bbfan
Freshman
Posts: 204
|
Post by bbfan on Nov 6, 2017 9:25:22 GMT -8
Wyoming is at Top 100 team but should be a W if the Beavs have postseason hopes this year
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Nov 6, 2017 10:02:20 GMT -8
This game will definitely be a good test for the Beavers. Wyoming won the CBI last year and have most of their team back -- losing third leading scorer and one other rotation player who was starting at end of the season. They take a lot of 3s (guy they lost was their leading 3-pt scorer), which after reading the Pacific thread could be some problems for Beavers. Cowboys seem to have a lot of seniors and have length (top 3 returning scorers are listed at 6-7, 6-8, and 6-9). Certainly isn't going to be an easy game.
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Nov 7, 2017 10:57:26 GMT -8
Implicit in this thread (and the topic title) is an assumption that the "first test of the season" will come next Monday. Note that we have a game on Friday. Given that (and the Pacific game), I beg to differ - given our record last season, the first test of the season will come this Friday, with Southern Utah. Right now, and until proven otherwise, Ws are a rare commodity for MBB.
I do agree Wyoming will likely present a stiff challenge, and more of one than SUU, but given what I saw last season, the SUU game isn't in the bag yet either.
Go Beavers!
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 7, 2017 11:22:32 GMT -8
A loss to Wyoming wouldn't mean the season is lost. They ARE experienced, while we're trying to re-integrate Tres Tinkle and train some freshmen. Kone is also out, and he could be a difference maker if he can come back healthy. However, a WIN vs Wyoming could mean good things are coming.
|
|
|
Post by baseba1111 on Nov 7, 2017 11:51:45 GMT -8
A win vs Wyoming is... just a non-conference win. It means nothing more or nothing less. It's early, we have tons of new people to integrate and the coaches have not even come close to seeing who can do what and set a rotation. More experienced teams will give us trouble... as we are still scratching the surface of what we actually have. Kone' is a complete unknown and should not have played last year... in a normal situation at least. But, he is certainly not a "game changer" for us. At this point he is more depth... if he can ever get healthy. Otherwise he is a (very) poor man's Brian Jackson.
This team HAS to play better D to have a prayer of a top 5 Pac12 finish. Offensively I hate our lack of movement, ball skills, and tendency to break down and go iso. As I said, it is early, but we have a long ways to go on both ends of the court AND the bench before we can even be a threat to the upper 5-6 Pac12 teams.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Nov 7, 2017 14:04:59 GMT -8
Implicit in this thread (and the topic title) is an assumption that the "first test of the season" will come next Monday. Note that we have a game on Friday. Given that (and the Pacific game), I beg to differ - given our record last season, the first test of the season will come this Friday, with Southern Utah. Right now, and until proven otherwise, Ws are a rare commodity for MBB. I do agree Wyoming will likely present a stiff challenge, and more of one than SUU, but given what I saw last season, the SUU game isn't in the bag yet either. Go Beavers! Well no game is in the bag, but I refuse to think of last year as "the norm." We might not see the improvement we'd all like to see, but if we can't beat a S. Utah team that went 6-27 last year and lost its best player by far (23.6 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1.5 spg -- all of which led the team) as well as 2 other starters then we be in trouble.
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Nov 7, 2017 14:22:30 GMT -8
Implicit in this thread (and the topic title) is an assumption that the "first test of the season" will come next Monday. Note that we have a game on Friday. Given that (and the Pacific game), I beg to differ - given our record last season, the first test of the season will come this Friday, with Southern Utah. Right now, and until proven otherwise, Ws are a rare commodity for MBB. I do agree Wyoming will likely present a stiff challenge, and more of one than SUU, but given what I saw last season, the SUU game isn't in the bag yet either. Go Beavers! Well no game is in the bag, but I refuse to think of last year as "the norm." We might not see the improvement we'd all like to see, but if we can't beat a S. Utah team that went 6-27 last year and lost its best player by far (23.6 ppg, 6.6 rpg, 3.2 apg, 1.5 spg -- all of which led the team) as well as 2 other starters then we be in trouble. No argument there, beaverinohio, my point was (especially for game 1, exhibition notwithstandiing), the fact that we have added a bunch of new players to the team does not necessarily mean that we have collectively improved as a team. Now just the re-integration of Tres should lead to a W Friday, but even that process of digesting Tres' return may take a while. So any game until we have things a bit better "figured out" (than, say, we had figured out in the Pacific exhibition) should be considered a challenge. Especially since (norm or not) the "last known good" for the Beavers was all of 5 wins, with losses to teams that you and I would traditionally file under the same category as SUU...... Note that I am hoping for at least an NIT berth this season with the talent we have on paper, but I haven't seen the same intensity, focus and discipline from early WT years yet for this team (and definitely not last year's).......I am hoping we start seeing it Friday in an SUU pummeling. But as they say, hope is not a strategy and change is not a destination..... Go Beavers!
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Nov 7, 2017 15:22:46 GMT -8
As I have watched the Beavers since Tinkle started coaching them there are two things that are very disturbing to me in terms of likely success this year for the Beavers:
(1) In the first year of coaching the team, the team defense (both effort and execution) were outstanding. The team offense while severely limited by a lack of talent was disciplined, with good passing, player movement, and effort.
(2)Since the end of the second year, team defense in my opinion has virtually disappeared. On offense, good passing, moving without the ball, court balance are seldom seen.
(3) The team seems to play the way you would imagine an AAU All Star team would play. It appears that every player thinks he is a possible NBA All Star and that on individual talent alone OSU can win games.
(4) Coach Tinkle seems to not be able to change (2) and (3). Not sure why, but the players most often seem to be doing what they want to do on offense and defense, not what he should be demanding they do.
As a fan I go way back to the Ralph Miller era. Fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. If a player (any player) no matter how talented did not play team basketball, he did not play.
|
|
|
Post by atownbeaver on Nov 7, 2017 15:55:38 GMT -8
As I have watched the Beavers since Tinkle started coaching them there are two things that are very disturbing to me in terms of likely success this year for the Beavers: (1) In the first year of coaching the team, the team defense (both effort and execution) were outstanding. The team offense while severely limited by a lack of talent was disciplined, with good passing, player movement, and effort. (2)Since the end of the second year, team defense in my opinion has virtually disappeared. On offense, good passing, moving without the ball, court balance are seldom seen. (3) The team seems to play the way you would imagine an AAU All Star team would play. It appears that every player thinks he is a possible NBA All Star and that on individual talent alone OSU can win games. (4) Coach Tinkle seems to not be able to change (2) and (3). Not sure why, but the players most often seem to be doing what they want to do on offense and defense, not what he should be demanding they do. As a fan I go way back to the Ralph Miller era. Fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. If a player (any player) no matter how talented did not play team basketball, he did not play. Year one and two had GPII... his presence on defense, and his leadership cannot be understated. He commanded your attention on the court. He didn't always yell the loudest, but he was ALWAYS in the huddle, and if you effed up, he was the first to send you a stare of death. Part of it was his actual skill, he was the most supremely athletic player we have had in a long time... Part was his pedigree. He is Gary Payton's kid, one of the greatest PGs in NBA history and one of the single greatest defenders in history as well. Year 3 lost a leader. Then next obvious leader is Tres... but there is an immediate problem there. It is just tough to be "the guy" when you are the coaches kid. It is harder for Tres to get his teammate's respect. He has to earn it moreso than any other player. I am not sure players naturally respond to him, like they would respond to another player. And of course, he got hurt a handful of games into the season... The same is partially true for the Thompsons as well. It means the natural leadership figure really should probably fall to Eubanks... AND, well, that is where we run into problems that you describe. I think to your point 4, Tinkle wanted to pull a Ralph Miller, but couldn't. He even went as far as to make post game statements to the effect of "my kids won't listen, and I don't have the depth to put anybody on the bench". As long as we are not snakebitten with injuries this year, Tinkle has the luxury to sit a player that doesn't want to fall in line.
|
|
|
Post by skyrider on Nov 7, 2017 16:08:06 GMT -8
Thank you for you well thought out response.
"my kids won't listen, and I don't have the depth to put anybody on the bench" seems to me to be the road to ruin.
However, I will try to keep an open mind and hope for the best.
Your insights on Gary Payton and Tres Tinkle were outstanding. Again, thank you!
|
|
2ndGenBeaver
Sophomore
Posts: 1,729
Grad Year: 1991 (MS/CS) 1999 (PhD/CS)
|
Post by 2ndGenBeaver on Nov 7, 2017 17:07:37 GMT -8
I too date back to the Ralph Miller era with Beaver basketball (and to Kelvin Sampson at my undergraduate institution prior to that), so I appreciate coaches with the "my way or the highway/pine" philosophy. I also appreciate disciplined, well-coached teams. Now add in some spectacular talent and you have the makings of something special. Talents such as Payton (either one) really puts a team over the top. But I never heard coach Miller offer up "my kids won't listen, and I don't have the depth to put anybody on the bench". Unfortunately, I am not sure, for whatever reason, that we have the same vocal, visible leadership at present that the other team members actually look up to.......whenever you start getting the "quiet, leads by example, doesn't say much, let's their actions do all the talking for them......" apologist talk, I start getting nervous. Consider me nervous, because you also seem to have the "I am soooo ready for the next level, this is my stepping stone" opinion that one could derive from the end of last year (more the talk that accompanied declaring for the draft, not just the act of declaring for the draft - which was understandable). The GPII years, this team was interesting to me. More recently, I must confess, if I am scratching my itch to watch a well-coached and executed basketball game, I start to consult the OSU WBB schedule. It isn't about the W-L aspect - I understand talent deficits affect that. It is the game that whatever team takes the court plays that was causing me pause, and the progression atownbeaver described is exactly what I saw as well. Hopefully this year the players that can't "get with the program" can polish the pine, and I can get back to seeing good basketball :-). And there is always this alternative, otherwise: Go Beavers!
|
|
|
Post by drunkandstoopidbeav on Nov 7, 2017 18:51:42 GMT -8
As I have watched the Beavers since Tinkle started coaching them there are two things that are very disturbing to me in terms of likely success this year for the Beavers: (1) In the first year of coaching the team, the team defense (both effort and execution) were outstanding. The team offense while severely limited by a lack of talent was disciplined, with good passing, player movement, and effort. (2)Since the end of the second year, team defense in my opinion has virtually disappeared. On offense, good passing, moving without the ball, court balance are seldom seen. (3) The team seems to play the way you would imagine an AAU All Star team would play. It appears that every player thinks he is a possible NBA All Star and that on individual talent alone OSU can win games. (4) Coach Tinkle seems to not be able to change (2) and (3). Not sure why, but the players most often seem to be doing what they want to do on offense and defense, not what he should be demanding they do. As a fan I go way back to the Ralph Miller era. Fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. If a player (any player) no matter how talented did not play team basketball, he did not play. The key phrase in this post is "Since the end of the second year". Well, last year was year three, so that's the one you are talking about, we only had 3 returing scholarship players come back (of which only 2 averaged 8 minutes or more of playing time the previous year) and play a full season. The Beavers were woefully shorthanded on returing talent Tinkle"s first two years and he made it work defensively. Last year they were even more woefully shorthanded on returning talent. This year is a wealth of riches in comparison to last, and an improvement over the first two years. I expect to see a big improvement. We now have the depth that a team should have (and frankly we're still a young team), and we can now see how Tinkle will handle it.
|
|
Deleted
Deleted Member
Posts: 0
|
Post by Deleted on Nov 8, 2017 7:06:57 GMT -8
As I have watched the Beavers since Tinkle started coaching them there are two things that are very disturbing to me in terms of likely success this year for the Beavers: (1) In the first year of coaching the team, the team defense (both effort and execution) were outstanding. The team offense while severely limited by a lack of talent was disciplined, with good passing, player movement, and effort. (2)Since the end of the second year, team defense in my opinion has virtually disappeared. On offense, good passing, moving without the ball, court balance are seldom seen. (3) The team seems to play the way you would imagine an AAU All Star team would play. It appears that every player thinks he is a possible NBA All Star and that on individual talent alone OSU can win games. (4) Coach Tinkle seems to not be able to change (2) and (3). Not sure why, but the players most often seem to be doing what they want to do on offense and defense, not what he should be demanding they do. As a fan I go way back to the Ralph Miller era. Fundamentals, fundamentals, fundamentals. If a player (any player) no matter how talented did not play team basketball, he did not play. great post. It is so clear to you and me. Why can't the coach see it? Even with improved talent beavs are still middle of the road to lower tier talent. That will not win games by itself. That's where coaching comes into play. That year was a defensive juggernaut. I watched much more talented teams come into Gill and lose their sh!t that year because they couldn't get a shot off. The defense was relentless. Was that all GPII?
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Nov 8, 2017 8:20:49 GMT -8
Nothing much that hasn't been said before, but I think last year was an anomaly. Young team, lack of depth made critical by injuries, and one of those injuries being Tres resulted in a team that had no leader and didn't have enough talent. Was effort lacking at points last season? Sure it was. Did we look like a cohesive team last year? No we didn't. But we have to remember we were a very inexperienced team without the talent to compete on many nights. On those nights we didn't have the luxury of a large portion of our roster knowing the system and having gone through the trials and tribulations of a college basketball season. So, yes, we saw too much iso and players trying to do too much as individuals, and then hanging their heads as the losses mounted. They didn't play as a team because they had never established themselves as a team and didn't know how to play as one together. Does some of that fall on Tinkle? Sure it does. But I think it was more a matter of a young, leadership-less team just never being able to get their head above water let alone on solid ground. I felt Tres would be the leader last year but that ended with his injury. But I think we'll see that come to fruition this year. I don't buy the "it is difficult for the coach's kid to be a leader" argument. Doug McDermott and R.J. Hunter had no problem being leaders in college. Tres's work ethic, being the best player on the team, and having to sit through last year's debacle will have him taking the mantle of leader. ST Jr. will step up some. I think Jaquori with a year of experience will start showing a bit more on court leadership. And hopefully one of the things Drew heard during his pro assessment process was that he needs to at least go hard all the time and lead by example. Then you have Berger, who has been through the wars, and Ethan, who seems to have some leadership skills of his own.
My introduction to OSU b-ball was also when Ralph Miller was coach. In high school our basketball coach was very similar to Miller. It wasn't until I went to OSU and was reading about Miller in the media guide that I realized that the reason in hindsight that my high school coach reminded me of Miller is because he actually played for Miller at Wichita St. So lack of team play and fundamentals kills me too, but unfortunately the game and players have changed. I think it is easier for the players to tune out a coach because they've been able to do it all along because of lack of repercussions. That's why the best coaches aren't just great X and Os guys or disciplinarians, they are able to create an atmosphere where players can form the bonds needed to be a team. When that happens a player can't tune out a coach because the leaders on the team set him straight. I think Tinkle was able to do all that before and, like I said, last year was an anomaly. Damn I'm excited for the season to start. Guess I'm staying up late this Friday night.
|
|
|
Post by beaverinohio on Nov 13, 2017 8:38:38 GMT -8
Very much looking forward to tonight's game (I do love that my cable package has Pac 12-OR). I thought overall the Beavs looked OK on Friday night. Tres is obviously the stud who makes the train go, but Ethan looked great too. He led or tied for the team lead in rebounds, assists, steals and blocks while scoring 20 and having no turnovers. I would have liked to have seen him get a few less minutes -- 38 seems like too many in a 17-pt win. I also though McLaughlin looked a more confident out there. Hollins and Manuel both showed some good things off the bench. I hope Berger's performance was just about being too amped up in his first game with Beavs. If not, we need Kone back healthy by conference time because I can't see Berger helping much at all.
Not sure what to make of Wyoming's first game. They beat Chattanooga at home, but only by 9. Chattanooga is usually a pretty decent team (19-12 last year), but they did lose their top 5 scorers from last year's team, basically only went seven deep, and three of those players were freshmen. Wyoming's top scorer from last year is battling an ankle injury and only played 13 minutes in the opener. Hayden Dalton led the team with 30 pts (on 5 for 9 shooting from 3-pt land) and 13 rebs. Not going to be an easy game, but I'm optimistic. One thing I'll be watching is the play of Ethan. Freshmen can be up and down, so not expecting him to stuff the box score like he did on Friday. But if he can show some consistency that could bode well for the season.
|
|