February 8, 2013

Ride the Wave?




I could wax poetically about how we just manhandled Pepperdine for the 24th straight time, or how it has been 11 years since the Waves last gave Gonzaga any trouble. I could talk about how our young perimeter’s confidence grows by the game or how our once little used end of the bench continues to improve and provide solid minutes. 22-2 is good for the best record in the nation, we are currently ranked #6 and will probably be #3 or #4 in next week’s rankings. This should be plenty to rest our hat on, right? We SHOULD be happy, right? All’s well in Spokane right? I say WRONG.

I’m not satisfied; I do not see this as “Big” victory. When I watch these 30 point drubbings of mediocre opponents like Pepperdine or Loyola Marymount I see all the tiny imperfections that teams like Florida, Indiana, or Duke would feed off of. I see our March success thwarted in the sweet 16…again. This is a team that is as talented and deep as any in the nation. Listen to the countless pundits on ESPN, Fox, or CBS who sing praises of Gonzaga on the rooftops. They mention “Final Four” and “Zags” in the same breath more often than ever before. But I don’t see this as enough; I see it as dangerous to the psyche of this team. 


It makes me cringe every time Stephen Bardo talks about how uber-talented Kelly Olynyk is, because while he has been absolutely dominant at times, there are so many others where he has disappeared against inferior competition. He plays 15 minutes in the first half last night without a foul, tentatively sitting inside watching the perimeter chuck threes barely trying to push around the small frontline of the Waves, then all of the sudden as if wrested from a deep slumber decides to exert his will and gets 2 bang-bang fouls. Why? He did not set the precedence of a physical smash mouth game with the refs; He did not earn his chips inside and create space by battling for position. He did not use his 7-0, 240 frame of superior athleticism to control the paint. I cringed. I could literally feel my face scrunch up in agony as I watched this obviously talented, but inexperienced player flail about like a fish out of water. Visions of March disappointment filled my mind.

There is so much I could discuss about this game. If I had the time, I could fill pages with anecdotal metaphors and age old sayings. Instead I will leave you with this: What happens in March will define this team, not the regular season accomplishments or legions of sportswriters who have jumped onto the Gonzaga bandwagon. If this team is hungry, they will rise above and choose their destiny. For me, I will hold my praise until the job is done.

12 comments:

Call_me_Coach said...

I keep wondering one thing:

Why is it that we have never seen the best, on paper, Gonzaga lineup?

Our best 5 players are:

1) Pangos
2) Bell
3) Harris
4) Olynyk
5) Dower

Tell me that ANYONE could stop that lineup. Scorers everywhere, forwards with perimeter skills... there would always be a heavy mismatch offensively, they could rebound like crazy. That lineup cannot be stopped.

The only issue I can see is on the defensive side. But I still think the quicks of Harris and the length of Dower and Olynyk would pose some real challenges, even if we had to go to a zone.

This lineup is a paper tiger... I want to see what it could do in real life.

Nic mooers said...

We can't run that lineup for two main reasons:

1) if we do run that lineup, we will get run over on defense because Dower is already a very mediocre defender.

2) What happens if Kelly gets into foul trouble? Who do we bring in as backup? PK is good, but is out of shape, and can't play a ton of minutes in a row. The rotation we have is perfect now, with Dower subbing the 4.

Our team is really rounding into shape, and the major "IF" on our team, which used to that of the small forward position, doesn't exist anymore. Hart is more then capable of holding his own against bigger guards defensively, Barham has shined as an efficient and competent three point specialist with good rebounding skills. Even KD looked very confident and solid last night running anything from point guard to that third guard spot.

We have a perfect rotation of big guys down low, with a great mix of guards/wings to play in the back court, why mess that up by giving Dower and more minutes? I'd rather see Barham get those minutes at the three.

Call_me_Coach said...

In general (ask Zach Lowe), bigger lineups are better defensively. Length is just a problem when you're trying to score. If that lineup were to get "Run over" I would be surprised. Besides, I don't love Barham defensively either. He's no Micah Downs.

2) I agree that this would be a change of pace lineup. But you're telling me that if we are down 6 with 8 minutes to go in March you wouldn't want to see that lineup on the floor? That team gets layups or open looks on every possession. And foul trouble be damned. But you have to see it here and there, just to SEE if it works.

kg said...

I was going to come on here and say that your proposed "ultra-big" lineup is unreasonable, but I think it could work in small stretches. Dower can shoot from the perimeter and crash the offensive boards (not his strength, mind you) while Harris lingers around the perimeter.

Here's the thing though. We're underestimating the really solid 2 man play chemistry that Harris and Olynyk have been developing this year. For stretches, that has been our entire offense. Adding another big man to the mix might clog the lane too much for them to work. I know Dower can play the perimeter, but he's at his best when he mixes his game up by posting then floating to the perimeter. He's not exactly a spot up shooter to me.

All that said, I'd love to see this lineup at least once in the coming month, maybe against WCC teams so we can tinker with it. It should give us a big scoring punch, but if they can figure out how to play D together it might be a nice crunch time lineup in the tourney.

Unknown said...

I can tell you what would happen right now with that lineup...Dower would disappear for long stretches and end up in Fews doghouse on the bench...he does it when hes one of the best scoring options out there, why would he suddenly become better with 2 better bigs out there with him?

kg said...

Theoretically, he would be wide open, but I have similar concerns. If he can get back to his "unstoppable bench scorer" mentality we'll be in great shape.

Call_me_Coach said...

Think about who checks Harris in that scenario... A traditional college 3 man? No effing way. That gets destroyed, and if you help from anywhere those guys can all shoot. The only option is to go zone against it... And playing zone against those kind of shooters hasn't worked real well against GU this year.

P-Hole said...

I'd rather have 3 players who can hit 3s reliably on the court at all times rather than an over sized line up. I think this discussion should really be about how we should see the last of Hart. KD and DB have shown that they are better and they are younger than Hart. Hart's lack of offense does not make up for his overrated defense. Every minute he plays takes minutes away from the development of two younger players who at worst are as good as Hart.

quidveritas said...

Nice write-up

All things considered, a very good game for the Zags. Even Karno was creating havoc on the floor!

Pepperdine will have nightmares about this game until they can forget about it.

As for the big line up, I'd go with most of the detractors in that our bigs are not great defenders and a quick line-up would expose that group pretty quickly.

Besides, what do you do with the rest of your bench? IIRC, this is a team game.

mjc

Unknown said...

So lighten up on yourself, lol.

It's normal for you to see imperfections and wonder if this team is all it is cracked up to be...and to want to wait for final proof.

If you were following Indiana, Duke, or Michigan, you'd see imperfections as well.

But that being said, I am the same way. Kind of like your car. Maybe everyone else thinks it looks perfect but you see the ding and scuff mark.

This team is real all right. And, what better year to have this team than this year of impostors? We may be the only real team.

Unknown said...

My comment is a reply to Josh, in case Quid is wondering what I am talking about, lol. I hate that we can't "reply" to posts right below posts...it makes it harder to follow.

Matt said...

This write up is def my speed. LOL. All is not well! Wolf WOLF!!! But, I don't think you are just crying Wolf. There are a couple issues that must be addressed just to make it out of the second round....

Rebounding. simply put we don't.

Flow, it seems it is an either or issue...either the back court is moving well, and the front court doing nadda or visa-versa. It is a bit rare that they all flow together, though when they do, who can stop them?

there was very little rhythm last night, though this could be due DB abd KD being in, and the front court not being aggressive at all...idk for sure but it was off...at least at the "eye test" level...at least IMO.

The big line up. They run the flex/motion...that is dependent upon 3 guard types, Harris may be able to do this from a set play from time to time but not as a majority of his PT.

Also, I think Josh is spot on, Dower would disappear in that scenario.

Lastly on the spirit of what Josh is eluding too in this write up...National relevance....it is predicated on what you do in the big dance. No one cares if you win the WCC. no one. If you dominate a smaller conference and then flame out under the bright lights of the Basketball big stage, you are soft. You are overrated, and kids who are elite don't want to come to the school who's Rep on the National scale is currently personified by the enduring image of it's "best player Ammo, laying on the court crying. Sorry to break it to you but that is perceived as soft. I was and still am embarrassed by that moment. It has surpassed "the slipper still fits" persona and has become the lasting image burned into the mind of the average basketball fan when it comes to GU.

This team is talented and they play together but so what? Is it good enough to win the WCC..yep it sure is, is it good enough to whip the team in the first round and even beat the one in the second...yep sure is...but does it have the ability to buckle down and beat the likes of Cuse,Sparty,OSU? Win with talent AND grit??? Does it have the desire to shed the soft label? Is this team willing to act counter to their head coach and his personality and get nasty? That is what it is going to take for GU to drop the Soft, overrated, overachieving, cry when we play soft and lose label it has nationally.

Personally, I think they can. Harris has some serious nastiness in him and I have seen some fire from KP and Dower as well...but they are going to have to take that chemistry they have and use it to fight for each other, to fight for relevance to show the nation, not just the WCC this is a legit national powerhouse.