EagleOutsider.com

BC has played good teams tough. Miami experience and overall talent will be tough to beat at home.

BC 66
Mia. 74

i think they lose by less than 13 if that's worth anything...

BC loses by 17 and Odio reverts to his old ways

joeyfenn {l Wrote}:BC loses by 17 and Odio reverts to his old ways

This. People are forgetting that Miami didn't have fatboy last time.

i thought nospace was a bluejays fan now

I think even more important than Johnson's availability is Clifford's likely unavailability. He played 18 in the last game. Played decent defense and ensured it wasn't Anderson solely responsible for interior D on 2 guys 6'10 240 plus.

I was pretty impressed on how the guard helped keep the ball out of Bookers hands, and he is a poor mans Johnson, but it could be brutal on the boards tonight.

Also the game Rahon rolled his ankle.

There was a story in the globe today about Clifford taking a cortisone shot about a week ago, so we'll have to see if that helps at all. Should be able to get a few minutes from Van Nest this time also..

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/mens-basketball/2013/02/05/boston-college-basketball-player-dennis-clifford-dealing-with-knee-pain/xqmtaMFzWzTrhp67igNixL/story.html

Miami is due for a clunker. Miami will dominate on the boards but will settle for long jumpers.

BC 58
Miami 56

Even if we lose, its close

Is this the game Caudill gets in?


Didn't think so either, would be nice for our best player not to match up against someone that outweighs him by 60+ pounds

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Is this the game Caudill gets in?


Didn't think so either, would be nice for our best player not to match up against someone that outweighs him by 60+ pounds

This would be a great game for Caudill to play. Johnson is big and slow. Id support minutes for him tonight

bcmurph {l Wrote}:Also the game Rahon rolled his ankle.

There was a story in the globe today about Clifford taking a cortisone shot about a week ago, so we'll have to see if that helps at all. Should be able to get a few minutes from Van Nest this time also..

http://www.boston.com/sports/colleges/mens-basketball/2013/02/05/boston-college-basketball-player-dennis-clifford-dealing-with-knee-pain/xqmtaMFzWzTrhp67igNixL/story.html

That's interesting about the cortisone shot and a good point re: Rahon. My belief is that Van Nest is actually worse suited for defending these bigs than Odio or even Heckmann because none of them can defend (except maybe Odio every once in awhile) after they get the ball in the low post but Heckmann and Odio are at least a plus in keeping that from happening. Van Nest is not.

This will be a very tough matchup for BC. Miami has an excellent defense, is one of the most experienced teams in the country, and has lots of size on the interior. Their home court, which used to be the equivalent of the Conte Morgue, has been energized by the great start in ACC play.

I will be pleasantly surprised if we keep this one within single digits.

I don't think this is a tough matchup for BC anymore than the last time they played them. I agree with epstein - close game, but I have little to no confidence BC can win those at this point unless it is after choking away a 20 point lead.

Miami 67
BC 63

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:I don't think this is a tough matchup for BC anymore than the last time they played them. I agree with epstein - close game, but I have little to no confidence BC can win those at this point unless it is after choking away a 20 point lead.

Miami 67
BC 63

Miami is a stupid team with dumb guards (Durant Scott). Instead of going inside they'll hoist 3s. If they're making contested 3s we'll get killed but most likely, that'll keep us in the game. Odio is a good post defender actually, he has long arms and can stay in front of guys.

Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

Miami is a terrible matchup for BC with Front court size and ability and Shooters who can hot jump shot. the only mitigating factor here is that Miami just beat NC ST at the gun on the road, which was a huge victory. they will niot be up for this game. I could see BC jumping out to an early double digit lead say 18-8, then Miami recovers and Bc heads into th locker room up 34-32. By the 10 minute mark of the second half Miami will be up 8, and the rest is window dressing. Miami 70-BC 56.

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

Miami is a bad matchup for BC on paper. On a basketball court, not so much. As epstein says, Miami is the kind of dumbass team with jacking guards that BC's style frustrates the shit out of, just like Clemson.

If Miami pumps it in the post every possession, it's a bad matchup. But they won't.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Miami is a bad matchup for BC on paper. On a basketball court, not so much. As epstein says, Miami is the kind of dumbass team with jacking guards that BC's style frustrates the shit out of, just like Clemson.

If Miami pumps it in the post every possession, it's a bad matchup. But they won't.

I don't buy this analysis. Miami's guards are better shooters and much better players than Clemson's guards. Larkin has been great this year and is shooting 41% from three. Jones shoots 37% from three. Miami also takes a lot less 3s than we do on the whole.

Scott fits the description, but not enough to mitigate the advantages they have across the board everywhere else.

There's no need to fellate the opposition just for the hell of it, but in this case I don't think you guys give enough credit to how good the team is we're going up against. They, along with Duke, are the class of the ACC this year.

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

I think the important thing is to keep reminding everybody how few ACC players there are on the team.

Its also important to remember that the following things are unacceptable excuses and/or explanations, which show message board small dickery: a) injuries, especially to the only legitimate center on the team; provided that if the injury is mentioned it must be in the context of a recruiting failure to find more than one ACC starter quality big man in two recruiting classes; further provided that it is essential to ignore the aforesaid injured centers freshman year in its entirety or to selectively remember it and to comment that he lacks offensive capabilities generally because he lacks such capabilities when he is injured; b) 95% of scoring from players in their sophomore year and below; provided that is important when rejecting this excuse to be sure to point out that all past improvements of players from class to class are irrelevant because none of the freshman are as good as Troy Bell was a freshman; c) that the trajectory of this team is essentially on course with other recent BC teams from a tournament reaching perspective.

gaelfu {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Miami is a bad matchup for BC on paper. On a basketball court, not so much. As epstein says, Miami is the kind of dumbass team with jacking guards that BC's style frustrates the shit out of, just like Clemson.

If Miami pumps it in the post every possession, it's a bad matchup. But they won't.

I don't buy this analysis. Miami's guards are better shooters and much better players than Clemson's guards. Larkin has been great this year and is shooting 41% from three. Jones shoots 37% from three. Miami also takes a lot less 3s than we do on the whole.

Scott fits the description, but not enough to mitigate the advantages they have across the board everywhere else.

There's no need to fellate the opposition just for the hell of it, but in this case I don't think you guys give enough credit to how good the team is we're going up against. They, along with Duke, are the class of the ACC this year.

A. Them being better than Clemson is irrelevant to my point, and undisputed.

B. You citing 3-point percentages makes my point quite nicely, thanks.

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

I think the important thing is to keep reminding everybody how few ACC players there are on the team.

Its also important to remember that the following things are unacceptable excuses and/or explanations, which show message board small dickery: a) injuries, especially to the only legitimate center on the team; provided that if the injury is mentioned it must be in the context of a recruiting failure to find more than one ACC starter quality big man in two recruiting classes; further provided that it is essential to ignore the aforesaid injured centers freshman year in its entirety or to selectively remember it and to comment that he lacks offensive capabilities generally because he lacks such capabilities when he is injured; b) 95% of scoring from players in their sophomore year and below; provided that is important when rejecting this excuse to be sure to point out that all past improvements of players from class to class are irrelevant because none of the freshman are as good as Troy Bell was a freshman; c) that the trajectory of this team is essentially on course with other recent BC teams from a tournament reaching perspective.

this post pretty much tips your real identity. hopefully it was a case of mistaken unlogoutedness

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

gaelfu {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Miami is a bad matchup for BC on paper. On a basketball court, not so much. As epstein says, Miami is the kind of dumbass team with jacking guards that BC's style frustrates the shit out of, just like Clemson.

If Miami pumps it in the post every possession, it's a bad matchup. But they won't.

I don't buy this analysis. Miami's guards are better shooters and much better players than Clemson's guards. Larkin has been great this year and is shooting 41% from three. Jones shoots 37% from three. Miami also takes a lot less 3s than we do on the whole.

Scott fits the description, but not enough to mitigate the advantages they have across the board everywhere else.

There's no need to fellate the opposition just for the hell of it, but in this case I don't think you guys give enough credit to how good the team is we're going up against. They, along with Duke, are the class of the ACC this year.

A. Them being better than Clemson is irrelevant to my point, and undisputed.

B. You citing 3-point percentages makes my point quite nicely, thanks.

Perhaps I am not as smart as you, but I do not follow:

A. Miami does not shoot an ungodly amount of 3 point attempts. Therefore, they are not Clemson style in that they don't fit the mold of a dumbass team with jacking guards. I agree that they are better than Clemson and that their guards are better than Clemson's guards.

B. Just because someone shoots a high percentage from the 3 point line doesn't mean they jack a lot of threes. In fact, if you take a lot of threes, it's harder to make them.

Miami is a pretty well balanced and experienced team that plays great defense and has size. We are also on the road. Therefore, I see a tough matchup.

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

I think the important thing is to keep reminding everybody how few ACC players there are on the team.

Its also important to remember that the following things are unacceptable excuses and/or explanations, which show message board small dickery: a) injuries, especially to the only legitimate center on the team; provided that if the injury is mentioned it must be in the context of a recruiting failure to find more than one ACC starter quality big man in two recruiting classes; further provided that it is essential to ignore the aforesaid injured centers freshman year in its entirety or to selectively remember it and to comment that he lacks offensive capabilities generally because he lacks such capabilities when he is injured; b) 95% of scoring from players in their sophomore year and below; provided that is important when rejecting this excuse to be sure to point out that all past improvements of players from class to class are irrelevant because none of the freshman are as good as Troy Bell was a freshman; c) that the trajectory of this team is essentially on course with other recent BC teams from a tournament reaching perspective.

this post pretty much tips your real identity. hopefully it was a case of mistaken unlogoutedness

Wasn't it already pretty obvious. I'm just gearing up for my Campion/bigpete/talon/huang stage of posting.

gaelfu {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

gaelfu {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:Miami is a bad matchup for BC on paper. On a basketball court, not so much. As epstein says, Miami is the kind of dumbass team with jacking guards that BC's style frustrates the shit out of, just like Clemson.

If Miami pumps it in the post every possession, it's a bad matchup. But they won't.

I don't buy this analysis. Miami's guards are better shooters and much better players than Clemson's guards. Larkin has been great this year and is shooting 41% from three. Jones shoots 37% from three. Miami also takes a lot less 3s than we do on the whole.

Scott fits the description, but not enough to mitigate the advantages they have across the board everywhere else.

There's no need to fellate the opposition just for the hell of it, but in this case I don't think you guys give enough credit to how good the team is we're going up against. They, along with Duke, are the class of the ACC this year.

A. Them being better than Clemson is irrelevant to my point, and undisputed.

B. You citing 3-point percentages makes my point quite nicely, thanks.

Perhaps I am not as smart as you, but I do not follow:

A. Miami does not shoot an ungodly amount of 3 point attempts. Therefore, they are not Clemson style in that they don't fit the mold of a dumbass team with jacking guards. I agree that they are better than Clemson and that their guards are better than Clemson's guards.

B. Just because someone shoots a high percentage from the 3 point line doesn't mean they jack a lot of threes. In fact, if you take a lot of threes, it's harder to make them.

Miami is a pretty well balanced and experienced team that plays great defense and has size. We are also on the road. Therefore, I see a tough matchup.

Miami is undoubtedly better than Clemson, especially at guard. The comparison to Clemson was based on the obvious style similarities between the two teams that were clearly demonstrated in the two games BC played against them - each got frustrated, used a lot of clock, and took a lot of bad shots. When they went down in bunches, they scored, otherwise, neither team did much. Clemson actually made a concerted effort to go inside after Brownell had opportunities to talk to them on the sidelines, but that went by the wayside after a couple of possessions each time.

Miami is, however, a team with guards that like to shoot a lot, too much given their size advantage. Their two leading scorers are a chucker (Scott) and a 6'11'' guy that thinks he is a three point shooter (Kadji). Scott, Larkin, Kadji and Jones (3 guards and a perimeter power forward) have taken 745 of the team's 1101 field goal attempts, 300 of which are 3s. Add in 118 shots from Brown (71 of which are threes). That means guards and Kadji take 78% of the team's shots, and 38% of the team's shots are threes.

This is the sole reason that BC was in the last game. It is the reason BC will be in this game.

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

I think the important thing is to keep reminding everybody how few ACC players there are on the team.

Its also important to remember that the following things are unacceptable excuses and/or explanations, which show message board small dickery: a) injuries, especially to the only legitimate center on the team; provided that if the injury is mentioned it must be in the context of a recruiting failure to find more than one ACC starter quality big man in two recruiting classes; further provided that it is essential to ignore the aforesaid injured centers freshman year in its entirety or to selectively remember it and to comment that he lacks offensive capabilities generally because he lacks such capabilities when he is injured; b) 95% of scoring from players in their sophomore year and below; provided that is important when rejecting this excuse to be sure to point out that all past improvements of players from class to class are irrelevant because none of the freshman are as good as Troy Bell was a freshman; c) that the trajectory of this team is essentially on course with other recent BC teams from a tournament reaching perspective.

this post pretty much tips your real identity. hopefully it was a case of mistaken unlogoutedness

Wasn't it already pretty obvious. I'm just gearing up for my Campion/bigpete/talon/huang stage of posting.

since those 4 ran off somewhere together, we would appreciate you backfilling this position.

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

TobaccoRoadEagle {l Wrote}:

guiltyparticipant {l Wrote}:

twballgame9 {l Wrote}:

claver2010 {l Wrote}:Tedwardo, will the weirdos count this as a moral victory?

THIS IS IMPORTANT!

Maybe we should add a 3 column to bc's record ala hockey...wins-losses-moral victories

10-6-5 and on the bubble baby!

I think the important thing is to keep reminding everybody how few ACC players there are on the team.

Its also important to remember that the following things are unacceptable excuses and/or explanations, which show message board small dickery: a) injuries, especially to the only legitimate center on the team; provided that if the injury is mentioned it must be in the context of a recruiting failure to find more than one ACC starter quality big man in two recruiting classes; further provided that it is essential to ignore the aforesaid injured centers freshman year in its entirety or to selectively remember it and to comment that he lacks offensive capabilities generally because he lacks such capabilities when he is injured; b) 95% of scoring from players in their sophomore year and below; provided that is important when rejecting this excuse to be sure to point out that all past improvements of players from class to class are irrelevant because none of the freshman are as good as Troy Bell was a freshman; c) that the trajectory of this team is essentially on course with other recent BC teams from a tournament reaching perspective.

this post pretty much tips your real identity. hopefully it was a case of mistaken unlogoutedness

Wasn't it already pretty obvious. I'm just gearing up for my Campion/bigpete/talon/huang stage of posting.

since those 4 ran off somewhere together, we would appreciate you backfilling this position.

I can probably backfill Pete's role of telling everyone how much they and the board suck at a much higher rate of success than Colson backfilled Cooley's coaching and recruiting.

i kinda had my eye on the "this board sucks and you do too" role but it appears that you called shotgun on it so i'll let you have it jerk

The big difference from past Miami teams is there coach.

wildcat81 {l Wrote}:The big difference from past Miami teams is there coach.

they got a new coach their in the last 3 weeks?