Houston 2/27 7:00 ESPN2

[Lobot]

After the streaming debacle for some of us with the TCU game, it's nice to be on the main ESPN channels for this one.

The Cougars are 24-3 have not lost a home game this season. They have beaten everyone at the Fertitta Center by double digits with the exception of Iowa St last week. One thing to note in that game is that Houston held on to the ball against the Cyclones and only committed nine turnovers. They are not going to hand us the ball tomorrow night.

On the flip side of that, we can't hand UH the ball because it's almost a guaranteed two points for them if you turn it over. This game will be won or lost in the first 8:00 or so, I would think. If we don't start fast it's going to be a very long night. We absolutely cannot get beat up on the boards at the beginning like the game at 5/3. The Bearcats are going to need good chemistry for this to work out and we're going to need good Dan and his scoring mentality sans the turnovers for this one.

ESPN predictor is giving us a less than 4% chance to win this game. I'm going to try reverse psychology and say that's pretty close to the mark for once.

https://www.espn.com/mens-college-ba...stats/_/id/248

[leo from jersey]

“This song’s only six words long…..”

more than one verse but what UC has to do. Buy a floor leader.

[Lobot]

as George Harrison sang " I got my mind set on you
I got my mind set on you
I got my mind set on you
I got my mind set on you

But it's gonna take money
A whole lotta spendin' money
It's gonna take plenty of money
To do it right, child"

Rufus it is a help to know that you may be replaced if money is there to buy your replacement. Plus if you are getting paid someone is in your ear (agent, parent) and they often correct your behavior. If not and if you have money, buy a winner. That is the way that tune is sung today sadly. I still think you can help most by wise coaching and confidence building. Plus cash. Things may go worse as only time will tell as you alluded to. Money isn't the only incentive. At least the business profs at UC taught that. We can look to the NBA to see how it has worked.

“This song’s only six words long…..”

[leeraymond]

I would look at all of this in a different light. #1: Houston has been sitting at the top of KenPom all year long. They are as deep, as fast, as talented as anyone this year. Not a win on your schedule. Cincinnati on the other hand had been saddled with the hold overs from the last regime...DeJulius, et al. Miller did the decent thing by respecting them. This year he was tasked with building a team to compete in a league that is as deep as any going back to the 1980s Big East. I see this hobbled together line up and all things considered...it performed up to its talent level.

For me, Miller has two more years to recruit before I would hope to see a team challenging in the Big 12. This team lacked outside shooting. It turned the ball over way too much. That starts with the type of experienced money guards that Baylor/Texas/Houston and a couple of other teams in the Big 12 have. The team rebounded well enough to stay in games despite its limitations. That is a good sign. I would be surprised if next year's edition of the Cats is not more solid than this one. Then in 2026 you should be top 5 in this league. If not, then you reconsider Wes.

I hear you. However, next year's team will be younger and somewhat inexperienced (depending on what players come back). Also, the BIG 12 is going to be a MONSTER next year. Remember the BIG 12 adds Arizona, Arizona State, Utah, and Colorado next year (the BIG 12 loses Texas and Oklahoma). So, I am not so sure if UC is going to fair much better next year than this year. We can always hope that it does.

[leo from jersey]

There's a scene in the Soprano's where Tony tells Bobby Bacala what he can do with his quotation book. Since Leo is from Jersey, I think it applies.

Motivation is not the issue. The players and the staff don't have the legs + mental fortitude currently to win night in and out in this year's Big 12. The bearcats look like a last place horse coming down the stretch. No point in calling for the jockey to whip the horse endlessly to the finish. Its not through fault, just lack of experience. We need to build upon our foundation and continue to grow the program which has been happening under Wes. As mentioned, the structure of NCAA with essentially every season being a new season make achieving this incredibly difficult for programs who don't have it. There isn't a coach in the game that has a playbook for it yet. Mick sure as **** can't do it in UCLA. The blue blood coaches have either retired to avoid it or haven't found success either.

I agree with you but we need to try all things. The heads are not in the game. By now playing out of control is not a lack of maturity but bb knowledge. I am not addressing the frosh. It is going to take coaching + money. I hope UC goes in that direction. BTW why do few mention Iowa State and their 3rd year coach? What is he doing there? Doesn't he have 9 new players with 6 frosh? I guess there are exceptions to every excuse.

[leo from jersey]

Kenyon's field goal shooting numbers went down every year of his college career. He improved drastically over his career, but it wasn't because of better shooting.

He made the shots when they counted --- DePaul

[Gypo O'Leary]

I would look at all of this in a different light. #1: Houston has been sitting at the top of KenPom all year long. They are as deep, as fast, as talented as anyone this year. Not a win on your schedule. Cincinnati on the other hand had been saddled with the hold overs from the last regime...DeJulius, et al. Miller did the decent thing by respecting them. This year he was tasked with building a team to compete in a league that is as deep as any going back to the 1980s Big East. I see this hobbled together line up and all things considered...it performed up to its talent level.

For me, Miller has two more years to recruit before I would hope to see a team challenging in the Big 12. This team lacked outside shooting. It turned the ball over way too much. That starts with the type of experienced money guards that Baylor/Texas/Houston and a couple of other teams in the Big 12 have. The team rebounded well enough to stay in games despite its limitations. That is a good sign. I would be surprised if next year's edition of the Cats is not more solid than this one. Then in 2026 you should be top 5 in this league. If not, then you reconsider Wes.

[sedz]

Regardless of the degree of control, random events can and do influence outcomes. You know, as a coach, once he/she puts a player on the floor/field, there is not an awful lot that he/she can truly control. The best plans in the world often times do NOT work. Each game in and of itself is one BIG random event. However, with continuous trials or contests, probabilities in the form of averages begin to emerge. Now we have some data points and patterns that we can measure. Here is the crazy part, with each game and the random events within games, the probabilities change.

So as a coach, he/she has control over what happens in practice and in training. Coaches have control of action plans and strategy. The implementation of that strategy is the jurisdiction of the players. Players are victims of probability and the randomness that occurs in games. That influences outcomes and outcomes become wins or losses. You are right, that is what makes sports so much fun. Winning also helps.

100% agree. Enjoy the randomness. Evaluate based on (always changing) patterns and strategies.

[leo from jersey]

Regardless of the degree of control, random events can and do influence outcomes. You know, as a coach, once he/she puts a player on the floor/field, there is not an awful lot that he/she can truly control. The best plans in the world often times do NOT work. Each game in and of itself is one BIG random event. However, with continuous trials or contests, probabilities in the form of averages begin to emerge. Now we have some data points and patterns that we can measure. Here is the crazy part, with each game and the random events within games, the probabilities change.

So as a coach, he/she has control over what happens in practice and in training. Coaches have control of action plans and strategy. The implementation of that strategy is the jurisdiction of the players. Players are victims of probability and the randomness that occurs in games. That influences outcomes and outcomes become wins or losses. You are right, that is what makes sports so much fun. Winning also helps.

emerge as you said is the key -- it is ever changing based on the present. Yes use them, but coach to make better ones.

[leeraymond]

Random variation can't be controlled. Overall strategy can. That's when you get into noticeable patterns.

If Newman is shooting 49% with low usage, that would most likely go down with increased usage. Yes, he would score more, but at a lower efficiency. I have said several times that the wings need to be more aggressive because our PGs are the most inefficient scorers on the team but they take a lot of shots. So I agree that Newman should be more aggressive, but that alone won't fix our offense. The average offense scores 1.06 points per possession. So if you're getting one shot per possession (offensive and rebounds and turnovers are even), then you need a true shooting percentage of 53 (or an effective field goal percentage around 51). Here's our team's true shooting percentages in conference:
63 Aziz (low usage)
60 Jamille
58 Newman (low usage)
52 Simas
49 Reed (low usage)
49 Skillings
47 Vik
46 Jizzle
42 Day Day

Jamille is our only efficient, high usage scorer. Simas is close. Aziz and Newman are efficient but low usage. Vik is capable when he's in the right place. Our PGs are bad, but they have the highest usage rates on the team. Skillings is third highest. That's a big problem. We've got to find a way to transfer shots from our poor shooters to our good ones. I think it starts by playing Jamille and Simas together a lot, and ideally Vik when he's in the right headspace. And Newman increasing his usage could be an important piece too.

Regardless of the degree of control, random events can and do influence outcomes. You know, as a coach, once he/she puts a player on the floor/field, there is not an awful lot that he/she can truly control. The best plans in the world often times do NOT work. Each game in and of itself is one BIG random event. However, with continuous trials or contests, probabilities in the form of averages begin to emerge. Now we have some data points and patterns that we can measure. Here is the crazy part, with each game and the random events within games, the probabilities change.

So as a coach, he/she has control over what happens in practice and in training. Coaches have control of action plans and strategy. The implementation of that strategy is the jurisdiction of the players. Players are victims of probability and the randomness that occurs in games. That influences outcomes and outcomes become wins or losses. You are right, that is what makes sports so much fun. Winning also helps.

[leo from jersey]

Miller is recruiting these kids by promising them that they can play a wide open style, ( as Sedz says midrange shots) but when he tries to structure another offense these kids refuse or can't adjust. So I think that's what we're seeing with Vik. In today's environment a kid can just leave if he doesn't like how he's being used or if he's not getting paid. Sampson and others buid winning teams because they found a way to keep the guys he wants to keep and plays the way he wants them to play. So at seasons end end we'll see if Miller is able to Keep JJ or Vik or DS. You can't build a team when you have multiple players turning over every year.

For decades or since the 3 point shot, the mid range has been abandoned - a drive or a 3. You see it in grade school, JV, Varsity, college. The tragedy is seeing 6 or 7 year olds jacking up shots will no chance to come near the rim. Hero ball and the lacking of fundamentals starting with the Brain and going down to the feet.

[Big_Daddy_Bearcat_07]

There's a scene in the Soprano's where Tony tells Bobby Bacala what he can do with his quotation book. Since Leo is from Jersey, I think it applies.

Motivation is not the issue. The players and the staff don't have the legs + mental fortitude currently to win night in and out in this year's Big 12. The bearcats look like a last place horse coming down the stretch. No point in calling for the jockey to whip the horse endlessly to the finish. Its not through fault, just lack of experience. We need to build upon our foundation and continue to grow the program which has been happening under Wes. As mentioned, the structure of NCAA with essentially every season being a new season make achieving this incredibly difficult for programs who don't have it. There isn't a coach in the game that has a playbook for it yet. Mick sure as **** can't do it in UCLA. The blue blood coaches have either retired to avoid it or haven't found success either.

[Rufus]

Miller is recruiting these kids by promising them that they can play a wide open style, ( as Sedz says midrange shots) but when he tries to structure another offense these kids refuse or can't adjust. So I think that's what we're seeing with Vik. In today's environment a kid can just leave if he doesn't like how he's being used or if he's not getting paid. Sampson and others buid winning teams because they found a way to keep the guys he wants to keep and plays the way he wants them to play. So at seasons end end we'll see if Miller is able to Keep JJ or Vik or DS. You can't build a team when you have multiple players turning over every year.

[sedz]

sometimes we need to make a poor shooter a good one - example Kenyon Martin -- hours in the gym and someone willing to shag the balls. That is for next year though. Plus do all have Kenyon's work ethic. I have discovered that many do like to shoot. It is the other tools that many ignore.

Kenyon's field goal shooting numbers went down every year of his college career. He improved drastically over his career, but it wasn't because of better shooting.

[leo from jersey]

Random variation can't be controlled. Overall strategy can. That's when you get into noticeable patterns.

If Newman is shooting 49% with low usage, that would most likely go down with increased usage. Yes, he would score more, but at a lower efficiency. I have said several times that the wings need to be more aggressive because our PGs are the most inefficient scorers on the team but they take a lot of shots. So I agree that Newman should be more aggressive, but that alone won't fix our offense. The average offense scores 1.06 points per possession. So if you're getting one shot per possession (offensive and rebounds and turnovers are even), then you need a true shooting percentage of 53 (or an effective field goal percentage around 51). Here's our team's true shooting percentages in conference:
63 Aziz (low usage)
60 Jamille
58 Newman (low usage)
52 Simas
49 Reed (low usage)
49 Skillings
47 Vik
46 Jizzle
42 Day Day

Jamille is our only efficient, high usage scorer. Simas is close. Aziz and Newman are efficient but low usage. Vik is capable when he's in the right place. Our PGs are bad, but they have the highest usage rates on the team. Skillings is third highest. That's a big problem. We've got to find a way to transfer shots from our poor shooters to our good ones. I think it starts by playing Jamille and Simas together a lot, and ideally Vik when he's in the right headspace. And Newman increasing his usage could be an important piece too.

sometimes we need to make a poor shooter a good one - example Kenyon Martin -- hours in the gym and someone willing to shag the balls. That is for next year though. Plus do all have Kenyon's work ethic. I have discovered that many do like to shoot. It is the other tools that many ignore.