Dixie Heights 73 Covington Catholic 59

[Theoldguy]

Remind you of Brennan Votel? I've heard the comparisons.

 

I will go back a bit farther and a bit better (with no disrespect to Brennan), as the young man as I have said before, reminds me of a young Randy Noll of UK and the University of Marshall fame.

[Clyde]

Remind you of Brennan Votel? I've heard the comparisons.

 

He's more athletic than BV. Probably doesn't have the ball skills yet that BV did.

[Clyde]

In regards to the issue of "running early in the season"(which I don't recall) vs "half-court" it must be a style issue because the scoring output doesn't seen to have changed much.

[Tomahawk]

Silly comparison.

 

CCH struggled on the perimeter last season - their inside game carried them. You need both.

 

Plus, Tobler isn't the focal point of the offense.

 

Lack of consistent outside shooting is the key issue right now.

 

This team isn't beating Dixie. Too many matchup problems. Dixie didn't play that well tonight and still had a 20 point lead. Different level right now.

. Earlier in the season, CCH was winning or competing in big games against teams better than Dixie by playing smash mouth full court defense. This aggressive defense created turnovers and defensive rebounds. Then they used team speed to create transition opportunities on the offensive side. Early in the season they were setting records for team fouls, but that was indicative of very aggressive defense. IMO that was a formula that could have won them the ninth region crown. Now they have gone soft on defense. They have fewer defensive rebounds, turnovers, team fouls and, as a result, less transition opportunities. They are settling into a half court offense with 4 guards and Tobler down low. They are not big enough or strong enough to win in the ninth region using this half court set. They have become very ordinary and easy to defend. BTW you're wrong -- CCH can beat any team in the ninth region.

[Clyde]

. Earlier in the season, CCH was winning or competing in big games against teams better than Dixie by playing smash mouth full court defense. This aggressive defense created turnovers and defensive rebounds. Then they used team speed to create transition opportunities on the offensive side. Early in the season they were setting records for team fouls, but that was indicative of very aggressive defense. IMO that was a formula that could have won them the ninth region crown. Now they have gone soft on defense. They have fewer defensive rebounds, turnovers, team fouls and, as a result, less transition opportunities. They are settling into a half court offense with 4 guards and Tobler down low. They are not big enough or strong enough to win in the ninth region using this half court set. They have become very ordinary and easy to defend. BTW you're wrong -- CCH can beat any team in the ninth region.

 

1. Which teams were better than Dixie that they beat or competed with? Not LexCath. Not GRC at the time.

2. They do not have enough offensive talent to survive if they are in foul trouble. You can't have Nick R getting in foul trouble being overly aggressive defensively. They need Tobler in the game as he's the only "post" player they have.

3. While I agree on "CAN" I don't see them beating Dixie. Dixie didn't play well last night and still led by 20. This CCH team has exceeded all expectations so I'm not bagging on them. I like the way they play. The future looks bright.

[Tomahawk]

It's hard to say CCH looked their best with two players that only played a few minutes combined.

 

I'd argue Tobler didn't get enough touches tonight. They had success early getting him good looks and went away. Had success early in the 3rd then threw two bad passes and went away again. He's the only post presence they have.

 

You're a fan of seniors playing. I thought Conner Cleves gave a lot of good minutes tonight. My guess is it's the most minutes he's played this year.

 

I'd suggest that some players not give the coach the "stink eye" when they're removed and not do a blow-by when he sticks his hand out when you're coming off of the floor.

. I was at the game and didn't see any "stink eyes" or "blow-bys". Regardless, this team didn't lose because the players aren't good cheerleaders. (see my other posts which explain why they are losing the big games). The crazies do a fine job with the cheer leading.

[Clyde]

. I was at the game and didn't see any "stink eyes" or "blow-bys". .

 

I shouldn't have mentioned it in the first place despite it being true as it casts aspersions on the "many" vs the "one." My apologies to all for that slip up.

[Tomahawk]

1. Which teams were better than Dixie that they beat or competed with? Not LexCath. Not GRC at the time.

2. They do not have enough offensive talent to survive if they are in foul trouble. You can't have Nick R getting in foul trouble being overly aggressive defensively. They need Tobler in the game as he's the only "post" player they have.

3. While I agree on "CAN" I don't see them beating Dixie. Dixie didn't play well last night and still led by 20. This CCH team has exceeded all expectations so I'm not bagging on them. I like the way they play. The future looks bright.

. Disagree again. nick R and Tobler need to play very aggressive defense for this team to have a chance. They are both replaceable. You nailed it -- players are playing soft defense to stay on the floor. The result -- a very ordinary team a very beatable team.

[Clyde]

. Disagree again. nick R and Tobler need to play very aggressive defense for this team to have a chance. They are both replaceable. You nailed it -- players are playing soft defense to stay on the floor. The result -- a very ordinary team a very beatable team.

 

Nick R , to go 78 Yankees on you, is the straw that stirs the drink. I don't agree they're playing soft. You can play hard in a half-court D. They just had too many matchup problems last night.

[Clyde]

Speaking of D, I'll say again that I thought C Cleves played a great game defensively.

[Clyde]

By the way, Tomahawk, I don't have a problem with your opinions. I don't necessarily agree with all of them but I have good friends whose opinions on this subject I don't always agree with either. I see this: regardless of the style played CCH struggles to hit open shots. They're getting open shots. They're not making enough. You'll say that they would get better shots if they ran. You can't always run especially if the other team makes a basket. However, it doesn't matter in the end. The offense they are using is getting plenty of good looks. It's up to the boys on the floor to make them.

[kyyank]

Nick R , to go 78 Yankees on you, is the straw that stirs the drink. I don't agree they're playing soft. You can play hard in a half-court D. They just had too many matchup problems last night.

 

This. The press hides their many deficiencies as a team. I've said it all year. They have little talent. Ruthsatz makes everyone look better than they really are. Take him off the team and they would be lucky to win half of what they have won.

[kinglouie]

. I was at the game and didn't see any "stink eyes" or "blow-bys". Regardless, this team didn't lose because the players aren't good cheerleaders. (see my other posts which explain why they are losing the big games). The crazies do a fine job with the cheer leading.

 

I guess you were not looking at the times it happened and was visible to many around. I agree they may not lose because they are not good cheerleaders, but if you do not think this behavior impacts the team chemistry and how they play, or how the coach feels towards a player demonstrating this behavior, I think you are mistaken.

[kinglouie]

This. The press hides their many deficiencies as a team. I've said it all year. They have little talent. Ruthsatz makes everyone look better than they really are. Take him off the team and they would be lucky to win half of what they have won.

 

Isn't that what a strong PG does? Make everyone around better?

[kyyank]

Correct. Imagine how dreadful they would be without him? They had no point guard who would do that. They had no big man who could take pressure off of a mediocre point guard. No shooting guard who can create off the dribble and get space for his own shot. No other player can create their own shot. The fact they are now playing Schuh and Heppler should tell you the strength, or lackthereof, of the returning cast.