MSU WBB

[Catlady]

Big game today as we start the stretch run to the tourney. Important to come together as a team and figure out the identity of this team. There’s no doubt the team is missing Lundberg’s offense, but defense has improved.

I think Binford is a quality coach, but she’s going to need to reinvent her team and let the Freshmen grow up.

[BelgradeBobcat]

Well the solution appears to be-have Madeline Smith be unstoppable and go for 25 points!.
She really had her low post moves working against Weber State. Braxton chipped in 8 so 33 from the center position.
The zone worked like a charm to neutralize them in the second half after Weber got within 3 at halftime. It was a lot like our men's team lately. Weber went cold and we cruised from there. It is different on offense without Claire Lundberg occupying two defenders by herself. Shots can be harder to come by. So we're going to have to rely on our posts for points.
I think we're a year away. The Big Sky's clear top 4 are PSU, UNC, ISU, and Idaho and all of them lose a lot of talent to graduation after this season. MSU, on the other hand, has everybody back and we have Fallyn Freije waiting in the wings-and she is really good. That being said, this team could still have a surprise or two in them for this season.

[Colter_Nuanez]

[RickRund]

Well the solution appears to be-have Madeline Smith be unstoppable and go for 25 points!.
She really had her low post moves working against Weber State. Braxton chipped in 8 so 33 from the center position.
The zone worked like a charm to neutralize them in the second half after Weber got within 3 at halftime. It was a lot like our men's team lately. Weber went cold and we cruised from there. It is different on offense without Claire Lundberg occupying two defenders by herself. Shots can be harder to come by. So we're going to have to rely on our posts for points.
I think we're a year away. The Big Sky's clear top 4 are PSU, UNC, ISU, and Idaho and all of them lose a lot of talent to graduation after this season. MSU, on the other hand, has everybody back and we have Fallyn Freije waiting in the wings-and she is really good. That being said, this team could still have a surprise or two in them for this season.

But we will not have Lundberg back next year, correct???

[aucat]

As is usually the case, no one knew what MSU team would show up today against Weber. The team that looked pathetic against Northern Colorado
and Idaho State at home? Or perhaps the MSU team that whipped UM by 22; whipped Northern Colorado on the road; whipped Eastern Washington on the road.

Well, I was in the second row today. I could tell from the get-go that MSU was really fired up and energetic. Really a great crowd as well.
Madeline Smith was absolutely on fire and unstoppable. The two things that I truly cannot understand about the MSU women's basketball team is 1. Why the volatility? Why do they play with so much fire and energy one night, and then look like they all have the flu the next game?
2. Why does Coach take out players when they are absolutely ON FIRE (Madeline Smith, Tori, etc.) and put in someone else cold off the bench when
the hot players do not appear in the least to be tired?

There were a couple of times in the third quarter when the team was playing with great chemistry and scoring at will and it appeared that we were about to blow the game open, and score over 80 points so everyone could get their cinnamon roll, etc. when suddenly Coach takes out Madeline and several other key players and put some players in who had not scored. Sure enough next thing you know we were only four points ahead.

Another substitution and boom, we go off and get back into a double digit lead (but alas, too late to score 80 so no cinnamon rolls!)

I guess this is one reason to come out and enjoy watching this team play. You absolutely have no idea what will take place. Note that the UM team that we whipped by 22, whipped Idaho State today (the team that dominated us Thursday night.

Remember last year when we blew out UM here at home, and then over in Missoula UM blew us out? I wouldn't be surprised if history repeats itself next Saturday. I certainly hope not. If the team that played today shows up in Missoula, and if Coach will leave the players who are really scoring and making plays in the game, we might just pull it out.

[aucat]

But we will not have Lundberg back next year, correct???
[/quote]


Afraid not

[HelenaCat]

I made the game today and enjoyed it. We do struggle a bit to score without Claire, but Madeline Smith was unstoppable down low. Really a nice game by her.

The pink uniforms kept throwing me off. I kept thinking I was watching the griz play.

[CatRowdy]

Saturday's game showed the potential of this team. Binford swapped out the seasons offense for her offense from two years ago. It worked. After another week I think the girls will have it fully integrated. Gabby was the only one that seemed to struggle with her role, but I'm confident in a weeks time she will have it down. As for defense the ladies got some nice stops, certainly better than Thursday night.
I also think Binford's energy from the sidelines has increased the last two games. These girls need motivation and while that might be a coaches toughest job I think Trish is really making an effort, which I believe will yield results.
As for subbing players, coach has said all year she feels she has a fairly deep bench, and why not sub out and give precious game time to additional players, especially some of our talented freshman. If you look at the schedule they have four games between March 2nd and March 9th (8 days) and then have to compete in the tournament starting on the 11th or 12th depending on seed. Whether we like it or not she's going to need her bench to get through that schedule.

As for Lundberg we wouldn't have had her next year as she's a senior. Hopefully her surgery will go well and her rehab will get her back so she can try out for the Pros, she certainly has the skills. Keep in mind the team will get Fallyn next season.

[Bobcat4Ever]

CatRowdy — Thanks for an excellent informative post. Much appreciated. I thought that action looked familiar, and that explains it. We rode it a long way with the right players two years ago. I'd like to have your comments on this year's offense, as much as you can say? Was it new this year? Was it something Coach thought would match these players better? It did provide a lot of three-point looks, but unfortunately other than Claire, no one has really been killing it from three.

I do like that Coach Binford recognizes that the sideline needs more energy, but I would hope the players would pick up on that and not leave it to the coach. I think we might have had more crazies on the bench on previous teams.

I am very excited to have Fallyn Freije be eligible next year. As a fan it will be quite an adjustment to be cheering for her instead of watching her beat us. Of all players, I’d have never guessed we'd see her in Bobcat colors. It sounds like we almost got her as a freshman, and wouldn't that have been sweet. She's a fine student as well — great fit.

[Anacomando]

Binford will have her team ready for the tournament. She'll get this team to exceed expectations.

[Ilikecats]

We need to quit thinking that we’re going to have a great team because of transfers! I can say that because I was guilty of the same thing this year. We have a habit of anointing transfers as the best and greatest and place them in a category higher than players who signed with us out of High School. Fallyn is going to be a welcome addition to the team, but Smith, Braxton and Squires are the soul of this squad and will be leaders this and next season. Let’s not put someone on a pedestal and forget about the players who given so much to the program. We also have a Freshman class this year that’s going to only get better. I’m glad to see Binford make a change in her offense and utilize her post players. Makes you wonder why she waited until Lundberg wasn’t available to use her existing talent! I agree, utilize the post and get Martell going....... it could be special!

[Catlady]

I know I sound like a broken record, but can’t for the life of me figure out why we don’t have Smith and Braxton on the court at the same time? They’re both able to cover the 3 pt shot which is a weakness for us and they’re both able to rebound. I’m excited with the offense they’re both bringing this season. They both only play 20 minutes a game. I’m thinking having them on the court together would only improve our offense and defense. We could be dominant inside which would open up outside shooting. We can get away with what we do with the bottom half of the league, but we are not going to beat Idaho, Idaho State, UNC or PSU unless we adapt and increase our defensive intensity.

[BobcatDel]

I know I sound like a broken record, but can’t for the life of me figure out why we don’t have Smith and Braxton on the court at the same time? They’re both able to cover the 3 pt shot which is a weakness for us and they’re both able to rebound. I’m excited with the offense they’re both bringing this season. They both only play 20 minutes a game. I’m thinking having them on the court together would only improve our offense and defense. We could be dominant inside which would open up outside shooting. We can get away with what we do with the bottom half of the league, but we are not going to beat Idaho, Idaho State, UNC or PSU unless we adapt and increase our defensive intensity.

In my favorite broken record response.

Yes you are sounding like a broken record. No Binford is not going to change it at this point. Both will be on court at same time in situational alignments.

No they can not cover the 3 point shot. They are not that fast, they would wear out quickly. If you did that to me, I would clear a side and let my guards take you to the hoop all day long, all day long, and all day long until you fouled out or got sagging help. Then I would feed my bigs inside against your smaller inside defense. That is not a winning strategy in my opinion.

Why would an opponent worry about stopping our outside shooting and opening up the outside. We really don’t have an outside game. We rank 9th in league in 3 point percent shots....only Lundberg at near 40 percent was a threat out there. We have had plenty of open look 3s, have taken more 3point shots than our opponents and as an opposing coach I will let you shoot out there all you want if you are going to try the big double inside. With Lundberg gone we have only Kuderer shooting 32.8 percent from 3 range. Last year we had 4 ladies that shot better than Kuderer outside. So as an opposing coach, please try the big double on offense and I will sag and double or triple team in the box like Idaho State did....then my smalls are going to sag to stop your passing lanes and swat away the ball when your big brings it down to dribble. Unless others like Martell, Squires, Mochi, and Wright start getting comfortable and hitting outside.....

Yep. Two bigs would help on offensive boards where we lag. But we are currently 2nd on defensive boards in conference so not much help there.

No our two bigs are not 40 min players.

What is your rotation going to be when you set them? Brynley and Wright on inside with Mochi, Squires, Kuderer outside....or Kuderer, Wright inside with Squires, Mochi, VanSickle outside? Are you going to try to uptempo game with smaller lineup in.

Do you think you can play a 3 or 4 day tourney with your bigs playing 35 min per game?

[Ilikecats]

I know I sound like a broken record, but can’t for the life of me figure out why we don’t have Smith and Braxton on the court at the same time? They’re both able to cover the 3 pt shot which is a weakness for us and they’re both able to rebound. I’m excited with the offense they’re both bringing this season. They both only play 20 minutes a game. I’m thinking having them on the court together would only improve our offense and defense. We could be dominant inside which would open up outside shooting. We can get away with what we do with the bottom half of the league, but we are not going to beat Idaho, Idaho State, UNC or PSU unless we adapt and increase our defensive intensity.

In my favorite broken record response.

Yes you are sounding like a broken record. No Binford is not going to change it at this point. Both will be on court at same time in situational alignments.

No they can not cover the 3 point shot. They are not that fast, they would wear out quickly. If you did that to me, I would clear a side and let my guards take you to the hoop all day long, all day long, and all day long until you fouled out or got sagging help. Then I would feed my bigs inside against your smaller inside defense. That is not a winning strategy in my opinion.

Why would an opponent worry about stopping our outside shooting and opening up the outside. We really don’t have an outside game. We rank 9th in league in 3 point percent shots....only Lundberg at near 40 percent was a threat out there. We have had plenty of open look 3s, have taken more 3point shots than our opponents and as an opposing coach I will let you shoot out there all you want if you are going to try the big double inside. With Lundberg gone we have only Kuderer shooting 32.8 percent from 3 range. Last year we had 4 ladies that shot better than Kuderer outside. So as an opposing coach, please try the big double on offense and I will sag and double or triple team in the box like Idaho State did....then my smalls are going to sag to stop your passing lanes and swat away the ball when your big brings it down to dribble. Unless others like Martell, Squires, Mochi, and Wright start getting comfortable and hitting outside.....

Yep. Two bigs would help on offensive boards where we lag. But we are currently 2nd on defensive boards in conference so not much help there.

No our two bigs are not 40 min players.

What is your rotation going to be when you set them? Brynley and Wright on inside with Mochi, Squires, Kuderer outside....or Kuderer, Wright inside with Squires, Mochi, VanSickle outside? Are you going to try to uptempo game with smaller lineup in.

Do you think you can play a 3 or 4 day tourney with your bigs playing 35 min per game?

I disagree. Our competition hasn’t been kicking our butts by clearing out and driving. Our competition is raining threes on us without anyone being in their face contesting the three. Big sky guards aren’t creating offense, they’re spotting up and hitting open threes! Check the stats! How many times do we have to yell cover the three during a game? Also with playing a 2/3..... they’ll still be another big inside to contest guards diving to the hoop! ( I’m sure you’re aware that we do a great job blocking shots). It’s call having twin towers! Our bigs aren’t 40 minute bigs, but having them on the court for 30 isn’t a big deal. They’re not the prototypical plodding Big Sky Big! Anywhere else they’ll be a 4! We are only getting 20 minutes now. Plus their shooting percentages are very strong. They’re also our best passers. I believe that Martell and Squires can hit threes if put in a spot up situation. I like a rotation of Smith, Braxton, Wright, Martell, Kuderer, Squires, Mocchi and Van Sickle. You wouldn’t need to sit your bigs at the same time...... you can either rotate them out or switch defenses. Even go smaller at times. What I do know is what we’re doing now doesn’t work against the top teams. Binford can stick to what she’s doing now and get an early ticket home from Boise or try some new things to improve a team with a .500 record. Montana on Saturday is going to remember that our bigs ate them alive in Bozeman. They’re going to cover the pick and roll and make us hit our outside shots. So we better have a strategy in place to counter. BTW we have another Big joining us next year. She’s not a jump shooter. Fallyn is another Big! We are going to have 3 bigs fighting for time next year! According to your post, I don’t see much improvement over this year if we don’t switch our strategy.

[Catlady]

BobcatDel
I respect that you think I sound like a broken record, but don’t see you offering any ideas. I’d love to hear your thoughts on what we need to do to improve. I didn’t even realize that Fallyn is’nt a guard.

[CatRowdy]

Madeline and Blair are 5's; Faylin is a 3 or a 4 just like Lundberg. I have to agree with Del, neither Maddie or Blair could play a whole 40 minutes. Binford's only answer at the post is to rotate them.
I also have to agree with Ilikecats... although I think you should be Ilike (the)Cats. Transfers will never be the answer to a winning team. They are a great addition to a winning team, but we should never think they will be THE answer. Losing Lundberg sucks because is ended her senior season and she's a good player, but that just means next woman up, and we have talent that can step up!
So Catlady, I don't know what the solution is besides continuing to work on our defense. I don't think Sunny has introduced a lot of different play, but I would have to think her approach coaching is likely different from Nates. Also we have a fair amount of freshman on the court at any given time, and without a doubt college play is way faster and fluid than what these girls experienced in high school.
All that said, I'm kind of excited where this team is headed. Yes, it's been a frustrating 1st part of the season as we definitely lost games we shouldn't have, but I can't help but think the coaches have learned something about motivating this particular team; and this team has learned things about themselves; all of which mean the possibility exists for them to put it together come tournament time. We'll see what to expect starting Saturday, we can beat the griz, it's tougher in their house, but still doable. If we get that done than I'm gonna believe this team has meshed.

[Ilikecats]

Fallyn is not a 3 and is not like Lundberg, not even close. Fallyn is more of a power player. Not near as graceful as Claire. Also doesn’t have Claire’s jumper. Watched her against the Bobcats many times. Basketball is changing and our bigs aren’t the usual 5’s, I’m not sure why we still look at hoops like the 1950’s! I see us coming home early from Boise because everyone else is evolving and we can’t figure out how to adjust. I hope I’m wrong, but right now we’re barely a middle of the pack team. I don’t think any player needs to play 40 minutes, but I do think 30 minutes is doable. It’s tournament time! You play to win because tomorrow isn’t promised!

[aucat]

I will make one more comment then shut up. I'm not a coach but I did play basketball. In my day you worked your butt off in practice to earn a starting spot. Then you worked your butt off in the games to prove that you deserved to start. We would have five starters with maybe a couple of key subs. We developed a great chemistry and could almost anticipate where the other players would be, and how to get the most effective plays, shots, and perform on D. Our coach in fall drills ran us pretty good, so we were in great shape. Now, having said that, we were told that whenever we were truly tired and needed a break, to just pull on the front of our jersey, and he would pull us out. Didn't happen much because we were in shape.

Now, some teams we played featured full court pressure from beginning to end. I watched a bit of a game between the Auburn-Alabama women the other night and that's what Auburn does. Auburn beat them by 40 points because the women played like wild in the streets, causing one turnover after another. So if a team runs THAT type of game plan, then I can certainly see why you would not stick to your starters for most of the game.

But otherwise, I just cannot for the life of me see the wisdom in taking players out when they are red hot and ARE NOT PHYSICALLY TIRED! Madeline Smith was well on her way to scoring 35 points. Tori was lighting it up from 3 point (a definite weakness with the Lady Cats this year), AND, the team was well on its way to blowing out Weber and scoring probably 85 points. Suddenly, Coach takes Madeline and Tori out of the game and puts in a couple of players stone cold off the bench who had not scored. Immediately our offense disappeared, Weber made a run, and closed the lead down to around 4 points I believe before Coach put them back in.

We built the lead back to double digits but, they had "cooled off" and I don't think we scored a point the last five minutes of the game. If you watch the great teams on TV, most of them have a go-to starting lineup with only a few substitutions.

I know that in pee wee ball coaches should play all the kids, because it should be about fun for all the players. However, on the college level, it is about WINNING GAMES. And if you want to do that, especially against the better teams, you had BETTER play your go-to players who can produce.

Not everyone on the MSU bench is capable of truly producing. Again, that's what I thought practice was about. TO EARN A STARTING POSITION.

THe constant subbing just drives me nuts

[Catlady]

I will make one more comment then shut up. I'm not a coach but I did play basketball. In my day you worked your butt off in practice to earn a starting spot. Then you worked your butt off in the games to prove that you deserved to start. We would have five starters with maybe a couple of key subs. We developed a great chemistry and could almost anticipate where the other players would be, and how to get the most effective plays, shots, and perform on D. Our coach in fall drills ran us pretty good, so we were in great shape. Now, having said that, we were told that whenever we were truly tired and needed a break, to just pull on the front of our jersey, and he would pull us out. Didn't happen much because we were in shape.

Now, some teams we played featured full court pressure from beginning to end. I watched a bit of a game between the Auburn-Alabama women the other night and that's what Auburn does. Auburn beat them by 40 points because the women played like wild in the streets, causing one turnover after another. So if a team runs THAT type of game plan, then I can certainly see why you would not stick to your starters for most of the game.

But otherwise, I just cannot for the life of me see the wisdom in taking players out when they are red hot and ARE NOT PHYSICALLY TIRED! Madeline Smith was well on her way to scoring 35 points. Tori was lighting it up from 3 point (a definite weakness with the Lady Cats this year), AND, the team was well on its way to blowing out Weber and scoring probably 85 points. Suddenly, Coach takes Madeline and Tori out of the game and puts in a couple of players stone cold off the bench who had not scored. Immediately our offense disappeared, Weber made a run, and closed the lead down to around 4 points I believe before Coach put them back in.

We built the lead back to double digits but, they had "cooled off" and I don't think we scored a point the last five minutes of the game. If you watch the great teams on TV, most of them have a go-to starting lineup with only a few substitutions.

I know that in pee wee ball coaches should play all the kids, because it should be about fun for all the players. However, on the college level, it is about WINNING GAMES. And if you want to do that, especially against the better teams, you had BETTER play your go-to players who can produce.

Not everyone on the MSU bench is capable of truly producing. Again, that's what I thought practice was about. TO EARN A STARTING POSITION.

THe constant subbing just drives me nuts

You’re right about Smith, but Martell had a bad shooting night and was 1-7 from 3! Smith was hot, but Braxton was 4 for 5. They both scored well and are very efficient.

[BelgradeBobcat]

But otherwise, I just cannot for the life of me see the wisdom in taking players out when they are red hot and ARE NOT PHYSICALLY TIRED!

Mick Durham used to do that chronically. Drove me nuts.

Our team needs to do two things better. Guard the 3 ball and shooting the 3. Right now if a 3 goes in for us-it feels like a happy surprise instead of an expected outcome.