|
Basketball thoughts regarding BB, Purnell, and the future
storage
This topic has been archived - replies are not allowed.
|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1957
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
Basketball thoughts regarding BB, Purnell, and the future
Mar 11, 2013, 10:45 AM
|
|
First, I think BB is a good coach and really knows the game. He knows how to gameplan for you, and really make you work to win. I don't buy into the idea that we will always play slow or only score 50 pts. My take below does not factor recruiting and how guys recruit... I'm not touching that.
Regarding Purnell:
I first want to say if you think OP just pressed all the time and ran no offense, then you don't know bball. Yes, he forced tempo... but he did that an number of ways. OP was based in the diamond (1-2-1-1), but he would also match up full court man and run and jump you some. OP frequently went to a 1-3-1 half ct. zone at the end of games or when we needed to get stops. He also played it 3/4 ct. some, and it caused people to slow down and often make mistakes.
Offensively, OP spread the floor and taught his guys how to react to the game. We were very good in transtion, and always filled lanes really well. We ran a lot of high/low stuff under OP as well. One reason we scored a lot was b/c he really knew how to teach creating offense with you defense.
Regarding Brownell:
BB is a very fundamental coach. He really knows the game well. He can put together a very good gameplan, which is honestly why we are in so many close games we shouldn't be in. The way we defense in the half court is a thing of beauty. As any good coach would... I think BB will change according to his players. Next year, we'll get out and pressure people more b/c we will be smaller and quicker. We will speed the game up some.
Offensively... I know this is what bugs everyone. We ran more when we had Stitt, Tanner, Young, and even Grant. With this group, we have to keep the game in the 50's b/c we just can't score enough. From a coaching standpoint, we need effecient possesions b/c of who we are putting on the floor. If you go back and watch, we really do get a lot of high percentage shots. We just can't finish them. There are times when we are really scoring well, and we can light it up. That's a glimpse of what scorers can do in his system.
I do think we will get out and run more next year. I think we'll play more pressure defense as well.
On a side note... I like BB... but I would take Shaka Smart in a minute.
I also wouldn't bash the admin. over firing BB either. I like him, but winning is winning and we need to win more.
|
|
|
|
 |
National Champion [7936]
TigerPulse: 100%
42
Posts: 13712
Joined: 2002
|
good post***
Mar 11, 2013, 10:48 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2253]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Yep !! I think that breaks it down pretty well !! *****
Mar 11, 2013, 10:57 AM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2610]
TigerPulse: 90%
33
|
Yeah, you're right, he had a few variations
Mar 11, 2013, 11:36 AM
|
|
here and there. But basically, he was a full court, 1211 guy for most of or all of the game, which ended up being to his detriment, esp come tourney time. His teams were built to start out strong early in the season when he could catch people off guard, then down from there as it got late in season. Too many easy baskets given up, which is a no-no in today's game.
|
|
|
|
|
|
All-In [30593]
TigerPulse: 99%
55
Posts: 28685
Joined: 2005
|
I completely disagree....
Mar 11, 2013, 11:42 AM
|
|
That style got us to the championship game of the ACCT, which last time I checked... was late in the season and against familiar opponents.
I'm not going to argue his tourney success, but I don't think it was all due to his style.
He may be the smartest coach we've had in a while. He knew you could get athletes to Clemson, but not necessarily great bball players. He did that and put them in positions to win.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Game Changer [1640]
TigerPulse: 100%
31
|
Re: I completely disagree....
Mar 11, 2013, 12:33 PM
|
|
One more thing. He had bigs that could play. Trevor is twice the player Devon is. And we all know about Jennings. Those two were vastly overrated.
Think about it. If you were a top-ranked player and could go anywhere in the ACC you wanted, would you choose Clemson? Somehow the athletic department has to change the precption or we will not get top players -- or coaches for that matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rival Killer [2610]
TigerPulse: 90%
33
|
Yep, with a pretty talented team
Mar 11, 2013, 1:18 PM
[ in reply to I completely disagree.... ] |
|
he did do that that one year. You're right. Doesn't change anything though.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Ring of Honor [22331]
TigerPulse: 100%
53
Posts: 18029
Joined: 2005
|
He gets the net 2 years to get us back to the tourney
Mar 11, 2013, 11:40 AM
|
|
no one likes losing, BB most of all. You could see the frustration this year as he played from a short deck. I fully expect us to begin the road back net year and in 2 years we'll be wondering how we'll hold on to him
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2507]
TigerPulse: 100%
32
|
Very good points and I agree with most of them
Mar 11, 2013, 12:02 PM
|
|
If we could get a go to scorer with BB system then we would win a lot more of these close games that we're in. Our D is great we just need guys to score.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Amateur [36]
TigerPulse: 90%
4
|
Well stated***
Mar 11, 2013, 12:02 PM
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
CU Guru [1103]
TigerPulse: 95%
26
|
We'd be in the NIT (at least) if we played a Big12 schedule!
Mar 11, 2013, 12:42 PM
|
|
What's the latest on that anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
|
Orange Blooded [2457]
TigerPulse: 97%
32
|
The funny part
Mar 11, 2013, 1:23 PM
|
|
was people would complain about Purnell's standing around at times around the arc. Whether it was intentional or not, there were plenty of times this year where Brownell ran 4 around 1 through Booker, just like Purnell did with Trevor.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Rock Defender [56]
TigerPulse: 69%
6
|
still think BB needs
Mar 11, 2013, 1:28 PM
|
|
two more years to have a fair shot
(considering bad luck, player injuries, and no seniors next year)
|
|
|
|
|
|
Replies: 12
| visibility 1957
|
|
|
|
50
