Montana

[jncuse]

Montana? No they are in the Big Sky

I posted about the SWAC not having to do a play in game yesterday in the wrong thread (it was in the Montana thread) instead of the Bracket comment thread) I got hammered on their board for saying Montana was in the SWAC.

So now Montana is in whatever conference I feel like. I believe they may soon get into the America 16.

 

[Cuse_1999]

Asheville was under seeded last year. Montana is over seeded this year. Asheville is the better team. Asheville played UNC, NC State and UCONN last year and lost all 3 games by single digits. No surprise that they came within 8 points of beating us.

Montana has not even played a game against a BCS conference team. Does that mean we will automatically win? No, but Asheville is the better team

 

[Marsh01]

Asheville was under seeded last year. Montana is over seeded this year. Asheville is the better team. Asheville played UNC, NC State and UCONN last year and lost all 3 games by single digits. No surprise that they came within 8 points of beating us.

Montana has not even played a game against a BCS conference team. Does that mean we will automatically win? No, but Asheville is the better team

Asheville last year is certainly better than this Montana team with their leading scorer out. No doubt. Asheville was at no worse a 15 seed last season and Montana is to me a 15 seed this year given the injury. Big difference is that Asheville had a big man who could score inside last year to complement their shooters. Montana doesnt have that now.

 

[OttoMets]

Waiters was good, but don't tell me Scoop was better than MCW or even Triche. We didn't have two better drivers together on the floor than this season.

Kris Joseph had his moments, but he was weak when faced with any resistance. He was great on the open floor, but in the half court, he could not drive up against other bigs.

I will give you Dion, but that's not the two headed monster. Even Dion would screw up a few open layups, like the ones that cost us a Final Four last season.

No on all counts.

Joseph's senior year disappointed some of us, but he was exponentially better at driving than any of our forwards. He'd drive, charge, turn the ball over, and miss circus shots. Maybe he only scored a third of the time on drives. But that's a lot more than South and Fair do.

Dion booted an important layup in the first half against Ohio State. I remember that only because it was such a rare occurrence.

Scoop was darn near automatic driving to the hoop. He's one of the most reliable finishers Boeheim has had. Not better than Mike? That's one of the craziest things ever written around these parts and the numbers (temporarily putting aside what we've all watched for the past few years) say otherwise. Mike shoots 38% from the field in large part because he can't make open-court layups, runners, and floaters. He's probably shooting 25 or 30% around the hoop this year; it's one of the most remarkable parts of his game.

We're so much worse driving to the hoop this year; it's been a factor in most of our losses. SWC's recaps note the two-point field goal percentage and it's frequently been woeful.

 

[JoeSU]

Asheville last year is certainly better than this Montana team with their leading scorer out. No doubt. Asheville was at no worse a 15 seed last season and Montana is to me a 15 seed this year given the injury. Big difference is that Asheville had a big man who could score inside last year to complement their shooters. Montana doesnt have that now.

I would also add that having a big man who can shoot from the elbow or top of the key causes problems when our zone has to extend to guard the opposing team's outside shooters (as we saw against Louisville).

 

[jncuse]

As posted on the Montana message board.

meantime, there has never been a question EVER but what a move up wouldn't have have been better for the basketball program. why? we have a BIG RECRUIT in the wings, one highly touted by his sisters, and no question our case would be better if we played better competition in real arenas, not sac state and portland state in ymca gyms.

That has to got to be worth 4* in itself.

 

[Marsh01]

I would also add that having a big man who can shoot from the elbow or top of the key causes problems when our zone has to extend to guard the opposing team's outside shooters (as we saw against Louisville).

Very true and a good point. This team doesnt have that now.

 

[Upstate]

If they keep it within 20, I hear they may be Big East-bound

 

[Rocco]

They will be lost once they play a team with our athleticism in the 2-3 zone. Give the 13.5.

 

[dollarbill44]

Even with JS getting hot, 2 of the 3 BET wins were only by 3 and one was in OT.

Lol. If we were playing in the Big Sky tourney, I would be concerned. You kind of gloss over who the wins came against. Any margin against those two teams in back to back days is good.

 

[DoctorBombay]

Why are these huge threads not multiple pages lately?

IMHO, some of the "debate" is not of the same quality of seasons past...and I hope that doesn't sound like too much "in my day..." Grumpy-Old-Man talk to some.
We're reduced to complaining extensively about refs and ruminating on conspiracy theories about the OBE.
Also, the overall arrogance towards an opponent is a bit distasteful.
Personally, I read alot more than I post nowadays- & to each his own.
Btw- thats a PERSONAL observation related directly to your question...nothing more, nothing less.

 

[shandeezy7]

IMHO, some of the "debate" is not of the same quality of seasons past...and I hope that doesn't sound like too much "in my day..." Grumpy-Old-Man talk to some.
We're reduced to complaining extensively about refs and ruminating on conspiracy theories about the OBE.
Also, the overall arrogance towards an opponent is a bit distasteful.
Personally, I read alot more than I post nowadays- & to each his own.
Btw- thats a PERSONAL observation related directly to your question...nothing more, nothing less.

There are now 60 posts per page instead of the 15 or 20 per page in the previous setup. Has nothing to do with the "quality" of posting.

 

[Texas Otto]

Im fairly certain they play in the Big West.

Well they really should've removed those Big Sky logos from the court then in the game I was watching :crazy:

 

[mslamariner]

Hey Guys, basketball fan from Montana here. I have to admit, while I would love to see us pull of the David vs Goliath, I just don't think it will happen. Here's a few thoughts:

- You guys are known for your solid, long 2/3 zone, and even though we shoot the three well, we don't shoot it consistently well enough to "shoot you out" of your zone.

- The only way we keep the game close is by driving to the bucket, and converting free-throws - Even then, it may not be all that close. We tried to do that against Wisconsin last year, and went stone cold from the outside, and couldn't convert when driving to the bucket - the Big Sky is way more whistle happy down low on any kind of contact, and we got our butts handed to us by expecting contact/whistle, then no whistle.

- We don't really have much of a low post game - we have a junior 6-9 guy who is okay...but not solid, and a 7-0 true freshman, who just doesn't have the weight/body type to compete down low yet.

- I know many are surprised that we are a 13 seed, but I'm not too surprised. The only conference game we lost was to Weber State, who is probably the better all around team in our conference. The NCAA tends to reward the small-midmajors that have "become regulars" in the tourney, as well as "showing well" in the tourney. Had say some other team in the Big Sky won besides us or Weber, they'd probably be looking at a 15/16 seed or even a play in. In 2005 when we beat Nevada, we got a 12 seed - coming off the heels of the previous year being a 15 or 16(?) seed and losing to Washington by 10/12 points, and during the regular season, we beat Colorado State, Stanford (who was #17 at the time), and I think a team somewhere in the #25-30 range...I don't really remember though.

- I believe you guys will pull away and end up winning by 15 or so. That being said, I do expect us to keep it "close" until then, but probably the closest we'll end up being to you through the game is between 5/8 points. I say that because our recent tourney history we've stayed close, with the exception being Wisconsin (who played way better than us, but also got crazy hot from 3 land):
--- 2005: 88-77 loss to Washington
--- 2006: 87-79 WIN vs Nevada, 69-56 loss vs Boston College
--- 2010: 62-57 loss to New Mexico - note that we were down by 17 at the start of the 2nd half
--- 2012: 73-49 loss to Wisconsin

-So, sorry for the long winded post. That's what I've got, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask!

Go Griz!

 

[netman99]

We've never played them before. We did play Montana State in '96 and beat them 88-55.

Seth Davis just predicted we go down in the first round.

I watched the whole weber st/ Montana finals and I cannot see SU losing to Montana... They are a much better free throw shooting team however

 

[mantonio]

No on all counts.

Joseph's senior year disappointed some of us, but he was exponentially better at driving than any of our forwards. He'd drive, charge, turn the ball over, and miss circus shots. Maybe he only scored a third of the time on drives. But that's a lot more than South and Fair do.

Dion booted an important layup in the first half against Ohio State. I remember that only because it was such a rare occurrence.

Scoop was darn near automatic driving to the hoop. He's one of the most reliable finishers Boeheim has had. Not better than Mike? That's one of the craziest things ever written around these parts and the numbers (temporarily putting aside what we've all watched for the past few years) say otherwise. Mike shoots 38% from the field in large part because he can't make open-court layups, runners, and floaters. He's probably shooting 25 or 30% around the hoop this year; it's one of the most remarkable parts of his game.

We're so much worse driving to the hoop this year; it's been a factor in most of our losses. SWC's recaps note the two-point field goal percentage and it's frequently been woeful.

Scoop was a good driver, but MCW is faster & longer, which gives him the advantage. We didn't have great games for penetration because our shots weren't falling & the defenses would pack it in.

If we shot even a decent percentage, you notice our guards had their way with the defense in the lane.

 

[RF2044]

Hey Guys, basketball fan from Montana here. I have to admit, while I would love to see us pull of the David vs Goliath, I just don't think it will happen. Here's a few thoughts:

- You guys are known for your solid, long 2/3 zone, and even though we shoot the three well, we don't shoot it consistently well enough to "shoot you out" of your zone.

- The only way we keep the game close is by driving to the bucket, and converting free-throws - Even then, it may not be all that close. We tried to do that against Wisconsin last year, and went stone cold from the outside, and couldn't convert when driving to the bucket - the Big Sky is way more whistle happy down low on any kind of contact, and we got our butts handed to us by expecting contact/whistle, then no whistle.

- We don't really have much of a low post game - we have a junior 6-9 guy who is okay...but not solid, and a 7-0 true freshman, who just doesn't have the weight/body type to compete down low yet.

- I know many are surprised that we are a 13 seed, but I'm not too surprised. The only conference game we lost was to Weber State, who is probably the better all around team in our conference. The NCAA tends to reward the small-midmajors that have "become regulars" in the tourney, as well as "showing well" in the tourney. Had say some other team in the Big Sky won besides us or Weber, they'd probably be looking at a 15/16 seed or even a play in. In 2005 when we beat Nevada, we got a 12 seed - coming off the heels of the previous year being a 15 or 16(?) seed and losing to Washington by 10/12 points, and during the regular season, we beat Colorado State, Stanford (who was #17 at the time), and I think a team somewhere in the #25-30 range...I don't really remember though.

- I believe you guys will pull away and end up winning by 15 or so. That being said, I do expect us to keep it "close" until then, but probably the closest we'll end up being to you through the game is between 5/8 points. I say that because our recent tourney history we've stayed close, with the exception being Wisconsin (who played way better than us, but also got crazy hot from 3 land):
--- 2005: 88-77 loss to Washington
--- 2006: 87-79 WIN vs Nevada, 69-56 loss vs Boston College
--- 2010: 62-57 loss to New Mexico - note that we were down by 17 at the start of the 2nd half
--- 2012: 73-49 loss to Wisconsin

-So, sorry for the long winded post. That's what I've got, and if you have any questions, feel free to ask!

Go Griz!

Appreciate the "inside" perspective on your team--thanks for posting!

Hope that you are right--would like to see us take care of business in the first round, but Cherry and your point forward [name escapes me right now--apologies] both look like great players. I expect this to be a competitive game, but hopefully our guys are ready to play and keep you from going wild from three. If so, I like our chances to get out of there with a 12-15 point victory. But if we don't come out sharp, this could be an uncomfortably tight game with your three point shooting prowess.

Again, appreciate you providing us with a tactical outlook on what to expect.

 

[Knicks411]

Joseph's senior year disappointed some of us, but he was exponentially better at driving than any of our forwards. He'd drive, charge, turn the ball over, and miss circus shots. Maybe he only scored a third of the time on drives. But that's a lot more than South and Fair do.

Well, for Southerland, I think his percentage of scoring on drives is 0/0

 

[OttoMets]

Scoop was a good driver, but MCW is faster & longer, which gives him the advantage. We didn't have great games for penetration because our shots weren't falling & the defenses would pack it in.

If we shot even a decent percentage, you notice our guards had their way with the defense in the lane.

Being faster and longer could be an advantage, but having an advantage doesn't mean as much if you don't make the shots. Mike doesn't.

And I don't think he's faster. He couldn't get around Luke Hancock on Saturday.

 

[OttoMets]

Well, for Southerland, I think his percentage of scoring on drives is 0/0

Maybe closer to 1/4, and that came in an early-season game.

But your point stands.

 

[pearl31]

Go Griz!

Welcome to the board, and thanks for the info.

 

[Knicks411]

And I don't think he's faster. He couldn't get around Luke Hancock on Saturday.

Btw, I have to bring this up. I was at the game Saturday, and we had tv monitors right near the seats, and we were watching the closed circuit feed as well as the game. Anyway, at half time, they showed the leading scorers, and for Lville, they listed a "Luke Handcock". I died.

 

[jncuse]

Hey Guys, basketball fan from Montana here. I have to admit, while I would love to see us pull of the David vs Goliath, I just don't think it will happen. Here's a few thoughts:

Go Griz!

Appreciate the perspective and information on your team,

 

[mslamariner]

Appreciate the "inside" perspective on your team--thanks for posting!

Hope that you are right--would like to see us take care of business in the first round, but Cherry and your point forward [name escapes me right now--apologies] both look like great players. I expect this to be a competitive game, but hopefully our guys are ready to play and keep you from going wild from three. If so, I like our chances to get out of there with a 12-15 point victory. But if we don't come out sharp, this could be an uncomfortably tight game with your three point shooting prowess.

Again, appreciate you providing us with a tactical outlook on what to expect.

No problem. Kareem Jamar is who you're thinking of. If we get hot from three and are able to keep it close, it could be very, very interesting.

Offensively, Cherry and Jamar make us "go." Cherry is an excellent slasher, with the able to knock down outside shots occasionally, but he's at his best driving, dishing, and getting to the line.

Jamar does pretty well in the block when matched up with a smaller player -- there's really no words to describe his game other than "all around." Somehow he just makes it work. He doesn't seem all that fast, but is more "sneaky" fast and athletic than he appears.

Weisner is a 6-6 wing player who is our most dangerous threat and most consistent shooter from 3. He'll need to have a big game is we have any inkling of an upset.

Coleman is 6-6 and has a nice mid-range game, can rebound okay, and can shoot from 3 occasionally. I like to think of him as a skinnier, taller version of Jamar, but not as talented.

Jordan Gregory is a 6-2 guard and is probably our second most consistent 3 ball threat. He's one of those players that hustles his butt off every play and just has a good feel for the game, and while not nearly as gifted athletically as Cherry is, he is probably our second best defender, and what he lacks in athleticism, he makes up for with good, smart positioning.

In order for us to pull off a win, I say 3/5 players of ours I listed above need to have monster games.

 

[mantonio]

Being faster and longer could be an advantage, but having an advantage doesn't mean as much if you don't make the shots. Mike doesn't.

And I don't think he's faster. He couldn't get around Luke Hancock on Saturday.

He couldn't get around Hancock because Hancock was grabbing, checking, & holding him, without whistles. You put MCW in a fair situation, & he blows by Hancock, & virtually everyone else.

It's misleading when you see him play. People who are longer appear to be slower than the little guys, but the longer guy covers more area in a shorter time frame, which means the smaller player might have to take two steps to the bigger guy's one step to cover the same distance. This creates the illusion that the smaller guy is faster because he's moving his legs & arms more quickly.