Man, if your Mom made you wear that color when you were a baby, and you're still wearing it, it's time to grow up!
I'm eager to see the toughness displayed last night carry forward. Others may feel the same way I do, but say they are anxious about it.
The blue-tinted lenses seem to have been of exceptional strength last night.
Sure, there were some missed plays in the game, and Valentine was even responsible for a few. But anyone who thinks he wasn't the strongest official on the floor last night is letting their distaste for him or his style get in the way of accurate analysis. He'd be the first to admit that he shouldn't have counted that bucket late in the game. That wasn't his only decision of the game (it wasn't even his only mistake), but that play and a widespread distaste for his mannerisms have been allowed to completely overshadow some superb refereeing on his part. Each of his partners swallowed the whistle in some big moments yesterday--on plays that were demanding of a whistle--and every time Valentine was even remotely positioned to do so, he came to the rescue.
Just to provide one example of the bias present in this thread: Valentine has been derided for being so concerned with showing off following Seth's offensive foul, that he failed to correctly report the number (30), and instead reported Andre's (20). The mistake was easily caught when folks realized Andre was on the bench. But why is anyone so sure that the mistake was Valentine's? Occasionally, scorers make mistakes. Is it conceivable that Valentine gave an accurate signal that was misread at the table? Or that the scorer read the signal correctly and simply marked it incorrectly in the scorebook? Or that the scoreboard operator misread the signal from Valentine or misheard the oral confirmation from the scorer? Maybe the PA announcer got it wrong for some reason? Each of these things happens every once in a while, and the fact that such possibilities would never even be considered says more about the observer than about Valentine and what he did or didn't do there.
"Valentine should be fired."
Last edited by calltheobvious; 02-24-2012 at 11:26 AM. Reason: left out a couple of words
What I was originally referring to, was the ill advised fouls that ultimately limit the ability to work on the oppositions bigs in the paint when necessary. (short version)
What I saw last night, didn't qualify as that, (I'm about to rewatch the game),I thought MP1&2 and Ryan played great. I won't attempt to put a "label" on what caused the early foul concerns, but it doesn't appear to come under the heading of "ill advised", more likely "beyond player control".
I really enjoyed what I saw last night, across the board, the team always answered and that bodes well going forward.
I had posted in previous weeks that while Seth had been struggling a bit from outside, he had been getting to the hoop more via cuts, passes, and off the dribble, personally, I think it was/is a blessing in disquise.
Here is why, Seth, is now as apt to go inside rather than just pull up with a 3, it makes him much more versatile and complements Austin and Andre. He's a pure shooter, with a shooter's mentality (and this is good), because his shot has been coming back recently and last night 3 was key, I really believe the we will see his 3 evidence itself positively down the stretch run.
Last edited by throatybeard; 02-24-2012 at 02:55 PM. Reason: fix tags
Let's go DUKE !!!!
I think our strategy was to pressure the guards and prevent the bigs from getting the ball, which we did a phenomenal job of. The announcers kept asking why FSU was choosing not to go inside, but our defense had a lot to do with it. And I think playing zone would make those interior passes easier.
Other than those plays, I agree that the bigs avoided the silly fouls.
Our fans do it too but the only difference is that, in their minds, they are right. Oh wait, that really isn't a difference...
Oh yeah and Duke is also the team that annoucers are really biased against but everyone else is just paranoid
One of the keys of the game, in my opinion, was how well we would perform in the turnover battle. My man to watch was Seth Curry, who had 6 turnovers in the previous game and had to do better at FSU for us to win. We lost the TO battle 11 to 8, however, Seth only had one of those 11 and he handled the ball a lot throughout the game. With that kind of ball security against a top notch and aggressive defensive team, Seth becomes a force on the offensive end, since he can drive and dish or score and has a pull up game for mid range scoring along with the ability to hit the three.
Yeah, if I'm a UNC fan I root for FSU to win yesterday and then lose one of their remaining games. That's more likely than Duke losing before playing UNC (not saying Duke is definitely going to beat VT and Wake, but it's a safer bet that FSU will lose one).
Last edited by throatybeard; 02-24-2012 at 04:42 PM.
A movie is not about what it's about; it's about how it's about it.
Some questions cannot be answered
Who’s gonna bury who
We need a love like Johnny, Johnny and June
---Over the Rhine
There are also a few mentions of how many of the fouls the Plumlees accumulated were not induced by 'anything FSU did' (re: the FSU fans subliminally realize we got hosed by the refs).
Conclusion: we REALLY got hosed by the refs, since the other team's fans aren't even complaining about the refs!
Edit: Just did a CTRL+F on their in-game thread (>500 comments), which revealed 5 instances of complaining about the refs. Two instances were then shot down by other posters. New conclusion: these guys don't know how to complain like basketball fans.
It's interesting how obvious it is when Seth is on vs. off his game; it's like you can literally tell whether he's having a good game by just watching one play.
When he gets low with the ball and shifts his weight forward, looking for a crease to dart through, he's actually an extremely effective penetrator and creator. When he's got his head up and weight back, guarding the ball, he's almost a liability. When he launches the ball early in his release with a high release angle (most important part), it seems like it goes in 90% of the time. When he guides the ball a little more and doesn't put that big arc on it, it's just bad. I'm not sure if I can remember a player for whom the outcome of his shots were more obvious the minute he released them.