Online Now 2916

Horns247 Board

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

On this Board 1053
Record: 4156 (12/1/2012)

Online now 2138
Record: 7224 (2/22/2012)

Boards ▾

Horns247 Board

The place to talk about the Texas Longhorns

6th Street

The place for off topic discussion on Hookem

Reply

Something that's becoming clear with Barnes' teams

  • A Villanova team that beat Louisville....

    NYHorn

  • bierce said...

    You mean Baylor clobbered St. John's.

    St. John's also lost to San Francisco (1-5 in the WCC) by 16, to Murray State by 5 (blowing a 7 point lead with 7 minutes left), to UNC-Asheville by 7, and was pounded by 12 points in OT by a bad Villanova team.

    All one can really say about St. John's is that it gives very inconsistent play.

    Yes, you are correct as to what I meant. confused

    “Kansas may wind up number one in these polls, but that would be so unfair to Texas...” -- Len Elmore, 2/13/11

    Bob in Houston ●

  • NYHorn said...

    A Villanova team that beat Louisville....

    Teams tend to have a good night when an opponent has a bad one at least once during a season. Witness Texas against UNC.

    Nova also lost by 22 to Alabama, by 18 at home to Columbia, by 15 at home to Temple, and to Providence.

    bierce ●

  • bierce said...

    The first two paragraphs ring true. The final statement above is false.

    Kenpom offensive efficiency ratings

    2003 3 2004 15 2005 25 2006 4 2007 5 2008 3 2009 39 2010 25 2011 21 2012 31 2013 243

    The poor offenses have been a product of the last 5 years, and they really haven't been that bad until the dramatic collapse of this season.

    Bierce, that is like pointing pointing at Greg Davis's scoring stats and saying he was a great offensive coordinator. Some years, we have a mix of players and defense that allow us to score. That isn't the same as having good offense.

    El General

  • GPie said...

    Yes, you are missing something. You're being obtuse when your dumb excuse was blown up by a Big East private school.

    Look at the number of minutes for their SRs and JRs. They are all ~1 min per game or "did not accumulate stats"

    Unless your position that just being on the team and at practice is worth so much.

    The same St. John's team that has gone 3-3 in conference since getting the services of Jamal Branch, a third year sophomore? Who is now giving them 25 mpg.

    Youth is not an excuse. It's a fact. Maybe when you've actually coached a season you would understand that.

    Should we have won at least one conference game by now? Sure. We have 2 OT loses and had Kansas down the entire game. Young teams make mistakes that cost you games. We will not make the same mistakes next year.

    HoopsCoach

  • HoopsCoach said...

    Should we have won at least one conference game by now? Sure. We have 2 OT loses and had Kansas down the entire game. Young teams make mistakes that cost you games. We will not make the same mistakes next year.

    I told someone after the game against KU that next year they will most of the close games they have lost this year, and two years from now, they might win them all.

    “Kansas may wind up number one in these polls, but that would be so unfair to Texas...” -- Len Elmore, 2/13/11

    Bob in Houston ●

  • Bob in Houston said...

    I told someone after the game against KU that next year they will most of the close games they have lost this year, and two years from now, they might win them all.

    Now that is absurd.

    Hoop98

  • Hoop98 said...

    Barnes has become Penders except with less alcohol stink and more lizard lip licking (from Shaggy):

    Rick's last 4 1/2 seasons and Penders' last 5:

    NCAA tournament appearances: Penders - 4; Barnes - 4

    NCAA tournament wins: Penders - 5; Barnes - 2

    Conference winning %: Penders - 66.2% (49-25); Barnes - 58.0% (40-29)

    Seasons ranked at end of year: Penders - 3; Barnes - 2

    Did you think this was smart? It's as dumb here as it is there.

    Beast 512

  • Hoop98 said...

    Now that is absurd.

    Why?

    El General

  • bierce said...

    The first two paragraphs ring true. The final statement above is false.

    Kenpom offensive efficiency ratings

    2003 3 2004 15 2005 25 2006 4 2007 5 2008 3 2009 39 2010 25 2011 21 2012 31 2013 243

    The poor offenses have been a product of the last 5 years, and they really haven't been that bad until the dramatic collapse of this season.

    I would argue three years of that good offense was basically the result of two guys breaking down the defense on every single play as opposed to an offensive structure.
    Ford - two seasons
    DJ - one
    I think that is where some of the frustration lies when they are overly reliant on dribble penetration from one player as your base offense.
    TT's freshman year until the collapse was the best system offense I have seen Texas run during Rick's tenure.
    Durant's year was more of a byproduct of his talent for me.

    signature image signature image signature image

    clacknasty ●

  • El General said...

    Bierce, that is like pointing pointing at Greg Davis's scoring stats and saying he was a great offensive coordinator. Some years, we have a mix of players and defense that allow us to score. That isn't the same as having good offense.

    Having been called out on your blatantly false assertion that Texas has always "sucked at offense" under Barnes and could never even "dream" of good offense, you are now guilty of misrepresenting my words to contend that I think Barnes is a great offensive coordinator. You must live in a very strange universe in which everything is divided into "suck" and "great" to conclude that my saying "not suck" must mean that I intend for you to hear "great."

    Now stop repeating false statements and open up to some reality.

    Barnes is not a great offensive coach, I freely admit that; however, it can't be ignored that his last ten teams finished inside the top 40 in offensive efficiency with an average rating of 17th. A guy who sucks at designing an offense won't be able to do that, no matter what kind of talent he has, and what kind of talent did he have in 2004 to be 15th in offensive efficiency? Do you really want to tell me that Tucker, Mouton, Ivey, Boddicker, Thomas, Taylor, Buckman, Klotz, Paulino, Moreno, and Harris is an offensive juggernaut? Those are some good players that blended pretty well into making a sum greater than its parts, but we're talking about a guy with a cup of coffee in the NBA, a several year way down the rotation guy, and a recently finally got on a team guy.

    You want to claim the offensive efficiency was the result of defense? Offensive efficiency can be increased somewhat by taking advantage of transition, but Texas has never been a team to utilize presses or to force that many turnovers. Case in point--the 2003-04 team was 215th in the country in forcing the opponent into a turnover in 19.7% of possessions. The Final Four team was 272nd. The Aldridge-Tucker-Gibson Elite Eight team was 205th. And so on.

    Texas tended to have high offensive efficiency numbers for a few reasons, but the two most noteworthy over that period of time have probably been limiting turnovers and getting offensive rebounds.

    Stat (rank 2003, 04, 06, 07, 08, 11)

    1) turnovers per possession (17th, 7th, 98th, 10th, 1st, 31st)
    2) offensive rebound % (2nd, 2nd, 4th, 68th, 61st, 25th)

    You may say that is the players talent coming through. I say that is only partly true. It's by design. It's what Barnes has designed and taught, and it works. It may not be pretty in some ways, but it is effective. If your team has more possessions in which it can shoot at the basket, it will tend to win. The more you can up the ratio of your shots vs. their shots, the more likely you are to win. You may not like it, but it makes for a more efficient offense and yields points.

    This year Texas is 123rd in offensive rebounding percentage and 288th in turnovers per possession. That goes a long way to explaining why the team is so dismal offensively.

    Does this kind of offense need a great point guard? It needs a good ball handling point guard, but not necessarily one that is a great shooter. Ford was a lousy shooter. The pile of guys running point in 03-04 were nothing more than a decent group, none of whom stood out as being anything like a wizard with the ball. Augustin was the only guy who was both a plus ball handler and plus shooter, and in 2010-11 there wasn't anyone on the team who could do both at a competent level.

    So yeah, Barnes is ok at designing and implementing an offense. It isn't great stuff by any means, but it does the job.

    bierce ●

  • bierce said...

    Having been called out on your blatantly false assertion that Texas has always "sucked at offense" under Barnes and could never even "dream" of good offense, you are now guilty of misrepresenting my words to contend that I think Barnes is a great offensive coordinator. You must live in a very strange universe in which everything is divided into "suck" and "great" to conclude that my saying "not suck" must mean that I intend for you to hear "great."

    Now stop repeating false statements and open up to some reality.

    Barnes is not a great offensive coach, I freely admit that; however, it can't be ignored that his last ten teams finished inside the top 40 in offensive efficiency with an average rating of 17th. A guy who sucks at designing an offense won't be able to do that, no matter what kind of talent he has, and what kind of talent did he have in 2004 to be 15th in offensive efficiency? Do you really want to tell me that Tucker, Mouton, Ivey, Boddicker, Thomas, Taylor, Buckman, Klotz, Paulino, Moreno, and Harris is an offensive juggernaut? Those are some good players that blended pretty well into making a sum greater than its parts, but we're talking about a guy with a cup of coffee in the NBA, a several year way down the rotation guy, and a recently finally got on a team guy.

    You want to claim the offensive efficiency was the result of defense? Offensive efficiency can be increased somewhat by taking advantage of transition, but Texas has never been a team to utilize presses or to force that many turnovers. Case in point--the 2003-04 team was 215th in the country in forcing the opponent into a turnover in 19.7% of possessions. The Final Four team was 272nd. The Aldridge-Tucker-Gibson Elite Eight team was 205th. And so on.

    Texas tended to have high offensive efficiency numbers for a few reasons, but the two most noteworthy over that period of time have probably been limiting turnovers and getting offensive rebounds.

    Stat (rank 2003, 04, 06, 07, 08, 11)

    1) turnovers per possession (17th, 7th, 98th, 10th, 1st, 31st) 2) offensive rebound % (2nd, 2nd, 4th, 68th, 61st, 25th)

    You may say that is the players talent coming through. I say that is only partly true. It's by design. It's what Barnes has designed and taught, and it works. It may not be pretty in some ways, but it is effective. If your team has more possessions in which it can shoot at the basket, it will tend to win. The more you can up the ratio of your shots vs. their shots, the more likely you are to win. You may not like it, but it makes for a more efficient offense and yields points.

    This year Texas is 123rd in offensive rebounding percentage and 288th in turnovers per possession. That goes a long way to explaining why the team is so dismal offensively.

    Does this kind of offense need a great point guard? It needs a good ball handling point guard, but not necessarily one that is a great shooter. Ford was a lousy shooter. The pile of guys running point in 03-04 were nothing more than a decent group, none of whom stood out as being anything like a wizard with the ball. Augustin was the only guy who was both a plus ball handler and plus shooter, and in 2010-11 there wasn't anyone on the team who could do both at a competent level.

    So yeah, Barnes is ok at designing and implementing an offense. It isn't great stuff by any means, but it does the job.

    Thanks for taking the time to put those thoughts together in one post, bierce. You, and others on this board have made many of these points before over time. Sometimes, they just need to be repeated ... over and over an over, again.

    BudreauReye

  • bierce said...

    This year Texas is 123rd in offensive rebounding percentage and 288th in turnovers per possession. That goes a long way to explaining why the team is so dismal offensively.

    And they rank 223rd in forcing turnovers. This team gets almost no easy baskets.

    “Kansas may wind up number one in these polls, but that would be so unfair to Texas...” -- Len Elmore, 2/13/11

    Bob in Houston ●

  • Bob in Houston said...

    And they rank 223rd in forcing turnovers. This team gets almost no easy baskets.

    And 227th in turnovers per opponent possession. That turnover stat is pretty typical of Texas teams under Barnes. The great defensive team of 2010-11 was 248th.

    Forcing turnovers to feed the offense has never been a feature of Barnesball. I thought he should have tried it in 2009-10 when everything went to hell with that team, but that would have been too drastic a change, I guess, and it maybe even lacked the pieces to do so after Balbay hurt his knee, but that team with Bradley and Balbay was relatively good at forcing turnovers--168th.

    bierce ●

  • HoopsCoach said...

    The same St. John's team that has gone 3-3 in conference since getting the services of Jamal Branch, a third year sophomore? Who is now giving them 25 mpg.

    Youth is not an excuse. It's a fact. Maybe when you've actually coached a season you would understand that.

    Should we have won at least one conference game by now? Sure. We have 2 OT loses and had Kansas down the entire game. Young teams make mistakes that cost you games. We will not make the same mistakes next year.

    Absolutely true. Young teams have to learn how to close out games. There is one issue that affects the end game that may not be corrected though; free throw shooting. Outside of McClellan; we are an atrocious free throw shooting team. When I look at Ridley and Ibeh; I don't see either one of them ever hitting much about .500 from the line.

    gordosan

  • bierce said...

    And 227th in turnovers per opponent possession. That turnover stat is pretty typical of Texas teams under Barnes. The great defensive team of 2010-11 was 248th.

    Forcing turnovers to feed the offense has never been a feature of Barnesball. I thought he should have tried it in 2009-10 when everything went to hell with that team, but that would have been too drastic a change, I guess, and it maybe even lacked the pieces to do so after Balbay hurt his knee, but that team with Bradley and Balbay was relatively good at forcing turnovers--168th.

    That group was the best that Rick has ever had at pressuring the ball as a group. Defensive pressure was why we started the season the way we did. But we slowly lost most of the pieces as the season progressed. At the start of the season, that team could turn people over.

    gordosan

  • HoopsCoach said...

    The same St. John's team that has gone 3-3 in conference since getting the services of Jamal Branch, a third year sophomore? Who is now giving them 25 mpg.

    Youth is not an excuse. It's a fact. Maybe when you've actually coached a season you would understand that.

    Should we have won at least one conference game by now? Sure. We have 2 OT loses and had Kansas down the entire game. Young teams make mistakes that cost you games. We will not make the same mistakes next year.

    Jamal Branch is a true sophomore. He transferred from A&M at Christmas his true freshman year (2011) and became eligible at St. John's at Christmas last month. He was in the same class as Myck.

    Hornographer ●

  • Hornographer said...

    Jamal Branch is a true sophomore. He transferred from A&M at Christmas his true freshman year (2011) and became eligible at St. John's at Christmas last month. He was in the same class as Myck.

    Then I stand corrected. Thank you. Still, I think my point stands that there aren't many teams that are playing well with only freshmen and sophomores. I think when we get Kabongo back we will win a few games as well.

    HoopsCoach

  • Goo said...

    In my opinion Barnes does not think FTs are important and/or they are a point of inphisies in practice. Tend to think the same of offense.

    What is "inphisies"?

    LMAO.

    Tell U Something Good

  • Tell U Something Good said...

    What is "inphisies"?

    LMAO.

    I thinks they are lesions on that part of your noggin that affects, no, effects, no, causes problems with your communications and such.

    BudreauReye

Texas
247Sports
Features
Resources
Connect

247Sports In partnership with CBS Sports