Secondly, I think Carroll and Lawrence have one common non-coference opponent, UW-Oshkosh, whom Lawrence beat and Carroll did not. I'm not mentioning this so that I can boo-hoo if Lawrence loses to Carroll and Carroll ends up hosting the tournament (I'll do that privately) but it seems very reasonable, if not logical, to take these two issues into consideration.

More accurate/important than point differential, at any rate...

Just my two cents from an LU fan on whether or not I'd like to play Grinnell in the 1st round:

First and foremost, Tharp knows how to coach against the system, so in that respect I am confident our players will KNOW what they have to do. The thing I always worry about Grinnell, and this goes for any underdog team, but especially for Grinnell, is you can play great against them, but if they are hitting shots there is not a whole lot you can do. This was apparent in the Grinnell at LU game earlier this year. Lawrence was up 45-27 with a little over 8 minutes to go in the first half, and was totally dominating Grinnell. I thought it was going to be a blow-out by 30-40 points. Then, Grinnell gets hot, we turn it over a few times, and it's a 59-59 tie at half. A 32-14 run...

Secondly, of course you worry about being tired the next day, but I have to believe Tharp has worked the guys in practice enough for them to be able to play Grinnell then play another tough team the next day. I think it would be more important to play someone else in the first round just because, if you win, you get to play Grinnell, who should probably be exhausted if they beat Carroll or Lawrence in the first round, or the tired winner of that game. It must be fun to know the other team is just a little bit more tired than you are.

The one thing I think people are missing so far in this discussion is what a win against Grinnell does to your confidence. Because they are always pressuring, always swarming and always slapping, if you beat Grinnell you must have done a good job of not turning the ball over. I loved watching LU play LFC the day after our home game against Grinnell -- LFC was down and the coach wanted to switch things up so he switched to a full court press. After Grinnell, Lawrence broke it no problem, getting some easy buckets on the other end. In fact, we had 25 assists to 9 turnovers in that game.

So I don't think I would necessarily want to play Grinnell because they are always a scary team, but IF you beat Grinnell, you are going to be able to handle any sort of pressure thrown at you the next day. And you'll probably be ready to make your lay-ups.

Here ya go, Old School.

http://www.lawrence.edu/sorg/trivia/

Hinz ended up with 17 points, 11 rebounds, 7-8 from the foul line.

Braier had 14 points and 9 rebounds. My favorite part though is that Braier had 7 assists and 0 turnovers, while Hinz had 2 assists and 3 turnovers. My other favorite part is that Hinz had 7 points 30 minutes into the game, and scored his final 10 when Beloit was down 20+ the whole time.

Oh yea, my final favorite part was that Hinz played 38 minutes, while Braier only logged 27. I vote Braier for POY.

PS -- Braier averages 19.5 rebounds a game against Grinnell in his career. I know it's not 36, but come on, almost 20 boards a game is ridiculous.