Brackins: no more 3's!!!

**djkent01** · 10-28-2008, 12:55 PM

I'm fine with CB shooting the three as long as he only takes them in the flow - and doesn't constantly hang around the perimeter looking for them.

**kg-cyclone** · 10-28-2008, 12:57 PM

Originally Posted by cgwarrior33

Motion offenses are based on reads...(so is the dribble drive motion offense, if reports are correct that we will be running this soon)...the ability to have players who can compliment each other at the positions to allow you to make the correct reads and take what the defense gives you. CB and AT can both shoot it out to 15-18 consistently. This allows them to read off of each other and use inside out techniques. The one thing that hurt us last year was the lack of ability to do motion based movements. Coach Mac used sets too many times last year when I thought "just letting them play" would have been to our advantage. The team seemed to, at times, get pretty set in how they would do things...i.e. only down screen. I think sometimes with sets, players get too into a certain movement...down screens, rear screens...and forget the double screens, fade screens, pick and roll or pick and pop can be highly effective in just getting the ball reversed and softening the defense.

Actually it was lack of options...

**cybsball20** · 10-28-2008, 01:00 PM

Originally Posted by kg-cyclone

Actually it was lack of options...

even the worst players can score in a motion based offense. When you stand around it puts too much pressure on one or two guys.

**mplscyclone** · 10-28-2008, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by cybsball20

even the worst players can score in a motion based offense. When you stand around it puts too much pressure on one or two guys.

I agree. When they were moving around, it looked like they knew more what they were doing, and just looked better overall.

At the beginning of the year, they were doing so much standing around, that it was easy to defend. It just looked bad when guys were standing around.

I've always had the philosophy with sports that if you don't have many opportunities, or you don't have enough options, that you need to create opportunities and create options.

This is how teams with less talent are able to compete.

When I wrestled in high school, we had a lot less talent than many schools in our conference. We focused not only on technique of course, but also conditioning.

Conditioning was something that could be controlled, and we decided we'd be the best conditioned team. I believe we were one of the best ,as we had some practices with other schools, even some better than us and they had to sit out some of our practices and walk during conditioning.

Ok, so where am I going with this? A lot of top high school wrestlers, tend not to be as conditioned. This is often times because they can put the match away either with little effort OR before the third period. If you have the philosophy that you're going to work them until the third, you knew you had a chance. We upset several ranked guys just because they hit the will when they had to work in the 3rd period. A lot of guys we didn't beat, if we got in the third, they'd win by a close margin.

How does this relate to basketball or any other sport? When you have lacking talent, you gotta make things happen. There are things you can control like attitude, moving around, working for boards, etc. Not saying you'll win everytime, but you'll put yourself in a better position to win if you don't.

I hope this year, we see a lot more motion and a lot more fiestyness with these guys. On paper, we won't have as much talent as some of our Big XII foes, but if they can scrap and try to make things happen, they may win some guys no one would expect to.

Again, this is all speculation. I'd like to see how the team looks, and I'm confident the coaching staff knows very well all of the things I've typed and the team will be fine. Just wanted to write about college basketball.

I'm pumped the season is starting soon!

**kg-cyclone** · 10-28-2008, 01:19 PM

Originally Posted by mplscyclone

I've always had the philosophy with sports that if you don't have many opportunities, or you don't have enough options, that you need to create opportunities and create options.

Petey is very politically correct...

Iowa State basketball: Young Cyclones have room to grow | DesMoinesRegister.com | The Des Moines Register

**cybsball20** · 10-28-2008, 01:21 PM

I hope this Chemistry guy averages a double double... Best team I ever played on we had fist fights at practice, guys that didn't get along, clashing egos, but still kicked tail.

Of course the ones that fought the most were identical twins.

**cgwarrior33** · 10-28-2008, 01:37 PM

Originally Posted by kg-cyclone

Actually it was lack of options...

I would not say it was a lack of options, it was how the options worked with each other. CB, Jiri, and AT all complimented each other. We also had some guards that complemented each other as well. I was just not sure how well the were able to play without bounderies so to speak. I am not saying this was Mac's fault for how he ran things, my point is that the parts need to figure out how to work with each other. Our movement was terrible at times last year. It was like if they weren't running a set, they had no idea what to do after that. Unfortunately this is a by product of a transition phase in the program. Some is coaching, some is player discipline. The chance to succeed was there, our execution was just terrible at times.

**WalkingCY** · 10-28-2008, 01:42 PM

Horace Grant on NBA Jam was not the best.

That honor went to Jeff Hornacek. And, I always hated when someone would pick Charlette. Weak.

**kg-cyclone** · 10-28-2008, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by cgwarrior33

I would not say it was a lack of options, it was how the options worked with each other. CB, Jiri, and AT all complimented each other. We also had some guards that complemented each other as well. I was just not sure how well the were able to play without bounderies so to speak. I am not saying this was Mac's fault for how he ran things, my point is that the parts need to figure out how to work with each other. Our movement was terrible at times last year. It was like if they weren't running a set, they had no idea what to do after that. Unfortunately this is a by product of a transition phase in the program. Some is coaching, some is player discipline. The chance to succeed was there, our execution was just terrible at times.

Part of Mac's opening comments...He's basically telling you what was going on the only way he can...believe it or not.

"But I think to have a successful program at this level, you've got to try to eliminate egos, as much selfish attitude as possible."

**DSEV377** · 10-28-2008, 01:52 PM

I don't care where he shoots from if he scores 33 a night. That being said get your butt down in the blocks where we need a big to do some damage.

**peachy** · 10-28-2008, 01:52 PM

Originally Posted by WalkingCY

Horace Grant on NBA Jam was not the best.

That honor went to Jeff Hornacek. And, I always hated when someone would pick Charlette. Weak.

Charlotte was weak? With Zo and Grand-ma-ma? Are you kidding me? They were the 2 baddest mo fo's on the game. I would always play with them, because they brought the pain down low. Pure elbows and pushin.

**johnsonjj** · 10-28-2008, 03:09 PM

Originally Posted by mplscyclone

You can have an inside-outside game without shooting many 3s. Look at Tim Duncan, Kevin Garnett, Patrick Ewing, Karl Malone, etc. A 15-18 foot jumper is enough to keep the defense on its toes.

Yes, the 8 trey's vs. Baylor was sexy, but what I was really impressed with was how well Craig played the face up from 15-18. He can hit it, which means people have to play up on him, but he showed he could put the ball on the floor and drive to the hole athletically. In this thread I have heard him compared to Julo in that regard, but for those of you around in Julo's days (I was in grad school) he travelled everyother time he tried to put it on the floor from the elbow during his Frosh season.

I think Craig will be great in a high-low offense, and would be great in a pick an roll type offense that Utah used to run with Malone-Stockton. Yes, we need him to be stronger to finish like Malone could, and please not as many fade aways as Malone, but he has the game to play that. On the other hand, there is the fact that we haven't proven to have a Stockton yet.

We needed Jiri to bang, and he showed he could learn that. What people forget about Fizer is that: A) we had guards that could rebound; b) While Stevie was only 6'4" or 5" he could jump outta the gym; c) it is a misnomer that we had no other "big" as we had both Shirley and Rancik (albeit one or the other was injured during chunks of the season)

I don't mind the occasional three, the only issue is that who will be underneath rebounding when he misses it? We have other guys that can spot up, but not lots of big bodies on the boards. If he is in the flow and gets it...take it. Otherwise, let him move around and make the other team's big guard his mobility.

**ISUFan22** · 10-28-2008, 03:11 PM

Originally Posted by kg-cyclone

It's not about changing anybodys game...it's adding tools/weapons to keep the defense honest.

If that's the case, I'd like to see us bring in a hacksaw and heat-seeking rocket launcher. We'd be totally unstoppable then.

**johnsonjj** · 10-28-2008, 03:17 PM

Originally Posted by ISUFan22

If that's the case, I'd like to see us bring in a hacksaw and heat-seeking rocket launcher. We'd be totally unstoppable then.

Is that like the military axiom that "incoming" has the right of way?

**jbhtexas** · 10-28-2008, 03:43 PM

Originally Posted by Knownothing

If Brackens is getting good at shooting 3 pointers I have no problem with him drilling them. Just because he is tall does not mean he can't make 3's. How awesome would it be if he could start hitting them consistantly. He would be impossible to guard. Inside outside game by himself.

Lots of "if"'s in that paragraph...