PDA

View Full Version : USA loses again 75-67, Ellington DNP - Injured



ACCBBallFan
07-26-2007, 09:21 PM
http://www.usabasketball.com/men/2007/07_mpag_stats/07_mpag_box_07.pdf

mapei
07-26-2007, 09:45 PM
Minor consolation: at least it looks like my man Big Roy isn't at fault. Scottie Reynolds, OTOH, has a pretty bad stat line . . .

gw67
07-27-2007, 07:02 AM
Without seeing the game it is difficult to judge performances but it would appear that the USA frontcourt players continue to do their job but that the perimeter players are coming up short. White, Hibbert, Gist and Leunen have shot 34-60 in two games and outrebounded both opponents. The guards and wings, however, have shot 18-73 and have several more turnovers than assists. Neitzel has played decently but Reynolds and Weaver both start and play major minutes and neither has played well. Unfortunately, the only bench perimeter player who has made a shot has been Foster. Maynor, Ellington and Low have yet to make a shot.

USA basketball continues to do a good job picking the U19 and U21 teams but the player selection committee appears to have missed the boat this time. The USA teams in these competition need guards and wings who can hit the perimeter shot. I would take kids who can shoot the three over players like Weaver and Maynor who may be better all around players and extra big men like Dorsey. You can always hide a poor defensive player against these international teams because they are not deep in scorers. Besides, who was the defensive wiz on the USA team who couldn't stop Pinnock?

I note that the high scorer for Panama, Pinnock, was an average player for George Washington and Levy was a two-year starter for Wake. I believe that Lloreda also played college basketball but he was not a star.

gw67

crimsonandblue
07-27-2007, 04:47 PM
Min-----TotalFG-----3ptrs-------FT-------Rbs------PF------A/TO---Steals
52------4 for 20---1 for 11----2 for 4------7--------8-------5/10-----3

So, at least he's rebounding well.

Play Low. If Wright trots Reynolds back out there it's complete BS being done for the year to come at Villanova.

greybeard
07-27-2007, 05:28 PM
Play one on one with a guy who likes to shoot 16 footers, practices from that distance all the time, on condition that you start foot and a half further out, which is your shot. Don't care who is better, you will win most of the time.

Guy who plays out front is used to the inside help coming from off side at say X feet away. Knows he is safe if he forces you to come at a certain angle because his help is there. Only now it ain't.

Player selection ain't got nothing to do with it, imo; of course, I have seen none of these games and know none of the outside players selected, but that don't stop me.

grey "my theory works no matter the facts" beard

pfrduke
07-27-2007, 06:06 PM
Play one on one with a guy who likes to shoot 16 footers, practices from that distance all the time, on condition that you start foot and a half further out, which is your shot. Don't care who is better, you will win most of the time.

Guy who plays out front is used to the inside help coming from off side at say X feet away. Knows he is safe if he forces you to come at a certain angle because his help is there. Only now it ain't.

Player selection ain't got nothing to do with it, imo; of course, I have seen none of these games and know none of the outside players selected, but that don't stop me.

grey "my theory works no matter the facts" beard

Forgive my ignorance/comprehension deficiencies, but I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say here, or how it applies to our Pan-Am team. Can you (or anyone else for that matter) clarify?

greybeard
07-27-2007, 07:03 PM
Forgive my ignorance/comprehension deficiencies, but I have absolutely no idea what you're trying to say here, or how it applies to our Pan-Am team. Can you (or anyone else for that matter) clarify?

See my earlier post on the thread about the first loss. Basically, the point is that it is a different game, the International game. Different three point line, a little further out, changes what is a normal three-point look. That is huge, even if your range is longer. If you are used to knowing you can hit a three even if all the stars are not aligned perfectly from the normal three, the chemistry going into the other three is off. it has to be. The game just does not feel/look the same from spot ups outside the other line. Huge!

Ditto with the position of the interior players. Help comes with different timing from different angles and you, as an exterior player, no longer know what you thought you did regarding when you are in danger on defense or when you have the edge on offense. And, the added step at the end, please.

The differences in the game cannot be made up by selecting different players. If the game were played on our court by our rules, I would expect the outcomes to be completely the opposite.

I have not mentioned my other explanation for why we get beat in the International game, but it has something to do with the immersion of International players in a culture in which another sport, which I shall not name, that is much richer in my view in the passing/use of time/space/momentum aspects of sport than our in-bread and individualized approach to basketball currently is.

Hope that helps.

SilkyJ
07-27-2007, 10:06 PM
Min-----TotalFG-----3ptrs-------FT-------Rbs------PF------A/TO---Steals
52------4 for 20---1 for 11----2 for 4------7--------8-------5/10-----3

So, at least he's rebounding well.

Play Low. If Wright trots Reynolds back out there it's complete BS being done for the year to come at Villanova.

how many losses til we are eliminated? for some reason I just assumed it was double elim...but that was arbitrary on my part...

pfrduke
07-28-2007, 01:25 AM
See my earlier post on the thread about the first loss. Basically, the point is that it is a different game, the International game. Different three point line, a little further out, changes what is a normal three-point look. That is huge, even if your range is longer. If you are used to knowing you can hit a three even if all the stars are not aligned perfectly from the normal three, the chemistry going into the other three is off. it has to be. The game just does not feel/look the same from spot ups outside the other line. Huge!

Ditto with the position of the interior players. Help comes with different timing from different angles and you, as an exterior player, no longer know what you thought you did regarding when you are in danger on defense or when you have the edge on offense. And, the added step at the end, please.

The differences in the game cannot be made up by selecting different players. If the game were played on our court by our rules, I would expect the outcomes to be completely the opposite.

I have not mentioned my other explanation for why we get beat in the International game, but it has something to do with the immersion of International players in a culture in which another sport, which I shall not name, that is much richer in my view in the passing/use of time/space/momentum aspects of sport than our in-bread and individualized approach to basketball currently is.

Hope that helps.

yes, it did help, and thanks so much for explaining further. I hope you didn't take my first post as insulting in any way - I didn't intend it to be. From reading your other posts, I know you have a good intuitive feel for the game, so I had a feeling that what you were saying was both accurate and insightful (which it was). Maybe it was just a case of my brain being fried after a long week.

Your comment about feel also has to do with throwing people together for an all-star team in general, regardless of rule changes. We saw last year watching Duke how much time it took for everyone to adjust to playing with each other, and those guys play and practice together every day for months. With an all-star team, you don't have a lot of time to learn your teammate's tendencies, and so people might react slightly differently than you would expect, leading to turnovers, poor defensive rotation, etc. Not a whole lot can be done about that, though, aside from establishing the national team as a separate entity from either college or pro ball.

gw67
07-28-2007, 07:39 AM
C&B,

Based on the win against Argentina, you are on the mark. Wright replaced Weaver and Reynolds in starting line-up with Low and Foster. Both scored in double figures and hit some three pointers. Weaver and Maynor DNP and Reynolds still got 20 minutes off the bench although I don't think Wright had much choice since Maynor hasn't shown anything and Ellington is injured. White and the frontcourt players continued to play well.

USA plays in consolation bracket.

gw67

crimsonandblue
07-30-2007, 09:32 AM
gw,

I really like Low. He doesn't look the part, but the kid can play. And...all truth be told, I am not a fan of Reynolds. I didn't like the way he ditched OU when Samson left and Capel came in. I understood wanting out, that was legit. But I didn't like his method. And watching him last year, he's basically a mediocre pro-style volume shot guard. And he's clearly struggling. There's no sense in continuing to run him out there.

Anyway, it'd be nice if we could actually see these games to intelligently comment on them. Sometimes the numbers lie. But with Reynolds numbers, they couldn't lie that much.

gw67
07-30-2007, 10:48 AM
The USA team defeated Panama to finish in 5th place in Pan Am basketball. They won their last three games after Low and Foster replaced Reynolds and Weaver in the starting line-up. Statistics sometimes lie but the team shot 29% from three point distance and, except for Low who didn't play much in the two losses, none of the perimeter players shot well or handled the ball well. The latter can be excused because of the unfamiliarity of the players but, IMO, there is no excuse to pick a USA team that can't shoot the basketball. The last two cuts, Taylor and Carter, have a history of being better shooters than any of the players chosen for the team and the 3rd best, Ellington, got hurt.

In addition to Low, all of the frontcourt players apparently made positive contributions, particularly, White who shot and rebounded well.

http://www.usabasketball.com/news.php?news_page=07_mpag_game_05_story

gw67

mgtr
07-30-2007, 12:48 PM
I posted on another thread that the coach, Jay Wright, did not pick the team. Instead it was picked by a committee, which came up with an elephant -- white, in this case. I do not understand why a coach would allow himself to be used in such a way.

jaimedun34
07-30-2007, 01:10 PM
gw,

I really like Low. He doesn't look the part, but the kid can play. And...all truth be told, I am not a fan of Reynolds. I didn't like the way he ditched OU when Samson left and Capel came in. I understood wanting out, that was legit. But I didn't like his method. And watching him last year, he's basically a mediocre pro-style volume shot guard. And he's clearly struggling. There's no sense in continuing to run him out there.

Anyway, it'd be nice if we could actually see these games to intelligently comment on them. Sometimes the numbers lie. But with Reynolds numbers, they couldn't lie that much.

What happened with Reynolds? I didn't realize that he was an OU commit (with Damion James of Texas) until after this season was over. Those would have been 2 nice players for Capel to have this past season.

pfrduke
07-30-2007, 01:51 PM
I posted on another thread that the coach, Jay Wright, did not pick the team. Instead it was picked by a committee, which came up with an elephant -- white, in this case. I do not understand why a coach would allow himself to be used in such a way.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't this how USA Basketball does the national team as well? I thought Jerry Colangelo was substantially involved in having a say over who to invite to try out and who to ultimate keep and cut, and the K didn't have 100% control over the roster.

ACCBBallFan
07-30-2007, 02:51 PM
C&B,

Based on the win against Argentina, you are on the mark. Wright replaced Weaver and Reynolds in starting line-up with Low and Foster. Both scored in double figures and hit some three pointers. Weaver and Maynor DNP and Reynolds still got 20 minutes off the bench although I don't think Wright had much choice since Maynor hasn't shown anything and Ellington is injured. White and the frontcourt players continued to play well.

USA plays in consolation bracket.

gw67
Looks like since Argentina had already clinched the medal round, they only played Garcia 6 minutes vs US whereas in other 4 games he played 30-31-33-28.

On flip side, they played a guy names Byro 25 vs.US when prior he was 14-0-3-1 and Mainoldi 14 vs US by 9-1-1-1- in other 4 games.

I have no idea who their stars are and some of this could have been affected by injuries.

crimsonandblue
07-30-2007, 03:02 PM
I don't know how this committee was structured, but I know Bill Self was on or helped advise the committee that botched this team compilation.

As for what happened with Scottie Reynolds, just came off poorly, blowing off Capel and OU, initially saying OU was in the mix post-Kelvin and then making it clear he had committed to Samson and not the school. Basically the norm for a lot of guys, just a less attractive presentation from him than the usual. No big deal.

mgtr
07-30-2007, 08:30 PM
I don't see K agreeing to a deal where he doesn't have 100% or at least close to it on the roster. According to the article I read, about 8-10 guys on the committee decided the PanAm roster. Why would any coach worth his salt sign on to this deal? It sure didn't pay off for Wright.

pfrduke
07-30-2007, 10:52 PM
I don't see K agreeing to a deal where he doesn't have 100% or at least close to it on the roster. According to the article I read, about 8-10 guys on the committee decided the PanAm roster. Why would any coach worth his salt sign on to this deal? It sure didn't pay off for Wright.

You know, professional coaches (in all sports) sign on to these kinds of deals all the time. It's called having an owner and a GM. Very, very rarely does a professional coach (many of whom are "worth their salt") have full and total say over who is on his roster.

It would be one thing if Wright was adamantly against many of the choices made by the committee. But for all we know, he was 100% behind all the selections. And he had equal say in the selection process as anyone else, if not more, since, after all, he was the one on the hook for coaching the team.

What is it about a group selection process that offends you so much?

mgtr
07-30-2007, 11:46 PM
I don't think any reputable coach would want to walk into such a situation. Professional coaches, maybe. In part they are well paid to put up with a certain nuttiness.
What does a Pan-Am coach get out of the whole deal? Not much more than the honor and glory, I would guess. But suppose Jay Wright gets $100,000 for coaching the team. Still, he ends up with the shame and dishonor for coaching a team he didn't select. Not worth the money, in my view. He is not too likely to be asked back.
Whats wrong with a committee? Just look at the failed Congress we have, for example. Republican or Democrat, it doesn't matter. We have a bunch of self-promoting jerks who couldn't organize their way out of a paper bag.

gw67
07-31-2007, 07:15 AM
Reynolds is from Northern Virginia and was a three-year star at Herndon High School. In high school he was a high volume shooter (we called them "gunners" when I was growing up) but his team was successful and he often carried them on his back. The Post ran a couple of articles about Reynolds while he was in high school. One dealt with his friendship with Eric Hayes (He played with Hayes and Vasquez on an AAU team). The other dealt with his family. If memory serves, he was adopted and it was a "feel good" story. He came accross as a quality kid with caring parents. It is too bad that he didn't play better at the Pan Am games but the USA coaching staff should have put a governor on his shooting hand when it was obvious he was not hitting his shots.

gw67