BYU vs. Gonzaga Dec 2014

[MikeWaters]

I thought BYU played about as perfect a game as could be reasonably expected with the players they have.

They had a chance to take down #8 on their home floor and came reasonably close to doing so.

Gonzaga, however, played far below its potential. They didn't have a great answer for BYU's small ball and zone.

Doesn't it seem like Pangos and Gary Bell have been there for 10 years?

The quality came through for Gonzaga in the end, and they pulled out of reach.

When is BYU going to shoot free throws like that again? Hopefully many times. But it felt like that performance was at least a couple standard deviations above the mean.

One wonders if Nate Austin would have made a difference. We'll find out when they play again. But given that the game is on the road, I expect a blowout Gonzaga win. They'll have a better approach and be more prepared, and if they play to their average abilities, should win easily.

It just shows that when Gonzaga is rebuilding, it's just reloading, and they are a class above BYU. BYU trots out guys that Mark Few wouldn't even bother to look at the tape (our bigs). Rose has really failed in recruiting bigs.

But we already knew that.

It was refreshing also to watch a big game where it felt like Rose wasn't being outcoached. The problems with the throw-ins being the exception.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

I thought BYU played about as perfect a game as could be reasonably expected with the players they have.

They had a chance to take down #8 on their home floor and came reasonably close to doing so.

Gonzaga, however, played far below its potential. They didn't have a great answer for BYU's small ball and zone.

Doesn't it seem like Pangos and Gary Bell have been there for 10 years?

The quality came through for Gonzaga in the end, and they pulled out of reach.

When is BYU going to shoot free throws like that again? Hopefully many times. But it felt like that performance was at least a couple standard deviations above the mean.

One wonders if Nate Austin would have made a difference. We'll find out when they play again. But given that the game is on the road, I expect a blowout Gonzaga win. They'll have a better approach and be more prepared, and if they play to their average abilities, should win easily.

It just shows that when Gonzaga is rebuilding, it's just reloading, and they are a class above BYU. BYU trots out guys that Mark Few wouldn't even bother to look at the tape (our bigs). Rose has really failed in recruiting bigs.

But we already knew that.

It was refreshing also to watch a big game where it felt like Rose wasn't being outcoached. The problems with the throw-ins being the exception.

Gonzaga has played below its potential every time they've gone to Provo. The MC clearly bothers them. We almost beat them a couple of years ago when they got the #1 seed and our team went to the NIT. We beat them two other times in Provo when they were also better than us, and neither of those wins were close games. This year may be Gonzaga's deepest and best team ever, but we came close and may have won with a healthy Austin in the lineup. BYU is playing well right now. You can argue that USF and SCU aren't good teams, and they're not, but neither were LMU, Pepperdine, Pacific last year who were able to beat us. I don't think we lose any WCC games we shouldn't this year. It's obviously still early, but the rest of the WCC so far is having a tough time adjusting to our unorthodox lineup. Also, ESPN's bracketology this morning gives us a 10 seed, matched up with Colorado State in the first round. I think we would win that game. But I doubt we actually end up matched up with a MWC team in the NCAA tournament.

[MikeWaters]

if BYU only loses 2 more games (Gonzaga twice), will be interesting to see where they are seeded.

It's like I said before. This BYU team has issues. But so do most teams.

I don't have a lot of expectations for this team. I predict one and done in the tourney.

Fast-paced teams with ultra-low quality bigs don't do well.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

if BYU only loses 2 more games (Gonzaga twice), will be interesting to see where they are seeded.

It's like I said before. This BYU team has issues. But so do most teams.

I don't have a lot of expectations for this team. I predict one and done in the tourney.

Fast-paced teams with ultra-low quality bigs don't do well.

Before Rose, the historical "expectation" for BYU basketball every year was win more games than they lose and go to the NCAA tournament on average about every 3-4 years, after which they almost always lose the first game.

Under Rose it has upgraded to make the tournament almost every year and 4 wins in 7 appearances. It's still a work in progress that hopefully means continuing to get there, but win more often. I think we will get there this year again and are better equipped than last year to pull off one win, but whether it happens depends on seeding, matchups and injuries, in my opinion. We'll be a little better next year if Collinsworth is back. Davis and Aytes will give us some interior scoring and Kaufusi and Neilson will get better. I think Toolson has the potential to replace some of Haws' scoring.

[MikeWaters]

Under Roger Reid, in less than 7.5 seasons:

BYU also made five NCAA Tournament appearances, won three conference regular season titles and two conference tournament championships during his tenure.

That's more than you are saying.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Under Roger Reid, in less than 7.5 seasons:



That's more than you are saying.

Yeah, I guess you're right. And it was a lot harder to make the tournament in previous eras.

[MikeWaters]

Roger Reid was unlikable as a person. And his style of play was ultra-boring. But it worked as long as BYU was winning.

The post-Jimmer period has been tough due to lack of talent. It's very clear that the Jimmer team was MUCH more talented than the guys we have now (there is some overlap, with pre-mission Haws and Collinsworth).

But hopefully this incoming crop will help things. Basketball is a tough gig. Winning and losing is dependent on whether you hit or miss recruiting. You aren't going to win with Worthingtons, Andruses, Nixons, and Neilsens. Not that they are terrible. They just aren't conference champion material. You need guys like that to ride the pine.

I wonder if Bartley is going to transfer after this year. He's not getting minutes while guys like Nixon are (I know they don't play the same position).

[Archaea]

Originally Posted by MikeWaters

Roger Reid was unlikable as a person. And his style of play was ultra-boring. But it worked as long as BYU was winning.

The post-Jimmer period has been tough due to lack of talent. It's very clear that the Jimmer team was MUCH more talented than the guys we have now (there is some overlap, with pre-mission Haws and Collinsworth).

But hopefully this incoming crop will help things. Basketball is a tough gig. Winning and losing is dependent on whether you hit or miss recruiting. You aren't going to win with Worthingtons, Andruses, Nixons, and Neilsens. Not that they are terrible. They just aren't conference champion material. You need guys like that to ride the pine.

I wonder if Bartley is going to transfer after this year. He's not getting minutes while guys like Nixon are (I know they don't play the same position).

Roger Reid also had Sean Bradley, did he not? One or two of those wins were with Bradley.

[BlueK]

Originally Posted by Archaea

Roger Reid also had Sean Bradley, did he not? One or two of those wins were with Bradley.

He had Bradley for one year in 1991 when he blocked 11 shots and beat Virginia. He no longer had him when they won a game in 1993. The 93 team was definitely better than the 91 team, I think.