If my memory serves me correctly it was Miller who first brought pack line to X.
Results 381 to 390 of 403
Thread: Sean Miller
-
03-28-2025, 09:21 PM #381
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Location
- Cincinnati
- Posts
- 177
-
03-28-2025, 09:31 PM #382
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Posts
- 9,010
Agree.
They left Swain alone and made sure no one else beat them. The gameplan was to allow him to get some points. And Sean left Swain in for most of the game. Essentially playing 4 on 5 where they didn't have to guard someone. Good coaches will always attack that.
Played right into it.
The less educated eye would say "Swain had the best game of his career, how can you say that"? It was designed that way.Last edited by drudy23; 03-28-2025 at 09:33 PM.
-
03-28-2025, 09:34 PM #383
Swain scored 27 points on 10-17 shooting. Hard to call that playing 4 on 5. Why would Miller have taken Swain out? Who was going to do better than that?
-
03-28-2025, 09:43 PM #384
- Join Date
- Dec 2016
- Location
- FL, on the Cape
- Posts
- 1,258
-
03-28-2025, 09:46 PM #385
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Posts
- 9,010
You take him out because they flat weren't guarding him. That's why none of our 3 point shooters could gets looks. Everyone else was focused on them. When you don't have to guard one guy, a good coach start salivating.
It wasn't a matter of "who would have done better than that" - it was a matter of eliminating Swain from the equation as it would have forced them to guard all 5 guys, and potentially opened it up. Never really happened.
They basically ignored Swain, overplayed our shooters (that's why we had some many attempts at the rim), and let their 7 footer disrupt our small team at the rim, which is exactly what happened. Could't finish in the paint.
That's why Swain had 27 - he wasn't guarded.
-
03-28-2025, 09:49 PM #386
Yeah, I don't think their plan was for Swain to get an efficient 27. Worked anyway because we otherwise sucked.
Creighton actually employed the same strategy to better results (on the actual strategy), but we still won against them.
-
03-28-2025, 10:03 PM #387
- Join Date
- Jan 2008
- Posts
- 4,733
I think it worked perfectly. Saying let’s see if he can beat us, he has his best night of his career and we got smoked. They’d do the same thing again.
Granted, we lost because of the other side of the ball. It was just bad all around
-
03-28-2025, 10:03 PM #388
-
03-28-2025, 11:00 PM #389
I don’t think they expected their strategy to result in 27 for swain on the shooting % he shot.
Also his guy was sagging off on the paint, not an extra guy guarding our shooters. Swain got into the lane anyway and scored. He did hit a couple unexpected 3’s as well.
Their plan was the guy can’t shoot and if he does he will miss and if he drives it will be difficult bc his defender is there waiting."I’m willing to sacrifice everything for this team. I’m going to dive for every loose ball, close out harder on every shot, block out for every rebound. I’m going to play harder than I’ve ever played. And I need you all to follow me." -MB '17
-
03-28-2025, 11:13 PM #390
But they were on fire from 3. So trade that all night. If the game would have tightened up, they probably change up the strategy and put some effort into swain. But until that time, why adjust away from what works.
No doubt they had no respect for swain, and he put up big numbers while we got crushed.
Bookmarks