Pitino Blog: Maroon/Gold Scrimmage Analysis

Donate To GopherHole
BleedGopher

BleedGopher

Well-known member
Joined
Nov 11, 2008
Messages
60,765
Reaction score
16,159
Points
113
Lots of player notes in the link, but overall, per the blog:

Overall

Positives- We moved the ball well at times in the half court and made the extra pass. We need to constantly try to attack the paint because we will have three ball handlers in the game at all times. Much is said about our backcourt but Mo and Elliott shouldn't be overlooked. Daquein has obviously improved. Loved his attitude during the game. He even called a play for himself in a timeout. That shows great growth for him. Love guys like "Day Day" who quietly do their job everyday. I think we all saw the potential of the newcomers. All of them have the physical ability to make a difference.

Negatives- Body language! First scrimmage in the Barn in front of our great fans and some guys seemed very frustrated. A lot of that, in my opinion, is normal. Guys get so excited over the offseason and when adversity hits they quickly get down. Collectively as a team we need to get mentally tougher. I spoke to the team about being energy givers not energy takers. That will be a big emphasis this week.

http://www.gophersports.com/blog/20...ld.html?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

Go Gophers!!
 

I read between the lines that Pitino has high expectations and high ambitions for this team.
 

If Richard is this honest in his blog...I'm guessing most players have no doubt where he'd like to see improvement from them. :cry: ha
 

From the various observations I have read, I am encouraged by the following:

1) Elliot and Mo sound like they are picking up where they left off and are improving;
2) although neither Morris nor McNeil could hope to replace Austin this year, we had nothing behind Austin last year so the two players might equal as much or more as Austin and nothing else;
3) Bakary appears good enough that we might have him and one of Mo or Elliot on the floor at the same time;
4) Nate Mason could be a dramatic improvement over Malik Smith of last year.

We had no depth in the front line last year and now we appear to have some. Although the number of perimeter players might be bit thinner than last year they might be better overall.
 

cjbfbp said:
From the various observations I have read, I am encouraged by the following:

1) Elliot and Mo sound like they are picking up where they left off and are improving;
2) although neither Morris nor McNeil could hope to replace Austin this year, we had nothing behind Austin last year so the two players might equal as much or more as Austin and nothing else;
3) Bakary appears good enough that we might have him and one of Mo or Elliot on the floor at the same time;
4) Nate Mason could be a dramatic improvement over Malik Smith of last year.

We had no depth in the front line last year and now we appear to have some. Although the number of perimeter players might be bit thinner than last year they might be better overall.
Click to expand...

Nate Mason is a much better player than Malik. Mason comes from a great program, and has been well-coached. There is a good chance he sees close to 20 min/game
 


cjbfbp said:
From the various observations I have read, I am encouraged by the following:

1) Elliot and Mo sound like they are picking up where they left off and are improving;
2) although neither Morris nor McNeil could hope to replace Austin this year, we had nothing behind Austin last year so the two players might equal as much or more as Austin and nothing else;
3) Bakary appears good enough that we might have him and one of Mo or Elliot on the floor at the same time;
4) Nate Mason could be a dramatic improvement over Malik Smith of last year.

We had no depth in the front line last year and now we appear to have some. Although the number of perimeter players might be bit thinner than last year they might be better overall.
Click to expand...


I'm a little confused by #2. Why cant they hope to replace him? The nothing else comment kind of confuses me too?
 

shickmyjanski said:
I'm a little confused by #2. Why cant they hope to replace him? The nothing else comment kind of confuses me too?
Click to expand...

I think the comment is meant to talk about his leadership. As far as play goes, I believe we can replace him
 

The only spot on the floor where we take a step back is at the starting 3. But year 2 Day Day and Squirrel are both better than year 1 Day Day and Mason is already better than Smith and Mav (no disrespect as both had big games and helped us win, just saying that all around, he seems to be a better player right now). Add the fact that our 2 C's and King should be a year better and Konate may be serviceable and we should improve in the frontcourt as well with Martin in there too. So talent wise we should be better overall. The question of course is about execution and mental toughness
 

Tommy Flanagan said:
I think the comment is meant to talk about his leadership. As far as play goes, I believe we can replace him
Click to expand...

Correct...in Austin's 20 Big Ten opponent games as a senior...take away four nice scoring games and in the other 16 games he averaged
8 points a game. He had games of 2 twice, 4 once, 5 once and 6 three times. So seven times out of 20 games as a senior he pretty much just did give us leadership. We were 3 and 1 in the games he scored 16 or more. We were 3 and 4 in the 7 games he scored 6 or less. On paper he is replaceable.
 



60's Guy said:
So seven times out of 20 games as a senior he pretty much just did give us leadership
Click to expand...

There is a lot more to the game than ppg and leadership.

Also, 12.4 ppg, nothing to scoff at.
 

HOOP DREAMS said:
There is a lot more to the game than ppg and leadership.

Also, 12.4 ppg, nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

Indeed. He was also consistently good on defense. Of course, he was also the MVP of the NIT and that's nothing to scoff at either.
 

HOOP DREAMS said:
There is a lot more to the game than ppg and leadership.

Also, 12.4 ppg, nothing to scoff at.
Click to expand...

Thanks, I thought those were the only two categories. Yes, 12.4 is helpful. The point was in 7 of the 20 games it was 4.4ppg. Consistency.
Defense is a little harder to quantify. Austin was just as inconsistent in that phase as well imo. Yes, he finished the season in the NIT awesome!
Not saying he was not an important team member. I am saying his production is replaceable. You disagree. That's cool.
 

60's Guy said:
I am saying his production is replaceable. You disagree.
Click to expand...

Sure his points are replaceable. He was a good rebounded for his position, could guard multiple positions, got a lot of deflections, solid FT shooter, made smart decisions, etc.

You can't replace the unique type of player he was apples to apples, but we will be fine.
 



You must log in or register to reply here.



Top Bottom