PennStateHoops.com Discussion Forum

Your Reasons To Be Excited About Hoops


#1

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/10/14/2487110/reasons-to-care-about-penn-state-basketball


#2

I was going through the roster and I came across this comment on Billy Oliver.

"He is shooting the heck out of the basketball. I have never seen someone shoot the ball the way he does. I love that a four man can stretch the defense and he can take it off two dribbles and do something with the ball, which nobody even knows about.

  • Patrick Chambers

This is a big reason for anyone to be excited :slight_smile:


#3

Hey, if Chambers can turn Oliver into a productive player…by all means, we all welcome it


#4

[quote=“bleedinblue, post:2, topic:2737”]“He is shooting the heck out of the basketball.”

  • Patrick Chambers[/quote]
    So could Nikolai Obrodovic. There is a stark difference between shooting the ball well in practice and being a good basketball player, especially when the lights come on and the crowd is watching. I’m in the “I’ll believe it when I see it” crowd, ED said the same things about BO.

#5

I’m excited to see some passion and intensity out of the head man. Also, to see how Travis and Lewis grow during the season.


#6

I’m excited that Penn State hired exactly the personality needed to put this program on the CBB map. Now, whether Chambers can actually coach successfully at this level and whether a tough first and maybe second season will bury fan interest before Chambers has a chance to build momentum, we’ll have to wait and see.


#7

http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/10/19/2485932/pat-chambers-interrogation-with-the-nova-blog

Can the 4-out 1-in motion offense work in the Big Ten? How much does it depend on the quality of your players?

I’ll admit that I’m not a Big Ten guru, so I’m not sure I can definitively say that - but what the 4-out-1-in offense needs is ballhandlers, shooters, and a big man who is confident away from the hoop

Explains the thrust of PG recruits being mentioned.


#8

[quote=“Tom, post:7, topic:2737”]http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/10/19/2485932/pat-chambers-interrogation-with-the-nova-blog

Explains the thrust of PG recruits being mentioned.[/quote]

As I’ve said often, I grew up following the Big 5, and the parochial worship of all things Villanova is still galling to me. It’s not like they were UCLA.

That said, I love Jay Wright. He makes it hard to hate them.


#9
[url=http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/10/19/2485932/pat-chambers-interrogation-with-the-nova-blog]http://www.blackshoediaries.com/2011/10/19/2485932/pat-chambers-interrogation-with-the-nova-blog[/url]
Can the 4-out 1-in motion offense work in the Big Ten? How much does it depend on the quality of your players?

I’ll admit that I’m not a Big Ten guru, so I’m not sure I can definitively say that - but what the 4-out-1-in offense needs is ballhandlers, shooters, and a big man who is confident away from the hoop

Explains the thrust of PG recruits being mentioned.

As I’ve said often, I grew up following the Big 5, and the parochial worship of all things Villanova is still galling to me. It’s not like they were UCLA.

That said, I love Jay Wright. He makes it hard to hate them.

I’m beginning to think that if what PC’s going to run is this different from the rest of the B-10, could it be like when Tiller 1st went to Purdue? He gernerated a bunch of buzz for bringing the “gunslinging style” to the B-10, and really attracted some decent talent there, until he kind of peaked out. He also dragged some of the stodgier programs to become a little more modern in their thinking, which was a good thing for the league overall.

I’m excited to watch the next few years how this all plays out… (isn’t that the topic anyway? :wink: )


#10

[quote=“MarkH, post:9, topic:2737”]I’m beginning to think that if what PC’s going to run is this different from the rest of the B-10, could it be like when Tiller 1st went to Purdue? He gernerated a bunch of buzz for bringing the “gunslinging style” to the B-10, and really attracted some decent talent there, until he kind of peaked out. He also dragged some of the stodgier programs to become a little more modern in their thinking, which was a good thing for the league overall.

I’m excited to watch the next few years how this all plays out… (isn’t that the topic anyway? :wink: )[/quote]

Strong take MarkH. I was actually thinking the same thing. It will be interesting to see 1) if Chambers can pull something like this off with his own team, and 2) how the Big Ten reacts, both on a game-by-game basis and in the long term, if in fact PC’s offense has its sticking points within the league.

I go back six years (wow, already) to the Illini of 2005. They ran solely a 3-guard offense, but had players like 6’4" Luther Head and 6’3" Deron Williams who could guard bigger forwards with their athleticism. Not to mention that both those players were NBA first rounders :).

I think for PC’s plan to work he just can’t cart out 3 or 4 Dee Brown types (5’11" on his tippy toes) and expect to light the Big Ten world aflame. Offensively, other teams might go nuts in trying to guard PSU, but defensively it will get ugly, quickly.


#11

Depends on how well we could execute the Turkey Tap defense.


#12

I’m excited that we have a new coach and how our new players will play. I just want to see how the whole team has progressed from last season.


#13

I’m excited because I like when my team presses on defense and scores the ball off of it. It’s so demoralizing to the other team. I expect to see more pressing than I have since… well… ever since I’ve been watching PSU hoops.


#14

I don’t think we will see much pressing. A pressing defense leads to fouling. We are too thin to foul much. Let’s just wait and see. The games are not far away!
I just hope this team can be competitive.


#15

Wasn’t that the expectation going into the ED years, too?


#16
[quote="bleedinblue, post:2, topic:2737"]"He is shooting the heck out of the basketball." - Patrick Chambers[/quote] So could Nikolai Obrodovic. There is a stark difference between shooting the ball well in practice and being a good basketball player, especially when the lights come on and the crowd is watching. I'm in the "I'll believe it when I see it" crowd, ED said the same things about BO.

Agree completely on the I’ll believe it when I see it attitude, but I do hold out a little hope. I doubt the practice reports of his shootings were lies, so he must light it up in practice. And it was also obvious in the games that Oliver was lost most of the time. Reason I have some faint hope is confidence. It was pretty obvious that Oliver had no confidence at all last year and one thing I have a real good feeling about is PC’s ability with his attitude that if he can’t increase Oliver’s confidence to the point of playing in the game like practice, than just about nobody can.


#17
[quote="NittanyIllini, post:10, topic:2737"][b]I think for PC's plan to work he just can't cart out 3 or 4 Dee Brown types (5'11" on his tippy toes) and expect to light the Big Ten world aflame. Offensively, other teams might go nuts in trying to guard PSU, [b]but defensively it will get ugly, quickly. [/b][/b][/quote]

Depends on how well we could execute the Turkey Tap defense.

Agreed, big risk.

While the 4-1 offense makes sense, the article talks about a big man being able to play well outside. Seems to me if you’re going to limit inside play, you need one great inside player(think Sullinger, or even Leuer, DeShawn Sims, Suton or even Cole), otherwise, teams will just D up the arc, unconcerned with inside points. Nova has had talent, yet always seems to struggle vs. teams with tough inside play. They went 2-7 in their last 9 games last year. When they had Dante Cunningham it worked better, but he was a 1st round draft choice, so it should. Wright’s record is great, but he gets lots of highly ranked kids. Pitt plays this too, with great success, but they’re bruisers. If PSU goes the Pitt route, i.e., a more rough style, I think it’ll work better, esp in the Big 10. Pitt always seems to finish stronger than Nova in recent years. It’s almost like Nova’s style gets exposed as the season goes on as being soft inside, and teams attack the basket, and D up the arc. Two years ago they got bumped by St. Mary’s in the tourney, when St. Mary’s Omar Samhan shot 13-16, completely dominating them, finishing with 32 points. I expected St. Mary’s to go far after that display, yet Baylor killed them, 72-49, with the game over by halftime, 46-17. Epke Udoh’s inside play, 11 rebounds, and Baylor’s over rb edge, 42-29, kind of changed things. Baylor made the Elite 8, losing to NCAA champ Duke, 78-71 but still. IMO, kind of shows just how weak Nova was, losing 75-68 to St. Mary’s.


#18

ED wanted to run, but couldn’t get the athletes to effectively do it in the Big 10. You got be able to catch and make the outlet. We didn’t have big guys who could do this. When the guards got out ahead, we finished (unlike Parkhill squads, which almost always pulled it back). But without a clear advantage, we definitely slowed it down on offense. And our guards hit the boards, so Talor was rarely out front to start or finish a break - he was under the hoop.

Fewer possessions is thought to penalize the more athletic/skilled team, although I have no idea whether that holds up to stat scrutiny.

As far as fan interest, I think winning trumps all. If we’d have run more last year but gone 11-16, “entertaining” basketball would not have meant more support.


#19

[quote=“tjb, post:18, topic:2737”]ED wanted to run, but couldn’t get the athletes to effectively do it in the Big 10. You got be able to catch and make the outlet. We didn’t have big guys who could do this. When the guards got out ahead, we finished (unlike Parkhill squads, which almost always pulled it back). But without a clear advantage, we definitely slowed it down on offense. And our guards hit the boards, so Talor was rarely out front to start or finish a break - he was under the hoop.

Fewer possessions is thought to penalize the more athletic/skilled team, although I have no idea whether that holds up to stat scrutiny.

As far as fan interest, I think winning trumps all. If we’d have run more last year but gone 11-16, “entertaining” basketball would not have meant more support.[/quote]
I will be surprised if PC runs what he wants at least initially. ED wanted to run but correctly identified that he had a less skilled team than most of his opponents and had to shorten games. You may agree or disagree with his method for doing achieving the shortened game (stand around offense vs a Bo Ryan out execute style) but it was the correct strategy.

If PC is a good coach he will adjust his philosophy to the strategy that gives the team the best opportunity to win.


#20

[quote=“tjb, post:18, topic:2737”]ED wanted to run, but couldn’t get the athletes to effectively do it in the Big 10. You got be able to catch and make the outlet. We didn’t have big guys who could do this. When the guards got out ahead, we finished (unlike Parkhill squads, which almost always pulled it back). But without a clear advantage, we definitely slowed it down on offense. And our guards hit the boards, so Talor was rarely out front to start or finish a break - he was under the hoop.

Fewer possessions is thought to penalize the more athletic/skilled team, although I have no idea whether that holds up to stat scrutiny.

As far as fan interest, I think winning trumps all. If we’d have run more last year but gone 11-16, “entertaining” basketball would not have meant more support.[/quote]

Ed had 8 years to bring in players for a running style if he wanted to play that way and didn’t.