Georgetown vs. #19 Oregon

[Bluejay]

I too was disappointed in the Georgetown loss. Oregon was down its starting PG and a couple other major contributors. Oregon's coach, Altman, was Creighton's former HC and many of us are familiar with his ultra conservative style of play. Because the game was on a neutral court and because of Oregon's injuries, I expected Georgetown to win.

I wasn't surprised at all with St John's loss. I didn't see the game, but suspect if was almost a home game for Wisconsin. On top of that, Wisky's style is probably the absolute worst type of match-up for St Johns.

I'm gald Providence won, but I think many are overrating BC. I will be shocked if they end up in the tourney and feel they will be quite mediocre. The rivalry aspect is what made this compelling IMO.

[Bill Marsh]

I wasn't surprised at all with St John's loss. I didn't see the game, but suspect if was almost a home game for Wisconsin. On top of that, Wisky's style is probably the absolute worst type of match-up for St Johns.

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

[Wizard of Westroads]

I wasn't surprised at all with St John's loss. I didn't see the game, but suspect if was almost a home game for Wisconsin. On top of that, Wisky's style is probably the absolute worst type of match-up for St Johns.

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

Beating a dead horse here, but that's what Wisconsin does to teams. I get that St. Johns played poorly, but Wisky frustrates teams. They don't let you run, they squeeze the ball for 30 seconds, then shoot a 3. If it goes in, the opponents' shoulders drop. The talent thing shows up on them by the end of the season, but early on, they're tough. Pomeroy has them 16th, about where they are every season.

[Bill Marsh]

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

Beating a dead horse here, but that's what Wisconsin does to teams. I get that St. Johns played poorly, but Wisky frustrates teams. They don't let you run, they squeeze the ball for 30 seconds, then shoot a 3. If it goes in, the opponents' shoulders drop. The talent thing shows up on them by the end of the season, but early on, they're tough. Pomeroy has them 16th, about where they are every season.

If St. John's got frustrated, then that's on them. It's a sign of immaturity. Wisconsin took the early lead. That's not a factor of style of play and they're not the only team that's going to get out in front early on St. John's or anyone else. A mature team takes that in stride and battles back - which St. John's actually did. But when Wisconsin pulled away again in the 2nd half, St. John's had no answer. I hope that it's growing pains, so I don't want to judge the season on that, but it's not a good sign.

Wisconsin also isn't the only team that's going to slow down the pace of the game. If St. John's can't handle that against Wisconsin, what are they going to do against Georgetown? Allow themselves to be back doored to death?

And slumping the shoulders when Wisconsin hits their 3's? Sure, but why in the world did they let them hit almost half of their 3's? Is it a secret in Jamaica that Wisconsin is going to hoist up a lot of 3's? They should have been all over those guys on the 3-point line and forced them to take the ball inside where St. John's had the advantage. But they didn't, which probably means that they didn't play the passing lanes very well and allowed Wisconsin to go inside out.

St. John's had a field day with offensive rebounds in that game. They should have shot a higher percentage with the way they controlled the inside. The Wisconsin defense is murder at the 3-point line, but it's nothing special inside of that. St. John's had the edge on speed, so they should shave gotten out on fast breaks. They had the edge inside, so they should have pounded the ball down low.

Lavin better use this as an opportunity to make his team better. and the players better respond.

[Bluejay]

I wasn't surprised at all with St John's loss. I didn't see the game, but suspect if was almost a home game for Wisconsin. On top of that, Wisky's style is probably the absolute worst type of match-up for St Johns.

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

I'm not arguing with you, but Wisconsin is just different. They grind the crap out of teams. They require opponents to play with extreme patience and a high level of hoops IQ. It wears out teams mentally to guard for 30+ seconds of every possessions and is demoralizing when you think you've done it, only to have the opponent drop a trey with 2 seconds on the shot clock. On the other side of the floor, they play superb defense which adds to the mental anguish of the opponent who often can't get into their "stuff".

It always seems to me that teams that rely the most on athleticism struggle against Wisconsin the most. You have to be mentally strong and have tremendous basketball IQ to beat Wisconsin. Its just a different type of basketball that can be really hard to watch at times.

[Bill Marsh]

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

I'm not arguing with you, but Wisconsin is just different. They grind the crap out of teams. They require opponents to play with extreme patience and a high level of hoops IQ. It wears out teams mentally to guard for 30+ seconds of every possessions and is demoralizing when you think you've done it, only to have the opponent drop a trey with 2 seconds on the shot clock. On the other side of the floor, they play superb defense which adds to the mental anguish of the opponent who often can't get into their "stuff".

It always seems to me that teams that rely the most on athleticism struggle against Wisconsin the most. You have to be mentally strong and have tremendous basketball IQ to beat Wisconsin. Its just a different type of basketball that can be really hard to watch at times.

If you're saying that St. John's demonstrated on Friday that at this point in the season they are not mentally strong and that they do not have a high basketball IQ, I can buy into that. I'm extremely disappointed in them because I thought they would be better than that at this stage with a number of Wisconsin players still learning new roles and still trying to figure out how to implement the system that allows Wisconsin teams to do what it is that they do.

[billyjack]

IMO you're overrating Wisconsin. "Style of play" is one thing, but a team still has to have the talent to make their style of play effective against another opponent. The talent differential and the return of all St. John's players from last year' steam made this a game St. John's. Should have been able to win. The court never should have been a factor. It was not a home game for Wisconsin. Sioux Falls is more than 400 miles and 6-7 hours away from Madison and it's not like it's a metropolis loaded with Wisconsin alums.

St. John's lost the game because they didn't defend the 3 and because they couldn't make one to save their lives, Style of play tells us that Wisconsin is going to take a lot of 3's, but it doesn't tell us they're going to make 48% of them as they did in this game. That tells us that St. John's didn't defend. The same style of play resulted is Wiscy making 33% of their 3's last year, but they can do a lot better when they're left wide open. To make matters worse, St. John's shot only 15% of their own 3-point attempts.

I'm not arguing with you, but Wisconsin is just different. They grind the crap out of teams. They require opponents to play with extreme patience and a high level of hoops IQ. It wears out teams mentally to guard for 30+ seconds of every possessions and is demoralizing when you think you've done it, only to have the opponent drop a trey with 2 seconds on the shot clock. On the other side of the floor, they play superb defense which adds to the mental anguish of the opponent who often can't get into their "stuff".

It always seems to me that teams that rely the most on athleticism struggle against Wisconsin the most. You have to be mentally strong and have tremendous basketball IQ to beat Wisconsin. Its just a different type of basketball that can be really hard to watch at times.

If you're saying that St. John's demonstrated on Friday that at this point in the season they are not mentally strong and that they do not have a high basketball IQ, I can buy into that. I'm extremely disappointed in them because I thought they would be better than that at this stage with a number of Wisconsin players still learning new roles and still trying to figure out how to implement the system that allows Wisconsin teams to do what it is that they do.

I agree with Bill M in this thread and think of things in this way:
---> I think every game is winnable for the Big East, except realistically vs Top 10 teams, where a win is possible but a little less likely...
---> so, in my opinion, and for reasons that Bill mentioned above, there's really no reason St John's should have lost to Wisconsin... or GU should've lost to Oregon... those 2 games aren't "disaster" losses, but they ARE missed opportunities... they could have been "statement wins"... now tonight, I have every reason to be confident in a Xavier win vs Tennessee in another solid potential "statement win"...

[stever20]

I agree with Bill M in this thread and think of things in this way:
---> I think every game is winnable for the Big East, except realistically vs Top 10 teams, where a win is possible but a little less likely...
---> so, in my opinion, and for reasons that Bill mentioned above, there's really no reason St John's should have lost to Wisconsin... or GU should've lost to Oregon... those 2 games aren't "disaster" losses, but they ARE missed opportunities... they could have been "statement wins"... now tonight, I have every reason to be confident in a Xavier win vs Tennessee in another solid potential "statement win"...

Think this is a great way of phrasing things.

ONly thing i disagree with is i don't know how much folks view Tennessee as being a really good team like Oregon, or even much moreso Wisconsin. One reason I don't is well Tennessee doesn't have that little number to the left of their name currently, while Wisconsin/Oregon both did. So, don't think it makes quite the same statement as us beating Wisconsin or Oregon would have.

[TheHall]

I agree with Bill M in this thread and think of things in this way:
---> I think every game is winnable for the Big East, except realistically vs Top 10 teams, where a win is possible but a little less likely...
---> so, in my opinion, and for reasons that Bill mentioned above, there's really no reason St John's should have lost to Wisconsin... or GU should've lost to Oregon... those 2 games aren't "disaster" losses, but they ARE missed opportunities... they could have been "statement wins"... now tonight, I have every reason to be confident in a Xavier win vs Tennessee in another solid potential "statement win"...

The fact that SJU's biggest newcomer is a freshman pg led me to not expect a SJU win. Integrating a pg into a team that desperately needs a pg doesn't happen normally in nov. In the BE maybe only CU has a team that pretty much has a team that has been there & done that. Most of the rest of us are figuring things out to meet new higher expectations. Even Marq, the consensus top prog is trying to figure out how many superstars do they have. They have some good candidates but all unproven in that role. Just like last season after Crowder & DJO graduated. It took awhile but vb surprisingly became that star that buzz always has. By the end of the season quette was rolling. Focus so much on winning or losing misses the point that the early part of the season for teams like SJU is about making progress as a team and finding out some things about your players with an eye on being great by conference play.

Similar story with the hoyas. Last time I checked nobody is down on the hoyas except here (even if only slightly). The hoyas are still receiving votes & they're 0-1. Missing the opportunity to get a statement win doesn't automatically equal bad loss. If the hoyas had lost by the same amount but with no Joshua Smith explosion I might have considered that a bad loss. Everyone wants to win, but if a game is winnable that also means it's losable, not a lock. I don't think anyone here was calling the games against higher ranked Oregon a lock for the hoyas or Wisc vs SJU.

[stever20]

where i think the loss for Georgetown hurts is with the rest of the OOC schedule- games @ Kansas and Michigan St @ MSG- 2 games not sure you can count on to win. Outside of that, the only other place to get a good OOC win is Puerto Rico.