zippy5

minimum of 2 games. not adjusted for OT. sorry for not clarifying. if that is wrong, blame ESPNews, didn't think I'd have to check their stats.

Really? That's "the DiG strategy" now? I'm the best example you can cite for doing that on ZN.O? Amazing. Haha, I'm sure it's not exclusive to you (I'm sure I've done it myself in fact)... just the most recent example of someone arguing the same point. My points are that you're using borderline useless data (I assume you're using averages from tournament games only?) and that this year's Final Four is not representative of the norm anyway. Averages from tournament games, to show success in the tournament? useless? their regular season stats have nothing to do with this tournament. Maybe there's a reason this year's final four isn't representative of the norm? Things change. This isn't 2009 anymore The data isn't even right anyway. Duke has given up 56.25 ppg in this tournament. You claim that they are one of the three teams giving up the least points in the tournament. However you do not realize that Notre Dame had a ppg against of 51 in the tournament. Guess how many games they won? Texas A&M gave up 56 ppg (adjusted for the OT game they played). I just did a quick glance at the bracket so there could be more. Might want to get your stats right next time. ESPNews showed the table, I didn't look anything up...maybe it was a minimum of 2 games played. Watch the channel today, all they do is show the same 15 minute segments repeatedly anyway, I'm sure it will be up there.

Really? That's "the DiG strategy" now? I'm the best example you can cite for doing that on ZN.O? Amazing. Haha, I'm sure it's not exclusive to you (I'm sure I've done it myself in fact)... just the most recent example of someone arguing the same point. My points are that you're using borderline useless data (I assume you're using averages from tournament games only?) and that this year's Final Four is not representative of the norm anyway. Averages from tournament games, to show success in the tournament? useless? their regular season stats have nothing to do with this tournament. Maybe there's a reason this year's final four isn't representative of the norm? Things change. This isn't 2009 anymore

At least we're not latching onto "Conventional Wisdom" and have points to back up our assertions. I'll take the informed position any day of the week. I have points to back them up, you just may not agree with them. My point is that the three teams with the least points scored upon them are in the final four. Maybe because they play slow, maybe because they're the three best defenses. Whatever that style is, it seems to be working.

You are correct, we played the best defense in the MAC last year... but guess what? We played the best offense too. Can you guess who had the best offense in the MAC this year? I'll bet you can. I'm gonna guess OU I think our decline this year was because our defense declined moreso than the offense. But I don't have any random stats to throw out there to defend that, so take it how you may. P.S. how are you measuring "offense?" PPG, effiency, pythagorean theorem?

Whenever WVU needed something to happen, they had a left handed guard who drove to the basket and made layup after layup (I forget his number...21?). WVUs center made a three point shot late in the second half. When WVU needed points, they got them from their offense and won the game. BTW, why isn't anyone talking about what a great coach former UofA coach Huggins is? Forget that he dresses like a Sopranos character, the guy can flat out coach. Why isn't anyone talking about KY's star player missing relatively open shots late in the game? KY got some good looks at the basket and missed. WVU's defense didn't cause it, the inability of KY's players caused it throughout the game. You guys can throw whatever stat you want up about WVUs defense Saturday, it paled in comparison to how their offense played. We weren't watching the same game...their offense was really bad. 68% from the line, which you pointed out, is in fact offense. Huggins is a great coach, we can all agree on that. At least when he's sober. also, WVU was up by 12 with 2:30 to play. Kentucky cut it to 3...I assume it was WVU's awesome offense and clutchness that accounted for that swing?

Who hit a big shot from WVU? Their offense was pitiful. And to tell you the truth, if I could find the stats, I'm willing to bet WVU shot under 65% from the line in the last three minutes. Flowers almost airballed two free throws... @woot- people think we need to focus less on defense here at Akron, and I don't think they could be any more wrong. Our offense was pretty even-keeled over the past two years, while our defense was great one year, and not so great the next. Care to tell me which team won the MAC?

+1

From what I have heard from an inside source, interesting is an understatement... Care to tell us if this is a good thing?

1. Efficiency shmeffiency. Did you watch wvu beat kentucky with their stellar offense? No 2 point field goals halfway through the second half! It sure as hell wasn't their barnburning offense that pulled away at the end with 0 poin guards in the lineup. Great defense the entire game, they forced kentucky to 2-24 from three at one point, I don't know the final count. 2. Ever think those teams that "hold it for 32 seconds" do it because their offense can't keep up if it turns into a track meet? nah that can't be right. They do it because they are so offensively efficient, right? 3. You guys are starting to scare me, everyone here finds one obscure idea/thought and latches onto it. First it was the whole JUCO thing. "We need a JUCO, he can bring us to the promised land with his magical JUCO powers." It would be a decent idea if we actually had a good juco in mind, instead of wanting a juco for the sake of having one, but that's a different argument. Then it was the mcnees at pg/sg fascination. And now this whole offensive/efficiency revolution. Its like browns fans with their backup QB's. Watch the games, and tell me what you think of wvu and butlers "offense." Duke, ill admit, has a decent offense, and I haven't seen enough of msu to make an opinion.

Dear GP1, The three teams with the lowest PPG allowed this tournament are all in the final four. Sincerely, Duke, WVU, and Butler.

I picked Butler to go to the final four in 2 of my polls. no big deal. prove me wrong and get to the championship! go bulldogs!

Joe Dunn said Steve McNeese is one of the best point guards in the midwest and people want to move him to the 2-spot. How can anyone question Joe Dunn's basketball IQ? I don't get the fascination is with steve at the 2 spot. Maybe two years ago, but get out of the past! He's been playing some great ball lately, and at the point guard position. Steve is playing PG somewhat by necessity. Humpty has apparently been too turnover prone for KD and Steward has never been able to get healthy. That leaves Steve as the primary ball-handler, but he's always been better off doing most of his damage off the ball spotting up and knocking down the 3 while only being a secondary ball-handler. If the Zips had a true point that KD had some trust in, a Dru Joyce type, then Steve would be playing primarily at SG. Explain to me his "damage" at the end of the season while running point guard...id say he's done pretty well of spotting up and hitting the three while running point. Disregard the assists to turnovers right for a second. He's been scoring, while at the point. Add in his assist:turnovers and its a no brainer, imo. He wasn't really doing "damage" to the Zips at the end of the season, but he sure could have been doing a lot more damage to our opponents playing off the ball more. A guy whose primary weapon is the 3 point shot (if you disagree with this statement, then there is just no arguing with you) becomes more and more effective as he gets more space to get the shot off. Playing him off the ball would theoretically facilitate more space for Steve to get his shot off. Further, as has been pointed out, while Steve doesn't turn the ball over, his assist totals are simply unacceptable for a D-I starting PG. A good D-I PG should be able to get you at least 4-5 assists per game, and the numbers across D-I bear this out. Steve gets you 2.5. For comparison sake, Dru Joyce, the last true PG to really start for this team averaged 5 his junior year and 4.3 his sophomore and senior year. Not elite, but more like what you are looking for from your starting PG. He shot 37% from three. Averaged about 5-6 three pointers attempted per game...at least in the last 15 games or so I looked at. Would these numbers change if he wasn't running point? do you expect the kid to go 6-10 from 3 every night? After the first pass is made in the set, he's just as much as a shooting guard as anyone else is, he can still "facilitate space to get his shot off." He's been at the top of the +- and help value charts after every game also. But I digress.

This is the kind of kid we need. I'm really excited to see him in a Zips uni.

Is Joe Dunn said Steve McNeese is one of the best point guards in the midwest and people want to move him to the 2-spot. How can anyone question Joe Dunn's basketball IQ? I don't get the fascination is with steve at the 2 spot. Maybe two years ago, but get out of the past! He's been playing some great ball lately, and at the point guard position. Should a Point Guard average just 2.5 assists per game? Sure he doesn't turn the ball over, but he also doesn't facilitate the offense. I'll take someone who turns the ball over 3 times per game if they average 8 assists. Especially on a defensive team like Akron where TOs don't always translate to opposing points. I started to take you seriously until you called our team defensive.

Joe Dunn said Steve McNeese is one of the best point guards in the midwest and people want to move him to the 2-spot. How can anyone question Joe Dunn's basketball IQ? I don't get the fascination is with steve at the 2 spot. Maybe two years ago, but get out of the past! He's been playing some great ball lately, and at the point guard position. Steve is playing PG somewhat by necessity. Humpty has apparently been too turnover prone for KD and Steward has never been able to get healthy. That leaves Steve as the primary ball-handler, but he's always been better off doing most of his damage off the ball spotting up and knocking down the 3 while only being a secondary ball-handler. If the Zips had a true point that KD had some trust in, a Dru Joyce type, then Steve would be playing primarily at SG. Explain to me his "damage" at the end of the season while running point guard...id say he's done pretty well of spotting up and hitting the three while running point. Disregard the assists to turnovers right for a second. He's been scoring, while at the point. Add in his assist:turnovers and its a no brainer, imo.

Joe Dunn said Steve McNeese is one of the best point guards in the midwest and people want to move him to the 2-spot. How can anyone question Joe Dunn's basketball IQ? I don't get the fascination is with steve at the 2 spot. Maybe two years ago, but get out of the past! He's been playing some great ball lately, and at the point guard position.

We dont need a PG as much as we need a straight up baller. We need that guy that wants to be a ball hog and take it to the rack. Pardon me for saying it, but a Can't type player. PG is really the least of my worries. If they bring in a slasher that can take it to the hoop, we're in a great spot. To me, thats what we've been missing, and what we need.

My favorite part, along with GP1's too, I'm sure... "we rebuilt." I had a bad feeling about the direction of this team 2 weeks ago, but now I think KD is ready to take them to the next level.

I've never toured Akron's dining facilities, but I haven't heard of a school that doesn't have all-you-can-eat cafeterias. Is UA an exception? no, but at Rob's, al you can eat = all you can sh*t.

Kentucky by 23.

Agree 100 percent. I'm with these fellas.

6- I'm older, my opinion is better than yours.

This is a darn savvy introspection. Especially coming from a young person. There is hope for the Zips. What does the fact that he is young have to do with anything? Some of the more stupid posts I see on this board are from posters who want to relive the 1950s. +1

Can someone please explain why steve HAS to be a 2 guard? Is it because he has a good shot? Just because one can shot does not make him a 2 man. 2-1 assist:TO ratio, and his recent great play, guess what position he was at? Point guard! I think we are past the days of steve playing point by default, we are now seeing steve play point guard because he is pretty damn good at it.