Ten Thoughts (Offseason)

[zjcvols]

That sentiment is fine, but my argument was to run the system that fits the players best and the difference in the two systems we ran the past few years led to similar results.

However, I do think that the type of players in this class does suit a faster pace and pressure. I think a lot of what hurt us was the bulk in the frontcourt with Chism and Williams. Harris is another story as he has fantastic open court skills for a 4. Taking a look at the others coming in, McRae, Golden, Ware, Jones and, possibly, Selby, shows me that we are looking to run in the future.[/QUOTE]

And running is perfectly fine. There is nothing wrong with wanting to push the tempo and start more fastbreaks. But we don't need to press to do that. You can do that by boxing out and throwing outlet passes. I just feel that the team doesn't need to press and I really don't see the benefits of pressing after the way the D played this year.

 

[Titanic]

We're going to be hard pressed to find another big man who can switch screens the way Wayne could, and JP Prince was certifiably unique among collegians. I wouldn't expect that kind of halfcourt defense to become the norm here. I enjoyed the run we had last year but we don't have anyone on the team that can approach either of those players on the defensive end. Bruce has been saying since Wayne stepped on campus how great he was on defense, and everyone knows what JP can do.

 

[zjcvols]

We're going to be hard pressed to find another big man who can switch screens the way Wayne could, and JP Prince was certifiably unique among collegians. I wouldn't expect that kind of halfcourt defense to become the norm here. I enjoyed the run we had last year but we don't have anyone on the team that can approach either of those players on the defensive end. Bruce has been saying since Wayne stepped on campus how great he was on defense, and everyone knows what JP can do.

You can teach a kid how to play D. That won't be an issue if you know how to teach defense.

 

[justrabid]

We will see. Maybe the light turns on for Woolridge (probably not though). I don't know about Maymon. Will he understand that he is best suited at four? Does he understand that he won't start? We will see. At Marquette, he seemed like a baby. I guess we will see. Maybe he can have a JP-like impact when JP transferred.

Maymon may understand if he doesnt start.......but does his dad? he expects his son to start and from things ive read,most likely be a big part of the offense.dad has NBA on his mind...mouthy parents and sulking kids,could hurt a team...jmo.

 

[Unimane]

That sentiment is fine, but my argument was to run the system that fits the players best and the difference in the two systems we ran the past few years led to similar results.

However, I do think that the type of players in this class does suit a faster pace and pressure. I think a lot of what hurt us was the bulk in the frontcourt with Chism and Williams. Harris is another story as he has fantastic open court skills for a 4. Taking a look at the others coming in, McRae, Golden, Ware, Jones and, possibly, Selby, shows me that we are looking to run in the future.[/QUOTE]

And running is perfectly fine. There is nothing wrong with wanting to push the tempo and start more fastbreaks. But we don't need to press to do that. You can do that by boxing out and throwing outlet passes. I just feel that the team doesn't need to press and I really don't see the benefits of pressing after the way the D played this year.

Why not? It's worked for us in the past. A lot of times we only use a token press anyway, dropping off after the first pass. A press can be very effective. Kansas would've beaten Northern Iowa had they pressed earlier and Kentucky would've beaten W. Virginia had they pressed at all.

 

[tennesseefan31]

Kenny Hall is 6' 10"?????

 

[NYYVol]

Why not? It's worked for us in the past. A lot of times we only use a token press anyway, dropping off after the first pass. A press can be very effective. Kansas would've beaten Northern Iowa had they pressed earlier and Kentucky would've beaten W. Virginia had they pressed at all.

Yet when we scrapped that junk we make it farther than we ever have.

That's not coincidence.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Titanic]

Yeah, it had nothing to do with having a competent senior point guard, or two upper classmen big men, or a focused and determined JP prince, or even because one basket went our way in the sweet sixteen instead of our opponents. You're right. We stopped pressing, and that made all the difference. There's AMPLE evidence to make that kind of declaration.

You people aren't living in reality.

 

[zjcvols]

Why not? It's worked for us in the past. A lot of times we only use a token press anyway, dropping off after the first pass. A press can be very effective. Kansas would've beaten Northern Iowa had they pressed earlier and Kentucky would've beaten W. Virginia had they pressed at all.

Because Pearl understood that was the only way we could compete defensively with Lofton and Bradshaw playing. Now we don't have to have that.

 

[zjcvols]

Yeah, it had nothing to do with having a competent senior point guard, or two upper classmen big men, or a focused and determined JP prince, or even because one basket went our way in the sweet sixteen instead of our opponents. You're right. We stopped pressing, and that made all the difference. There's AMPLE evidence to make that kind of declaration.

You people aren't living in reality.

It wasn't the fact we stopped pressing. It was the fact that Pearl started demanding defense from the half-court. We don't need to press anymore.

 

[Unimane]

Yet when we scrapped that junk we make it farther than we ever have.

That's not coincidence.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Yes, it is. The difference between not making the Elite 8 in 2007 and making it this year was one possession. We're talking about two games that could've gone either way. That's not any kind of validation for the idea that "scrapping that junk" made any difference other than it fit the personel.

 

[Unimane]

It wasn't the fact we stopped pressing. It was the fact that Pearl started demanding defense from the half-court. We don't need to press anymore.

He always demanded half court defense, he just didn't have the horses to run it like he did this year. A number of coaches remarked how our length made our half court defense very difficult, something we didn't have early in Pearl's time here.

 

[LawVol13]

Yes, it is. The difference between not making the Elite 8 in 2007 and making it this year was one possession. We're talking about two games that could've gone either way. That's not any kind of validation for the idea that "scrapping that junk" made any difference other than it fit the personel.

The difference was we couldn't play half-court defense that year.

The only reason it was a one possession game against OSU was because we had absolutely shot the lights out to make up for inability to play half-court D.

 

[Titanic]

The difference was we couldn't play half-court defense that year.

The only reason it was a one possession game against OSU was because we had absolutely shot the lights out to make up for inability to play half-court D.

And the only reason we won against OSU this year was because they called a foul on what looked like a clean steal for an open layup by Diebler.

And the reason we lost against Ohio State in 07 was because we were throwing Ramar and Jordan at Mike Conley and they couldn't stay in front of him. If you put Bobby Maze on that team there's no way they come back on us in the second half like they did. Conley had something like nine straight trips in the last twelve minutes where he either scored, got fouled, or handed it off for a dunk/layup because we could not stay in front of him. Bobby Maze would have done a hell of a lot better in that regard.

Personally I think the 07 team would have ran this year's OSU team into the ground, and I think that 07 OSU team would have given this year's vols fits. They had the big physical presence that we had trouble with all year(Cousins, Tompkins, even the gator guys), and great point guard play(ala Wall and the kid from USC who torched us). That 07 Ohio State team was faaaaar superior to this year's one man band, there's not even an argument. There were like seven players on that OSU team in 07 that are playing for pay right now, and three of them were NBA first rounders.

 

[NYYVol]

Yes, it is. The difference between not making the Elite 8 in 2007 and making it this year was one possession. We're talking about two games that could've gone either way. That's not any kind of validation for the idea that "scrapping that junk" made any difference other than it fit the personel.

And we had to shoot the lights out to keep it to one possession.

Scrap the junk.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Unimane]

And we had to shoot the lights out to keep it to one possession.

Scrap the junk.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

You still haven't proven anything. So, we shot well in the first half. And? We didn't exactly set the world on fire in the second half and it's not like that team didn't have a number of games shooting like that. We win that game by 10 if we make our free throws, anyway, which has nothing to do with style. That 2007 Ohio State team beats this year's UT team by 15, by the way. You want to play Oden in a half court game? Dumb idea.

I have yet to see any evidence of a discernable difference in the results between the two styles. Nothing in terms of won-loss record, conference titles won, etc. And the one level advanced further in the tournament could've gone either way both years.

Like I said before, that lack of using "junk" cost Kansas and Kentucky losses in the tournament. Kansas ran Northern Iowa ragged once they started pressing, but it was too late, and Kentucky failed to pressure a West Virginia team without their PG and their back up in foul trouble.

 

[NYYVol]

You still haven't proven anything. So, we shot well in the first half. And? We didn't exactly set the world on fire in the second half and it's not like that team didn't have a number of games shooting like that. We win that game by 10 if we make our free throws, anyway, which has nothing to do with style. That 2007 Ohio State team beats this year's UT team by 15, by the way. You want to play Oden in a half court game? Dumb idea.

I have yet to see any evidence of a discernable difference in the results between the two styles. Nothing in terms of won-loss record, conference titles won, etc. And the one level advanced further in the tournament could've gone either way both years.

Like I said before, that lack of using "junk" cost Kansas and Kentucky losses in the tournament. Kansas ran Northern Iowa ragged once they started pressing, but it was too late, and Kentucky failed to pressure a West Virginia team without their PG and their back up in foul trouble.

The better team won in 2007.

So you think it's mere coincidence that when BP scrapped the junk we progress farther than any other point in history?

Also, there's a difference between pressure and BP's "controlled chaos.". The controlled chaos is garbage, and needs to be relegated to the UNCA's of the world.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Unimane]

The better team won in 2007.

So you think it's mere coincidence that when BP scrapped the junk we progress farther than any other point in history?

Also, there's a difference between pressure and BP's "controlled chaos.". The controlled chaos is garbage, and needs to be relegated to the UNCA's of the world.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

Yes, it's a "coincidence", or whatever you may call it, when it's a matter of a point or two. It's not as if the half court style was some magical elixer that won the game for us. It was UT finally catching the breaks at the end of a Sweet 16 game. It's takes quite a stretch of logic to think that the results of two toss up games are solely the result of a stylistic change.

You simply want it to be the philosophy because it validates all the whining about Pearl's style you've made over the years. God forbid all your highly critical statements of Pearl turns out to be just a bunch of nonsense. No, no, no, can't have that.

Also, the funny thing is that you state, "the better team won in 2007", and it was still a one point game, nearly won by us at the end. This terrible style was only denied an Elite 8 by the great play of the future #1 draft pick, not a failure in the system. However, I guess, if we stopped running the "junk", Oden magically misses the block or something and we go to the Elite 8, right?

I mean, it's just so ridiculous. "No mere coincidence", my god. As if we were bounced in the first round year after year, changed our style and then went to that Elite 8. Now that would demonstrate "no mere coincidence", not one possession games in the Sweet 16.

 

[zjcvols]

Yes, it's a "coincidence", or whatever you may call it, when it's a matter of a point or two. It's not as if the half court style was some magical elixer that won the game for us. It was UT finally catching the breaks at the end of a Sweet 16 game. It's takes quite a stretch of logic to think that the results of two toss up games are solely the result of a stylistic change.

You simply want it to be the philosophy because it validates all the whining about Pearl's style you've made over the years. God forbid all your highly critical statements of Pearl turns out to be just a bunch of nonsense. No, no, no, can't have that.

Also, the funny thing is that you state, "the better team won in 2007", and it was still a one point game, nearly won by us at the end. This terrible style was only denied an Elite 8 by the great play of the future #1 draft pick, not a failure in the system. However, I guess, if we stopped running the "junk", Oden magically misses the block or something and we go to the Elite 8, right?

I mean, it's just so ridiculous. "No mere coincidence", my god. As if we were bounced in the first round year after year, changed our style and then went to that Elite 8. Now that would demonstrate "no mere coincidence", not one possession games in the Sweet 16.

Watch the 2007 game and this year's game. Because Pearl scrapped the press and focused more on halfcourt D we were able to stop Turner those last two possessions while Conley ate us up late. Pearl didn't focus on halfcourt D (or demand it, or whatever) because he had the press and assumed that would be fine. Now? We don't need to press, unless they are the Austin Peay's of the world and you want to end the game. Why press when you don't need to? We now have the length and athleticism that we don't need to press.

 

[Titanic]

Watch the 2007 game and this year's game. Because Pearl scrapped the press and focused more on halfcourt D we were able to stop Turner those last two possessions while Conley ate us up late. Pearl didn't focus on halfcourt D (or demand it, or whatever) because he had the press and assumed that would be fine. Now? We don't need to press, unless they are the Austin Peay's of the world and you want to end the game. Why press when you don't need to? We now have the length and athleticism that we don't need to press.

Riiiight. You do realize Turner is a wing who had to play point because they didn't have anyone else, right? Mike Conley is starting in the NBA. Those are not even remotely the same thing. We just didn't have anyone quick enough to stick to Conley when he tried to turn the corner. Put Bobby Maze or Goins on that 07 team and this isn't even a discussion.

 

[zjcvols]

Riiiight. You do realize Turner is a wing who had to play point because they didn't have anyone else, right? Mike Conley is starting in the NBA. Those are not even remotely the same thing. We just didn't have anyone quick enough to stick to Conley when he tried to turn the corner. Put Bobby Maze or Goins on that 07 team and this isn't even a discussion.

Yes, yet Turner is a better player still.

Ramar Smith was a good defender despite all his flaws. Bobby Maze would have been torched by Mike Conley. Maze is not a good defender.

Here's the point. The reason Pearl pressed the first 2-3 years was because he had to. Hell, even if he continues to press sporadically that's fine. We now have the size, length, and athleticism to play excellent half-court defense. We should not press every time like we use to. It's dumb strategy.

 

[ChattanoogaVols]

*feat

Four some reason, this won literally made me laugh out loud. Keep um comin'.

 

[WesternKyVol]

Riiiight. You do realize Turner is a wing who had to play point because they didn't have anyone else, right? Mike Conley is starting in the NBA. Those are not even remotely the same thing. We just didn't have anyone quick enough to stick to Conley when he tried to turn the corner. Put Bobby Maze or Goins on that 07 team and this isn't even a discussion.

Pearl has, and will continue to, run the defense that best suits out personnel.

That being said, we need 3-point shooters if we're gonna win championships running a half court defense becasue we will not be able to benefit from points off turnovers.

 

[NYYVol]

Yes, it's a "coincidence", or whatever you may call it, when it's a matter of a point or two. It's not as if the half court style was some magical elixer that won the game for us. It was UT finally catching the breaks at the end of a Sweet 16 game. It's takes quite a stretch of logic to think that the results of two toss up games are solely the result of a stylistic change.

You simply want it to be the philosophy because it validates all the whining about Pearl's style you've made over the years. God forbid all your highly critical statements of Pearl turns out to be just a bunch of nonsense. No, no, no, can't have that.

Also, the funny thing is that you state, "the better team won in 2007", and it was still a one point game, nearly won by us at the end. This terrible style was only denied an Elite 8 by the great play of the future #1 draft pick, not a failure in the system. However, I guess, if we stopped running the "junk", Oden magically misses the block or something and we go to the Elite 8, right?

I mean, it's just so ridiculous. "No mere coincidence", my god. As if we were bounced in the first round year after year, changed our style and then went to that Elite 8. Now that would demonstrate "no mere coincidence", not one possession games in the Sweet 16.

The culmination of events leading up to Oden's play was a reason why we lost. How soon you forget how that game played out.

And this has nothing to do with dislike of Pearl. It has everything to do with an emphasis on halfcourt D and scrapping that junk of controlled chaos.
Posted via VolNation Mobile

 

[Unimane]

Watch the 2007 game and this year's game. Because Pearl scrapped the press and focused more on halfcourt D we were able to stop Turner those last two possessions while Conley ate us up late. Pearl didn't focus on halfcourt D (or demand it, or whatever) because he had the press and assumed that would be fine. Now? We don't need to press, unless they are the Austin Peay's of the world and you want to end the game. Why press when you don't need to? We now have the length and athleticism that we don't need to press.

I understand that you want the emphasis on the half court defense and an end to the style Pearl's played for his whole coaching career, but I'm pointing out that the supposed evidence supporting this position is a mirage. I very clearly remember that game against OSU and it doesn't support yur position.

The Austin Peay's and UNCA's of the world don't press, I have no idea where you get this concept. In fact, weaker teams do the opposite. They pack it in and try to limit possessions. What inferior teams do you know run a "controlled chaos"? I remember ETSU running something similar, but with a lot of success. Superior teams play agressive defense and extend that defense, generating turnovers and a higher number of possessions. That's what I want from UT in the future.

And, actually, the "chaos" part of Pearl's style typically hasn't been on defense, anyway. As I said perviously, the press is often designed to drop off after the first pass. The real freedom came on offense, where we would shoot 25-30 threes a game.