Stony Brook

[UA_MA_2000]

The students absolutely did get into Neto's head tonight! The students were also great with counting down the shot clock incorrectly! Why is it that it keeps working (hey, no complaints!)? S.B. appeared to rush their shots on several possessions because the students were prematurely counting down the time on the clock. Great work students! It's going to be nuts when the student body comes back for the spring semester later this week. Should be a lot of fun next Sunday against Hartford and especially in February with those big home games (Bingo on 2/3 for the Big Purple Growl, Boston University, and Vermont later in February!).

[Clickclack]

Good game, nice win. I echo those who've said that SB is the most athletic team in the AE. They really get up of the ground, but they are unpolished as a team. Iati, what can I say, the guy simply was the difference between a win and a loss tonight by putting the team on his back in the early going. I also like the emergence of Covington down on the low block, good to see him with a very solid game. In the past he's been able to get his shot of but was lacking the touch, in this game his touch was there and played very well, also it appears he is getting more confident in his abilities there. It certainly would be great to get something down on the low block to free up some of our outside shooters. 3-1 in this difficult stretch is very solid. Now I hope they rest up for Hartford, they deserver it.

[Zalman B]

Was I seeing it wrong, or were the Seawolves playing a 3-2 (as opposed to the normal 2-3) zone? It was certainly causing us problems, especially in the second half. They ended up able to near- triple team the ball handler on the perimeter. Good thing Jimmie had a strong game to give us some sort of inside presence. It looked like we just couldn't pass the ball around quick enough to escape the pressure while not turning the ball over.

 

I think SB was playing a 1-3-1. It gave us trouble because it is geared towards putting pressure on the perimeter and cutting off penetration from the top and wings - our strengths - at the expense of baseline and post defense. There was one drive in particular where we attacked it properly, when (I think) Siggers took the pass in the corner away from the benches and drove baseline before the D could rotate, getting a layup out of it. I think it also played towards SBs strength in that they had enough long athletic bodies to aggressively trap with it up top.

 

Only two years ago, we were happy coming away with any win. I can't help but think how quickly things have changed, where I leave the game tonight glad we won a game we should have won, but concerned about whether we're playing well enough to beat the better teams in our conference.

 

Jimmie and Iati came up huge, but there were times on offense where we didn't appear to be running any sort of offense at all. Against the better teams, I worry that when the shots aren't falling we don't have anything to fall back on except for hoping Jamar and Jason can take the guy across from them to the hole. Granted, they will usually be able to, but it'd be nice for that to be the fall-back plan, instead of what we do time and time again down the court.

 

All that said, it's tough not to be happy with 3-of-4 in this stretch and kudos to the team for pulling out a good win. Winning these games at home against teams we should beat is something that we have to do consistently in order to stay a top program in the conference. I hope they do enjoy the (brief) rest.

[olddog71]

. . . Did anyone else notice how Brown substituted the entire starting 5 players after 3 or so minutes into the game for a brand new 5 players (Iati, Covington, Ross, Gifford, and Connolly)? I believe we were down 4-0 at that point in the game. I wasn't sure if it was a new idea for keeping our starters fresh for the second half or whether he was upset with the starting unit for having gone several possessions without a score. Thoughts?

 

Perhaps another part of the reason why Brown substituted all five starters was the idea that he couldn't allow his starters to put as much time into the game as they had played at Vermont. Seeing the total minutes that a couple starters put in, despite the UVM game being the 3rd game in 5 days, reminded me of the team when we first started in Dvision I. Remember Iati's first season when he played an average of 40+ minutes per game? That strategy is going to be, sooner or later, suicidal

 

I'm glad that Coach gave his starters several breaks during the game. It proves that second-string players can SOMETIMES be better than starters when the starters aren't so effective. It shows the coach's faith in ALL his players.

[Oldtimer]

Very good attendance by students during break. Indoor track team is really great support. Student attendance has been a real positive this year. Great to see young people having fun along with us OLDTIMERS!!