MBB: Landmark Conference

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Funny you say SS was a factor with 17 points... he wasn't even close to a factor in the Goucher game and I don't think he had 17 points.

As for the calls... can't say a thing... I do know who was working the game... but I am not one who assumes that a run-in with a coach and two calls to begin the half are really a common occurance. There is a chance (assuming here) that the refs talked about seeing some moving screens and didn't call them so they spotted then and made the call early in the second half - that happens a lot. Again... wasn't there... just not a conspiracy guy as much as everyone else on these boards.

As for making it up here on the 20th... you should... we haven't seen you at the now Decker Sports and Recreaction Center in a while.

[susiddad]

Just have to take your hat of to the Gophers.  Congrats on the win.  The brash SU fans got what we deserved. 

[Matt Letourneau]

Funny you say SS was a factor with 17 points... he wasn't even close to a factor in the Goucher game and I don't think he had 17 points.

As for the calls... can't say a thing... I do know who was working the game... but I am not one who assumes that a run-in with a coach and two calls to begin the half are really a common occurance. There is a chance (assuming here) that the refs talked about seeing some moving screens and didn't call them so they spotted then and made the call early in the second half - that happens a lot. Again... wasn't there... just not a conspiracy guy as much as everyone else on these boards.

As for making it up here on the 20th... you should... we haven't seen you at the now Decker Sports and Recreaction Center in a while.

Well, its either that, or they are bad officials...so, take your pick.

Yeah, I saw that he was quite ineffective against Goucher.  Beats me what happened. 

BTW--he certainly doesn't have a D1 body, but neither did Stephan Curry...

[hoopit123]

we can only hope perhaps the refs took a peek at the landmark board and took the discrepancy into consideration!! haha   KARMA!

after being benched, it looks like mr SS was a little ticked off and just went off... cua got 'spens-ified' in the 2nd half...but its ok, it happens to most!  

but yes, dave, i think the stephen curry comparison is right on! never thought of that.

[Matt Letourneau]

Well before we get too carried away, I wasn't really comparing him to Curry--just his body!

I actually wonder if CUA would have contained him better if he had been playing the whole game--and they adjusted to him being on the court.  The way it played out, it was sort of a shock to the system because you've been playing one way for 28 minutes, and then all of a sudden your opponent starts giving you a totally different look including a player with a totaly different skill set.  Suddenly, right at crunch time you're playing a different game.  Like I said--it worked out perfectly for them.

Its always easier, btw, when the alpha dog on a team is a guard.  In CUA's case, its tough for their best player to really dominate in the same way because he's dependent on somebody else getting him the ball.  He's not taking the ball up the court and taking somebody on the dribble.  I think Jason did show today his range by hitting the two 3's--you have to respect him even out of the perimeter.  He did get his points, but they didn't get enough out of everybody else.

[hoopit123]

i mean this in all due respect, matt, but i feel as though if someone else was saying this, as in me saying similar things if SU had lost, you would be in one way or another saying to 'suck it up' (for lack of better words).  sort of like when susid was giving gripe about the refereeing.  you were quick to rule out any suspicion of home-court favoring, however, now you are touching on some anti-cua bias. 

also, it is troubling to fathom your best player as forward vs guard scenario.   you're saying its easier to take the ball off the dribble, shake your defender, bust a few moves and then shoot and score than just catching a pass from someone else on the block and making a move?   it is just very difficult to agree.  (even with all su-bias aside...just from a basketball fan standpoint).

[Matt Letourneau]

I'm not touching on an anti-CUA basis, I'm suggesting that one particular official today changed the way he was calling the game after he didn't like what a coach said to him.  Having watched this particular official for many years, I've always thought he had rabbit ears so it didn't surprise me.  I don't think it has anything whatsoever to do with CUA--could have been any coach, any team.    I thought the whole thing was an interesting sidebar but not the story of the game, nor did it affect the outcome.  Hey, plenty of people were at the game--that's just my opinion. 

Given that the accusation was made that Catholic "gets call" at home, its at least relevent to mention--I don't think any neutral observer could say that today.

Actually, I don't think I commented on "home-court" favoring.  Someone else said that you can't take something like free throw numbers and extrapolate a home court bias and though I didn't say it, I think that's right.  It totally depends on the game situation and the style of play.  For instance, today's free throw numbers for Susquehanna are a little inflated because Catholic fouled intentionally at the end of the game.  Typically the winning team is going to have more free throws for that reason alone.

As far as the "best player" argument--I'm not really arguing anything, just making an observation that I've made for a long time, going back to when Catholic had Matt Hilleary and Will Morley.  My point is that its harder for a post player to "take over" a game, especially when his team is behind, simply because his role dictates that he's not handling the ball as much and he's dependent on entry passes for looks.  For instance, I think Jason probably should have had more touches today (7 shot attempts), but that's not all on him--the Catholic guards couldn't get him the ball and there was quite a bit of sloppy ball handling.  Conversley, a one or two guard has a little more freedom and can create shots.  The best guards have the ability to do more on their own, whereas even the best post players need help.

[BCannon]

Dmac-couldn't be more spot on with ur take on GC...they have really improved here as of late..Looking at them in the Pride of MD I thought JC would come in and win by 20 and that was certainly not the case. JC came out flat and Goucher jumped on them early and had an answer for every run JC made. Their whole team played within themselves today which I thought was key for them. Perry, Yambor, Musenga, and Gladden all had good games with Suggs and Bailey making good contributions as well. Big week coming up for JC. Can't say I don't miss the games, but I sure as hell don't miss the drills they are going to be doing this week.

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

BCannon - great point, "they played within themselves." That has been a MAJOR problem for many Goucher teams since the '04-'05 season (and even had problems then). There are players who simply don't play within the game and try and take over no matter how they or the team is playing. You mentioned Perry, he has been the biggest offender in the last few years... always taking shots, even if it was the most ill-advised decision for any player. He certainly is doing a little of that still now, but it is far less then in the past and that is giving other guys good looks.

Also, young guys like Trae Lindsay and Tim Alexander have really stepped up recently. Lindsay could end up being one of the better inside players in this conference and maybe region if he continues to improve during his career at Goucher. Alexander is a decent shooter from outside, but he brings to the court heart, desire, and early signs of being a good on-court leader... something Goucher hasn't had since Jonathan Garritt (the only one they have had since their hey-day).

Yambor is starting to feel more comfortable on the court - though I would love to see him take smarter shots especially when he is driving and not really getting a good look. Gladden's year off has calmed him a bit and he certainly likes to battle... but his size is a concern for me - sometimes is just too small inside. It would be nice if he developed a short-range jumper. Musenga is too quiet, I would love to see him get more aggresive and battle a bit more (more muscle would help). And even guys like Kosh are contributing off the bench... which is deeper then in years past.

All that being said... two game winning streak doesn't mean they are going to remain a tough unit. The beginning of the season, especially the first game against Marymount, is still fresh in everyone's heads... meaning I know what this team is capable of when it falls apart. They have to stick to what has been working in the last few months and realize that going away from it won't help.

[lefty2]

Just have to take your hat of to the Gophers.  Congrats on the win.  The brash SU fans got what we deserved. 

I can't believe I'm doing this, but +1 to you.

[tpm4286]

Congratulations to Goucher. They are the team to beat now and I am proud of those guys for stepping up and turning things around. It's the start of the new decade and GC bball may be starting something good!!!!!

[ronk]

I'm not touching on an anti-CUA basis, I'm suggesting that one particular official today changed the way he was calling the game after he didn't like what a coach said to him.  Having watched this particular official for many years, I've always thought he had rabbit ears so it didn't surprise me.  I don't think it has anything whatsoever to do with CUA--could have been any coach, any team.    I thought the whole thing was an interesting sidebar but not the story of the game, nor did it affect the outcome.  Hey, plenty of people were at the game--that's just my opinion. 

I would speculate, before discussing it with the official, that what was said at the end of the half had nothing to do with calls that weren't made in the 1st half.  More likely , it wasn't his call/non-call previously and, in the 2nd half, it was, or, the officials discussed it during halftime  and agreed it should have been called,or he called it when the other official continued to omit it, even if he didn't have primary responsibility. I would hope, if I were the coach, that the head official would inform me so before the 2nd half begins. It makes for an uneven game, but the emphasis is on getting the call right.
Again, I'm speculating ahead of discussing it with him because he might not want it publicly on a msg board for a specific game.
 

[NEPAFAN]

Ashworth and Farrell ( can you say rookie of year?) combine for 45 of Scranton's 59 points. They hung with USMMA for the most part and covered the 25 point spread.



I think this conference is wide open.

[Matt Letourneau]

I'm not touching on an anti-CUA basis, I'm suggesting that one particular official today changed the way he was calling the game after he didn't like what a coach said to him.  Having watched this particular official for many years, I've always thought he had rabbit ears so it didn't surprise me.  I don't think it has anything whatsoever to do with CUA--could have been any coach, any team.    I thought the whole thing was an interesting sidebar but not the story of the game, nor did it affect the outcome.  Hey, plenty of people were at the game--that's just my opinion. 

I would speculate, before discussing it with the official, that what was said at the end of the half had nothing to do with calls that weren't made in the 1st half.  More likely , it wasn't his call/non-call previously and, in the 2nd half, it was, or, the officials discussed it during halftime  and agreed it should have been called,or he called it when the other official continued to omit it, even if he didn't have primary responsibility. I would hope, if I were the coach, that the head official would inform me so before the 2nd half begins. It makes for an uneven game, but the emphasis is on getting the call right.
Again, I'm speculating ahead of discussing it with him because he might not want it publicly on a msg board for a specific game.
 

Well there's no chance he's going to tell you that he got irritated at a coach and decided to prove a point. 

All I can tell you is that it was called twice on back to back posessions, and not again the rest of the game, even though I saw several obvious moving screens.   And it isn't like that was it.  Whatever, its not worth a big thing on here.  The only thing I'd really be interested in hearing from him is why he chose not to enforce any of the bench/sportsmanship rules.   

[NEPAFAN]

I'm not touching on an anti-CUA basis, I'm suggesting that one particular official today changed the way he was calling the game after he didn't like what a coach said to him.  Having watched this particular official for many years, I've always thought he had rabbit ears so it didn't surprise me.  I don't think it has anything whatsoever to do with CUA--could have been any coach, any team.    I thought the whole thing was an interesting sidebar but not the story of the game, nor did it affect the outcome.  Hey, plenty of people were at the game--that's just my opinion. 

I would speculate, before discussing it with the official, that what was said at the end of the half had nothing to do with calls that weren't made in the 1st half.  More likely , it wasn't his call/non-call previously and, in the 2nd half, it was, or, the officials discussed it during halftime  and agreed it should have been called,or he called it when the other official continued to omit it, even if he didn't have primary responsibility. I would hope, if I were the coach, that the head official would inform me so before the 2nd half begins. It makes for an uneven game, but the emphasis is on getting the call right.
Again, I'm speculating ahead of discussing it with him because he might not want it publicly on a msg board for a specific game.
 

Well there's no chance he's going to tell you that he got irritated at a coach and decided to prove a point. 

All I can tell you is that it was called twice on back to back posessions, and not again the rest of the game, even though I saw several obvious moving screens.   And it isn't like that was it.  Whatever, its not worth a big thing on here.  The only thing I'd really be interested in hearing from him is why he chose not to enforce any of the bench/sportsmanship rules.   

Matt,

Seems like you have it all figured out and it doesn't matter what Ronk relays to you. I am awaiting for a game where Catholic losses and you simply tip your cap to the other team, without bring up the refs.