This site is supported by the advertisements on it, please disable your AdBlocker so we can continue to provide you with the quality content you expect.
  1. Follow us on Twitter @buckeyeplanet and @bp_recruiting, like us on Facebook! Enjoy a post or article, recommend it to others! BP is only as strong as its community, and we only promote by word of mouth, so share away!
    Dismiss Notice
  2. Consider registering! Fewer and higher quality ads, no emails you don't want, access to all the forums, download game torrents, private messages, polls, Sportsbook, etc. Even if you just want to lurk, there are a lot of good reasons to register!
    Dismiss Notice

tBBC 2nd Glance: Wisconsin

Discussion in 'News' started by Ken, Feb 5, 2016.

  1. Ken

    Ken Guest

    2nd Glance: Wisconsin
    via our good friends at Buckeye Battle Cry
    Visit their fantastic blog and read the full article (and so much more) here

    (Thad is still pointing a few things out to his team)

    The Wisconsin game was a microcosm of this season to me. A very slow start (down 11-0 after 4 minutes) followed by a spirited comeback held 21-20 lead eight minutes later), then unable to finish the half (trailed 38-32 at the half) nor able to finish the game, trailing by only 3 points with 4:03 left in game.

    This was interesting, to me, because it shows that with a young team, you never are quite sure where your points are going to come from. Established “senior” players pretty much came up empty; younger players, coming off the bench lit up the scoreboard. More on that, below..

    Viewing Experience

    This game was an example of certain statistics not fully telling the story of how a game ended. For example:

    – Points in the paint-OSU 32,WIS 24.
    – Points off turnovers-OSU 19,WIS 10. – 2nd chance points-OSU 13,WIS 9.
    – Fast break points-OSU 7,WIS 2. – Bench points-OSU 46,WIS 15.

    By any reasonable guess, you’d think that with results shown above, Ohio State would have pulled out a win, especially when you saw the “Bench Points” difference. Alas, no. The Ohio State “bench (Lyle, Williams, Thompson) scored their 46 points on a very solid 18-33 (54%) from the field and 5-9 (55%) from the foul line. It doesn’t reflect that Wisconsin overwhelmed Ohio State with its 3-point shooting. The Buckeye perimeter defense continues to be a learning exercise.

    The Thad Matta Factor

    I think that Thad’s “shuffle the lineup” approach is a good approach. This is a very young team that not only needs to figure out how to play at this level of D1 competition, but also how to play/mesh with one another. If nothing else, at this point, having Thompson, Lyle and Williams come off the bench will lead to an impressive surge in energy, points and rebounds once they enter the game.

    I’ll refer to my comments about Marc Loving’s play (below). I would be OK with making this young team even younger. It’s time to get Mickey Mitchell more playing time.

    There are 7 games left in the regular season. For Thad to get to another 20-win season, the Buckeyes have to win at least 6 of these games. However, 5 of these games are against Northwestern, Michigan, Michigan State and Iowa.

    A 20-win season isn’t happening this year. It’s time to recognize that and begin to put together the lineup combination(s) for next season. There is still a lot to be accomplished this season.

    The Three Magi:

    The “senior statesmen” of Marc Loving, Kieta Bates-Diop and Jae’Sean Tate had a poor-mediocre game against Wisconsin. They combined for 22 points, 13 rebounds, 2 blocks, 9 fouls and 3 turnovers in nearly 90 minutes of game time. That represents 45% of game time. That’s not too good. Not good at all.

    Jae’Sean Tate clearly played inspired ball. He played his usual “grubby” full effort game. Jae’Sean was a decent 4-9 from the field and 1-1 from the free throw line. He had 9 points, 3 rebounds, 1 assists and 1 block. He didn’t necessarily match up too well against Wisconsin’s Hayes / Happ / Brown, but you knew you are getting an unquestioned effort from him. At 6’4″, Tate will almost always be the short front court player. Fortunately, heart and will are factored into a player’s contribution.

    Marc Loving was absolutely atrocious against Wisconsin. His play was passive and his decision making was poor. He clocked in with 6 points, 2 rebounds, 4 fouls and 2 turnovers. Here is how passive his play was; of his 7 FG attempts, 5 were from 3-point range and he had no FT attempts. Regarding ‘decision making’, he had one play that was a head-scratcher.. With about 3:30 in the first half and OSU trailing 30-27, Marc did something astounding. From the left wing, he drove to his right (always a good move for a right hander) across the key, went up for a jump shot (while momentum still drifted him to the right) and attempted a left-handed “jump” shot. Hilarity ensued as Loving clanked the shot then committed a foul during the rebound scrum. It may be a point where Thad has to consider Loving’s status as a starter and, in the end, how much playing time he gets.

    In contrast, Kieta Bates-Diop, played a much more aggressive, assertive game. Although KBD scored only 7 points, he did pull in a game leading 8 rebounds. While ML did not get to the free throw line, KBD was 3-3, due to his play putting Wisconsin in positions to foul him.

    Lineup Mix-n-Match:

    Thad went with his latest lineup iteration of ‘Tate / Loving / Bates-Diop / Giddens / Harris. This continues to be an interesting experiment.

    Ball Control:

    The Buckeyes actually didn’t do too badly, committing 10 turnovers on the night. It needs to get better, but it’s still 3-4 below their season average. Of the 10 turnovers, Daniel Giddens had 3 (an Amir Williams type of performance) while Loving and Lyle had 2 each.

    As mentioned earlier, Ohio State outperformed Wisconsin in “points off turnovers 19-10, but unfortunately there is more to the game than that. However, OSU’s dominance in that metric mad the game closer than it should have been.

    Interior play, Center(s) of Attention:

    Thad started Daniel Giddens, again, at center in place of Trevor Thompson. This “new” look didn’t work out too well against the Badgers. Giddens was a non-factor. He did not take a shot and was 0-2 from the FT line. That was the good news. The bad news is that he had 4 fouls and committed 3 turnovers. I’m sure that was a net-negative for the night. This was accomplished in 15 minutes of game time.

    Meanwhile, Trevor Thompson had a fairly productive 19 minutes on the floor. He scored 9 points, grabbed 6 rebounds and blocked 1 shot. That’s a pretty decent box score for Trevor.

    David Bell did not see any action against Wisconsin.

    Up Next…

    The Buckeyes (14-10, 6-5) host Northwestern (16-8, 4-7) on Thursday, February 9th. Tip off is scheduled for 8:00 PM ET. The Buckeyes did manage a win against the Wildcats (65-56) on January 6th.

    The post 2nd Glance: Wisconsin appeared first on The Buckeye Battle Cry: Ohio State News and Commentary.

    Continue reading...

Share This Page