Rest of the way

[seattlebuff]

Since it seems we're at a make or break point, wondering how everyone see the rest of the schedule. Obviously, I'm not hopeful we make the Dance. But considering what happened, and how incredibly young we are, an 18 win season and NIT bid is not the end of the world.

vs. UT: W (I'm 50-50 on this one)
vs. WSU: W
vs UW: L
@ UCLA: L
@ USC: W
vs ASU: L
vs AZ: L
@ UT: L
@ STAN: L
@ Cal: L

 

[Quattro]

Think you're being too negative with the Utah, UW, and ASU home gMes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[slider]

4 wins. We'll lose one we should win and win one we shouldn't.

 

[cubuffs85]

Since it seems we're at a make or break point, wondering how everyone see the rest of the schedule. Obviously, I'm not hopeful we make the Dance. But considering what happened, and how incredibly young we are, an 18 win season and NIT bid is not the end of the world.

vs. UT: W (I'm 50-50 on this one)
vs. WSU: W
vs UW: L
@ UCLA: L
@ USC: W
vs ASU: L
vs AZ: L
@ UT: L
@ STAN: L
@ Cal: L

The NIT might not be literally the end of the world, but I think it would stunt a lot of the progress we've made during the entire Boyle era and just a huge letdown considering where we were at a few weeks ago. The NIT might've been a goal 5 years ago, but I can't say I'll be happy at all if that's where we're heading.

 

[cubuffs85]

Think you're being too negative with the Utah, UW, and ASU home gMes


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I think we win two out of those three. A lot less confident than I was before the game on Saturday however.

 

[Quattro]

I think we win two out of those three. A lot less confident than I was before the game on Saturday however.

They're still road games in college basketball. We suck dick on the road, but I'll take my chances at home against most PAC 12 teams. UW has it very tough because we are there second altitude game and will be more tired. Current probabilities from KenPom FWIW...

UU - 60%
WSU - 88%
UW - 70%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[rolandftw]

Utah: Win
Washington: Win
Washington State: Win
UCLA: Loss
USC: Win
ASU: Win
Arizona: Loss
Utah: Loss
Stanford: Loss
Cal: Loss

I figure 9-9 gets CU to 6th or 7th in the Pac-12. Likely favorable first round matchup to get the 10th win. I'm not confident 10-10 gets CU into the tourney tho, especially if it plays out like I predicted with 5 losses in the last 6 games

 

[cubuffs85]

They're still road games in college basketball. We suck dick on the road, but I'll take my chances at home against most PAC 12 teams. UW has it very tough because we are there second altitude game and will be more tired. Current probabilities from KenPom FWIW...

UU - 60%
WSU - 88%
UW - 70%


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

I was really discouraged with the performance on Saturday regardless of location. We've only had two post-Spencer home games and beating USC isn't exactly an accomplishment. Let's see how we do in with this home stretch, three very winnable games.

 

[seattlebuff]

I'm not sure why people are optimistic about beating UW. I'm not even talking about the first game ass kicking. Throw that out. I'm just looking at the direction both programs are going. Williams-Goss is heating up, and we know what Wilcox can do. They have a lot of guys who can go off. And looking at what ASU has done to us over the past 2 seasons, they are a brutal matchup for us. Not sure the CEC makes up for the talent disparity with them. And Utah ... they clearly can beat anyone, or lose to anyone. Those two are toss ups to me, but Krystowiak has that program going in the right direction.

 

[rolandftw]

I'm not sure why people are optimistic about beating UW. I'm not even talking about the first game ass kicking. Throw that out. I'm just looking at the direction both programs are going. Williams-Goss is heating up, and we know what Wilcox can do. They have a lot of guys who can go off. And looking at what ASU has done to us over the past 2 seasons, they are a brutal matchup for us. Not sure the CEC makes up for the talent disparity with them. And Utah ... they clearly can beat anyone, or lose to anyone. Those two are toss ups to me, but Krystowiak has that program going in the right direction.

Look at how the Buffs have played at home vs how they play on the road since Boyle was hired. Night and day. Not saying it will be easy, but think you'll see a much different CU team in the next 3 games

 

[Quattro]

I'm not sure why people are optimistic about beating UW. I'm not even talking about the first game ass kicking. Throw that out. I'm just looking at the direction both programs are going. Williams-Goss is heating up, and we know what Wilcox can do. They have a lot of guys who can go off. And looking at what ASU has done to us over the past 2 seasons, they are a brutal matchup for us. Not sure the CEC makes up for the talent disparity with them. And Utah ... they clearly can beat anyone, or lose to anyone. Those two are toss ups to me, but Krystowiak has that program going in the right direction.

Because road games are a bitch in college basketball...for some reason you're ignoring that factor which is pretty big


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk

 

[buffaholic]

I said 3 to 4 when Spencer first went down and it's the way I still see it.

Utah at home is not an easy game. I think we scrap out a win.

 

[CVilleBuff]

Currently in the 4 more win (8-10) camp. Need to win next 3, have my doubts that we do. If this team can't pick up wins and improve, the 7 game end stretch will be an absolute nightmare. February is a grind and it's where teams prove who's capable and hungry and who isn't. Utah is undoubtedly hungry and plays poised on the road. I'm glad we have a week to sit on our recent performances and hopefully get ourselves ready for a battle on Saturday. Utah also doesn't much like us. It was apparent both games last year (how fired up they were in SLC and their antics at halftime in Boulder). Maybe it came from how brutally we beat them down in Boulder in the first Pac game for each of us on NYE 2011. Either way, Utah's team has us marked and senses a road win against a vulnerable, fading team. Time to prove otherwise and show the Pac (and a certain committee) we've got fight and wins left in us

 

[Goose]

4 wins. We'll lose one we should win and win one we shouldn't.

I think 5 wins. But it wouldn't surprise me to see us lose to Utah Saturday and beat Arizona somehow. Because we're special.

 

[cubuffs85]

I think 5 wins. But it wouldn't surprise me to see us lose to Utah Saturday and beat Arizona somehow. Because we're special.

Me either, like someone else said, we're probably going to win a game we shouldn't win and lose one we should win. I do think if GameDay comes, you'll see a lot more energy for that game. Even if they don't, it will still be the second best game (would've been the best obviously with Spencer).

 

[NYbuffDIEHARD]

You live in Seattle, I live in Seattle, have you see the Dawgs on the road? The did play Arizona tough but other than that they look like a totally different team, meaning not good. I think we beat them at home. I like the rest of your predictions though.

 

[tante]

So Tad would neg rep me if he reads this post but...

What if we started with a 2-3 zone to throw a wrench on Utah's offensive plans. They show a willingness to drive to the rack or take any 3 point shot that looks decent. I think we can get them to settle for a bunch of long shots (which hopefully don't go in). If we don't start with zone it would be nice to see it within the first 5 minutes. We can settle back into man to man later but would like to see some zone to see how Utah responds.

So now for part two. I am expecting a dead crowd. Noon game, coming off two losses, day before super bowl. I am expecting a bad crowd. What if Tad starts Mills? He always gets the crowd excited
Giving him early minutes will really engage the crowd and fits in with the zone defense plan.

We really need this win so I am willing to shake things up.

 

[Daaah]

So Tad would neg rep me if he reads this post but...

What if we started with a 2-3 zone to throw a wrench on Utah's offensive plans. They show a willingness to drive to the rack or take any 3 point shot that looks decent. I think we can get them to settle for a bunch of long shots (which hopefully don't go in). If we don't start with zone it would be nice to see it within the first 5 minutes. We can settle back into man to man later but would like to see some zone to see how Utah responds.

So now for part two. I am expecting a dead crowd. Noon game, coming off two losses, day before super bowl. I am expecting a bad crowd. What if Tad starts Mills? He always gets the crowd excited
Giving him early minutes will really engage the crowd and fits in with the zone defense plan.

We really need this win so I am willing to shake things up.

You don't start Mills over your best player and the one guy who has actually stepped up his game after Dinwiddie went down.

 

[tante]

You don't start Mills over your best player and the one guy who has actually stepped up his game after Dinwiddie went down.

I was thinking starting Mills over Gordon. So starting 5 would be ski, Hopkins, XJ, Scott and Gordon. Would probably be okay in a zone defense with Mills in the middle and XJ and Scott on each side.

I should add that I think they start Olsen who is 6-10 and Bitchinski who is 7-0. Neither is terribly athletic. Not 100% sure those guys start.

 

[seattlebuff]

You live in Seattle, I live in Seattle, have you see the Dawgs on the road? The did play Arizona tough but other than that they look like a totally different team, meaning not good. I think we beat them at home. I like the rest of your predictions though.

Yep, UW is bad on the road. Agreed. But our offense lately has looked nothing short of awful, partly because of the defense but mostly cuz we have no shooters, nobody to take the pressure off Scott and others inside. I just wonder if we can score against anyone right now. UW often plays 3 guard sets and they stifled our backcourt even when Spencer was in the game in Seattle. We were leading early cuz Wes was dominating and Scott was solid.

 

[BUFFset]

You don't start Mills over your best player and the one guy who has actually stepped up his game after Dinwiddie went down.

Agreed, but Tad still needs to do some more adjusting with this team in order to turn things around. We could play more zone on D in order to cut down on the wide open threes. Threes that Frosh were rotating poorly off of hedges.

Every opponent has been collapsing on Scott and daring us to shoot it. The ball screens along the three point line just aren't working.

 

[seattlebuff]

Every opponent has been collapsing on Scott and daring us to shoot it. The ball screens along the three point line just aren't working.

Nailed it. And it's only going to get worse until someone proves they can hit an open jumper.

 

[jgisland]

Nailed it. And it's only going to get worse until someone proves they can hit an open jumper.

How has CU scored the last 3 years? Nothing has changed, nor is it going to change. Like it or not, this is the offense. The offense is driven by the defense and transition opportunities.

 

[seattlebuff]

How has CU scored the last 3 years? Nothing has changed, nor is it going to change. Like it or not, this is the offense. The offense is driven by the defense and transition opportunities.

How about Brown? Tomlinson? And I think we thought Ski was going to develop into a fairly consistent outside threat. You put a Burks or Higgins on this team, and we're in MUCH better shape.


Understood, defense and transition. Yep, that's us. Again, it's not that we need to be a great shooting team that lives on jumpers. But you have to have some kind of competence from the outside, someone who people see as dangerous and respect. We don't have a single player like that right now. You'll never convince me that you can have zero good jump shooters and still be a top flight program. Sorry.

 

[Darth Snow]

How about Brown? Tomlinson? And I think we thought Ski was going to develop into a fairly consistent outside threat. You put a Burks or Higgins on this team, and we're in MUCH better shape.


Understood, defense and transition. Yep, that's us. Again, it's not that we need to be a great shooting team that lives on jumpers. But you have to have some kind of competence from the outside, someone who people see as dangerous and respect. We don't have a single player like that right now. You'll never convince me that you can have zero good jump shooters and still be a top flight program. Sorry.

we aren't a top flight program this year without spencer. so yes, accept that and accept we are going to depend on defense and transition.

 

[CVilleBuff]

How has CU scored the last 3 years? Nothing has changed, nor is it going to change. Like it or not, this is the offense. The offense is driven by the defense and transition opportunities.

Read this and take it to heart, folks.​

 

[seattlebuff]

we aren't a top flight program this year without spencer. so yes, accept that and accept we are going to depend on defense and transition.

And next year? Just hope one of our guards develops a jump shot? We'll be in the same predicament.

Somebody on another thread was bemoaning the fact that lots of us "fair weather" fans just come on here and bitch and say "we suck" and don't offer any solutions. I'm saying Tad has a blind spot for jump shooters and I think he needs to find someone to fill that gap, either through recruiting or transfer. There are players that can defend competently and get out and run a bit and also be competent shooters. I love Tadball, but you can't win if you completely ignore one fundamental part of the game. IMO.

 

[CVilleBuff]

And next year? Just hope one of our guards develops a jump shot? We'll be in the same predicament.

Somebody on another thread was bemoaning the fact that lots of us "fair weather" fans just come on here and bitch and say "we suck" and don't offer any solutions. I'm saying Tad has a blind spot for jump shooters and I think he needs to find someone to fill that gap, either through recruiting or transfer. There are players that can defend competently and get out and run a bit and also be competent shooters. I love Tadball, but you can't win if you completely ignore one fundamental part of the game. IMO.

We went after transfer Evan Smotryz from Michigan hard. He simply chose Maryland.

.​

​

 

[jgisland]

How about Brown? Tomlinson? And I think we thought Ski was going to develop into a fairly consistent outside threat. You put a Burks or Higgins on this team, and we're in MUCH better shape.


Understood, defense and transition. Yep, that's us. Again, it's not that we need to be a great shooting team that lives on jumpers. But you have to have some kind of competence from the outside, someone who people see as dangerous and respect. We don't have a single player like that right now. You'll never convince me that you can have zero good jump shooters and still be a top flight program. Sorry.

Brown shot 30.7% from 3, taking 37% of his shots from 3
Ski is shooting 30.3% from 3 and he takes 37.7% of his shots from 3

Tomlinson shot 34.3% from 3, taking 68.2% of his shots from 3
XJ shoots 36.2% from 3 and he takes 33.1% of his shots from 3

CU has as good of shooters and outside threats as Brown and Tomlinson this year. Even XJ had comparable 3pt numbers last year to what Levi had his Sr year before dipping this year. Levi as great as a shooter as he was also didn't start b/c Tad had to pick his spots and line-ups to cover his defense, with Tad it's defense, it's always defense.

Burks plays in the NBA and Higgins has played in the NBA. Any college team that has a former player playing in the NBA could say they'd be better if they had them on the team now. And neither one of them was a great 3pt shooter or even remotely an outside threat. Burks shot 29% his Sr and Higgins 34%. What they both did do was take the ball to the rack, get fouled and get to the line. Burks' weakness is still his outside shot.

I don't think CU's a top flight program, they've had exactly 1 top 25 recruiting class, i'm not arguing that a shooter wouldn't help, it's just not fundamentally how Tad's offense is built or how he recruits. You've said Tad should go after guys like Heslip, I'm not sure he plays much on a Tad team, he's a terrible defensive liability. If you go back and listen to Tad or player interviews from when practice starts he routinely states that guys that will play are the guys that can defend. From all accounts Hopkins couldn't hit an outside shot to save his life in practice, but who started when Wes went down after the CSU game? Hopkins

 

[rolandftw]

I agree that defense and rebounding are certainly pillars of the program. And the recruits that have been brought in have primarily been very good defensive players.

With that said, it's not like defense/rebounding and outside shooting are mutually exclusive.