Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Enfield Vs Cronin

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Enfield Vs Cronin

    Early on USC tried to pick and Gonzaga completely switched the pick-Enfield had no idea how to counter(early on in game if you taped) Either create driving lane for small on big or post it with big on small -granted cronin got to watch film(granted again this should be within your offense regardless) Gonzaga switched and cronin got a triangle away and drove it and got a foul(Gonzaga could not switch anymore) SC got down early because of this exact situation and never recovered.

  • #2
    Yeah or maybe UCLA has way better players and especially shot makers than USC outside of the Mobleys including a way better PG and Andy is 4-0 against Mick. Ever consider that?

    Comment


    • #3
      Saying UCLA has "Way better players" is a strong statement. They have better guards, generally, but Peterson and Tahj are at that level, White would definitely be in that rotation and the Mobleys are their own load down low - that's already a starting lineup.

      We lack a true ball handler a la tyger (who is good but phenomenal) and Jaquez and Juzang are just a little better at doing things themselves than Tahj or Drew.

      @the poster, I would argue that basketball is a VERY different game when you have 5 days to prepare vs when you only have one. AND your practice on that 1 day is the earliest practice of the day after a 3 am night. That's disgraceful. Moreover, if your guard is getting picked by the opponents center, that's hardly a coaching issue.

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by Trojan2021 View Post
        Saying UCLA has "Way better players" is a strong statement. They have better guards, generally, but Peterson and Tahj are at that level, White would definitely be in that rotation and the Mobleys are their own load down low - that's already a starting lineup.

        We lack a true ball handler a la tyger (who is good but phenomenal) and Jaquez and Juzang are just a little better at doing things themselves than Tahj or Drew.

        @the poster, I would argue that basketball is a VERY different game when you have 5 days to prepare vs when you only have one. AND your practice on that 1 day is the earliest practice of the day after a 3 am night. That's disgraceful. Moreover, if your guard is getting picked by the opponents center, that's hardly a coaching issue.
        UCLA has the best shot maker in the Pac 12 in Juzang, the best 3 point shooter in the Pac 12 in Singleton. Two other first team all Pac 12 players in Campbell and Jacquez and really solid starters in Bernard and Riley who were both top 50 recruits and have talent. Meanwhile, USC had maybe 5/6 Pac 12 level players on their roster. Meanwhile, Andy got them to an elite 8, swept Mick and Mick couldn’t hold his jock in the first game. The real question is how Mick Cronin couldn’t coach that team to avoid the first four with all of that talent

        Comment


        • #5
          Moreover, if your guard is getting picked by the opponents center, that's hardly a coaching issue. The problem was Enfield did not create room for Eaddy to attack the big(although I would have posted Mobley instead) If you pick alot-which SC does..this scenario should already be part of offense....what the hell to do if their is a complete switch...the turnovers were because of poorly designed offense(counter to a switch).


          The real question is how Mick Cronin couldn’t coach that team to avoid the first four with all of that talent. You are 100% correct. The difference was style of play in tournament compared to Pac 12 play. In pac 12 Most of what UCLA did was pick into 2...and they could not cut the corner because all the help....In the tourney For the most part Cronin stopped picking and allowed his players to attack without a pick(thus not bringing more help to ballhandler) which freed up his players.
          Last edited by NamedafterMcKay; 04-04-2021, 07:35 AM.

          Comment


          • #6
            Passionate discussion. I love it!

            Here's where I stand (fwiw) .... at the most basic level, the games against the Zags boiled down to matchups. UCLA had the matchups (particularly with skilled guards) to be competitive; USC did not. The Zags' early pressure was too much for SC to overcome; the smothering defense on a team lacking in quality ballhandlers and shot-makers was exactly the thing that Colorado and Utah had thrown at SC this season. SC had no answer for that, and the game was over before it started.

            UCLA, by contrast, starts four guards in Tyger, Bernard, Juzang and Jaquez -- very much like the Zags do -- all of whom are quality shot-makers. SC starts one guard: Eaddy. The Zags simply couldn't put the type of pressure on UCLA's starters that they put on SC's. Once that smother defense was out the window, the game had the possibility for competitiveness.

            From there, UCLA needed to make shots. It did. Indeed, for the last 10 minutes or so of the game, the Zags really couldn't stop UCLA's spread, isolate and pick'n'roll game -- whether it was with Tyger, Juzang or Jaquez, or Riley finishing off the pop or roll.

            I do agree with Trojan2016 that USC basically has 6 legit Pac-12 players -- at least for offense: Tahj, Drew, Isaiah W., Isaiah M., Chevez and Evan. Ethan, Noah and Max are not Pac-12 caliber offensive players at this stage; though I do think Max, because of his defense, is an overall Pac-12 caliber player.

            The one thing I would say is that it did not appear to me that SC was really ready to play Gonzaga. Now, I understand that SC had just come off the late game against Oregon, had the earliest practice schedule the following day, and then the late afternoon game against the Zags less than 48 hours after the Oregon game ended. That being said, our scout of Gonzaga seemed like it could have been done by looking at the Zags' stat leaders. SC had prepared the most vanilla game plan with basic man and the same 2-3 that it had been running for the entire Tourney run. It was hard to detect any real Zag-specific adjustments in there.

            Could SC have won under any circumstances? That's hard to know. The matchup seemed very similar to the one against Colorado, but a much, much better version of Colorado.

            Comment


            • #7
              Yeah, I think that sums it up nicely Chase.

              I think pressure on our guards was a point of emphasis for gonzaga and something we were destined to struggle with. In particular: *if your guards can't get the ball to your bigs, you eliminate that advantage completely.*

              Moreover, steals and missed shots give more transition opportunities so the effect is compounding and smothering.

              That's an elegant game plan to attack SC. I've mentioned this stat 50 times since our Zags game: in the first half we took 31 shots and they took 46. *Any* team would have a 20 point margin given such an advantage. That's not to say the Zags don't deserve it, they created that advantage afterall and they do it consistently, but that is a core reason that we got smoked.

              Comment

              Working...
              X