Good Mo Creek article

[bronkonagurski 894]

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/02/26/sports/ncaabasketball/maurice-creek-an-ex-hoosier-lifts-george-washington.html?_r=2

 

An enjoyable read.  This story was posted on that other forum yesterday and Clockwork Ken quickly had it deleted but I think it is worth a look. 

[mdn82 26,344]

Great article. Like you had said elsewhere to be fair nobody except one Mo Creek fan in particular could have envisioned the season he had. His shooting would have been huge for this team. I would be shocked if there wasn't regret from Crean on that one.


Sent from my iPhone using BtownBanners mobile app

[Bowhunter 3,125]

MO thought he had earned his spot.  He had fallen back behind other players on the team.  That  is very sad.  He was very impressive as a freshman, but the best freshman in the country might have been a stretch,  I do believe he could have provided us some outside shooting this year. It's funny how our fan base say guys leave because  they are homesick. Most the time it's do to looking for a different fit or more playing time.

[OliviaPope40 7,443]

Let's ask TakeMeBack to see what he says on this topic.

[bronkonagurski 894]

MO thought he had earned his spot.  He had fallen back behind other players on the team.  That  is very sad.  He was very impressive as a freshman, but the best freshman in the country might have been a stretch,  I do believe he could have provided us some outside shooting this year. It's funny how our fan base say guys leave because  they are homesick. Most the time it's do to looking for a different fit or more playing time.

 

I agree that when guys leave, they are looking for a better fit or more playing time.  Transfers happen, it isn't necessarily a negative reflection on the coach.  Which is why I found it humorous that the other site decided to delete this particular story. 

[bronkonagurski 894]

Let's ask TakeMeBack to see what he says on this topic.

 

He was the one who started the thread on the other site.  Still can't figure out why that got deleted but from what I understand Clockwork Ken tends to operate that way.  If you are going to advertise yourself as the open and honest forum then you probably should not be deleting threads with no explanation.  Just my opinion.  

[Myrmidon76 614]

He was the one who started the thread on the other site.  Still can't figure out why that got deleted but from what I understand Clockwork Ken tends to operate that way.  If you are going to advertise yourself as the open and honest forum then you probably should not be deleting threads with no explanation.  Just my opinion.  

 

Never registered over there. Without hitting below the belt, I thought it would be an extension of HSN...I was wrong. This place has the opinions I value (positive and negative). Yea, yea...cheap plug I know, but its just....I don't know...familiar here. As far as Mo goes, I watched him play a couple of weeks back where he ripped off like 11 points in 2 miuntes of play. The defenders he was shooting against really didn't value closing out quickly. His shot was slow as ever, but he could get it off with rythmn. His legs still look mighty small and he runs down the floor with a hitch, but he can still hit big shots. I have no doubt the defenders in the Big 10 would have harassed him as they did when he was here. I'll never forget Mo Creek or what he could have been had fate been kinder.

[Piker 0]

I am just a regular Joe, but the offense we use does not suit what we thought Creek had become in my opinion.  As I watch this offense, with few off the ball screens, it is apparent that stand alone shooters (Roth, Creek from injuries) do not fit this system.   I used to Marvel at how our motion offense used screen after screen to get a shooter an open look, and that shooter worked hard to get open by using those screens.  You did not have to be the flash, but you had to use screens well.  I miss that.  When Yogi and Will are cold from outside, I always think it would be nice to have a Creek or Roth on the team, but we would have to utilize an offense that would screen off the ball to get them open looks.   Creek says he still has his shot, and I wish we had some options in our system to have used that.   The closest attempt I see to get a perimeter shooter an open look is that dribble down the middle, often ending out of bounds on the baseline, with a wild throw to the perimeter somewhere on the drive in, or out of bounds, hoping a defender failed to stay home.  It does work at times, but doesn't at others.   Maybe the motion offense lost its prime when the shot clock went to 35.   I don't pretend to really know these things.  Just tired on the day after DST implementation, so rather than work at my computer, thought I would join and post.

[Rayl 527]

The pure motion offense lost its effectiveness when defenses got bigger and stronger. The game became rougher and officials stopped calling fouls on as much contact. It's hard to be great at running the motion when the defense can knock you off your routes. It's also a very difficult system to learn. It takes a year or two for players to really grasp it to the point where they know all of the rules intuitively. With the best players leaving school early coaches need a system that younger players can pick up and run well. Even Coach K has had to adapt his offense from a pure motion system to include more quick hitters and two-man game sets.

 

As for Mo, it's great that he is having success again this year. I don't think it would have happened at IU. From what I have seen in the games I've watched, Mo doesn't move very well. I don't know that he could have kept up with Crean's pace of play.

[Piker 0]

Thanks, that makes great sense.