Notre Dame Game Thread

Forum rules
"The opinions expressed on this board are property of the poster and do not reflect the opinion of EagleOutsider, Boston College or Boston College Athletics"

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Thu Feb 08, 2018 7:41 pm

The defensive system JC is employing is also incredibly dumb.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Thu Feb 08, 2018 9:14 pm

eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
claver2010 wrote:eh yes and no, some of them would be terrible at defense IRregardless of minutes


Defense is effort. Easier to do it if you are playing 33 instead of 40 and if there is a viable threat on the bench to sub for you if you lollygag.


I’m not saying it wouldn’t improve with depth, but none of these guards are capable of playing defense.


This is dumb. Any half ass decent athlete is capable of playing defense. BC guards are way above average athletes.


The fact you think that 3 guards who will have played 8 combined seasons of college basketball are magically going to flip some switch and actually play defense is ridiculous.


You know nothing about playing basketball.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby BCEagles25 on Thu Feb 08, 2018 10:11 pm

eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
claver2010 wrote:eh yes and no, some of them would be terrible at defense IRregardless of minutes


Defense is effort. Easier to do it if you are playing 33 instead of 40 and if there is a viable threat on the bench to sub for you if you lollygag.


I’m not saying it wouldn’t improve with depth, but none of these guards are capable of playing defense.


This is dumb. Any half ass decent athlete is capable of playing defense. BC guards are way above average athletes.


The fact you think that 3 guards who will have played 8 combined seasons of college basketball are magically going to flip some switch and actually play defense is ridiculous.


It's not magic, it's human biology. You ever been the only point guard on a roster, rec league/mens league/organized ball or otherwise? It's not fun. Your quads and calves start to give out on you from all that sprinting/lateral movement/jumping/driving through screens and these guys are doing it for 35-40 minutes against top tier NCAA talent 3 times a week. The energy in the body and the body's ability to supply oxygen and blood to exhausted muscle fibers in order for them to perform explosively is completely finite. I can't even believe you are arguing this
I like BC basketball.
User avatar
BCEagles25
Merkert Hall
 
Posts: 3920
Joined: Sun Sep 06, 2009 12:42 pm
Location: Ask campion or TRE.
Karma: 118

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Thu Feb 08, 2018 10:17 pm

BCEagles25 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
claver2010 wrote:eh yes and no, some of them would be terrible at defense IRregardless of minutes


Defense is effort. Easier to do it if you are playing 33 instead of 40 and if there is a viable threat on the bench to sub for you if you lollygag.


I’m not saying it wouldn’t improve with depth, but none of these guards are capable of playing defense.


This is dumb. Any half ass decent athlete is capable of playing defense. BC guards are way above average athletes.


The fact you think that 3 guards who will have played 8 combined seasons of college basketball are magically going to flip some switch and actually play defense is ridiculous.


It's not magic, it's human biology. You ever been the only point guard on a roster, rec league/mens league/organized ball or otherwise? It's not fun. Your quads and calves start to give out on you from all that sprinting/lateral movement/jumping/driving through screens and these guys are doing it for 35-40 minutes against top tier NCAA talent 3 times a week. The energy in the body and the body's ability to supply oxygen and blood to exhausted muscle fibers in order for them to perform explosively is completely finite. I can't even believe you are arguing this


They play awful defense from the opening tip of the basketball game. It’s not like it gets worse as the games goes on.

ND came out and made 5 of their first 6 shots, 4 of them were wide open.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Thu Feb 08, 2018 10:23 pm

Also, last year, Robinson played 34 a game and Bowman/Chatman were under 30 a game.

What was the excuse for being the worst defensive team in the ACC last season?
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 7:49 am

Just stop.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 11:31 am

twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:31 pm

eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:40 pm

twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.


My point is that the lack of effort, which we're aligned on, doesn't have a ton to do with the minutes played or lack of depth.

I'm not sure why next year they'll start trying on defense
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:58 pm

eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.


My point is that the lack of effort, which we're aligned on, doesn't have a ton to do with the minutes played or lack of depth.

I'm not sure why next year they'll start trying on defense


Lack of effort has many reasons. First and foremost is minutes played. And your why don't they play defense in the first half theory is stupid, they know they are playing 38 and they are being asked to carry the team on the other end as well. Only so much in the tank.

Marcus Smart would not be Marcus Smart if he played Kyrie Irving minutes and was asked to score 25 a night. He's Marcus Smart because he's the 7th man, plays limited minutes, and isn't asked to do much on the offensive end. Same goes for Rozier. This is all pretry basic hoop 101.

Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby Cadillac90 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 12:59 pm

twballgame9 wrote:Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.


Amen
Cadillac90
Campion Hall
 
Posts: 1883
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 1:51 pm
Karma: 195

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby TobaccoRoadEagle on Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:43 pm

Could you two just fuck now already
bieber, justin
bush, george h.w.
chong, tommy
curry, tim
jong-un, kim
lange, artie
mitchell, joni
newton-john, olivia
osborne, ozzy
windsor, queen elizabeth
User avatar
TobaccoRoadEagle
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 19731
Joined: Wed Sep 02, 2009 7:51 am
Location: tobaccoroad
Karma: 5544

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:52 pm

twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.


My point is that the lack of effort, which we're aligned on, doesn't have a ton to do with the minutes played or lack of depth.

I'm not sure why next year they'll start trying on defense


Lack of effort has many reasons. First and foremost is minutes played. And your why don't they play defense in the first half theory is stupid, they know they are playing 38 and they are being asked to carry the team on the other end as well. Only so much in the tank.

Marcus Smart would not be Marcus Smart if he played Kyrie Irving minutes and was asked to score 25 a night. He's Marcus Smart because he's the 7th man, plays limited minutes, and isn't asked to do much on the offensive end. Same goes for Rozier. This is all pretry basic hoop 101.

Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.


What was the issue last year when they were playing 28, 30 and 34 minutes respectively? They still were horrid defensive players.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 2:53 pm

Cadillac90 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.


Amen


When you’re giving up games of 95 points there’s nowhere to go but up
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:17 pm

eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.


My point is that the lack of effort, which we're aligned on, doesn't have a ton to do with the minutes played or lack of depth.

I'm not sure why next year they'll start trying on defense


Lack of effort has many reasons. First and foremost is minutes played. And your why don't they play defense in the first half theory is stupid, they know they are playing 38 and they are being asked to carry the team on the other end as well. Only so much in the tank.

Marcus Smart would not be Marcus Smart if he played Kyrie Irving minutes and was asked to score 25 a night. He's Marcus Smart because he's the 7th man, plays limited minutes, and isn't asked to do much on the offensive end. Same goes for Rozier. This is all pretry basic hoop 101.

Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.


What was the issue last year when they were playing 28, 30 and 34 minutes respectively? They still were horrid defensive players.


When you are the only two players on the team that can score or are remotely athletic, looking at box score team totals as a measure of whether those two guys can play defense rises to Costco-ian levels. Put Marcus Smart on a team with Meznieks, Tava, Owens, Pop, Jeffers and Turner, and UNC would drop 100 on them, regardless of Smart's on ball skills.

BC's good players don't play good defense. But the final team score is not a measure of that, since there are only 2 of them and 5 guys play. BC's good players don't play defense because they are out there all night, there's no one with whom they can be replaced, and they are required to score all the points if they have any shot to win. Guys that play 38 and score 20+ pick their spots on defense, if at all.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 3:18 pm

This is the closest I have seen a normal poster get to nospacian oversimplified stupidity by the way. Kudos.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby eepstein0 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:29 pm

twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:
eepstein0 wrote:
twballgame9 wrote:Just stop.


Don't let facts and numbers get in the way of a good agenda item.


There's no agenda. If you are a good athlete and statistically bad at defense, you aren't working hard enough. Defense isn't a skill or talent, its 99% athletic ability crossed with effort.


My point is that the lack of effort, which we're aligned on, doesn't have a ton to do with the minutes played or lack of depth.

I'm not sure why next year they'll start trying on defense


Lack of effort has many reasons. First and foremost is minutes played. And your why don't they play defense in the first half theory is stupid, they know they are playing 38 and they are being asked to carry the team on the other end as well. Only so much in the tank.

Marcus Smart would not be Marcus Smart if he played Kyrie Irving minutes and was asked to score 25 a night. He's Marcus Smart because he's the 7th man, plays limited minutes, and isn't asked to do much on the offensive end. Same goes for Rozier. This is all pretry basic hoop 101.

Add players that can play and BC will play better defense.


What was the issue last year when they were playing 28, 30 and 34 minutes respectively? They still were horrid defensive players.


When you are the only two players on the team that can score or are remotely athletic, looking at box score team totals as a measure of whether those two guys can play defense rises to Costco-ian levels. Put Marcus Smart on a team with Meznieks, Tava, Owens, Pop, Jeffers and Turner, and UNC would drop 100 on them, regardless of Smart's on ball skills.

BC's good players don't play good defense. But the final team score is not a measure of that, since there are only 2 of them and 5 guys play. BC's good players don't play defense because they are out there all night, there's no one with whom they can be replaced, and they are required to score all the points if they have any shot to win. Guys that play 38 and score 20+ pick their spots on defense, if at all.


Turner and Owens were actually good defensive players. Didn’t help a bit.

Mitchell is the only good defensive player on the floor this year.

I sure hope you’re right but you’re not. They’re going to have to out score teams in the ACC and that isn’t going to work against teams with superior talent.
User avatar
eepstein0
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 15283
Joined: Thu Sep 10, 2009 7:35 pm
Location: Danvers, MA
Karma: -325

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby twballgame9 on Fri Feb 09, 2018 4:55 pm

Turner and Owens were only good defensive players in comparison to their offensive ability. Likewise, Bowman and Robinson are bad defensive players in comparison to how good they are offensively. Your definitions of good an bad defensive players are pretty arbitrary, and cookie cutter stereotypes based on stuff like "guy that doesn't play much because he can only dunk but is a good athlete and looks like he plays hard in the 8 minutes of run he gets." Owens is a perfect example of my point.
"We remind everyone that Boston College fired a perfectly good coach because he went on a job interview, and deserves all of this." Spencer Hall
User avatar
twballgame9
BC Guy
 
Posts: 29079
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 8:49 am
Karma: 2322

Re: Notre Dame Game Thread

Postby claver2010 on Sat Feb 17, 2018 7:10 pm

claver2010 wrote:seems like farrell always kills us



Hgaw
Bush, George H W
Cosby, Bill
Disick, Scott
Flair, Ric
Griffin, Kathy
Khamenei, Ali
McCain, John
Pele
Soros, George
User avatar
claver2010
Gasson Hall
 
Posts: 16730
Joined: Sat Sep 05, 2009 5:55 pm
Karma: 2902

Previous

Return to Conte Forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 3 guests

Untitled document