|
Post by standiego on Jul 13, 2015 17:56:21 GMT -8
Who we sign in 2017 could also depend on what 2016 recruits we get.
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Jul 14, 2015 0:34:06 GMT -8
Who we sign in 2017 could also depend on what 2016 recruits we get. If we land any of these 10 guys, we will have won. Five of these guys will be 1st round picks.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Jul 14, 2015 6:23:53 GMT -8
Would guess how well we do this year could be major factor on how recruits see us going forward . SW16 is very important or better . Plus the match ups against Kansas and CAL .
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Aug 17, 2015 21:54:00 GMT -8
I was hoping that the AZTECS would make a play for 6'8 Ira Lee. No cigar. There currently aren’t any concrete plans for Lee to visit any schools, but he has an idea of the ones he wants to see. “I haven’t thought that deep about it,” he said. “I have plenty of time. I will probably take unofficial visits to Cal, Arizona, and UCLA. Places close to home. “I am going to look at how they function every day, what their routine is, and the overall environment.”
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 18, 2015 11:12:10 GMT -8
Could be very important for the Aztecs to do well in 2016 ,to show that we are a program on climb , that a very talented player or two could put us in contention to get even higher.
|
|
|
Post by OldSlowWhiteBaller on Aug 19, 2015 10:13:35 GMT -8
Brandon McCoy in 2017 would be some kinda nice! 247 Sports has him SDSU 67% Oregon 33%...Bring him to the mesa!
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 19, 2015 10:27:32 GMT -8
McCoy has also been chatting with U of A and most of the better schools in the PAC or other areas .
IMO , will be important this year for the team to show that it knows how to affectively use our 5 's on offense . Recruits do notice ,the style you play and where they would fit in . Could mean in early practices that we stress to our 5's that the offense will involve them, if they move to get open and do not lose the ball. With JH it could come to them quickly so be prepared . High quality 5's ,who also like to score are looking to continue that style of play in college and prep them for the NBA . Just saying to them if we had them in our offense would be different may not cut it, or play for your home city .
|
|
|
Post by Gundo on Aug 26, 2015 22:26:50 GMT -8
|
|
|
Post by ab on Aug 27, 2015 7:19:26 GMT -8
We can offer every guy . What is important what guys have the Aztecs on their list . Maybe if we play a little more up tempo this year and include the 5/C as an active part of the offense would help if we want those recruits to consider SDSU. I think it's important for our overall recruiting to get more up tempo this year. Kids love that style of play. I fear we've missed out on a couple recruits for this year that changed their mind when we didn't push the tempo.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 27, 2015 10:22:08 GMT -8
Completely agree we are not going to get highly rated "BIG " players that excel on offense if we do not use an offense that includes the center and has some up tempo style . The half court ball screen for the guy playing the 5 may not cut it for a guy that is looking for NBA in his future .
|
|
|
Post by Ambivalent_Fan on Aug 27, 2015 10:55:02 GMT -8
Completely agree we are not going to get highly rated "BIG " players that excel on offense if we do not use an offense that includes the center and has some up tempo style . The half court ball screen for the guy playing the 5 may not cut it for a guy that is looking for NBA in his future . And so should we change our entire style of play to accommodate the possibility of one of the top 7-10 best centers (there are about that many 5's each each that make a NBA roster as a rookie) in the world potentially coming to SDSU to be a one-and-done?. I have breaking news... A NBA-ready center is not coming to the Aztecs anytime soon...regardless of what our style of play is... What we can realistically hope for is attracting a center who may be rated in the 15-30 range who can stay with the team for 4 years and develop into a great team player who can pull down rebounds with an intense effort and a nose for the ball, play tough defense by forcing other teams' centers to play away from the basket with a strong inside presence, make free throws 70% of the time, and help the other members on the team to find success. Spellman / Bolden / Azubuike / Herald are not coming to the Mesa...this is not our game... Much better to try an attract a 5* or 4* wing or combo guard than waste our efforts on a 5* center
|
|
|
Post by fisherville on Aug 27, 2015 11:38:28 GMT -8
Honestly not very impressed. Solid college guy. Cal and AZ are well in front.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 11:39:35 GMT -8
Offensive tempo is NOT our issue. Last year it was EFFICIENCY.
Here's another news flash - UNLV ran the exact same tempo offensively as we did, yet they're landing these "faster pace" recruits & we're not? Sorry - that's NOT the issue. Both teams average offensive possession was 18.8 seconds. Our offensive tempo is FINE. And last year was nearly the same as the year before. The beloved 2013 team ran nearly the exact offensive tempo as last year's team (18.7 vs. 18.8 seconds per possession). The difference wasn't how fast we played, it was how efficient we were in doing so. WE MADE SHOTS. A faster tempo may get you some easier shots, OR it might make you less efficient due to TO's (& fewer OB's). We don't force things; we take opportunities when presented. It'll be no different this year, although hopefully our opportunities to run may be more apparent.
Here's a list of a few schools that were more deliberate than we were offensively last year, and tell me if this has been an issue with their recruiting: Florida, Kansas St, WEST VIRGINIA, UConn, NCST (who's had a big year recruiting), BAYLOR, UTAH, Cincy, VIRGINIA, and yes, WISCONSIN. Wisconsin runs the most conservative offensive set in the entire country (350th of 351 teams) and they seem to be doing fine & they seems to get some damn good recruits, including those who like to run & gun. Have you checked out UVa's recruits lately?
To think players don't like SDSU because of our tempo more so than ANY other team is simply incorrect. Some players will always like some offenses more than others, but that happens everywhere. Duke loses kids to Kentucky for the same reason, and vice versa. So we'll lose players who want to play slower (e.g. Utah), and some who want to play really fast (e.g. BYU), but it's not a major barrier.
To play at SDSU who have to be willing to hustle on D', learn HOW to play D', and then play normal basketball offensively. Big guys should LOVE playing for us, given how good our D' is. Utah is very sluggish compared to us - yet Frank Jackson has them in his final 4, and they seem to be doing pretty well overall.
Here's another fallacy: we don't use our big guys. Absolutely FALSE. Sky isn't involved in the offense, but that's his choice. He tends to be less aggressive with the ball due to his fear of FT's, and doesn't fully take advantage of his skills. Chol, on the other hand, was involved in 21% of our offensive possessions while he was in the game & took 18% of our shots. By comparison, Poeltl at Utah was involved in 22% & took 19% of their shots. MINIMAL difference, and he's considered a big time post. Tarcewski at UA - 17.8% & 16%; he was used less than Chol. Okonoboh at UNLV - only involved in 14% of their offensive possessions, and just under 13% of their shots.
Gonzaga, and specifically Karnowski, is involved in about the same amount of possessions as Chol (23% vs. 21%), but takes more shots (23% vs. 19%). That's because he's more aggressive & willing to take the shots.
Any "big" who is talented KNOWS that about SDSU. They know we USE our bigs WHEN he has the offensive skillset. And any PF who's contemplating coming here needs to look no further than JJ (or Winston or Pope, etc.).
Perception is not reality.
PS. I will add that I think Rice WANTs to run faster but what's interesting is that every year he's been at UNLV his teams have actually gotten SLOWER.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 27, 2015 11:52:23 GMT -8
What was suggested was making adjustments .No one said change everything . Over reaction to any change. Are you completely satisfied with our results the last 3 or 4 years . Believe Fisher has said he has goals for E8 finish or better . That is not going to happen by playing the same style of basketball , we need to improve some way . Defense has been very good , so what does that mean getting better on Offense or what do you suggest ? Fisher said we need to sore the basketball , so you need guys that can score with regularity. Over 12 million was spent on the JAM Center , one part to help guys improve their offense . I also hope it was done to improve the recruits we bring in . So yes I do hope/expect that we start battling for the higher rated recruits , that includes a highly rated guy that plays the 4 or 5 . Guys that want to score ,does not mean they do not also play D. The coaches recruit very athletic guys , maybe let them use more of their skills on offense . Are you saying forget even trying to sign a guy like McCoy or Ayton in 2017 ? If they tell us no thanks then move on . IMO to get towards E8 or better you need a high quality guard and a guy at the 4 or 5 , sometimes they want to be involved in the offense .
|
|
|
Post by fisherville on Aug 27, 2015 12:05:36 GMT -8
Why are you specifically talking up about centers? Oh because PF's aren't bigs or they don't fit your narrative Stan? SDSU landed a extremely skilled big that can play the 4 (or 5 in college tho 4 is definitely more natural for him) that Gonzaga, Illinois, and Miami wanted... he was a consensus top 100 2016 recruit and a top 50 recruit on scout... so it seems SDSU is doing fine and picking up high quality bigs.
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 12:06:54 GMT -8
What was suggested was making adjustments .No one said change everything . Over reaction to any change. Are you completely satisfied with our results the last 3 or 4 years . Believe Fisher has said he has goals for E8 finish or better . That is not going to happen by playing the same style of basketball , we need to improve some way . Defense has been very good , so what does that mean getting better on Offense or what do you suggest ? Fisher said we need to sore the basketball , so you need guys that can score with regularity. Over 12 million was spent on the JAM Center , one part to help guys improve their offense . I also hope it was done to improve the recruits we bring in . So yes I do hope/expect that we start battling for the higher rated recruits , that includes a highly rated guy that plays the 4 or 5 . Guys that want to score ,does not mean they do not also play D. The coaches recruit very athletic guys , maybe let them use more of their skills on offense . Are you saying forget even trying to sign a guy like McCoy or Ayton in 2017 ? If they tell us no thanks then move on . IMO to get towards E8 or better you need a high quality guard and a guy at the 4 or 5 , sometimes they want to be involved in the offense .And they will be at SDSU, as proven by Chol.
The goal is to make the FINAL 4 every year; it's also always taking the next step. Same goal as anyone I'd assume. Changing the offensive scheme in ANY WAY doesn't guarantee you taking the next step. Being MORE EFFICIENT typically does. We missed a lot of open looks last year. The JAM hopefully will turn those misses into makes. Take the same amount of shots/same shots but make MORE = more efficient, which turns into more wins (hopefully).
Last year the 2 guys who dominated the ball the most were Winston & AQ; Kell & JJ were also used often. This year it'll probably be split more between Pope, Win & Hemsley, with Kell probably close behind. If Pope & Hemsley are more efficient than JJ & AQ were I'd expect us to be very good. Pope is quicker with the ball than JJ; Helmsley is quicker with the ball than AQ. That is what will speed up our game, if anything. Not changing our offensive scheme.
If we force missed shots as good as last year we'll be VERY good. If we force the same % of missed shots, and get the rebounds then we'll have more fast break opportunities. More fast break opportunities + greater offensive efficiency = VERY, VERY good.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 27, 2015 13:49:39 GMT -8
If the goal is F4(do we agree at least SW16 ) then we are going to need a improvement . Most of us feel the D is good so that means major improvement on offense , as Coach Fisher says Score the Basketball . What I am saying is that means getting more scoring from the guys and that includes the 5 position . That they work from Day 1 to be on the scoring part of the offense , not just ball screener . It also does mean at least 60% FT . Part one expect to get quick passes , hang on to them and do something positive with it . Emphasis on rebounding , getting into transition as quickly as possible and attacking the basket . we have too many quality athletes not to get them in motion . We are going to 30 second shot clock so will mean a faster pace. We brought in a PG that likes to play at a quick pace . We have the athletes that can do it let them use their skills . Last year our guard play was below average and play was going through JJ at PF , need to adjust the offense to fit the skills of the 2015 squad . I do think going forward we should try to go after other high quality players that do include guys that play 4 or 5 and want to score . It takes high quality players to get to E8 level or better . You may not think so but some high quality players do not consider SDSU because last few years we are D but little offense and they want to play and score .
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 27, 2015 16:15:38 GMT -8
If the goal is F4(do we agree at least SW16 ) then we are going to need a improvement . Most of us feel the D is good so that means major improvement on offense , as Coach Fisher says Score the Basketball . What I am saying is that means getting more scoring from the guys and that includes the 5 position . That they work from Day 1 to be on the scoring part of the offense , not just ball screener . It also does mean at least 60% FT . Part one expect to get quick passes , hang on to them and do something positive with it . Emphasis on rebounding , getting into transition as quickly as possible and attacking the basket . we have too many quality athletes not to get them in motion . We are going to 30 second shot clock so will mean a faster pace. We brought in a PG that likes to play at a quick pace . We have the athletes that can do it let them use their skills . Last year our guard play was below average and play was going through JJ at PF , need to adjust the offense to fit the skills of the 2015 squad . I do think going forward we should try to go after other high quality players that do include guys that play 4 or 5 and want to score . It takes high quality players to get to E8 level or better . You may not think so but some high quality players do not consider SDSU because last few years we are D but little offense and they want to play and score .
The goal EVERY year is to make the final 4; that doesn't mean you define success or failure based on that, or making the E8 or even S16. Making the tournament is an accomplishment for every team, as is winning their own conference, etc. Everyone wants to win. You define being a successful program as making the S16. I don't. When it comes to the NCAA tourney few teams have accomplished what we've accomplished. We're among the best programs in the nation.
As to the bolded statement above, prove that? If you're going to make a statement like I'd love to see actual facts to back it up. Find me ONE PLAYER who has said we are "little offense" and that's why he's not coming here? One. Has a coach told you this? Talk to Dave? Hutson? Fish? Is potential PT important - yes. Many have said so. But I'd love to know which players criticized our offensive sets/style, especially since we allow our players more freedom than many coaches. Most of the players I've met are actually wired very differently. If a team struggles offensively and that's something they bring to the table, then assuming they like the coaches/players/facilities/school, they want to be the guy to help improve the offensive production. They wouldn't shy away from it. A kid like Ayton or McCoy wouldn't shy away from a program because Skylar doesn't get 10+ shots a game. If they have the temperament most kids of that caliber have, they'd know they WOULD get a lot of opportunities. Narain's dad even said they like how we used our bigs, and I'm sure Nolan could see himself even getting more looks.
I believe you're also making another major leap about the need to use the "5" in general. We get Chol the ball often, as much as most teams in all of college basketball. Sky didn't want the ball, and wasn't as aggressive getting his shots. Hopefully he is more so this year. But we could still be a significantly better offensive team without our "5" taking any additional shots within the flow of the offense. The bottom line is being more efficient on offense as a team - instead of scoring 1.2 pts per possession you get 1.5. That can be done several ways, but done most easily by just making the same good shots we missed. I think anyone on this board can recount 3-4+ good shots within 4-5 feet of the hoop in each game that we missed & came away empty. Shoot 35% from 3 instead of 32% & we're significantly more efficient.
As great as it'd be to get more scoring from everyone, and even to have SS/AC average 10-50 a game, it's not necessary. If we have Pope scoring 25 & Win 20 & Kell 15 & everyone else in the rotation around 5 or so we are going to be very good. Especially given our emphasis on D'. You don't need 5 guys scoring 13-15 each to be successful.
I also have no doubt our offense will evolve to some degree. It has to - the same players aren't here. If we find the offense is most productive running it through Win or Pope on the post, then we may see a lot of what we did last year. Just different players. If best through JH, then maybe more of what we saw with X (although doubtful to that degree). Where we differ is I can't see any coach changing his offensive structure. We'll see the same screen action; same zone offense, etc. Shrigs just won't be the guy popping to the top of the key. As stated before, because Pope & JH are quicker with the ball than JJ & AQ, there's no doubt we'll get up the court a little faster. But we're not going to be a team that forces fast breaks. We'll run off our D' IMO. It's in Fisher's DNA. As noted, his best team at SDSU went at the same pace as last year.
Tony Bennett isn't going away from his mover/blocker offensive scheme because he's getting 4-5 stars at UVa whereas he was playing with 2-3 stars at WSU. He's allowing some more freedom, as most coaches would with either more experience and/or more talent. But the o-sets aren't changing.
As for the shot clock that'll be interesting. We've seen via NIT, etc., that it basically adds just under more possession per half, and little to scoring. Historically reducing the shot clock has worked against scoring, not for it. So time will tell. However, we averaged 18.8 seconds per possession, meaning we typically shot half-way through the shot clock on each possession, on average. What would be interesting to know would be the MEDIAN time per possession, since that's truly where our "typical" possession length stands. The 18.8 can be screwed by a high % of quick shots or high % of shots in the final 5 seconds. Since nobody can take shots between 30 & 35 any more, we know the 18.8 will go down to some degree, but by how much? Don't recall what % of our shots were in the last 5 seconds? Has to be very small. So what I'd expect, and I may be wrong, is that we'll see the % of shots taking between 25 & 30 seconds will increase dramatically, the average possession length will decrease (w/ elimination of 30-35), but the overall median length of possession will not be greatly impacted. In other words, we'll typically still take shots 16-20 seconds into the possession, just like we have most of Fisher's tenure. Hopefully we'll get a few more easier shots, but more importantly I hope we MAKE more than we did last year.
And agree 100% about the FT line. Last year was unacceptable. Increasing that by 5 points alone would significantly impact our offensive efficiency, although we did make up for many of the misses with O-rebounding & put backs.
I'm sure you know this, but AC/SS - they work on their post moves all the time; they work on catching the ball inside, etc. They've spent time doing it at every practice I've ever attended. Hopefully they also take that to the JAM center now.
Last comment - you say we'll need "major improvement" on offense to get to the S16. Major? If we shoot 40% from 2-pt vs. 37% against FSU or even made 1 more 3 vs. Wyoming we could have been a higher seed, and with a different match-up may have made the S16. We don't & won't know. Matchups are critical. But that doesn't necessarily mean changing the offense or how often we run the break or by eliminating ball screens, or even making significant adjustments. It can be simply being smarter about shot selection and making a higher % of those good shots, OR it could simply mean having a JH & Pope on the floor vs. AQ & JJ, or having Kell as a SO vs. a FR.
|
|
|
Post by standiego on Aug 28, 2015 9:13:03 GMT -8
You have numerous paragraphs with a variety of stats . My basic thoughts . Spoiled but hopeful. Our goal should be SW16 at the least ,with a decent seed . We were not SW16 level last year . Bottom line : Our defense has been good but the offense has not . So it needs improvement or some adjustments. players change every year , to me coaches have a basic scheme but need to adjust it to the players they recruit . This year with the new 30 second clock could be a great time to try it . Our coaches recruit very athletic athletes and IMO the coaches may need to let them use more of their athletic talents on offense . Our guys run and jump very well , this years team could have one of the better athletic team we have had since K.Leonard's group . Use their athletic ability . Make the other team chase us . Yes agree 100 % that we need to be Making more shots . As Coach , I and others have said Score the basketball . We need more lay ups and slam dunks . There needs to be a priority to try to get more transition points . Hit the boards , outlet pass and then trying to get to the basket as quickly as possible for high % shots . Almost every one of our players can run and attack the basket with authority. We added a very quick PG that played up tempo basketball , so there should be that scheme in place. We did not add a 3 point shooter , we have Malik and Kell , in addition to shooting from the outside both also can take it to the hoop r create their own shots .
I also believe that a way to improve the scoring is really working with SS/AC that we really need them involved with the offensive scoring . First mentally , and senior pride, they are important: scoring , passing and rebounding the ball on Offense . Can we get 15 points rather then 8 from the 5 position . Need to want the ball and do something positive with it . That also means hitting FT's ,if they want to be in at crunch time . Choice either do that or back to ball screens. But do think they have the ability to do it . I also feel that if there is the improved play by SS/AC other recruits will notice . Yes they do observe the way a team plays . read comments of recruit Zach Collins on why he chose Zags over us . He felt he was a better fit with his style and the Zags style of play .
These are adjustments things that could improve the offense . If you are not getting better ,you stay the same or fall back
|
|
|
Post by sdcoug on Aug 28, 2015 11:48:36 GMT -8
Yes they do observe the way a team plays . read comments of recruit Zach Collins on why he chose Zags over us . He felt he was a better fit with his style and the Zags style of play . These are adjustments things that could improve the offense . If you are not getting better ,you stay the same or fall back Yes, and Norain liked the way WE used our bigs, and Montague apparently like our style over Oregon, etc. It goes BOTH WAYS. As noted, Kentucky loses guys to Duke due to their style and vice versa.
Running more doesn't necessarily make you more efficient. Not even close. Wisconsin IMO should be who we model ourselves after, not BYU or Florida Gulf Coast or USC. They're closer to Fisher's typical MO. BTW, only 6 of the 30 quickest teams made the dance; 8 of the 22 most deliberate teams made the dance, including Wisconsin, Northern Iowa, Cincy, Virginia & Utah. On the flipside, an amazing 7 of the 10 teams which force their opponents to work the clock the most while on D' made the dance (we were #1).
Playing great D gets you to the dance; playing efficient offensively gets you to the dance. If we can run w/o TO's & if it yields better looks, then great. Again, we should be somewhat quicker just based on JH & Pope alone. But it's not important.
PS. I guess I missed the part where he said he didn't like SDSU's style of play or how we used our bigs:
“It was the relationship I established with the coaches,” Collins said of picking Gonzaga. “They’ve been recruiting me since last year when nobody really knew about me. Definitely how they play and it’s all about team. And also their player development.”
|
|