Beech @ Lipscomb

[catsbball1]

Wilson Central[/url] Dogg' date='Jan 23 2005 - 02:36 PM']I can't feel bad for teams that are down by 30 with 2 minutes left in the game and theyre still calling timeouts as if they were only down by 4.

 

Besides, why doesnt that team thats losing just "hold the ball?"

825532858[/snapback]

because then it would be a "boring game" as you said earilier and I thought you hated boring games and didn't want to pay money to see them?

[Wilson Central Dogg]

because then it would be a "boring game" as you said earilier and I thought you hated boring games and didn't want to pay money to see them?

825533059[/snapback]

 

A game is boring when its 60-20. And if you think such a game is exciting then you need to get a life.

 

Besides, your the one implementing the double standard here. You agree with the mercy clock but think stalling is good. If stalling is good to keep game close, then maybe the teams losing by 40 would be smart to stall after theyre down by 40?

 

Or at least not call timeouts. Of course, the losers obviously don't and make it look worse on themselves, and then people go WAHHH score run up!

[catsbball1]

Wilson Central[/url] Dogg' date='Jan 24 2005 - 12:22 AM']A game is boring when its 60-20.  And if you think such a game is exciting then you need to get a life.

 

Besides, your the one implementing the double standard here.  You agree with the mercy clock but think stalling is good.  If stalling is good to keep game close, then maybe the teams losing by 40 would be smart to stall after theyre down by 40?  

 

Or at least not call timeouts.  Of course, the losers obviously don't and make it look worse on themselves, and then people go WAHHH score run up!

825533930[/snapback]

I never said anything about the mercy clock. All I was saying was you have been talking about how bad of an idea holding the ball is even if that's the only way you can win, and then you said if you are losing real bad, it's a good idea to hold the ball.

 

I also said that the defense is what controlled this game and most games, not holding the ball. Holding the ball was DL's answer to Beech's 1-3-1 zone. Beech knew if they came out of the zone, they probably would have lost because they don't run much man, and DL knew if they played zone offense, they probably would have lost because they are good at motion/man offense and they don't run much zone offense. thumb

[Wilson Central Dogg]

I never said anything about the mercy clock.  All I was saying was you have been talking about how bad of an idea holding the ball is even if that's the only way you can win, and then you said if you are losing real bad, it's a good idea to hold the ball. 

 

I also said that the defense is what controlled this game and most games, not holding the ball.  Holding the ball was DL's answer to Beech's 1-3-1 zone.  Beech knew if they came out of the zone, they probably would have lost because they don't run much man, and DL knew if they played zone offense, they probably would have lost because they are good at motion/man offense and they don't run much zone offense. thumb

825534974[/snapback]

 

Your 1st paragraph makes no sense. It's 2 single thoughts in itself. What does "holding the ball when your down by 40 if you dont want score run up" have to do with "holding ball to win games?" Sorry I think its very corny and cheesy but technically you are allowed to do it so I guess there is not much one can say.

 

However, being allowed to do it, if a team wins 100-10, its the team with 100 that is criticized. By the logic of being able to "hold the ball," I would put the blame on the team that scores 10. They don't want to hold the ball? Then the team with 100 should just keep riling up the points.

 

Now if the team with 10 is trying to hold the ball but the team with 100 is still going 100% then that team has some serious issues with lacking class.

Edited January 24, 2005 by Wilson Central Dogg

[Sportster]

The only thing that matters is whos winning at the end of the game....

 

Great job Beech.... Good game plan DL just didnt turnout the way you had hoped.....

[PanzyFan]

Wilson you are pathetic. A few points.....1>I doubt Lipscomb is too worried about losing money or their fan base. 2> Brilliant coaching by Pickens. 3> I would rather watch a team stall every so often to try to get a W and consistently win +20 games a season than a team who runs and guns and has a few sweet jams a game and go 4-20 and lose in the first round of the district tournament. But then again I would dive on the floor, or take a hit, or make a good fundamental pass then throw a behind the back turnover......thats just me though.?

[Mark Gaither]

Several thoughts:

1. No one was there to take up money, so all got in for free.

2. Beech had played a very difficult game against Whites Creek the night before. Lipscomb has a deep bench that Coach P could have used to run Beech down. He thought he was the reincarnation of Coach Don Meyer and frustrated all, including his teammates and fans of both teams. Coach Meyer did not become a "good coach" until the advent of the shot clock. His teams were around .500. Coach P is turning this team the same way. Lipscomb will lose a lot of seniors. Expect to see a significant number of slow-down games next year.

3. MLK runs a very agressive man-to-man defense. A stall won't work against them.

4. Anybody know how much shot clocks are? I will pitch in $20! AAU season begins in about 45 days. That is when the real basketball will start.

[Wilson Central Dogg]

Wilson you are pathetic. A few points.....1>I doubt Lipscomb is too worried about losing money or their fan base. 2> Brilliant coaching by Pickens. 3> I would rather watch a team stall every so often to try to get a W and consistently win +20 games a season than a team who runs and guns and has a few sweet jams a game and go 4-20 and lose in the first round of the district tournament. But then again I would dive on the floor, or take a hit, or make a good fundamental pass then throw a behind the back turnover......thats just me though.?

825535188[/snapback]

 

English

[dlhsalum]

Holding the ball is a brilliant coaching strategy by Ritchie Pickens. Before him, Coach Mike Roller always used this strategy whenever Lipscomb was in a game with a team which was more athletic and physical than the Mustangs.

Wilson, holding the ball is much easier said than done. There is a certain art to it. Most teams, when another team is holding the ball against them, will start pressing and double-teaming and force turnovers. Holding the ball requires teams to use screens and back-screens to free up players to pass the ball to, otherwise the player holding the ball will get called for 5 seconds and turn the ball over. The beauty of this type of offense is that you can also run back-doors with your screens and have players cutting to the basket for layups, or you can have players use screens so that you can free up your best shooters for open three-point attempts.

But when you're going up against a team as talented as Beech, which had beaten Lipscomb soundly earlier this season, I have no problems with the Mustangs holding the ball. I, like panzyfan, agree that a close game is much more exciting than a blowout.

When I was a student at Lipscomb back in the late '80's, Mike Roller was our coach, and we beat undefeated Overton High School by holding the ball against them. It was a really low-scoring game, they had a team loaded with talented athletes who could have blown us out if we hadn't held the ball against them.

How many coaches just keep trying to push the ball downcourt and run a fast-break-type of offense when they obviously don't have the personnel to run that type of system? I have seen a lot of games turn into blowouts because their coaches stubbornly kept trying to run a fast-break offense against faster more athletic players and they just turn the ball over each time and wind up getting beat by 30, 40, or 50 points.

Edited January 25, 2005 by dlhsalum

[Jim B.]

So winning is everything? Is that why I know friends who left the game at halftime saying they had better things to do? They said is was ridiculous! And that they would not be back to see another Lipscomb game (by the way, they are/were Lipscomb fans). Play ball, so what if Beech beats you? You made a fool of yourselves (well, not really the players, the COACH!)

[BombSquad]

So winning is everything?  Is that why I know friends who left the game at halftime saying they had better things to do?  They said is was ridiculous! And that they would not be back to see another Lipscomb game (by the way, they are/were Lipscomb fans).  Play ball, so what if Beech beats you?  You made a fool of yourselves (well, not really the players, the COACH!)

825538427[/snapback]

 

Hmm, let's see... By your post, when an athlete comes driving down the lane, you would rather your player get out of the way so you can see a dunk than take a charge, or play any defense at all? You would rather see a player throw a behind the back pass out of bounds than a chest pass to an open man in the corner? You would rather see a guy do his And1 moves against a double team rather than throw a bounce pass to an open shooter on the wing?

 

With an attitude like that [calling out a coach for making a coaching move that was much smarter than anything you could have come up with] good luck in life. For those fans you talk about, let them go. If they, or you if it's you reading this, cannot appreciate a coach doing something to try to win a game, you can stay at home, or find another team who will put on a show just for you. In my opinion, and it is just that, it wasn't the coach that "made a fool of himself." Have a wonderful day.

Edited January 27, 2005 by BombSquad

[GoBama]

So winning is everything?  Is that why I know friends who left the game at halftime saying they had better things to do?  They said is was ridiculous! And that they would not be back to see another Lipscomb game (by the way, they are/were Lipscomb fans).  Play ball, so what if Beech beats you?  You made a fool of yourselves (well, not really the players, the COACH!)

825538427[/snapback]

 

 

 

If what you say is true about them not coming back to see another Lipscomb game ... then they weren't fans in the first place. A true fan does not give up on their team just because they didn't like how the coach coached one game. I would say that to their face if I knew who it was. I mean, heck, I'm a huge Lions fan ...