Wake over NCS
Keith Jordan
It was a great game to watch as an NCSU fan ... except for about seven
minutes of the second half.
The Deacs won by eight in a relatively low-scoring affair that was
tied 17-17 at halftime. The Wolfpack led by seven early in the second
half before a Wake flurry.
Wake showed that it's the better team. State showed that it's a
smart, capable team and that its style can work in the ACC -- if the open
shots are falling. The Wolfpack was something like 1-11 from three-point
range. Make that 4-8 and, theoretically, that's a one-point NCS victory.
(I know it doesn't really work that way ... :-) )
Also, depth is going to be a problem for State. Last I heard, the
bench didn't score; and it's tiring playing against taller guys, all game
and all season.
If State keeps playing its game, it can probably manage a winning
overall season and may get postseason consideration. But I wouldn't
expect many big upset wins by the Pack. The hot-and-cold three-point
shooting of the Les Robinson era won't be as big a factor in the Sendek
years.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keith Jordan http://www.naplesnews.com/staff/kjordan/
ncsu97
I just got back from the game. The Reynolds crowd was rockin' in the
first half, but the Pack offense just wasn't there to compliment the
tremendous defensive effort. There was a stretch in the first half of
about 5 or 6 possessions where Wake could literally not even get a shot
off. I have been waiting a long time for the Pack to become a contender
again, and I am not saying that we are back by any means, but I have a
good feeling about the differences that Sendek has made already. With
no real increase in talent from last year, he has turned the Pack into a
team that has the potential to make some noise in the ACC. I hope to be
watching two other teams play the Thursday night Les Robinson
Invitational, and I think that this team could finish in the middle of
the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
2-17 on threes). Well, overall I think it was a good showing and the
future is definitely looking up! GO PACK!!!!
--
ncs...@ipass.net
Raleigh, NC
Keith Jordan
In article <32A9C9...@ipass.net>, ncsu97 <ncs...@ipass.net> wrote:
> ... and I think that this team could finish in the middle of
> the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
> 2-17 on threes).
Middle of the pack in the ACC will be tough with these players;
there's just not much inside.
The overall shooting I'd attribute to Wake's size and greater talent.
But 2-17 from three-point range is really apalling. A lot of those shots
(maybe most of them) were wide-open, taken by guards, so there's really no
good reason they were 2-17 instead of maybe 6-17.
Forgive my math/numeric errors earlier about threes -- not sure what I
was thinking, but the basic point's the same.
Andrew Worley
Keith Jordan <sto...@naples.infi.net> wrote in article
<stomper-0712...@pa1dsp12.apf.infi.net>...
> In article <32A9C9...@ipass.net>, ncsu97 <ncs...@ipass.net> wrote:
>
> > ... and I think that this team could finish in the middle of
> > the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
> > 2-17 on threes).
>
> Middle of the pack in the ACC will be tough with these players;
> there's just not much inside.
>
Is there a team in the ACC with a better inside game than Wake?
( DO *NOT* SAY UNC, I'LL FREAK !!!)
Tim Duncan is the best player in college. Period. What type of game
did he have against State? He just couldn't get the ball because of the
pressure. When he did, the help cam eover quick. By *MOST* standards,
Tim had a good game. But not as good as he usually does!
The middle of the ACC is *possible*. I doubt that NCSU will be starting
their
ACC tournement play on a Thursday this year.
Just my opinion....
Andrew
john wesley brooker
ncsu97 (ncs...@ipass.net) wrote:
: I just got back from the game. The Reynolds crowd was rockin' in the
: first half, but the Pack offense just wasn't there to compliment the
: tremendous defensive effort. There was a stretch in the first half of
: about 5 or 6 possessions where Wake could literally not even get a shot
: off. I have been waiting a long time for the Pack to become a contender
: again, and I am not saying that we are back by any means, but I have a
: good feeling about the differences that Sendek has made already. With
: no real increase in talent from last year, he has turned the Pack into a
: team that has the potential to make some noise in the ACC. I hope to be
: watching two other teams play the Thursday night Les Robinson
: the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
--
I, too, was impressed with what Sendek has done. He has focused the
State effort on the defensive end, which is exactly what State needs. The
offense will get better as the year progresses. If you don't know how to
play defense, however, it is hard to win games come February and March.
State had Wake totally confused offensively. It was sickening how many
turnovers
Wake had. Wake just refused to move without the ball on offense. The
pressure caused Rutland and Braswell to pick up their dribble way too
early, and then nobody would come to the ball to help (especially in the
first half). Wake should thank their lucky stars that nobody on State
had a hot hand from the perimeter. I don't think the game in Winston
will be as close. By then Wake should be able to react to pressure much
better. State will win some ACC games this year, though, probably more
than most people expect.
Brent Daniel
john wesley brooker (broo...@wfu.edu) wrote:
: I, too, was impressed with what Sendek has done. He has focused the
: State effort on the defensive end, which is exactly what State needs. The
: offense will get better as the year progresses. If you don't know how to
: play defense, however, it is hard to win games come February and March.
: State had Wake totally confused offensively. It was sickening how many
: turnovers
: Wake had.
If my memory serves me correctly, Wake had 20 turnovers in last year's
game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
offensive performance.
Wake ended up shooting 50% for the game. That's not exactly a sign of
great defense.
It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
but won't win very much.
Brent
mike c
Brent Daniel (dani...@wfu.edu) wrote:
: john wesley brooker (broo...@wfu.edu) wrote:
: : I, too, was impressed with what Sendek has done. He has focused the
: : State effort on the defensive end, which is exactly what State needs. The
: : offense will get better as the year progresses. If you don't know how to
: : play defense, however, it is hard to win games come February and March.
: : State had Wake totally confused offensively. It was sickening how many
: : turnovers
: : Wake had.
: If my memory serves me correctly, Wake had 20 turnovers in last year's
: game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
: For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
: All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
: it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
: energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
: offensive performance.
I think the main cause of their poor offensive performance was that they
don't have many good players. If state had "wasted" their energy with a
more up-tempo game that probably would have been beaten much worse than
they were. I like Sendek's style. He realizes that their team isnt very
good, but if he can get them to play really hard defense then they will
probably have a shot at winning most of their games. However, i do think
that this strategy works much better at home, where the players get
strong crowd support for their defensive play.
: Wake ended up shooting 50% for the game. That's not exactly a sign of
: great defense.
I think you mean that wake shot 50% when they were actually able to shoot
the ball. There were many offensives sets where state's defense was so
tough that wake didn't even have a chance to shoot the ball. They played
EXCELLENT defense.
: It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
: will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
: but won't win very much.
: Brent
--
Keith Jordan
On second thought, the way State was playing defense is probably the
reason for the poor shooting, especially from long range. My guess is
that they were tired. As much as I admired the defense (especially in the
first half) and enjoyed watching it, maybe they should tone it down just a
little until there's more depth. Or have some defensive and some
offensive specialists.
Andrew J. Smith
dani...@wfu.edu (Brent Daniel) wrote:
>It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
>will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
>but won't win very much.
This is probably true, but for different reasons. Last year, the Pack
had talent but were not fundamentally sound. It looks to be the other
way around this year (for the most part).
Andy
>Brent
O'Cain SUCKS!
Think what Sendek could have done with Fuller last year.
--
George Stavrakakis
NO MORE PAIN!!
FIRE O'CAIN!!!
Andrew J. Smith
Trying not to... ; (
andy
Gadgets R Us
David Palmer wrote:
>
> sto...@naples.infi.net (Keith Jordan) wrote:
>
> > On second thought, the way State was playing defense is probably the
> >reason for the poor shooting, especially from long range. My guess is
> >that they were tired. As much as I admired the defense (especially in the
> >first half) and enjoyed watching it, maybe they should tone it down just a
> >little until there's more depth. Or have some defensive and some
> >offensive specialists.
>
> this is the best chance they have against a team with obviously
> superior talent. And maybe they'll start to shoot a little better
> tired.
I think the proper term is "build some stamina". The regulars have not been playing at this frenzied pace
very long. They are not only adjusting to Sendek's philosiphies but also adjusting to the physical demands of
playing at this level of intensity. In the most of the first 5 games, the bench was able to play some
significant minutes so the starters could rest. Give them some time to adjust and I think that the results
will be much better toward the end of the season.
Remember Sendek's first practice with the team? Marco Harrison passed out and had to be taken to the
hospital! I think that Sendek knew that a lot of conditioning would be necessary to be successful with this
defensive scheme. We are starting to see some of the results now. However, the real payoff be next year (or
maybe the end of the season this year) when the players have had sufficient time to adjust mentally AND
phsically.
> I think we'll see a remarkable parallel to Clemson in Barnes' first
> year.
Hopefully the result will be as good or better! :-)
Daniel Francis Bowen
Brent Daniel (dani...@wfu.edu) wrote:
:
: game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
: For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
: All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
: it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
: energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
: offensive performance.
: great defense.
: It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
: but won't win very much.
: Brent
Finally someone is thinking logically!!! Us pack fans have no
reason to start expecting winning seasons with this crew. And here is
why. We have no bench!!!! Only seven people played that game any
considerable amounts of time. As brent here pointed out the defense just
wasn't there in the second part of the second half. Probably due to over
exertion of ones self in the first thirty minutes. The bench factor is
going to become another problem late in the season. Strong, hyatt,
harrison, and benjamin can't keep playing 37-38 minutes a game. They
will have no legs by the end of the year. It is just going to be
impossible to keep up that defensive intensity for the whole year without
giving buffum, wells, mccollum, and sutton more minutes. And once the
defense goes it will be a rough year. Sendek needs to give those four
some time in these games that aren't close. A second point i want to
make is that i feel danny strong is not be used right. Strong took over
games single handedly last year on offense. this year he has failed to
get over 11 points i think. Herb needs to get him some open looks. And
finally i would like to point something out to everyone!!! last year ncsu
played wake without todd fuller. so we had basically the same team
marshall=gainey, thornton=harrison except the coach. And we came within
one basket of winning the game. which was much closer than yesterday.
not saying sendek isn't a better coach. Just pointing it out. I think
five wins is in conference is very feasible. But don't expect more than
that.
--
dan
Everett Harris
In article <32A9C9...@ipass.net>, ncsu97 <ncs...@ipass.net> wrote:
>I just got back from the game. The Reynolds crowd was rockin' in the
>first half, but the Pack offense just wasn't there to compliment the
>tremendous defensive effort. There was a stretch in the first half of
>about 5 or 6 possessions where Wake could literally not even get a shot
>off. I have been waiting a long time for the Pack to become a contender
>again, and I am not saying that we are back by any means, but I have a
>good feeling about the differences that Sendek has made already. With
>no real increase in talent from last year, he has turned the Pack into a
In fact, we have a major decrease in talent -- Todd Fuller is off to the
NBA.
>team that has the potential to make some noise in the ACC. I hope to be
>watching two other teams play the Thursday night Les Robinson
>Invitational, and I think that this team could finish in the middle of
>the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
>2-17 on threes). Well, overall I think it was a good showing and the
>future is definitely looking up! GO PACK!!!!
>--
>ncs...@ipass.net
>Raleigh, NC
--
// Everett Harris "Nobody told me there'd be days
// eha...@cais.com like these. Strange days indeed."
// http://www.cais.net/eharris/ - John Lennon
PackBacker
A second point i want to
>make is that i feel danny strong is not be used right. Strong took over
>games single handedly last year on offense. this year he has failed to
>get over 11 points i think. Herb needs to get him some open looks.
I have to disagree here. Strong has had the open looks.... He just
has been missing them. If memory serves he was 0-7 from 3 pt range
yesterday, most of these being fairly uncontested. he has looked poor
in every game that I have seen at Reynolds this season. Some of this
can most likely be attributed to his thumb injury. I don't think that
Strong's offensive performance in any way can be attributed to Coach
Sendek.....
-PackBacker
"I don't want a baby-face; I want a scar!"
Lucas Wolenczak seaQuest DSV
David Palmer
ncsu97 <ncs...@ipass.net> wrote:
> I have a
>good feeling about the differences that Sendek has made already. With
>no real increase in talent from last year,
that is, a big decrease--the loss of Fuller. When I was watching this
game, I started having shivers of fear imagining what Sendek defense
would have been like with Fuller.
That was really an incredible performance. With decent shooting,
State could easily have won.
--Dave Palmer
David Palmer
sto...@naples.infi.net (Keith Jordan) wrote:
> On second thought, the way State was playing defense is probably the
>reason for the poor shooting, especially from long range. My guess is
>that they were tired. As much as I admired the defense (especially in the
>first half) and enjoyed watching it, maybe they should tone it down just a
>little until there's more depth. Or have some defensive and some
>offensive specialists.
There's probably a lot to this. But I think with State's players,
this is the best chance they have against a team with obviously
superior talent. And maybe they'll start to shoot a little better
tired.
I think we'll see a remarkable parallel to Clemson in Barnes' first
year.
--Dave Palmer
David Palmer
dani...@wfu.edu (Brent Daniel) wrote:
>If my memory serves me correctly, Wake had 20 turnovers in last year's
>game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
>For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
>All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
>it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
>energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
>offensive performance.
>
>Wake ended up shooting 50% for the game. That's not exactly a sign of
>great defense.
>
>It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
>will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
>but won't win very much.
But you're comparing last year's teams with this year's.
You've gotta take into account the fact that Wake's got better players
this year (the same players, all more experienced), and NCSU lost
Fuller. Do you think Les would have played as many teams close
without Fuller?
--Dave
Tom
Living in Atlanta, it's hard to get good coverage of NCState. (for
good reason, recent years). Our paper the Atl Journal/Constitution
doesn't cover the Wolfpack but for a 1 sentence blurb. Thanks for your
synopsis.
Tom 1983
sto...@naples.infi.net (Keith Jordan) wrote:
>In article <32A9C9...@ipass.net>, ncsu97 <ncs...@ipass.net> wrote:
>> ... and I think that this team could finish in the middle of
>> the Pack if it can get some of those shots to fall (17-55 against Wake,
>> 2-17 on threes).
> Middle of the pack in the ACC will be tough with these players;
>there's just not much inside.
> The overall shooting I'd attribute to Wake's size and greater talent.
>But 2-17 from three-point range is really apalling. A lot of those shots
>(maybe most of them) were wide-open, taken by guards, so there's really no
>good reason they were 2-17 instead of maybe 6-17.
> Forgive my math/numeric errors earlier about threes -- not sure what I
>was thinking, but the basic point's the same.
cl...@aol.com
One point:
Fuller didn't play in the Wake game in Raleigh last year.
Chris
Fred Fahey
State deserves a LOT of credit for their defensive effort for the first
30 minutes of this game. They pressured the Wake guards into oodles of
turnovers (Braswell was finally benched), they tripled Duncan in the
post and did a commendable job on the D boards against a substantially
taller team. The only thing that kept Wake in the game was their
outstanding defensive job that lasted 40 minutes. Ricky peral had
another in a long series of outstanding defensive jobs against a
smaller, quicker player in Danny Strong. Ricky did an excellent job
giving Strong no open looks. Ricky also scored 7 clutch points as Wake
made its way back after falling behind by 9 early in the 2nd half.
Rutland hung with Benjamen, even though it looked at one point like
Ishua would take over the game. The only player to score for State was
CC Harrison.
Finally with about 12 minutes to go, Wake got in gear. Rutland hit a
couple of 3s, they posted Peral (something that could have worked all
day) and Duncan made some nice moves. Odom won the game with a smaller
lineup of Rutland, Amonmette (Braswell didn't play the last 16 miuntes
of the game!!), Goolsby, Peral and Duncan. Woods only played 4 minutes
(1 shot, no points, no boards, no blocks). Hopefully, this was just
because Odom wanted to use the smaller lineup and Duncan was already
easily controlling the middle, defensively. We'll see.
Best to survive a game like this early in the season. I would hate to
go to Reynolds in midseason!!
Sendak has taken the path used recently by of Jones, Odom, and Barnes.
Play good hardnose defensive ugly ball. It will keep you in the game
and then when you get talent, you can compete.
Fred
Jeremy Chapman
On Mon, 9 Dec 1996, Fred Fahey wrote:
> Best to survive a game like this early in the season. I would hate to
> go to Reynolds in midseason!!
Amen - I said something to that effect after the game, too.
>
> Sendak has taken the path used recently by of Jones, Odom, and Barnes.
> Play good hardnose defensive ugly ball. It will keep you in the game
> and then when you get talent, you can compete.
I think that they've got enough talent to be dangerous this year. I
don't know that they'll even go 8-8 in conference, but they have a good
chance to stay out of the 8/9 game, at least. Sendek's done an
outstanding job (so far) of instilling his philosophy in the players he's
inherited; it will be interesting to see this team develop with his
recruits coming in.
Jeremy Chapman
Mississippi State '92
Wake Forest '94
O'Cain SUCKS!
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
> Finally someone is thinking logically!!! Us pack fans have no
> reason to start expecting winning seasons with this crew. And here is
> why. We have no bench!!!! Only seven people played that game any
> considerable amounts of time. As brent here pointed out the defense just
> wasn't there in the second part of the second half. Probably due to over
> exertion of ones self in the first thirty minutes. The bench factor is
> going to become another problem late in the season. Strong, hyatt,
> harrison, and benjamin can't keep playing 37-38 minutes a game. They
> will have no legs by the end of the year. It is just going to be
> impossible to keep up that defensive intensity for the whole year without
> giving buffum, wells, mccollum, and sutton more minutes. And once the
> defense goes it will be a rough year. Sendek needs to give those four
> some time in these games that aren't close. A second point i want to
> make is that i feel danny strong is not be used right. Strong took over
> games single handedly last year on offense. this year he has failed to
> get over 11 points i think. Herb needs to get him some open looks.
What in the world are you thinkingof?!?! Strong was 1-15 in the Wake
game. How many more "open looks" do you want to give him? I have no
problem with Strong taking that many shots in a game because he is a
good player. If he gets started nobody can stop him. But to say that
Sendek needs to get him more open looks when he gets 15 shots is crazy!
How many shots do you want him to take?
> And
> finally i would like to point something out to everyone!!! last year ncsu
> played wake without todd fuller. so we had basically the same team
> marshall=gainey, thornton=harrison except the coach. And we came within
> one basket of winning the game. which was much closer than yesterday.
Once again you are way off the mark with this one!
First of all, last year's game was at the end of the season! If you
think there isn't a difference between how a team plays in Dec. and how
a team plays in late Feb./early March you are nuts!!!!
Secondly, Marshall was a SENIOR Gainey is a FRESHMAN! Harrison had
almost an entire season under his belt by that time. Take a look at
Thornton now and Thornton in late Feb./early March and then come back
and let us know how much he has improved!!
> not saying sendek isn't a better coach. Just pointing it out. I think
> five wins is in conference is very feasible. But don't expect more than
> that.
>
> --
> dan
Finally, how can you even think of critisizing Sendek when so far he has
done an amazing job with the talent he has. Not to mention the talent
that he has recruited to come into the program for next year.
J. Graves
mike c wrote:
>
> Brent Daniel (dani...@wfu.edu) wrote:
> : john wesley brooker (broo...@wfu.edu) wrote:
>
> : : I, too, was impressed with what Sendek has done. He has focused the
> : : State effort on the defensive end, which is exactly what State needs. The
> : : offense will get better as the year progresses. If you don't know how to
> : : play defense, however, it is hard to win games come February and March.
> : : State had Wake totally confused offensively. It was sickening how many
> : : turnovers
> : : Wake had.
>
> : game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
> : For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
> : All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
> : it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
> : energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
> : offensive performance.
>
> don't have many good players. If state had "wasted" their energy with a
> more up-tempo game that probably would have been beaten much worse than
> they were. I like Sendek's style. He realizes that their team isnt very
> good, but if he can get them to play really hard defense then they will
> probably have a shot at winning most of their games. However, i do think
> that this strategy works much better at home, where the players get
> strong crowd support for their defensive play.
>
> : great defense.
>
> the ball. There were many offensives sets where state's defense was so
> tough that wake didn't even have a chance to shoot the ball. They played
>
> : It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
> : will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
> : but won't win very much.
>
>
> --
Question, which team Wake or State has more top 150 (HS) players?
State. I am not saying that State is more talented but we do have some
good players. The main problem with this years team is depth. I think
that problem can be solved by mid-season when some of the other
freshman, Wells and McCullum, get in better shape and have a better
grasp of ACC ball. Also State's offense will eventually catch up to the
defense and when it does they should be tough.
JG
Jeffrey James Price
In article <58f1rv$i...@f1n1.spenet.wfu.edu>, dani...@wfu.edu (Brent Daniel) writes:
|>
|>If my memory serves me correctly, Wake had 20 turnovers in last year's
|>game at Reynolds. The defense -looked- better, but I'm not sure it was.
|>For one thing, state couldn't keep the pressure on for the entire game.
|>All of their intense defensive pressure won't give them an advantage if
|>it makes them too tired to play in the second half. I have to wonder if this
|>energy expenditure on the defensive end was the cause of their poor
|>offensive performance.
|>
Have you ever seen UNLV or Loyola Marymount's offense....100+ ppg ???
there is a reason their offense was so awesome...they didn't bother wasting
any energy on defense.
|>Wake ended up shooting 50% for the game. That's not exactly a sign of
|>great defense.
Defense is more than just shooting percentage. PSU shot 43% for the game
as opposed to 27% for NC State...but who won the game?
NC State is trying to pressure the ball and keep teams from shooting. That
is the easiest way to keep someone from scoring. BTW what rank is WFU?
#2 in the Nation I think??? This game was won by Tony Rutland. He hit a
wide open 3 from about 7 feet behind the 3pt arc (which was why he was open).
Which I though got the crowd out of it and pretty much sealed things. That
is waht great teams do. After State made their run and was up by 9...Wake
came back and hit the shots when they needed. That is the difference
between good teams (aka State) and great teams (aka Wake Forrest).
I'm glad to see your such a student of the game to make broad sweeping
statements from a single line in the box score.
|>It'll be interesting to see how state does this year. My guess is that it
|>will be a lot like last year - State will come close to winning a lot,
|>but won't win very much.
Apparently you didn't see NCSU much last year, or much this year because
they are very different teams. This years team actually has confidence
and the look like winners. We didn't beat ourselves agaisnt Wake...sure
we had a bad shooting night, but that's not why we lost. Wake just killed us
with big baskets in the second half.
Besides....look at how bad we were shooting, and how close the game was.
now you tell me if we even shoot 35% what kind of teams we can beat?
--
GO PACK !!!
------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Jeffrey James Price Senior Computer Engineering &
http://www4.ncsu.edu/eos/users/j/jjprice/www/ Computer Science
Keith Jordan
In article <32AC9A...@worldnet.att.net>, geor...@worldnet.att.net wrote:
> Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
>
> > And
> > finally i would like to point something out to everyone!!! last year ncsu
> > played wake without todd fuller. so we had basically the same team
> > marshall=gainey, thornton=harrison except the coach. And we came within
> > one basket of winning the game. which was much closer than yesterday.
>
> Once again you are way off the mark with this one!
>
> First of all, last year's game was at the end of the season! If you
> think there isn't a difference between how a team plays in Dec. and how
> a team plays in late Feb./early March you are nuts!!!!
In the case of this Wake team and this State team, Wake will be
comparatively better late in the year. Last year's State team wasn't
good, but it had more depth. This year, the Pack is likely to be fatigued
come February/March.
And, you know, Wake has the same chances State has to improve through
the year, so this isn't a valid reason to say you can't compare the games.
> Secondly, Marshall was a SENIOR Gainey is a FRESHMAN! Harrison had
> almost an entire season under his belt by that time. Take a look at
> Thornton now and Thornton in late Feb./early March and then come back
> and let us know how much he has improved!!
Marshall wasn't playing better than Gainey is now, though. He had
recovered from a hand/arm injury and wasn't quite his old self.
Harrison had more experience, but Thornton has more talent. So again,
I'd say the teams (without Fuller) are pretty comparable talent-wise.
And, again, I'm sure you could find Wake players who improved last
year during the season, and young Wake players this year who still need
refinement. The whole "season under their belts" philosophy cuts both
ways.
> > not saying sendek isn't a better coach. Just pointing it out. I think
> > five wins is in conference is very feasible. But don't expect more than
> > that.
>
> Finally, how can you even think of critisizing Sendek when so far he has
> done an amazing job with the talent he has. Not to mention the talent
> that he has recruited to come into the program for next year.
State has beaten no teams that have ACC-level talent. I wouldn't
describe his job this year as amazing. State's 5-1, and the best team
they've beaten is Penn State, which is way down from last season. Don't
blow this early success out of proportion.
As for the talent he's recruiting, that won't help until next year at
the earliest.
BUT, don't get me wrong. I'm very happy with how the team's playing,
though I think Sendek needs more depth to really benefit from this style
of play. I think the program's headed in the right direction. I'm really
happy with Sendek.
What Les had last year that Sendek doesn't is 1) depth and 2) a
reasonable chance that someone will be on from three-point range. His
game was more offense-oriented, which may not win championships but is
more likely to notch big upsets. That's what happened (almost) last year
versus Wake. This year, we lost by eight points, fair and square. Last
year, with a poor-shooting game by the Pack, Wake could have beaten State
by 20.
Let's not forget Les' record versus Dean Smith, the Wolfpack's marquee
opponent and one of the toughest teams State usually plays. Clearly, one
of Les' few game-day virtues was that his teams were capable of the
occasional great shooting night. It may be the same with Sendek, but they
haven't shown it yet.
Sendek's doing the right things, as far as I can see ... but let's not
build any statues just yet.
Keith Jordan
> Question, which team Wake or State has more top 150 (HS) players?
> State. I am not saying that State is more talented but we do have some
> good players.
Recruiting rankings aren't the most reliable things, but FYI, being a
top 150 recruit isn't anything special in the ACC. Being a top 50 recruit
means you're likely to be a good player; a top 100 player is likely to be
a starter or key reserve; a top 150 player is likely to play some as a
senior.
But, again, lots of guys are ranked high and never contribute much,
and lots of guys get poor rankings and are terrific.
I'd rather have Tim Duncan than five guys who were ranked between #135
and #150 coming out of high school. (And yes, I realize Duncan himself
was something of a diamond in the rough ... but what are the odds?)
Dirk Faude
>I think that they've got enough talent to be dangerous this year. I
>don't know that they'll even go 8-8 in conference, but they have a good
>chance to stay out of the 8/9 game, at least. Sendek's done an
>outstanding job (so far) of instilling his philosophy in the players he's
>inherited; it will be interesting to see this team develop with his
>recruits coming in.
I agree. I'm really looking forward to the State/Carolina game. State
could really give the Tarheels a tough game with their defense. If
State's going to come up with a big upset in the conference this year,
I think it will be against the Heels.
Daniel Francis Bowen
: game. How many more "open looks" do you want to give him? I have no
: problem with Strong taking that many shots in a game because he is a
: good player. If he gets started nobody can stop him. But to say that
: Sendek needs to get him more open looks when he gets 15 shots is crazy!
: How many shots do you want him to take?
since when does taking 15 shots mean you were open??? Peral had
a hand in strongs face most of the game. Danny did have open looks like
you said though. Though all 15 were not open. Maybe 5 were open. And
once again you can't judge my comment on how strong should be more
involved in the offense by one game. He has barely touched the ball
within scoring position in the first few games. He is our best offensive
threat and needs to be shooting the ball 15 times a game in every game.
not just wake forest.
:
: Once again you are way off the mark with this one!
:
: First of all, last year's game was at the end of the season! If you
: think there isn't a difference between how a team plays in Dec. and how
: a team plays in late Feb./early March you are nuts!!!!
Exactly... And when wake plays us in febuary they will beat us
by thirty points!!! because they will have gotten better!!! Just like
they were playing better last year when we played them then they were
playing on saturday. And you can't agrue with that. thus the we played
better at the end of the year last year theory is foolish because it
applies to wake too.
:
: Secondly, Marshall was a SENIOR Gainey is a FRESHMAN! Harrison had
: almost an entire season under his belt by that time. Take a look at
: Thornton now and Thornton in late Feb./early March and then come back
: and let us know how much he has improved!!
You have got to be kidding me. Marshall was awful for us last
year. he comitted numerous turnovers and never ever scored. Gainey may
not score... but at least he doesn't throw the ball away. and as for
marco. How many times did you even see him in the game last year before
wake??? Not many. He didn't come in till after the season was halfway
over in the first place. At the moment thornton is at least equal to
harrison.
:
: Finally, how can you even think of critisizing Sendek when so far he has
: done an amazing job with the talent he has. Not to mention the talent
: that he has recruited to come into the program for next year.
:
was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
job. We have some very good players on this team. We should be beating
penn st. and memphis. Penn st was missing there best player and memphis
has no one this year. If we had lost to them it would have been upsets.
I am not trying to discredit what herb sendek has done here. but i am
trying to keep it in perspective.
--
dan
PackBacker
dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu (Daniel Francis Bowen) wrote:
At the moment thornton is at least equal to
>harrison.
You've got to be kidding me!!!! Damon is a great young player but he
has the experience of 1 (one) ACC game. Marco, if memory serves, had
several inches on Damon and was fairly accurate with the three
pointer. Don't get me wrong, Damon is going to be a great player, but
he still has a long way to go. Marco was reasy to take over Fuller's
position this season. By the end of the year, Damon might be up to or
surpassing the level of play that Marco was demonstrating......
J. Graves
You misunderstood my whole point. Those who say we have no talent are
wrong. That is all I was saying. Our main problem is depth and to some
degree height. But when you look at the players we have now Osh, CC,
Damon, Andre, and Pinkins were all top 80 recruits. Osh was a top 30
player. Strong and Gainey were top 125. That is a fair amount of
talent. Recruiting rankings don't mean a whole lot I agree but they do
mean something. I disagree with your evaluation of top 50 players, top
100 players etc.., I remember hearing Bob Gibbons say that if you land
a top 80 player you are getting a player than can play in the ACC and
have a big impact. After the top 10-20 players there isn't much
difference between 20-80. Once again my point is that most people not
associated with NCSU underrate our talent level. We have some guys that
can flat out play and best of all our starting 5 consist of superior
athletes. I also think we will do much better than you obviously.
Don't sell this team and Herb short!
JG
Jeffrey James Price
In article <32AD95...@unity.ncsu.edu>, "J. Graves" <jsgr...@unity.ncsu.edu> writes:
|>You misunderstood my whole point. Those who say we have no talent are
|>wrong. That is all I was saying. Our main problem is depth and to some
|>degree height. But when you look at the players we have now Osh, CC,
Come one guys....Height did not hurt us against Wake. Did anyone notice
Odom had to sub in a SMALL lineup to better MATCH UP with what Herb
was doing.
I hate to bring this up, but it is usually a good sign when you have a
"percieved" weakness, and are forcing the other coach to play to it.
Granted having Peral and Duncan in there is still pretty dang on big,
but he wanted to play Woods as well but was unable do to our "smaller"
guys.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <32AC9A...@worldnet.att.net>, "O'Cain SUCKS!" <geor...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
|>> And
|>> finally i would like to point something out to everyone!!! last year ncsu
|>> played wake without todd fuller. so we had basically the same team
|>> marshall=gainey, thornton=harrison except the coach. And we came within
|>> one basket of winning the game. which was much closer than yesterday.
|>
|>Once again you are way off the mark with this one!
|>
|>First of all, last year's game was at the end of the season! If you
|>think there isn't a difference between how a team plays in Dec. and how
|>a team plays in late Feb./early March you are nuts!!!!
|>
Don't forget that this team has been together for 2 months now with Herb.
Some of last years players had played under Les' system for almost 4 years.
That tends to make a difference.
Scott Gallimore
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
>
> was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
> Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
> job. We have some very good players on this team. We should be beating
> penn st. and memphis. Penn st was missing there best player and memphis
> has no one this year. If we had lost to them it would have been upsets.
> I am not trying to discredit what herb sendek has done here. but i am
> trying to keep it in perspective.
>
Dan,
I agree with most of what you said...
Just a note about the PennState and Memphis games:
Penn State was favored by ~9 points to beat NCSU
in Raleigh! So I don't think Penn State beating the
Pack would have been an upset! Quite the opposite...
I didn't see the line on the NCSU-Memphis game, but I
would guess that Memphis was favored at home, where
they had won something like 33 straight regular season
games...
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
Charles Board
In article <58j44m$q...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu (Daniel Francis Bowen) writes:
|> since when does taking 15 shots mean you were open??? Peral had
|> a hand in strongs face most of the game.
Nice little nugget in today's N&O pointing out that over the last four games
the guys Peral was assigned to are shooting a whopping 17% from the field.
The presence of Duncan and Peral's stupid fouls tend to obscure it, but
he's a fantastic defensive player.
William M. Gray
In article <58j44m$q...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>,
Daniel Francis Bowen <dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
> was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
>Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
>job.
Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
#1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
Billy
Rob Mac K
In article <58mgef$f...@nrtphc11.bnr.ca>, cnc...@bnr.ca (Charles Board) wrote:
>Nice little nugget in today's N&O pointing out that over the last four games
>the guys Peral was assigned to are shooting a whopping 17% from the field.
>
>The presence of Duncan and Peral's stupid fouls tend to obscure it, but
>he's a fantastic defensive player.
Well, one might question how "fantastic" he is if he keeps making "stupid
fouls". :) But it's tough for a wing guy to be guarded by someone who's
6'10" on the perimeter, especially if he's going to try and beat him by
driving only to be be met by Duncan and/or Woods....
- Rob Mac K
E-mail: blud...@worldnet.att.net
Visit my home page at http://www.geocities.com/colosseum/1861
David Fowler
Scott Gallimore wrote:
>
> Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
> >
> > was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
> > Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
> > penn st. and memphis. Penn st was missing there best player and memphis
> > has no one this year. If we had lost to them it would have been upsets.
> > I am not trying to discredit what herb sendek has done here. but i am
> > trying to keep it in perspective.
> >
>
> Dan,
>
> I agree with most of what you said...
>
> Just a note about the PennState and Memphis games:
>
> Penn State was favored by ~9 points to beat NCSU
> in Raleigh! So I don't think Penn State beating the
> Pack would have been an upset! Quite the opposite...
>
> I didn't see the line on the NCSU-Memphis game, but I
> would guess that Memphis was favored at home, where
> they had won something like 33 straight regular season
> games...
>
> Scott
> NCSU-91
> Go Pack!
According to the Dallas Morning News, the lines were:
NCSU - 3pt favorite over Penn State (matched the spread)
Memphis - 3pt favorite over NCSU (beat the spread obviously)
Scott Gallimore
David Fowler wrote:
>
> > Dan,
> >
> > I agree with most of what you said...
> >
> > Just a note about the PennState and Memphis games:
> >
> > Penn State was favored by ~9 points to beat NCSU
> > in Raleigh! So I don't think Penn State beating the
> > Pack would have been an upset! Quite the opposite...
> >
> > I didn't see the line on the NCSU-Memphis game, but I
> > would guess that Memphis was favored at home, where
> > they had won something like 33 straight regular season
> > games...
> >
> > Scott
> > NCSU-91
> > Go Pack!
>
> According to the Dallas Morning News, the lines were:
>
> NCSU - 3pt favorite over Penn State (matched the spread)
WOW! Really?
WPTF-680am in Raleigh was saying that Penn State was a a 9-point
favorite....and the Wolfpack announcers were calling the Pack's
win over Penn State (on the Penn St.- NCSU broadcast) an "upset"...
I'm not sure where the real descrepancy lies...
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
Everett Harris
In article <32AEE2...@ix.netcom.com>,
over a team stronger than Florida Internat'l is an upset. :-)
--
// Everett Harris
// eha...@cais.com
// http://www.cais.net/eharris/
WILLIAM GAY
Charles Board <cnc...@bnr.ca> wrote:
>Nice little nugget in today's N&O pointing out that over the last four games
>the guys Peral was assigned to are shooting a whopping 17% from the field.
So, may we assume that, were he to guard Capel, it would be a
tactical error on Odom's part?
-Will
O'Cain SUCKS!
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
> : game. How many more "open looks" do you want to give him? I have no
> : problem with Strong taking that many shots in a game because he is a
> : good player. If he gets started nobody can stop him. But to say that
> : Sendek needs to get him more open looks when he gets 15 shots is crazy!
> : How many shots do you want him to take?
>
> you said though. Though all 15 were not open. Maybe 5 were open. And
> once again you can't judge my comment on how strong should be more
> involved in the offense by one game. He has barely touched the ball
> within scoring position in the first few games. He is our best offensive
> threat and needs to be shooting the ball 15 times a game in every game.
> not just wake forest.
>
>
> dan
Here you go Dan. The following is a link to Boyette's Unofficial N.C.
State Basketball page (GREAT PAGE!!!!!). Take a look at the stats so far
this year. The stats have been put together by Saab. You will notice
that Strong is second in shots attempted only 3 behind C.C.
http://ourworld.compuserve.com/homepages/bboyette/ncsu.htm
To Saab: Even though I completely disagree with you about O'Cain, I
would like to thank you for the great job you have been doing with the
stats. KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!
Daniel Francis Bowen
.66...@ix.netcom.com>
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution:
: Dan,
:
: I agree with most of what you said...
:
: Just a note about the PennState and Memphis games:
:
: Penn State was favored by ~9 points to beat NCSU
: in Raleigh! So I don't think Penn State beating the
: Pack would have been an upset! Quite the opposite...
:
: I didn't see the line on the NCSU-Memphis game, but I
: would guess that Memphis was favored at home, where
: they had won something like 33 straight regular season
: games...
I would be shocked if the line for the penn st game was that
high. I remember two years ago when we played kansas at home and the
spread was only eight points. I remember that because i considered
putting money on kansas i thought that line was so generous to us. as
for memphis i know they are impossible to beat in the pyramid. But their
program is definitely on a sharp decline over there. So i wouldn't say i
thought we would win. But this isn't the same memphis team that won
those 33 straight games or whatever... like i said... not trying to
discredit mr sendek. Just trying to keep it in perspective.
--
dan
Charles Board
In article <58kpch$m...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey James Price) writes:
|>
|> Come one guys....Height did not hurt us against Wake.
You don't think getting outrebounded 40-24 hurt you? (heck, Duncan with 20
almost outrebounded the whole State team)
You don't think Peral's height had something to with Strong's 1-for-15?
Daniel Francis Bowen
William M. Gray (wg...@bnr.ca) wrote:
: In article <58j44m$q...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>,
: Daniel Francis Bowen <dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
: > was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
: >Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
: >job.
: Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
: by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
: #1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
:
: Billy
You misread the post idiot... I was saying he hadn't done THAT
amazing a job of coaching. Make sure you realize what you are saying
before you critise someone.
--
dan
Andy Driver
On 10 Dec 1996 22:40:38 GMT, jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey James
Price) wrote:
>Don't forget that this team has been together for 2 months now with Herb.
>Some of last years players had played under Les' system for almost 4 years.
I was never aware Less had any "system". Mostly it looked like total
chaos to me.
Andy Driver
NCSU '84
Brent Daniel
Jeffrey James Price (jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
: NC State is trying to pressure the ball and keep teams from shooting. That
: is the easiest way to keep someone from scoring.
Usually, it's better to make a team take bad shots than to prevent any shot
at all. That is, provided you have good defensive rebounding. Considering
Wake's size advantage, you're probably right in this case.
: This game was won by Tony Rutland. He hit a
: wide open 3 from about 7 feet behind the 3pt arc (which was why he was open).
That's oversimplifying things. Wake's defense and their ability to hit the
open shots they were given were the keys to this game.
: I'm glad to see your such a student of the game to make broad sweeping
: statements from a single line in the box score.
I don't think I did. Note the word 'usually' in my statement. Usually, if
a team shoots 50%, the other team did not do a good job defensively.
: Apparently you didn't see NCSU much last year, or much this year because
: they are very different teams. This years team actually has confidence
: and the look like winners.
I watched many of NC State's games last year. At this point last year, the
team looked like it had confidence and the look of winners, too. I remember
people posting here about how it was the season that NC State would turn
everything around. There's nothing wrong with optimism for this year, but
I don't think it's fair to compare last year's team to this one just yet.
: We didn't beat ourselves agaisnt Wake...sure
: we had a bad shooting night, but that's not why we lost. Wake just killed us
: with big baskets in the second half.
NC State was flat out dead on their feet in the last ten minutes of the
game. Those big baskets didn't come because of luck - they came because
State was too tired to prevent Wake from getting open looks.
Brent
john wesley brooker
Brent Daniel (dani...@wfu.edu) wrote:
: Jeffrey James Price (jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
: : NC State is trying to pressure the ball and keep teams from shooting. That
: : is the easiest way to keep someone from scoring.
: Usually, it's better to make a team take bad shots than to prevent any shot
: at all. That is, provided you have good defensive rebounding. Considering
: Wake's size advantage, you're probably right in this case.
I would thikn it would be better to prevent shots totally. I don't
understand your argument at all.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <58mt7o$r...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu (Daniel Francis Bowen) writes:
|> I would be shocked if the line for the penn st game was that
|>high. I remember two years ago when we played kansas at home and the
Actually I had heard that the line was NCS by 1. I'm in the library so I
may just head over the periodical stack and check it out for myself.
|>spread was only eight points. I remember that because i considered
|>putting money on kansas i thought that line was so generous to us. as
Too bad you lost on that one....KU by 5 if I remeber correctly.
Reynolds is worth at least 10 points on a good night, 5 on a bad.
|>for memphis i know they are impossible to beat in the pyramid. But their
|>program is definitely on a sharp decline over there. So i wouldn't say i
|>thought we would win. But this isn't the same memphis team that won
|>those 33 straight games or whatever... like i said... not trying to
And we aren't the same NC State team that has had five losing seasons
and been miserable on the road...oh wait...actually we still are. Same
players and everything....?
|>discredit mr sendek. Just trying to keep it in perspective.
COACH SENDEK to you Danno.
You don't seem to be doing a very good job Dan, maybe you should
try being coherent, before keeping everything in perspective. You
have half the State fans on here thinking you like Les better than Herb.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <58mk1j$5...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca>, wg...@bnr.ca (William M. Gray) writes:
|>Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
|>by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
|>#1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
|>
last ranked team? Now who would that be? Are you talking ACC, there
aren't any divisions in the ACC, and BTW we where the worst team
in the ACC the past 5 years I think, well...we did beat ourselves
a few times, but that doesn't really count.
Jeffrey James Price
What word didn't you understand ??? ;)
"Height did not hurt us against Wake"
What did hurt us was miserable shooting. I was at the game, I didn't think
their height was the dominating factor in the game, rather it was our
offense. Why do you think they had so many rebounds to be grabbed, and
sure the taller players will get them, but the fact that we went 2-17
on threes, heck right there are 15 rebounds for Duncan/Peral/etc. Don't
foget we shot 30% for the game...how many more are up for grabs.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <58qn30$l...@f1n1.spenet.wfu.edu>, dani...@wfu.edu (Brent Daniel) writes:
|>Jeffrey James Price (jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
|>
|>: NC State is trying to pressure the ball and keep teams from shooting. That
|>: is the easiest way to keep someone from scoring.
|>
|>Usually, it's better to make a team take bad shots than to prevent any shot
|>at all. That is, provided you have good defensive rebounding. Considering
|>Wake's size advantage, you're probably right in this case.
|>
Now I know you are a complete idiot.
Taking a bad shot is NOT better than taking no shot. You see you can't
score if you can't shoot. Even if you take a bad shot, there is a chance
it will go in the basket. When the ball goes in the basket, you score.
It is really that simple. If you intercept a pass, force a 10second
count, force a travel, force a bad pass out of bounds, force a 35 second
violation the other team does not get to shoot, and therefore does not
get a basket.
Do you understand?
I can't believe you even made that statement....oh wait,
you said 'usually'. There is your catch all phrase in case you say
something extremely idiotic and you need to retract it later.
|>: I'm glad to see your such a student of the game to make broad sweeping
|>: statements from a single line in the box score.
|>
|>I don't think I did. Note the word 'usually' in my statement. Usually, if
|>a team shoots 50%, the other team did not do a good job defensively.
|>
Always looking for an excuse when you get proven wrong? I'm sorry
just because you said "usually" doesn't mean you don't get the Dunce
of the Week award.
Why even bother arguing with someone who doesn't know how teams
score in basketball....<sigh>
J. Graves
Jeffrey James Price wrote:
>
> In article <58mk1j$5...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca>, wg...@bnr.ca (William M. Gray) writes:
> |>Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
> |>by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
> |>#1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
> |>
> last ranked team? Now who would that be? Are you talking ACC, there
> aren't any divisions in the ACC, and BTW we where the worst team
> in the ACC the past 5 years I think, well...we did beat ourselves
> a few times, but that doesn't really count.
> GO PACK !!!
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Jeffrey James Price Senior Computer Engineering &
> http://www4.ncsu.edu/eos/users/j/jjprice/www/ Computer Science
>
I think we finished last 3 out of the 5 years. Might be 4 out of 5 but
I believe that FSU and Maryland might have come in and stolen a few
titles away from Les.
Daniel Francis Bowen
: |>spread was only eight points. I remember that because i considered
: Too bad you lost on that one....KU by 5 if I remeber correctly.
: Reynolds is worth at least 10 points on a good night, 5 on a bad.
The reason i considered was because in seasons before even with
the reynolds factor we got blown out at home... And i think we lost by
7.. not five. Maybe you can check that out on the bookstacks.
:
: |>for memphis i know they are impossible to beat in the pyramid. But their
: |>program is definitely on a sharp decline over there. So i wouldn't say i
: |>thought we would win. But this isn't the same memphis team that won
: |>those 33 straight games or whatever... like i said... not trying to
: And we aren't the same NC State team that has had five losing seasons
: and been miserable on the road...oh wait...actually we still are. Same
: players and everything....?
We did win at clemson last year. Only one of two teams to do
it. And clemson was actually good last year. I tried no to be too rude
toward the memphis progam but they are awful this year. AWFUL. they
barely beat some team from the swac at home a couple nights ago. Memphis
sucks. That victory proved little other than we can beat an awful team
in a half empty arena.
:
: |>discredit mr sendek. Just trying to keep it in perspective.
: COACH SENDEK to you Danno.
:
: You don't seem to be doing a very good job Dan, maybe you should
: try being coherent, before keeping everything in perspective. You
: have half the State fans on here thinking you like Les better than Herb.
Well if that is the way you want to take it then fine. I don't
understand what more i need to say to you people so that i may be more
COHERENT though. Herb has shown me nothing as far as a coach so far.
other than being a great recruiter which is 60% of the whole thing. He
hasn't done anything people!!!!!! At the same time last year you would
have been saying all these great things about how good we were going to
be. And look what happened. 3-13. And sure if sendek were coaching we
would have probably won 10 acc games last year. But you need to start
preparing yourself for the fact we will probably not win more than 4 or five acc
games. Is that coherent enough???
--
dan
Jeffrey James Price
In article <58s6kt$8...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu (Daniel Francis Bowen) writes:
|>: And we aren't the same NC State team that has had five losing seasons
|>: and been miserable on the road...oh wait...actually we still are. Same
|>: players and everything....?
|>
|> We did win at clemson last year. Only one of two teams to do
|>it. And clemson was actually good last year. I tried no to be too rude
Lets see, how many ACC road games have we won lately, or for that matter
how many big (against known teams) road games have we won. The only
ones I can think of would be Clemson, Duke (when they went 2-14) and
Missouri. Can't think of any others, there may have been a few but they
are far and few between.
|>toward the memphis progam but they are awful this year. AWFUL. they
|>barely beat some team from the swac at home a couple nights ago. Memphis
|>sucks. That victory proved little other than we can beat an awful team
|>in a half empty arena.
And we barely beat Lamar and Florida Atlantic?? Those are powerhouses. Heck
we only won by 15 in each.
|> Well if that is the way you want to take it then fine. I don't
|>understand what more i need to say to you people so that i may be more
|>COHERENT though. Herb has shown me nothing as far as a coach so far.
I'm not trying to be mean to you Dan, i'm just trying to let you know
we don't understand you.
|>other than being a great recruiter which is 60% of the whole thing. He
|>hasn't done anything people!!!!!! At the same time last year you would
|>have been saying all these great things about how good we were going to
|>be. And look what happened. 3-13. And sure if sendek were coaching we
|>would have probably won 10 acc games last year. But you need to start
|>preparing yourself for the fact we will probably not win more than 4 or five acc
|>games. Is that coherent enough???
Actually we have already won 5 games so I'm feeling pretty good about the
season. And except for those with a few bolts loose (if ya know what I mean)
expect us to win more then 6 games, right now I'm thinking 5.
But what I don't understand is for this team 5 or 6 wins would be a great
accomplishment. For last years team 6 wins should have been underacheiving.
The real difference is this team is playing a different style of ball,
its called BASKETBALL, so we can once again raise our hopes.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <32B17F...@unity.ncsu.edu>, "J. Graves" <jsgr...@unity.ncsu.edu> writes:
|>Jeffrey James Price wrote:
|>> last ranked team? Now who would that be? Are you talking ACC, there
|>> aren't any divisions in the ACC, and BTW we where the worst team
|>> in the ACC the past 5 years I think, well...we did beat ourselves
|>> a few times, but that doesn't really count.
|>
|>I think we finished last 3 out of the 5 years. Might be 4 out of 5 but
|>I believe that FSU and Maryland might have come in and stolen a few
|>titles away from Les.
|>
If we didn't finish in 9th place, it doesn't mean were still weren't the
worst team in the ACC, after all we did lose the first 3 (or 4??)
LRITs
Keith Jordan
In article <58rs1d$p...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jjp...@eos.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey
James Price) wrote:
> "Height did not hurt us against Wake"
>
> What did hurt us was miserable shooting. I was at the game, I didn't think
> their height was the dominating factor in the game, rather it was our
> offense.
You understand, of course, that the opposing team's height can affect
your team's offense ... :-) State lacks depth and height. Those are no
big deal early in a game, but near the end of a game that's a deadly
combination. A smaller player must exert that much more energy to
outhustle bigger players, and there's no one to come in and give them a
rest.
-----------------------------------------------------------
Keith Jordan http://www.naplesnews.com/staff/kjordan/
Daniel Francis Bowen
: how many big (against known teams) road games have we won. The only
: ones I can think of would be Clemson, Duke (when they went 2-14) and
: Missouri. Can't think of any others, there may have been a few but they
: are far and few between.
And they will be few and far between this year. Memphis wasn't a
big win.
:
: |>toward the memphis progam but they are awful this year. AWFUL. they
: |>barely beat some team from the swac at home a couple nights ago. Memphis
: |>sucks. That victory proved little other than we can beat an awful team
: |>in a half empty arena.
: And we barely beat Lamar and Florida Atlantic?? Those are powerhouses. Heck
: we only won by 15 in each.
What the hell does how much you beat them by mean??? You know
that means nothing. Especially the way we play. 10 point wins are blow
outs to us.
:
: |> Well if that is the way you want to take it then fine. I don't
: |>understand what more i need to say to you people so that i may be more
: |>COHERENT though. Herb has shown me nothing as far as a coach so far.
: I'm not trying to be mean to you Dan, i'm just trying to let you know
: we don't understand you.
well everyone else seems o understand me. I think i have
explained myself well. What is it you don't understand???
:
: |>other than being a great recruiter which is 60% of the whole thing. He
: |>hasn't done anything people!!!!!! At the same time last year you would
: |>have been saying all these great things about how good we were going to
: |>be. And look what happened. 3-13. And sure if sendek were coaching we
: |>would have probably won 10 acc games last year. But you need to start
: |>preparing yourself for the fact we will probably not win more than 4 or five acc
: |>games. Is that coherent enough???
:
: Actually we have already won 5 games so I'm feeling pretty good about the
: season. And except for those with a few bolts loose (if ya know what I mean)
: expect us to win more then 6 games, right now I'm thinking 5.
:
: But what I don't understand is for this team 5 or 6 wins would be a great
: accomplishment. For last years team 6 wins should have been underacheiving.
:
: The real difference is this team is playing a different style of ball,
: its called BASKETBALL, so we can once again raise our hopes.
We started out 6-0 last year and were losing by two to umass at
halftime. As for your commment about basketball... what is this great
change he has made to our team that makes them now play basketball???
all we do differently is play with more defensive intensity. We still
are taking 1/3 of our shots from the 3 point line. We proved nothing in
our one game this year(wake!!). Other than we can play defense. We
could play defense last year. I like coach sendek.
I think he is going to do wonders for our program. things les could
never do. But it ain't going to happen this year. And it will never
happen with the style of bball we are playing(I hate the way we play) And
no... 5-6 wins
would not be that great of an accomplishment. We won five acc games
three years ago if you recall. And we lost to florida atlantic that
year. that was an accomplishment!!! not losing to fau.. but losing to
fau and still winning 5 acc games. We were awful that year.
--
dan
Brent Daniel
Jeffrey James Price (jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
<Personal attack deleted>
: Taking a bad shot is NOT better than taking no shot. You see you can't
: score if you can't shoot. Even if you take a bad shot, there is a chance
: it will go in the basket. When the ball goes in the basket, you score.
: It is really that simple. If you intercept a pass, force a 10second
: count, force a travel, force a bad pass out of bounds, force a 35 second
: violation the other team does not get to shoot, and therefore does not
: get a basket.
: Do you understand?
I thought that the implications that were inherent in the statement "It
is usually better to force bad shots than to prevent any shot at all"
were clear. I guess they weren't, since a couple people have questioned this.
A better choice of words would have been "..than to prevent shots." It
is close to impossible to prevent any shot at all. If a team is playing
defense with the intensity level that is necesary to prevent most shots,
then they will likely tire out and end up giving the opposing team very
good looks at the basket (see NCSU vs. Wake, 1996). Even if you have a
team of supermen that are capable of playing that way for 40 minutes,
this defensive style will result in open shots. If you're playing a guard
so close that you prevent him from shooting, it's pretty likely that the
guard will drive past you and get an open look.
This is, of course, a very simple analysis. The two strategies are far
from being mutually exclusive.
<Another personal attack deleted>
I didn't use the word 'usually' as an out. I used it to make the statement
true. It is not true that in every case it is better to play a defense
designed to let the opposing team take bad shots than to try to prevent
shots. It is true (in my opinion, of course) that more times than not, the
first strategy is better.
: Always looking for an excuse when you get proven wrong?
Not really. I'm always looking for proof that I'm wrong, though. If you
would like to undertake an analysis of this problem, I would be happy to
look at it. Perhaps you could find a few teams who exemplify these
strategies. Assume that every turnover above the team's average is equivalent
to a missed shot. Compare the shooting percentages. It's very possible that
I am wrong.
<Two more personal attacks deleted>
Jeff, it seems like every year around this time I get a nasty message
from you when I dare to suggest that NC State has weaknesses. I think you
either need to take things a little less seriously, or make a more
realistic evaluation of your school's team.
Brent
Scott Gallimore
J. Graves wrote:
>
> Jeffrey James Price wrote:
> >
> > In article <58mk1j$5...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca>, wg...@bnr.ca (William M. Gray) writes:
> > |>Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
> > |>by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
> > |>#1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
> > |>
> > aren't any divisions in the ACC, and BTW we where the worst team
> > in the ACC the past 5 years I think, well...we did beat ourselves
> > a few times, but that doesn't really count.
> > GO PACK !!!
> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Jeffrey James Price Senior Computer Engineering &
> > http://www4.ncsu.edu/eos/users/j/jjprice/www/ Computer Science
> >
>
> I believe that FSU and Maryland might have come in and stolen a few
> titles away from Les.
Duke was actually last in the regular season in 1994-95. The Pack
swept Duke in the regular season, but lost to the devils in
the Les Robinson Invitational...
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
Rock Matthews
In article <stomper-1512...@pa1dsp12.apf.infi.net>,
Keith Jordan <sto...@naples.infi.net> wrote:
>
> You understand, of course, that the opposing team's height can affect
>your team's offense ... :-) State lacks depth and height. Those are no
>big deal early in a game, but near the end of a game that's a deadly
>combination. A smaller player must exert that much more energy to
>outhustle bigger players, and there's no one to come in and give them a
>rest.
No question that the Pack got tired and got into foul trouble, both
because of an aggressive defense and a total lack of depth. However,
Wake's height did hurt and, no, the fact that Wake used their "small"
lineup is not a case against this fact. Wake's small lineup had Peral
and Duncan. Duncan alone is a "large" lineup against most teams.
State is not a good shooting team against anyone but they are far
worse when they get no fast breaks and nothing inside. Wake, despite
the TO's, gave up very little in transition and noone for the Pack got
anything going in the paint.
State spent their time on the perimeter, shot a low percentage and
lost the game. What is surprising about this? State is getting
better and playing fine D but they are going to have trouble with
inside scoring this year. They'll have trouble b/c they have little
size and what size they have is not oriented towards inside offense.
Pinkins and Strong spend lots of time on the wings. Shooting 3-16 and
8-24 from 3pt range this season, respectively. Not only are the
percentages poor, the numbers indicate that they simply aren't
spending much time down low. By comparison, Benjamin and Harrison
have 16 and 21 3pt attempts on the season. Why don't these guys get
inside? Thornton is making progress but his offensive game is not yet
good enough to make much of an impact against ACC-quality centers and
forwards. I expect he'll improve significantly throughout the year.
Size hurts State b/c they don't have the frontcourt to score against
serious opposition just yet.
--
H. B. Matthews
Department of Chemical Engineering
University of Wisconsin-Madison
email: h...@bevo.che.wisc.edu
Scott Gallimore
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
>
> Well if that is the way you want to take it then fine. I don't
> understand what more i need to say to you people so that i may be more
> COHERENT though. Herb has shown me nothing as far as a coach so far.
> hasn't done anything people!!!!!! At the same time last year you would
> have been saying all these great things about how good we were going to
> be. And look what happened. 3-13. And sure if sendek were coaching we
> would have probably won 10 acc games last year. But you need to start
> preparing yourself for the fact we will probably not win more than 4 or five acc
> games. Is that coherent enough???
>
You are coherent, but I disagree with you.
Have you seen any Wolfpack games this year? Just by watching the
team play, you should be able to see plenty of evidence of Herb's
[very good] coaching:
1 - good, solid, man-to-man defense
2 - players giving 110% at all times
3 - improved shot selection
4 - offensive plays! Did you see C.C. get 3 layups off of inbounds plays
against Wake Forest? We haven't had three inbounds plays that
worked like that in 3 years!!!
Granted, we are 5-1, which isn't too much different than the last 2 years.
And, we may not finish above .500 this year. BUT, I don't think it will
be a result of Herb's [lack of] coaching! You have to have talent to
win in the ACC. I'm not saying we don't have *any* talent, but I would
guess that State has the least talent in the ACC...
IMHO, watching this year's Wolfpack and seeing Sendek's recruiting success
should give all Wolfpack fans a reason to be excited about the [near]
future.
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
William M. Gray
In article <58nsk8$d...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>,
Daniel Francis Bowen <dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>William M. Gray (wg...@bnr.ca) wrote:
>: In article <58j44m$q...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>,
>: Daniel Francis Bowen <dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu> wrote:
>: > was i criticizing him for recruiting??? no i wasn't. I know
>: >Sendek has done a great job recruiting... He hasn't done that amazing a
>: >job.
>:
>: by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
>: #1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
>: Billy
>
> You misread the post idiot... I was saying he hadn't done THAT
>amazing a job of coaching. Make sure you realize what you are saying
>before you critise someone.
Learn to spell, *idiot*. I would say going from losing to teams like
Florida Atlantic and Campbell to beating Memphis and Penn State is
just *THAT amazing*. Why don't *you* learn to read while you work
on that spelling.
Billy
O'Cain SUCKS!
Jeffrey James Price wrote:
>
> In article <58s6kt$8...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, dfb...@unity.ncsu.edu (Daniel Francis Bowen) writes:
> |>: And we aren't the same NC State team that has had five losing seasons
> |>: and been miserable on the road...oh wait...actually we still are. Same
> |>: players and everything....?
> |>
> |> We did win at clemson last year. Only one of two teams to do
> |>it. And clemson was actually good last year. I tried no to be too rude
>
> how many big (against known teams) road games have we won. The only
> ones I can think of would be Clemson, Duke (when they went 2-14) and
> Missouri. Can't think of any others, there may have been a few but they
> are far and few between.
>
Sorry guys but I have to point out one other little team that is missing
from this list:
the TARHOLES!
we DID sweep them one season with Les at the helm.
Allen Baxley
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
>
> We started out 6-0 last year and were losing by two to umass at
> halftime. As for your commment about basketball... what is this great
> change he has made to our team that makes them now play basketball???
> all we do differently is play with more defensive intensity. We still
> are taking 1/3 of our shots from the 3 point line. We proved nothing in
> our one game this year(wake!!). Other than we can play defense. We
> could play defense last year. I like coach sendek.
> I think he is going to do wonders for our program. things les could
> never do. But it ain't going to happen this year. And it will never
> happen with the style of bball we are playing(I hate the way we play) And
> no... 5-6 wins
> would not be that great of an accomplishment. We won five acc games
> three years ago if you recall. And we lost to florida atlantic that
> year. that was an accomplishment!!! not losing to fau.. but losing to
> fau and still winning 5 acc games. We were awful that year.
>
> --
> dan
First of all, the style of ball we are playing this year, 50-point games,
etc., is not the style of ball that Herb will play each year. He is doing
something this year that Les never did - assess his team's talent and
construct a style of play that will allow them to be competitive.
There is hardly any talent on this year's team. The fact that we lost to
Florida Atlantic or Campbell is immaterial to this argument today. Besides,
that team had a future first-round NBA draft pick in Fuller. I'll
wager that if we lose every ACC game this year, we'll still be in alot
of games. I'd rather lose 30-28 on a last-second shot than 100-70 and never
even have been in the game.
I can fully understand your analysis that we started out well with
several of Les' teams only to fall flat later in the year. I would just
ask you to assess Les' teams and how they won versus Herb's team and how
they are winning. Herb's team is playing fundamentally sound basketball -
something Les' teams never did. If all we proved in the Wake game is that
we can play defense, well hallelujah. Defense wins ballgames, baby. And the
defense that we've played this year is unlike any defense an NCSU team has
ever played. If you want to keep playing the comparison game, try this one
out: how would this years team be if Les were still coaching them using his
one style of play. I can't even stand to think about that.
Allen Baxley
NCSU '87
Jeffrey James Price
In article <592d0t$k...@f1n1.spenet.wfu.edu>, dani...@wfu.edu (Brent Daniel) writes:
|>Jeffrey James Price (jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu) wrote:
|>I thought that the implications that were inherent in the statement "It
|>is usually better to force bad shots than to prevent any shot at all"
|>were clear. I guess they weren't, since a couple people have questioned this.
|>
|>A better choice of words would have been "..than to prevent shots." It
|>is close to impossible to prevent any shot at all. If a team is playing
|>defense with the intensity level that is necesary to prevent most shots,
|>then they will likely tire out and end up giving the opposing team very
|>good looks at the basket (see NCSU vs. Wake, 1996). Even if you have a
So you are saying when you are on the court you should give less then
100% ? I can tell you right now, a team such as NC State will never beat
even a mediocore team if they are not playing as hard as possible for
every minute of the game.
|>team of supermen that are capable of playing that way for 40 minutes,
We would win every single game if we had superman on our team.
|>this defensive style will result in open shots. If you're playing a guard
|>so close that you prevent him from shooting, it's pretty likely that the
|>guard will drive past you and get an open look.
Well then...if that happened, we wouldn't be playing a defense that
prevented shots now would we....
You really amaze me in your ignorance, first you suggest that allowing a team
to take a shot is better that not, then you say if your playing a defense
that prevents shots, the other team would get open shots. If that was the
case you wouldn't be playing a defense which did not allow shots.
|>I didn't use the word 'usually' as an out. I used it to make the statement
|>true. It is not true that in every case it is better to play a defense
|>designed to let the opposing team take bad shots than to try to prevent
|>shots. It is true (in my opinion, of course) that more times than not, the
|>first strategy is better.
You are CLUELESS !!! You show me a team that doesn't allow a shot, and I'll
show you a team that doesn't get scored on. You show me a team that
allows bad shots and I'll show you a team that does get scored upon.
Why do have problems understanding the one basic fundamental in basketball?
|>Jeff, it seems like every year around this time I get a nasty message
|>from you when I dare to suggest that NC State has weaknesses. I think you
|>either need to take things a little less seriously, or make a more
|>realistic evaluation of your school's team.
Well every year I get stressed out from exams, that could explain the
nasty message part :)
As far as you suggesting NC State has a weakness, quite the contrary, you
were suggesting that a common and well known defensive philosophy was
incorrect, I proceeded to correct you. Sorry if you take offense to that.
If you would suggest that NC State's offense was weak, or that we have a
lack of depth, or lack of height...you may have a valid point. But what
I will not accept is that we are playing too hard. Which it seems that
you were implying. There is no such thing as giving to much effort, I'm
sorry you don't realize that but every minute you are on the court you
should give 110%, actually every minute you are alive you should give
110%, you'd be amazed at what you can accomplish doing that.
Daniel Francis Bowen
Organization: North Carolina State University
Distribution:
Scott Gallimore (swg...@ix.netcom.com) wrote:
: You are coherent, but I disagree with you.
:
: Have you seen any Wolfpack games this year? Just by watching the
: team play, you should be able to see plenty of evidence of Herb's
: [very good] coaching:
:
: 1 - good, solid, man-to-man defense
: 2 - players giving 110% at all times
: 3 - improved shot selection
: 4 - offensive plays! Did you see C.C. get 3 layups off of inbounds plays
: against Wake Forest? We haven't had three inbounds plays that
: worked like that in 3 years!!!
:
: Granted, we are 5-1, which isn't too much different than the last 2 years.
: And, we may not finish above .500 this year. BUT, I don't think it will
: be a result of Herb's [lack of] coaching! You have to have talent to
: win in the ACC. I'm not saying we don't have *any* talent, but I would
: guess that State has the least talent in the ACC...
:
: IMHO, watching this year's Wolfpack and seeing Sendek's recruiting success
: should give all Wolfpack fans a reason to be excited about the [near]
: future.
I have seen us play everygame this year... on the front row.
And first off i would like to explain something to you. ncsu was not a
bad defensive team last year. I have no idea where you got that idea
from. But it is not true. WE played good solid man to man defense last
year. It might not have been as intense as this year. but it was still
very good. I also thought our players gave it 110% last year and it is
unfair of you to say that giving 110% this year is an improvement because
it isn't. What is an improvement is shot selection and plays lke you
said. Les didn't encourage the best shot selection. Herb is a little
better though we still shoot from outside too much. but once he gets
players into our system we will be alright. I don't think herb is a bad
coach. I wish he would use his bench more... but i think he will be a
very good coach at our university. but you have to realize five wins
this year(even with the team playing this way) would be great. We have
lots of talent... but we don't have size and depth. two things needed
in the acc if you are going to suceed. if we were in any other
conference i would be saying that this year we should be tournament
bound to atleast the nit. but in the acc. where every team is good
enough to make the dance five wins would be about as many wins i think
herb can get out of these boys.
--
dan
Keith Jordan
In article <594eaq$3...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca>, wg...@bnr.ca (William M.
Gray) wrote:
First, we are all presumably NCSU fans here. By all, I mean the three
people (Dan, William and me) involved in this post, plus others who have
been involved in this ... whatever it is.
Let's remember that and not act like redneck teenagers over minor
disagreements.
Second, Dan actually *is* correct. He was saying, essentially,
"Sendek's done a great job recruiting, but I see no reason yet to be
overwhelmed by his game coaching ability." He was not saying he's
unsatisfied with Sendek's recruiting efforts. I agree. Sendek's done
well, but it's way, way too early to get excited about this season. And I
think the team will be worse late in the season as it gets fatigued.
Third, it's a mark of a newbie to insult someone for a typo or even a
true misspelling. Especially one as benign as using the British version
of a word. You make yourself look petty when you rip into someone over
that sort of thing.
What are we even arguing about? Seems there's one faction that thinks
Sendek's doing well but wants to reserve judgment over how great he is,
and another faction that wants to crown Sendek the King of Basketball. I
think we all agree he's doing well so far, and that we hope for more
success. Are we so pathetic that we have to amuse ourselves by starting
personal attacks over minor differences?
Scott Gallimore
Daniel Francis Bowen wrote:
>
>
> I have seen us play everygame this year... on the front row.
> And first off i would like to explain something to you. ncsu was not a
> bad defensive team last year. I have no idea where you got that idea
> from. But it is not true. WE played good solid man to man defense last
> year. It might not have been as intense as this year. but it was still
> very good.
I still think the Pack has improved defensively this year. Intensity,
pressure, and fundamentals. It's not every day that you hold
a team to 28 points in a game! Even if the team isn't good.
And the Pack is forcing a ton of turnovers (#2 Wake had 24 turnovers,
if I recall correctly)
> I also thought our players gave it 110% last year and it is
> unfair of you to say that giving 110% this year is an improvement because
> it isn't.
You are correct here.
> What is an improvement is shot selection and plays lke you
> said. Les didn't encourage the best shot selection. Herb is a little
> better though we still shoot from outside too much. but once he gets
> players into our system we will be alright.
I agree. It's hard to pound the ball inside with our current post
players. Now if we still had Fuller....
I'd still like to see Benjamin and Harrison drive to the basket more...
> I don't think herb is a bad
> coach. I wish he would use his bench more...
Who do you want him to use off the bench? Norton has been hurt.
Sutton? Wells? Buffum? I'd like to see more of McCullum...
If we lose Pinkins, I think Herb will have to start using some of these
guys more...
> but i think he will be a
> very good coach at our university. but you have to realize five wins
> this year(even with the team playing this way) would be great. We have
> lots of talent... but we don't have size and depth. two things needed
> in the acc if you are going to suceed. if we were in any other
> conference i would be saying that this year we should be tournament
> bound to atleast the nit. but in the acc. where every team is good
> enough to make the dance five wins would be about as many wins i think
> herb can get out of these boys.
>
I agree.
The Pack is 5-1. We have 4 non-conference games left that we should win.
If we go 5-11 in the ACC, we'll finish 14-12 heading into the ACC tourney.
I can live with that -- and we might sneak into the NIT, too...
> --
> dan
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
Charles Board
In article <594hjb$j...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey James Price) writes:
|>
|> You show me a team that doesn't allow a shot, and I'll
|> show you a team that doesn't get scored on.
Um, you mean they don't allow a ahot OR commit enough fouls to get to
the bonus? Now, *that's* a helluva defense! ;^)
Charles Board
In article <32B6A9...@ix.netcom.com>, Scott Gallimore <swg...@ix.netcom.com> writes:
|>
|> I still think the Pack has improved defensively this year. Intensity,
|> pressure, and fundamentals. It's not every day that you hold
|> a team to 28 points in a game! Even if the team isn't good.
|>
|> And the Pack is forcing a ton of turnovers (#2 Wake had 24 turnovers,
|> if I recall correctly)
How improved is that? Wake had 23 turnovers in Raleigh last year. And had
22 against defensive powerhouse VMI earlier this season.... ;^)
Scott Gallimore
Charlie,
I knew you were going to say something about this... :-)
I didn't have the stats from last year, but I did know Wake had
turned the ball over quite a bit this year. From the comments
of Odom, Duncan, and Rutland, they seemed impressed with the Pack's
new defensive pressure...
As a Wake fan, what did you think about the Wolfpack in the
Deacs' win over the Pack?
Scott
NCSU-91
Go Pack!
David Fowler
Jeffrey James Price wrote:
>
> In article <58mk1j$5...@crchh327.rich.bnr.ca>, wg...@bnr.ca (William M. Gray) writes:
> |>Yeah, a top 5-10 class in the nation after a season in which you are beat
> |>by the last ranked team in your division isn't that amazing. Now, the
> |>#1 recruiting class in the nation, that would be amazing. Righto.
> |>
> aren't any divisions in the ACC, and BTW we where the worst team
> in the ACC the past 5 years I think, well...we did beat ourselves
> a few times, but that doesn't really count.
> --
> GO PACK !!!
>
He's talking about Florida Atlantic (which would actually be a couple
of years ago, not last year -- they were last in Division I).
Jeffrey James Price
Now a FT is a shot in my book....
IMHO a team that plays that kinda defense would win the NCAA championship.
Jeffrey James Price
In article <32B5D2...@worldnet.att.net>, "O'Cain SUCKS!" <geor...@worldnet.att.net> writes:
|>
|>Sorry guys but I have to point out one other little team that is missing
|>from this list:
|>
|>the TARHOLES!
|>
|>we DID sweep them one season with Les at the helm.
|>
Yeah, In Les' first year !!!! Which I beleive was the 91-92 season??? (not sure)
BTW we beat UNC that year, then lost 9 straight, then beat UNC...hardly
worth mentioning.
Keith Jordan
In article <599qpb$i...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jjp...@eos.ncsu.edu (Jeffrey
James Price) wrote:
> In article <596ruq$r...@nrtphc11.bnr.ca>, cnc...@bnr.ca (Charles Board) writes:
> |>
> |>In article <594hjb$j...@taco.cc.ncsu.edu>, jjp...@unity.ncsu.edu
(Jeffrey James Price) writes:
> |>
> |>|>
> |>|> You show me a team that doesn't allow a shot, and I'll
> |>|> show you a team that doesn't get scored on.
> |>
> |>Um, you mean they don't allow a ahot OR commit enough fouls to get to
> |>the bonus? Now, *that's* a helluva defense! ;^)
>
> Now a FT is a shot in my book....
>
> IMHO a team that plays that kinda defense would win the NCAA championship.
They'd almost have to, unless they managed to also avoid scoring any
points. It's tough to lose to zero.
Jeremy Chapman
On 11 Dec 1996, WILLIAM GAY wrote:
> >Nice little nugget in today's N&O pointing out that over the last four games
> >the guys Peral was assigned to are shooting a whopping 17% from the field.
>
> So, may we assume that, were he to guard Capel, it would be a
> tactical error on Odom's part?
I've read a lot of things about Capel for the past several weeks, but
this comment was the funniest I've seen.
Jeremy Chapman
Mississippi State '92
Wake Forest '94