Duke 75, Boston College 50
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 19, 2012 9:45 PM EST
in Boston College Basketball
Email
PrintThis is me after the first 3:19 of the game -- BC 13, Duke 7:
(Click on the GIF for full effect)
BC was hitting everything. They started the game 5 for 5 from the field, but then it got ugly. They proceeded to miss their next 12 shots. This was me for the rest of the game:
(Click on the GIF for full effect)
Eagles Leaders: Points: Anderson, 21; Rebounds: Anderson, 8; Assists: Humphrey, Daniels, 3
Quick Thoughts:
It started out really fun, and then it became the game that I thought it would be. The Eagles could not get anything going on offense (more on this later) and Duke just plugged away and slowly but surely disposed of this young BC team. It was encouraging to see that BC was not initially intimidated by the prospect of playing Duke, but then you could see it wore on them. They made their first 5 shots (like I said) and then once shots stopped falling, it started to snowball. They got discouraged and Coach K made some adjustments that stifled the offense.
The lack of a go-to scorer is so apparent that it's scary. BC went over NINE MINUTES in the first half stuck at 13 points. NINE. MINUTES. Try to fathom how ridiculous that truly is -- can you? They went nine whole minutes without scoring a single point. I feel like you could probably just chuck half court shots for 9 minutes and get one to fall. They eventually got some free throws and were able to get on the scoreboard again. However, BC did not make another field goal until there was just over 2 minutes left in the first half. That means the Eagles went 14 minutes without a made basket. FOURTEEN MINUTES.
During this same stretch, BC played remarkable defense. Duke was unable to get anything going either and BC went into the half down just 30-21. The defense was as impressive as the offense was pathetic. For these young players to hang with an experience Duke team filled with talent, well, that was something I wasn't expecting.
(Side note: How nice would it be to be able to just give the ball to a guy like Austin Rivers and say "go to work"? BC has no players that can consistently create their own shot. This would be the key to ending these long scoreless stretches. For the record, I believe guys like Ryan Anderson and Dennis Clifford can become these types of players as they grow and mature.)
Here's a ridiculous stat for you: Duke rebounds - 45; BC rebounds: 21.
Coach Donahue made a good point after the game that the rebounding numbers were partly a result of the amount of missed shots that BC had, but it doesn't tell the whole story. The fact of the matter is that BC has nobody even close to as big and strong as Miles and Mason Plumlee.
(Another side note: did you see Miles Plumlee try to eliminate KC Caudill? That would have been an epic dunk if he had been able to finish.)
I feel as though I'm just rambling at this point, but this whole game was just weird. The two teams combined for 32 turnovers and might have set an NCAA record for traveling violations (probably not, though). There was a very big crowd, but it was zombie-like for much of the game. After the first three minutes, everyone seemed to mentally check out. Nobody really left until the very end, but it was just silent. There wasn't much to cheer about, but it was just awkwardly quiet. Nobody was talking on press row. Everybody just seemed in awe of how weird the game was. Maybe I'm making this up, but the game just felt surreal.
Conrad's Player Of The Game: Ryan Anderson
No contest here, really. Anderson had a game high 21 points and grabbed 8 rebounds. He shot 6 of 12 from the field and 7 of 10 from the charity stripe. He played really hard for all 33 minutes he was on the floor, despite being physically outmatched by the two Plumlee's. I said at the beginning of the year that I love Anderson's potential. He just needs to get more comfortable with his size and fill out his frame a little bit. His shooting mechanics could use some tweaks, but his stroke is effective enough. He's definitely got the potential to become the go-to guy that BC needs. He and Clifford could create an imposing front court in a couple years if they continue to grow and develop.
70 comments
|
0 recs |
Do you like this story?
Comments
Bye Superfans, we shall see you all again next season…only for the Duke game.
Writer at BC Interruption SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Follow me on Twitter
Next year it’ll be for the Carolina game. Or Syrcause. Duke will likely be a road game if we don’t get them twice. But if we do, hey, three well-attended home games!
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 6:48 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Yeah, super lame.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 19, 2012 10:16 PM EST reply actions
Clifford
Looked awful at the beginning of the game, but really looked strong at the end. But then again, that’s when Duke was cruising.
by EagleAboveTheRim on Feb 19, 2012 10:33 PM EST reply actions
The Plumlees have about 50 pounds on Clifford.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 19, 2012 10:38 PM EST up reply actions
The game was well in hand when Clifford finally got going.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 6:48 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Does anyone think
that implementing a mandatory “athletics fee” that covered the cost of student tickets and thereby made student tickets available “free” to all students would boost turnout to the rest of the home schedule?
What you’re suggesting is tricking students into attending basketball games. It costs ten dollars to go to a game. Cost is not a limiting factor.
Yeah, it’s not about cost, and this would drive the wrong behaviors. More people would camp out for the Duke games, but you are already selling the place out.
Conversely, because tickets were free, less students would attend the games against Wake Forest or Miami, since they wouldn’t feel like they are losing anything — the price of a ticket — by not going.
I have my gripes about Conte’s configuration and the student section for hoops (can be improved), but above all else, this team just has to win. It was not too long ago when BC was packing Conte regularly and hoops was outdrawing hockey. It can happen again, but Donahue has to build a winner.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 6:54 AM EST via mobile up reply actions
Charlie Sheen
It can happen again, but Donahue has to build a winner.
Recruit top talent and win, and they will come.
These new BC kids have more $$$$$$ than God!
for all the students with season tickets (lets be honest, how many are there?) who might feel like they’re not losing anything by not going to miami or wake, there’s hundreds more who might consider it as a spur-of-the-moment thing if they have a light homework night, but don’t feel like dropping $10 on a ticket. i don’t see it as tricking anyone. on top of that it’s extra revenue for the athletics department because it guarantees a student sell-out for all the revenue sports (fball, bball, hockey).
Students aren’t going to want to go to those games as a spur-of-the-moment thing. They are going to want to go to those games after they’ve have a great experience at the Duke, Carolina or Syracuse game watching a competitive team in front of a packed Conte Forum crowd.
It’s all about the atmosphere and making the games a social event. A few extra students trickling in for a game against Wake or Miami isn’t going to move the needle for attendance. Price is not the issue. Winning and in-game experience are.
Editor, BC Interruption
When I was a student, you could put the cost of student season tickets for basketball, hockey and football on your tuition bill, so mommy and daddy flip the bill. If you weren’t able to make it to a game, you made sure to give your ticket to a buddy so it didn’t go to waste.
Since you paid for the tickets at the beginning of the school year, they seemed free to us, but you still made a point of going or at the very least giving it to a buddy that could make the game.
Not sure how exactly the student ticketing policies or pricing have changed, but I’m very much convinced that pricing is not the factor here. It’s all about winning and making the games a destination, social event. Not giving away tickets for free.
Editor, BC Interruption
It’s all about winning and making the games a destination, social event.
Bingo. Unfortunately we don’t have enough of the diehard students, so the game itself has to be a bigger social event to draw in the lesser fans.
the heights had an article about the student ticket process if anyone is interested.
http://www.bcheights.com/news/the-logic-behind-bc-ticket-prices-1.2772328#.T0Jj1szEQks
by joshsouthern on Feb 20, 2012 10:17 AM EST up reply actions
good article, the price per game is a little off b/c there’s 17 men’s bball games a year, not 12, but otherwise very good breakdown of the system
You’re just not going to be able to improve the situation competing on price.
Look at the death spiral that football tickets are in with the AD dumping a bunch of tickets on GroupOn and the secondary market. This gives loyal season ticket holders no incentive to keep renewing, since they can get tickets for super cheap on the secondary market.
Look at Wake Forest, which the article cites as one school that doesn’t charge for student tickets. The Joel was 1/4 filled last year when the Deacons were in the midst of a 1-win ACC season. Winning is going to solve the attendance ten-fold over altering the student ticket pricing model.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 10:44 AM EST up reply actions
students only get 12 games in their ticket package, they don’t include the games during break
by joshsouthern on Feb 20, 2012 11:07 AM EST up reply actions
Not sold on Clifford
Yes he shows flashes of great potential, but unless he bulks up and becomes much more aggressive in the post and on the boards then I think he will be a waste of 7 feet. I am not being pessimistic, I want him to succeed (desperately want him to, actually). But he can just be so frustrating to watch at times. Love how Anderson has developed over the course of the season, though. Showed great fire after he hit his second 3 to start off the game. Awesome to see that kind of energy in a young guy. Definitely something the team can feed off of.
Obviously not sold on Clifford either, but the potential is there. I’m not sold on him as a player, but I’m sold on his potential. It is there.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 2:35 AM EST up reply actions
He needs to eat his Wheaties. Well about thirty pounds of Wheaties.
Writer at BC Interruption SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Follow me on Twitter
We Looked Like Saint Leo's
Conrad says: “There wasn’t much to cheer about, but it was just awkwardly quiet. Maybe I’m making this up, but the game just felt surreal.” Conrad – you aren’t making up anything – it was a large BC crowd looking to see what potential BC had realizing that at this point in the season they were no longer true freshman. It was awkwardly quiet and surreal because you had about 8,000 completely mortified BC faithful fudging their underwear simultaneously. I want to be optimistic but other than Anderson we do not have a single player who looks like he even has ACC potential. And by ACC potential you hope it means more than a group who doesn’t finish in last place. We are way too deep in the season not to have gotten something better than what we saw last night. We are not going to give Donahue five to ten years to learn how to recruit – so he better figure out how to work miracles with a team (and two more short guys coming in next year) that can’t consistently score or rebound in this league. I’m just worried that we have problems much deeper than what can be fixed in the weight room.
It was awkwardly quiet and surreal because you had about 8,000 completely mortified BC faithful fudging their underwear simultaneously.
I LOL’d.
Editor, BC Interruption
I tend to agree.
BC shouldn’t have had a performance like they did last night nearly 30 games into the season.
Donahue is not getting 5-10 like he did at Cornell. He’s gonna need to climb a steep learning curve on the recruiting trail if he hopes to turn this thing around. Recruiting in the ACC with a full complement of scholarships is not the same as selling a kid to go to the Ivy League and not getting paid for playing college hoops.
Obviously I’m thrilled with the energy, enthusiasm and incessant whistling he brings to the in-game atmosphere, but I also wonder if it’s too much. As Fukowi noted in the other thread, Donahue is going to need his assistants to step up, particularly with the loss of Jones to BU. Maybe it’s just more Donahue’s style to be the only guy hooting and hollering on the sidelines, but does this bode well for the program if the assistants just sit on the bench like they are attending mass? They don’t seem to be involved in the game at all, where I can remember guys like Cooley and Coen getting really into games (but this may just be in contrast to Skinner).
If the assistants don’t get involved in the game, how involved are they on the recruiting trail? They are very young and inexperienced, and I wonder whether their lack of involvement during the games is representative of their involvement in other aspects of the program. Just blindly speculating on this last point.
Obviously I’m not looking to dump Donahue, but I was disappointed in the result last night. BC played uninspired for most of the night and could have really made it a game early on with Duke constantly turning the ball over. Yet they disappeared (again) for a 14+ minute stretch in the first half and let Duke climb back in it and eventually deliver the knock-out punch early in the second.
Ryan Anderson will be a star here, but to have just three players in the scoring column more than 3/4 way through the game isn’t going to cut it in the ACC … A-10 … MAC … or even the Ivy League.
Editor, BC Interruption
BC shouldn’t have had a performance like they did last night nearly 30 games into the season.
I agree with everything you said except for that first line. BC absolutely should lose to Duke by 25 at this point. We’re talking about a team that has lost to UMass, Holy Cross, and Wake Forest. Losing to #5 Duke by 25 seems just about right to me.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 8:58 AM EST up reply actions
It’s not the final point differential. It’s the way BC lost last night.
You said so yourself. 9+ minutes without a point … 14+ minutes with a FG. There’s no reason the 10+ minute stretches without a bucket should still be happening 30 games in.
Editor, BC Interruption
But there’s also no reason for us to score 13 points in 2 minutes and hit 5 of 5 shots. Basketball is just a game of runs that evens out to what you pretty much expect by the end of the day
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 9:45 AM EST up reply actions
If basketball is a game of runs, then BC has been on the wrong end of said runs too often this season. There have been far too many stretches of no points in 10+ minutes this year, and not enough 13 points in 5 minutes.
Editor, BC Interruption
Well that’s because we aren’t very good.
/analysis
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 9:47 AM EST up reply actions
Correct.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 9:49 AM EST up reply actions
i dont think it was for lack of trying. sure, they made some bad plays and turned it over a bit, but i dont think the in-game coaching was really at fault. they got outplayed on the glass (everyone not named unc or kentucky does against duke) and duke put on a defensive clinic. there weren’t any moments in the game where i really thought “theyre doing this wrong” or “theyre doing that wrong” anymore than they did in a lot of the games they won. but youre playing against one of the most talented teams in the country, a team that does the little things much much better than north carolina. and i agree with conrad, losing to duke by 25 seems about right. ive seen duke beat much better teams than bc by much more than 25.
if there’s an issue with donahue, its his ability to recruit guys who can win at this level. i have no doubts about his ability to coach the talent he has, in practice or in-game
Again, I don’t think you can evaluate the overall performance of the team last night based on a final score. There’s a lot more to it than that.
The fact is BC turned in one of its worst performances of the season and failed to capitalize on Duke playing one of its worst halves of the season. We are now nearing 30 games into the season.
BC has played much better against similarly defensive-minded teams (Virginia, Florida State). I don’t think not scoring a point for 9+ minutes and not scoring a bucket in 14+ minutes is acceptable at this point in the year. All freshmen or no.
Editor, BC Interruption
Not scoring for 14 minutes last night was definitely unacceptable. Freshmen or not.
One thing that was really worrisome was how they handled Duke’s pick and roll defense. Daniels, Humphrey and Jackson missed Anderson wide open rolling the basket numerous times last night (especially in the first half). The Plumlees and Ryan Kelly kept coming out to trap the ball handler, which left Anderson wide open.
I think this team looks for the three a little too much. They have more success when they play balanced offense and try to score in the paint.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 9:59 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
you see duke playing one of its worst halves of the season, i see the bc playing very good man-to-man defense against a perimeter oriented team (especially when they’re biggest post threat was out of the game in foul trouble). BC has done a very good job of taking away the 3 on defense all year and we saw that last night. bad stretches happen, even to good teams. i think you’re reading way too much into the FG drought. I can’t tell you the number of times I’ve seen teams go scoreless for long periods against Duke. 14+ without a FG is excessive, but I see 8 or 9 minute scoreless stretches from teams against the Blue Devils all the time. Normally though, by the time those stretches end, Duke is up 20. The fact that that didnt happen last night says something about how far this team has come on the defensive end. There were a lot of missed opportunities on offensive, but not a lot of plays on that run where I really think doing 1 or 2 things differently wouldve helped all that much. They didnt get open shots, and they didnt make contested shots. They turned the ball over in pressure. All understandable for a team like this.
It would be one thing if the scoring drought was isolated to last night’s game but it isn’t. We’ve seen this time and again from this team.
Yes, we aren’t very deep or talented. I also think Donahue can make more adjustments so that we aren’t averaging “10 a game without a bucket” seemingly every night.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 10:53 AM EST up reply actions
assistants
I sat right behind the bench for the VT game and I noticed at least 2 of the assistants were yelling things out for a large portion of the game, so I don’t think they are completely silent
by joshsouthern on Feb 20, 2012 10:13 AM EST up reply actions
Good points Brian
That’s a good point. I think last night really exposed what the main problem is right now. He doesn’t have enough talent. They couldn’t score for 14 minutes!
Anderson’s emergence has been great. At this point he is the only player they have that consistently can affect the game in multiple ways (scoring, rebounding, defense).
Daniels played a solid game, I’m not sure if he’s a starting point guard in the ACC but he definitely is a back up. He’s too small to play 30 minutes a night in the ACC.
Clifford is still a huge project. He’s got very good footwork for a freshmen, but the second you put him up against a strong frontline like last night he gets pushed around. I think a lot of his hesistance is due to the fact he is so skinny. He plays like he’s afraid of contact. I think he’ll be more aggressive if he gets stronger.
Lonnie Jackson disappeared last night. I’m not as high on him as a lot of other people. Put him against a team that has an athletic backcourt and he’s pretty uselsess. He’s a solid defender and can’t do much on offense except hit stand alone threes. I think he’s a bench guy who is starting.
Humphrey is what he is. As Bill Simmons says, he’s a table guy. He takes as much stuff off the table that he brings to it. While he plays good defense and can hit some threes, his effort isn’t always there and he’s good for three to four head scratching shots a game. Not to mention some really bad turnovers.
Heckmann is a good player, I don’t know if he fits what Donahue wants to do. He’s a slasher who can create his own shot, something this team desperately needs. When Donahue had him play within his system, Heckman became a turnover machine who barely shot.
These are the players he has who have contributed to a win this year. Everyone but Anderson has to be considered a project. I think Donahue overvalued Caudill, Jackson and especially Odio. Jordan Daniels is here because he whiffed on all the other point guards he went after. He needs to really improve the recruiting. In game coaching is not the problem at this point.
We can bitch all we want about how he needs to improve his recruiting…but he’s had ONE class and we haven’t even seen their whole FRESHMAN year yet. One class…and the kids are 18 years old…and they just got beat by Duke, the fifth best team in the country. I think this class has a lot of potential talent. Enough talent to compete with Duke? Uh, no — obviously.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 9:13 AM EST up reply actions
I think this critique is fair. I agree it’s hard to judge the talent that Donahue brought in in his first year, but this isn’t your average freshman team. The starting five is four freshmen on paper only. Most players don’t get this much in-game experience until they are juniors.
This is where we are missing Heckmann.
I’m not as down on Jackson at tmcgoldrick80 but agree he disappeared last night. Odio and Cahill (gone next year, still) don’t appear to be ACC players. We need another big as Caudill doesn’t seem to be the answer. I’m excited to see what Hanlan and Rahon can do next season, but there still seems to be a lot of work to be done on the roster.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 10:51 AM EST up reply actions
He was warming up with the team last night. No shooting though. Maybe for the last couple games.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 9:41 AM EST up reply actions
I’ll rephrase some of my opinion. I should have stated that over the season the lack of depth has been the major problem. Last night, I think the game could have been closer as Duke did not play well in the first half.
At this point he needs three to four more players (I’d argue three which could start). A taller point guard (sounds like that’s a check with Hanlan). An athletic two guard who can get to the rim. A true small forward (6’6 or above). I’d like to see him get some faster guys so he can really unleash his system.
Then imagine Daniels, Lonnie Jackson and Heckman as your bench in two years. You would have to be pretty exicited about that team.
He really only has six players at this point (four freshman, one junior and a hurt freshman). It’s his major problem. I think moving forward he needs to focus less on projects like Clifford and more on power conference ready players.
He’s learning too, it’s a huge difference recruiting in the Ivy’s to doing it in the ACC. I think he should bring in a more experienced assistant to replace Jones this year too (I can’t blame him for not doing it last season Jones left late and there wasn’t a lot of time) with some recruiting experience. It will only help him.
I think he can get there, no one was in on Anderson when they got him and he blew up. He needs more than six players at this point.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 9:38 AM EST reply actions 1 recs
And I have faith that he will get those players…he just needs more than one recruiting class. I feel like people underestimate how difficult it is to walk into a new school and just install a system and make it work.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 9:48 AM EST up reply actions
Clifford a project player? How many 7 footers with his skill has BC ever gotten?
He’s had essentially one recruiting class. He got a potential star (Anderson), a couple solid players with upside (Clifford, Heckmann), some nice role players that can contribute (Daniels, Jackson), and then some projects (Odio, Caudill). That’s not a bad recruiting effort for ONE class.
Because we basically had no one returning he has to use some of those role players 30+ minutes which can lead to some poor stretches during games against top-tier talent like last night.
Clifford is a project. He has a ton of skill, but he’s raw. Here are things he needs to work on;
1). He has two post moves. The lefty hook which is strong and the up and under (which still needs some work). He will never go baseline with his back to the basket which makes him an easy cover in the post.
2). Last night was a perfect example, he needs to work on his touch around the basket. Lots of line drive shots.
3). He takes way to long to make decisions in the post.
4). He dribbles to much when he catches the ball in the post which leads to turnovers.
5). He needs to keep the ball high when he goes to shoot. He brings the ball down to his shoulder, which causes his shot to blocked.
6). He needs to get stronger which is highlighted all the time. It affects almost every aspect of his game. The kid tries box out, but he’s so skinny he’s getting pushed out of the box.
I think he has big upside and from everything I read a great work ethic. He needs to improve on a lot of things. For a freshmen center he’s got a lot of skill.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 10:09 AM EST up reply actions 3 recs
Almost everything you listed would be damn near fixed by adding 30 pounds. Hit the weight room, young fella.
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 10:11 AM EST up reply actions
He will.
And I just don’t see Clifford as a “project” player. He’s contributed as a skinny, freshmen. Most “projects” can’t play a lick as freshman (see KC Caudill).
Agreed. When I think of “project” I think of someone who is obviously athletic but still very raw. Clifford is skilled, just not big enough yet
FearTheSword, SBNation's Cleveland Cavaliers blog
by Conrad Kaczmarek on Feb 20, 2012 10:15 AM EST up reply actions
Well the last 7 footer who got minutes for BC was Nate Doornenkamp (17 minutes a game his freshmen year). Clifford is much better than him, but last night he looked like Nate (almost had more fouls than points a Nate specialty).
I still think he needs to improve a lot as a basketball player and hasn’t reached his potential. To give a comparison. The best post player BC has had in the past ten years was Craig Smith. I remember his first game against St Joe’s his freshmen year. He came off the bench and scored consistently in the post. At the time, no one was saying things like “when Craig Smith puts on weight he’s gonna be a beast.” Smith could play at a consistent level in the post immediately. You didn’t leave Conte with a list of areas where he needed improvement.
Clifford doesn’t do that. Whether you want to call him a project or not, a lot of things need to happen for him to reach his potential.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 10:28 AM EST up reply actions
Smith isn’t a fair comparison for Clifford.
Craig Smith did a PG year at Worcester Academy. Skinner and co. could have already told him a weight program he needed to be on. Smith also was playing with a lot of experienced players including Troy Bell his freshman season so he probably wasn’t getting the same attention in the post as DC is.
Clifford definitely has some things to work on but he isn’t so much a project like KC Caudill or Nate.
In a normal system, Clifford wouldn’t be playing a lick as a freshman either. Obviously extenuating circumstances have him playing way more minutes than a typical freshman would.
Editor, BC Interruption
by Brian Favat on Feb 20, 2012 10:56 AM EST up reply actions
Gotta agree on that. Under normal circumstances Clifford would be redshirting. He’s playing right now because they don’t have enough players.
Also, when he came in Smith had a complete post game. Clifford doesn’t right now, that’s not something that’s going to come by putting on weight. That comes by working on post moves during the summer. I’ll agree in saying he’s not a big a project as Caudill, but he still he has a lot of work to do.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 11:06 AM EST up reply actions 1 recs
Also, Smith averaged 17 points and 8 rebounds a game as a sophmore (with other sophmores and freshmen and only one senior) without Troy Bell. He was a power conference ready player from day one. Clifford isn’t, project might not be the right word but he isn’t ACC ready quite yet either.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 11:09 AM EST up reply actions
Fair point.
He would be playing though (almost no one redshirts in college hoops). Maybe not 25 minutes a game but he’d still be getting 12-15 minutes.
He’s got very good footwork as a freshman and has shown skill throughout the year. Does he need to put on some muscle? Of course and it will do wonders for his game.
This team needs to recruit some physicality. No one on this team is very physical, it’s literally all finesse. Ryan Anderson is probably the closest the team has to someone physical. But the centers are a mess, the guards are undersized and not very strong, and our entire bench is more of the same.
Writer at BC Interruption SBN's Boston College Eagles blog
Follow me on Twitter
this tie’s into the one issue i have with donahue which is recruiting philosophy. he refuses to recruit high major talent, instead trying to win with pieces that will fit his system. its a good philosophy that can get you into the ncaa tournament year after year once you establish a foundation (4-5 years). but it’ll probably never even get you to the 2nd weekend of the tournament, let alone beyond that. it’ll never get you higher than 4th or 5th in the ACC.
don needs to find a way to attract high major talent to the heights. not a lot of it. 1 top 50 player a year should be reasonable, as long as that player is an athlete. if he puts in the work he needs to he should be able to do this. but he continues to write it off and say hes not going to waste time with kids he doesnt think he can get. hes content to get last dibs at the leftovers
I think people automatically assume that BC will find under the radar gems because of the past ten years. Remember this is a completely different staff. One of the reasons so many people wanted Skinner gone was because he didn’t recruit enough highly rated talent. We can’t just assume this will be the case with Donahue. It’s only been one recruiting class.
I think both AJ and Spidey are right. If he wants his system to work in the ACC he needs to get more athletic players (who tend to be the more highly rated recruits).
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 12:48 PM EST up reply actions
Donahue can’t be afraid of going after major talent. His club plays in one of the best conferences in the country, with a full complement of scholarships, at one of the nation’s better academic institutions in one of the coolest cities in the country.
Again, in my mind it all goes back to the assistants. How these guys do on the recruiting trail will determine just how successful the Donahue era of BC hoops will be. With the experience the staffers have currently, they are still a long way away from Ed Cooley / Bill Coen status, and will have to work their asses off to establish relationships and sell the program.
I think we can agree that the staff probably missed on both Odio and Caudill, and guys like Cahill, Visockas, Cain Carney and Abdo are just warm bodies at this point.
Yes, it’s only year 1, but there’s still a lot of work left to do. I’m not expecting overnight results, but I’d also be naive in thinking Donahue gets 10 years to build something here at BC.
Editor, BC Interruption
Except developing a few more post moves. I’ve gone to every home game this year and two road. I think he’s afraid of contact because he’s so skinny. If he puts on weight, he will be a much better rebounder.
by tmcgoldrick80 on Feb 20, 2012 10:14 AM EST up reply actions
Karnac says: Rosemary Woods and BC Hoops Offense!!!
Name two things that disappeared for 14 minutes.
ping!
Big Maroon Dog needs that big man school and Donahue nees 2 5 star players, both frontline guys!
One thing that really bugged me was that there were some Duke fans dispersed in the student section. One even said that she was a BC student. I couldn’t believe that someone would root against their own school
Jeff was a closet Duke basketball fan when he hit the Heights as a freshman. I know a lot of guys like that that grew up on Duke hoops. That said, after ~one year you should be fully converted.
Editor, BC Interruption
i rooted for BC the first time they visited Maryland my freshman year in a december game. the eagles won, which was sweet. by the time the terps went down to conte in february i had almost a full season under my belt and was fully converted to maryland. the terps won the 2nd game, so despite the teams splitting the season series, i was 2-0
Comments For This Post Are Closed
Secondary Sidebar
User Tools
Related FanPosts on BC Interruption
FanPosts
Community blog posts and discussion.
