MBB: Landmark Conference

[saratoga]

NEPA:
Offensive rebounding is an art.
It takes hustle to get in position & some muscle & finesse to move the defense & hold that position.
Not that I would say the Royal's don't hustle...but this edition will never be confused with the Irv Johnson's, Jack Maher's & Joe Connelly's of Royal teams past.
They worked their tails off for second chance shots. This team doesn't even pretend to have an interest.

They have several things working against them.

Most good offensive rebounding teams have decent size...Scranton usually plays small.
Most good offensive rebounding teams get those putbacks because the shot taken was at close range, ie. guards that can penetrate & the bangers simply hit the glass...Scranton bombs away & most rebounds when they miss are deep, not good for a quick grab and putback.
Most teams with good offensive rebounding are fairly quick, they can take risks with their bigs because their guards can recover quickly and play D...Scranton is very slow & they are always worried about getting back after a missed shot.
Teams with good offensive rebounding want that to be an important part of their game & they work relentlessly at it.
Scranton lives & dies by the 3, they generally play small, they are anything but physical, they're slow & they are not that athletic ...all & all, not exactly the best recipe for offensive rebounding success.

I can understand them not being in the upper elite in this category nationally but virtually dead last, now that takes some serious non interest.
Absolutely unacceptable for any team that has any post season ambitions to be this weak.

I'd strongly suggest the Royal brain trust reserve a spot at Jay Wright's Big 5 b-ball camp this August and pay special attention to this topic when it's offered.



   

[ronk]

NEPA:
Offensive rebounding is an art.
It takes hustle to get in position & some muscle & finesse to move the defense & hold that position.
Not that I would say the Royal's don't hustle...but this edition will never be confused with the Irv Johnson's, Jack Maher's & Joe Connelly's of Royal teams past.
They worked their tails off for second chance shots. This team doesn't even pretend to have an interest.

They have several things working against them.

Most good offensive rebounding teams have decent size...Scranton usually plays small.
Most good offensive rebounding teams get those putbacks because the shot taken was at close range, ie. guards that can penetrate & the bangers simply hit the glass...Scranton bombs away & most rebounds when they miss are deep, not good for a quick grab and putback.
Most teams with good offensive rebounding are fairly quick, they can take risks with their bigs because their guards can recover quickly and play D...Scranton is very slow & they are always worried about getting back after a missed shot.
Teams with good offensive rebounding want that to be an important part of their game & they work relentlessly at it.
Scranton lives & dies by the 3, they generally play small, they are anything but physical, they're slow & they are not that athletic ...all & all, not exactly the best recipe for offensive rebounding success.

I can understand them not being in the upper elite in this category nationally but virtually dead last, now that takes some serious non interest.
Absolutely unacceptable for any team that has any post season ambitions to be this weak.

I'd strongly suggest the Royal brain trust reserve a spot at Jay Wright's Big 5 b-ball camp this August and pay special attention to this topic when it's offered.



   

  In addition to the 9 offensive rebounds by the MMA guards last nite - to win the big games, which are all that remain now, you need to do all the little things like boxing out on shot attempts.

[saratoga]

Ronk:
Absolutely.
To win games that matter at this point in the season, all the little things count.
Not only are the Royals horrible on the offensive glass (actual lost points), but now it seems they are simply being lazy & letting the oppositions guards slice through them for easy putbacks.
That is simply a lack of concentration, focus & preparation.
Not exactly the best formula for success heading into the stretch run for a tournament berth.

[sp0rtsfan]

That was a fair analysis of the Royals' men's team; good thought provoking insight. Yes, I do remember that team of '76. Although the biggest starter was Irv, at only 6'5", the guards did penetrate well, were quick, and always got back on D.  Jack Maher was as tough as they come and Connelly seemed to have a genius basketball IQ ..

I'm making another pilgrimage to Scrantonia tomorrow to catch the game vs CU & also to see the women so I can reassess my previous observations of them...Go Royals !

[ronk]

That was a fair analysis of the Royals' men's team; good thought provoking insight. Yes, I do remember that team of '76. Although the biggest starter was Irv, at only 6'5", the guards did penetrate well, were quick, and always got back on D.  Jack Maher was as tough as they come and Connelly seemed to have a genius basketball IQ ..

I'm making another pilgrimage to Scrantonia tomorrow to catch the game vs CU & also to see the women so I can reassess my previous observations of them...Go Royals !

  My son had a business school class @ Virginia Tech in the '90s taught by Jack Maher. Also a professor at the same time there, was George Clum who was the Royals' center my frosh team year

[saratoga]

SpOrtsfan:
Safe travels & hopefully you'll see two good games.
If those two good games are played by the Lady Royals/Royals...even better.

[CardsFan]

Well, quickfire reaction to the CUA-Scranton game is that the result doesn't surprise me at all. I fully expected a Scranton win, seeing as how CUA has not won in the Long Center in Landmark play ever. However, while the result doesn't surprise me, the quality of performance from the Cards was very disappointing.

The defense was porous for at least the last 30 minutes of the game. Fonville had a miserable first half going 1-9 (good call by coach Danzig putting Marcus Thomas on him from the start) and then he didn't really try to get into the game in the 2nd half as the 4 shots he took in the 2nd half all came within the final 2-3 minutes when the game was already over.

Jay Howard's early foul trouble took him out of rhythm and he never got back into it. While Corey Stanford had an excellent game, it was disappointing that all semblance of offense stopped so early. Three of the Cards starters barely took any shots at all.

Also, special mention has to be made of the 14 offensive rebounds the Royals had today. Coming into the game Scranton was the worst offensive rebounding team in conference play by a decent margin, but they were quicker to all missed shots and their effort to rebound was far greater than the Cards.

Fair play to Scranton as they were clearly the better team today, and from my POV probably have to be considered favorites going into the conference tournament.

[saratoga]

Worst offensive rebounding team in the conference?
Correct....but now take that a little further.
Coming into today's game, the Royals were the second worst offensive rebounding team in all of Division III.
In todays game, they equaled 3 games worth of offensive boards.
Amazing what those extra chance shots can do for you.
Even when it wasn't a clean rebound, they were batting the ball back and coming up with a new clock, new possession & another chance to score.
If they can bottle this game, this passion, this effort....they'll have more chances to play.
Kudo's to Brenden Boken...that kid plays both ends of the floor & really deserves a shot at league MVP.
Great win, enjoy it tonight, then get ready for the Crusaders.

[NEPAFAN]

The royals must have been studying up and taking notes on rebounding from the posters on this board.

[ronk]

  I'm wondering if Marcus Thomas will guard Brandon Hedley(Sus) as he did Fonville today. I'm guessing they played each other a number of times in Montgomery County(MD) high school games.

[Charles]

Well, quickfire reaction to the CUA-Scranton game is that the result doesn't surprise me at all. I fully expected a Scranton win, seeing as how CUA has not won in the Long Center in Landmark play ever. However, while the result doesn't surprise me, the quality of performance from the Cards was very disappointing.

The defense was porous for at least the last 30 minutes of the game. Fonville had a miserable first half going 1-9 (good call by coach Danzig putting Marcus Thomas on him from the start) and then he didn't really try to get into the game in the 2nd half as the 4 shots he took in the 2nd half all came within the final 2-3 minutes when the game was already over.

Jay Howard's early foul trouble took him out of rhythm and he never got back into it. While Corey Stanford had an excellent game, it was disappointing that all semblance of offense stopped so early. Three of the Cards starters barely took any shots at all.

Also, special mention has to be made of the 14 offensive rebounds the Royals had today. Coming into the game Scranton was the worst offensive rebounding team in conference play by a decent margin, but they were quicker to all missed shots and their effort to rebound was far greater than the Cards.

Fair play to Scranton as they were clearly the better team today, and from my POV probably have to be considered favorites going into the conference tournament.

That and the fact, other than a mediocre Susquehanna team (feasting on a terrible Landmark Conference) and a Scranton team nursing early injuries, CUA hasn't beat a team with a winning record this season, right?

[Dave 'd-mac' McHugh]

Beat Gwynedd Mercy (17-9) and Guilford (17-8)... and they did beat Susquehanna (who is better than you give them credit for) and they did beat Scranton (injuries not withstanding).

[ronk]

  Nice team victory for the Royals yesterday with contributions from many. So much better with the PG play of Kevin Doolan; no turnovers and it's good to have the ball in his hands as the shot clock winds down because he's going to get a satisfactory shot attempt. Now that we're in postseason play, I'd only give him 1 aggressive defensive foul per game before reigning him in on a risk/reward basis because of his value.
  Brain Farrell, on the other hand, would be encouraged to continue to be proactive on offense because that seems to be the nature of his play. I'll back anyone who's trying to do things within his capabilities like his taking it to the hoop.

[sp0rtsfan]

Great win by the Royals yesterday. There's a lot they did well, hustled on every possession, of course, as we already know, this team can sure shoot ! It's time for them to peak. The win made the tough ride home in the weather worth the risk...Go Royals !

[CardsFan]

So I don't know when the conference awards are announced but I'm gonna take a stab at first team all-conference:
- all stats are in-conference only
Ross Danzig (Sr.) Scranton: 14.9 ppg, 6.5 rpg, 4.9 apg, 50% FG, 43% 3-pt

Brendan Boken (Jr.) (Player of the Year) Scranton: 16.6 ppg, 7.3 rpg, 62.9% FG, 2nd in FT Attempts, 23 blocks

Byson Fonville (Jr.) CUA: 15.2 ppg, 4.7 rpg, 5.3 apg, 43.4% FG

Jay Howard (Fr.) Newcomer of the Year CUA: 17.3 ppg, 5.3 rpg, 56.9% FG, I believe he made more FT than anyone else attempted (95-141)

Brandon Hedley (Jr.) Susquehanna: 15.3 ppg, 2.7 rpg, 4.3 apg, 43.7% FG, 40.6% 3-pt

Josh Miller (Jr.) Susquehanna: 13.7 ppg, 8.0 rpg, 42.9% FG, 45.7% 3-pt

- Those just missing the cut are Mike Klinger (Drew), David Smith and Matthew Miller (both USMMA). Smith and Miller's cases suffer because they started the season 0-9 in conference. For whatever reasons (new coach, last season's drama) they started abysmally even though they returned the majority of the team (yes, they did lose Nick Sergio). They were one of the hottest teams in the conference over the last 7 games (6-1), but 0-9 to start is tough to get past. A case could be made for Klinger to replace, maybe, Miller, but there was such a gap between the top 3 and the rest of the conference that I felt they should be rewarded most.
- On principle I believe that Ross Danzig should have been Player of the Year every season based on the fact that he's clearly the best player in the league, but people get bored of always rewarding the same player (LeBron should be NBA MVP every season, but he isn't), and this season there appears to be wiggle room statistically for another winner (I'm sure the ankle injury played a big part) and Boken seems most deserving. Fonville and Howard had a real chance to stake their claim, but both played poorly last Saturday.

I know this post is really long, if you made it to the end congratulations!