Menu
What's new
By:
Filters
AllBuffs | Unofficial fan site for the University of Colorado at Boulder Athletics programs

This is a sample guest message. Register a free account today to become a member! Once signed in, you'll be able to participate on this site by adding your own topics and posts, as well as connect with other members through your own private inbox!

  • Prime Time. Prime Time. Its a new era for Colorado football. Consider signing up for a club membership! For $20/year, you can get access to all the special features at Allbuffs, including club member only forums, dark mode, avatars and best of all no ads ! But seriously, please sign up so that we can pay the bills. No one earns money here, and we can use your $20 to keep this hellhole running. You can sign up for a club membership by navigating to your account in the upper right and clicking on "Account Upgrades". Make it happen!

(2011-2015) #Tadball is Dead. Long Live (2010, 2015-?) #Tadball?

Darth Snow

Darth Snow

Hawaiian Buffalo
Club Member
Junta Member
We are ranked #201 in the country in scoring defense (kenpom says our D is ranked in the top 70, so this may be a tempo issue as quite a few teams have tried to run with us);

We are ranked #28 in scoring offense (kenpom puts our O just in the top 60;

Conclusion: we are just out scoring teams more than we are bludgeoning them into defeat. This team isn't near as good on offense as the 2010-2011 team (Kenpom had that team NINTH in the country in offensive efficiency, and they were 12th in absolute PPG), but it is a lot better on D (kenpom had them at #199, they were 292 in absolute PPG #s);

So the style isn't as close as you think (hell, we are way way WAY more inside out now - praise be to Wes & Jelly), but nonetheless there are some similarities. The tempo of the 2010 team was actually slower, but they got offensive rebounds at a similar rate. The reason this year's team is scoring so much is because the tempo is a big step up.

I'm sure we will see some ugly games in the future, but basically all of the above boils down to is the following: Why are teams running with us so we get so many of these high scoring games? Is it just a function of our opponents (ISU certainly was ugly and slow compared to our other games)? Or are we doing somthing different than previous years that is making this happen at a far higher rate?
 
The inside out game this year is opening up the 3pt shot more than any other season. It also helps we finally have shooters to nail the open shots too. Basically everyone in the rotation, except maybe Tory, has a green light from range.

Teams willing to run with us is also a benefit. Tad has always said that he loves it when a team comes to our building and tries to run with us, because he knows that we can win that kind of game.

If our defense can work its way into the top 150 in scoring defense, based on what I have seen so far this year, I think we could make a run at the Pac-12 crown. Assuming we maintain the scoring of course.
 
Our D officially has me worried. I just pulled up points per possession numbers for this year and it's pretty ugly. Northern Colorado and Portland seriously are making our numbers look respectable.

* Iowa State - 0.872
* Auburn - 1.135
* Portland - 0.840
* Nebraska-Omaha - 1.051
* Air Force - 1.014
* Northern Colorado - 0.722
* CSU - 1.116
* BYU - 1.025
 
Goose said:
Our D officially has me worried. I just pulled up points per possession numbers for this year and it's pretty ugly. Northern Colorado and Portland seriously are making our numbers look respectable.

* Iowa State - 0.872
* Auburn - 1.135
* Portland - 0.840
* ****braska-Omaha - 1.051
* Air Force - 1.014
* Northern Colorado - 0.722
* CSU - 1.116
* BYU - 1.025
Click to expand...
Yea, in @RK's podcast, Ziskin said something along the lines of we've played a bunch of crap offensive teams and those are really helping our defensive numbers. Given what CSU and BYU did against us, it's hard to argue with him.
 
The rules changes hamper Tad's defensive style more than others. We also don't have Roberson scooping up every loose ball.
 
Daaah said:
The rules changes hamper Tad's defensive style more than others. We also don't have Roberson scooping up every loose ball.
Click to expand...

I'd actually disagree with this, Tad's defensive style is not physical defensivelly. They don't "body up" the guards, the play pretty much straight up defense and don't gamble. In theory this should help CU more than others who would have adjust. The inability of the guards/wings to stay in front of guys and stop dribble penetration is a killer, it's putting a ton of pressure on Wes/Scott.
 
jgisland said:
I'd actually disagree with this, Tad's defensive style is not physical defensivelly. They don't "body up" the guards, the play pretty much straight up defense and don't gamble. In theory this should help CU more than others who would have adjust. The inability of the guards/wings to stay in front of guys and stop dribble penetration is a killer, it's putting a ton of pressure on Wes/Scott.
Click to expand...

Where I might see it is that Tad prefers big guards who can be physical. With so much emphasis on no hand checking, the rules probably favor the smaller, quicker guys.
 
Buffnik said:
Where I might see it is that Tad prefers big guards who can be physical. With so much emphasis on no hand checking, the rules probably favor the smaller, quicker guys.
Click to expand...

Have you ever seen a CU player hand check in the last 5 years?
 
Scoring is up because we are shooting 3's & free throws better than we have since the '10-'11 team. The '10-'11 team didn't have rim protectors like this team & it didn't have as many threats from 3. Holding ISU under 1 ppp is a positive. Auburn went nuts from 3 on their own court for 1 half---this is college hoops. BYU/CSU have mostly played in high scoring games. That Omaha game was definitely poor defensively but holding ISU to 68 pts means more for P12 play.

The most concerning stat is our turnover % on offense---20.1% of possessions 251st nationally.
 
BuffG said:
Scoring is up because we are shooting 3's & free throws better than we have since the '10-'11 team. The '10-'11 team didn't have rim protectors like this team & it didn't have as many threats from 3. Holding ISU under 1 ppp is a positive. Auburn went nuts from 3 on their own court for 1 half---this is college hoops. BYU/CSU have mostly played in high scoring games. That Omaha game was definitely poor defensively but holding ISU to 68 pts means more for P12 play.

The most concerning stat is our turnover % on offense---20.1% of possessions 251st nationally.
Click to expand...

And to add, Omaha is insane on offense as well. 88.6 ppg (6th nationally). Hit 100 or more 4 times already.
 
bombay said:
9-1 r bad.
Click to expand...
THIS! All your stat geeks seem to forget that these are still college kids (See UCLA: wins over #1 Kentucky st home and Gonzaga on the road: losses at home to Monmouth and Wake Forest.) For this team, some 1st halves are stone, while the second halves following, have been diamonds. At least they seem to respond to half-time adjustments and the coaches' "encouragement".

Sit back and enjoy, instead of the usual whining, over-analysis and be-yotching!
 
Last edited:
I agree that CU has been playing a very weak schedule (outside of ISU) and their defense needs to improve. However, 9-1 is pretty damn good. This is a change for Tad, pushing the ball up court and taking so many three's. Given the offensive output, their opponents are going to have more possessions and score more. We will know more by the end of January if this team is special or just a product of early season cupcakes on the schedule. I am enjoying the wins and potential of an 11-1 record going into conference play.
 
Isn't the whole point of RPI to factor in strength of schedule? How are we ranked 15 in RPI if all we have played are cupcakes?
 
Buffenuf said:
A mean and nasty, "no excuses" wizard this season!

Ski was a poisoness lesson well learned, it appears.
Click to expand...

Can we stop putting the entirity of last season's debacle purely on Ski's shoulders? I'm happy to have King/Fortune in Ski's stead, but there were many, many more factors other than Ski that lead to last season's failure.

FWIW, I think we lose 2-3 more games last season without him.
 
gone native said:
Isn't the whole point of RPI to factor in strength of schedule? How are we ranked 15 in RPI if all we have played are cupcakes?
Click to expand...

Really, is that all you read from my post? Not that I stated that their record is good and not that their offense has changed/improved... You would like to bring up the RPI. Great... Let's do that!
CU's RPI is no longer 15, that was two days ago. In fact, they will be fortunate to be in the top 40 by the time conference begins. That does not change 10-1 or the probability of 11-1 going into conference is absolutely fantastic.
That being said, CU's schedule is full of cupcakes. Take Utah, for instance... They are 9-2, do you think CU losing to ISU vs a team that has beat Duke and the only losses they have are to a ranked Miami team and a tough Wichita team? I am in no way stating that the Buffs cannot beat the Utes or that theUtes are a better team. But at 9-2, with a lower RPI, they have faced better opponents and have proven to be a strong team (by beating Duke alone).
CU has beaten:
Portland
Omaha
Air Force
Northern Colorado
Lewis
Nicolls State
Hampton

Please do not try to defend any of those teams as being relevant or even decent teams. You can add marginal teams to the list as well:
Auburn
BYU
CSU

Those teams are hovering around being ranked in the top 75-100. CU has one strong opponent to date, and that team lost to Northern Iowa tonight (lowering CU's RPI even lower than 26 to begin the night).

I am not saying this years Buffs team is not strong. Re-read my comments.... I am elated they are 10-1 and the team is maturing. However, there are concerns beyond a 10-1 record. CU beat a team by 42 pts tonight and played an 8 man rotation. Yes, a few guys got 2 or 3 minutes, but in a 42 point victory, practice players should have had significant minutes or at least more than a few minutes. Obviously, the team is not as deep as Tad would like.
I count 7 wins vs terrible teams and 3 wins vs mediocre opponents. I still believe in this team with Scott and King.... However, they are no longer a top 15 RPI team (tomorrow should have them somewhere between 30-45) and the weak pre-conference schedule could hurt them come selection time if they do not win the PAC-12 tournament outright. If Wes is able to recovery quickly and the immediate bench players continue to improve, there is no reason for the Buffs not to compete for the PAC-12 Championship. But back to your point, those 7 cupcakes and 3 mediocre teams do not help come selection time, although they may have increased team confidence.
 
Last edited:
Buffenuf said:
A mean and nasty, "no excuses" wizard this season!

Ski was a poisoness lesson well learned, it appears.
Click to expand...
Knock it off with the Ski stuff. All it does is create an unnecessary tangent as evidenced by the now three responses to you. As scoob mentioned, we probably would have been worse without Ski last year.

You may disagree and that's fine, but it isn't something worth discussing anymore. At this point I can only assume you make these posts to piss me and other posters off (trolling). I'm going to start deleting your Ski posts if you keep going.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top