Seems like their strategy of running people off the 3 point line and letting Edey dominate in the post worked. Is this just because they're so big or can this strategy work for bubble teams?

The strategy could work for anyone, but scoring 75 and getting 46pts from the starting backcourt is the hard part.

to me the one area of many that made uconn so good is their off the ball movement and cutting. they do a better job than just about any team i have seen in a long time with their off the ball movement. they would be a very difficult team to defend because if you show any help the open guy cuts to open space and they make a perfect pass for an easy bucket. they look like a much more skilled and athletic version of those old prenceton teams back in the day. they are a very very well coached team with lots of talent.

If you have the best offense in the nation and advantages at every other position on both ends of the floor it can work for anyone.

Is this the thread where we look at one of the greatest NCAA tournament teams in the history of the tournament and try to figure out why Texas A&M wasn't as good?

UConn sets a record for point differential in the NCAA tournament pic.twitter.com/8hC0JkuER7

— CJ Fogler account may or may not be notable (@cjzero) April 9, 2024

Yes, I know they're good. They're approach is opposite of ours in every way. Not saying we could pull it off.

It's a discussion of approach. Comparing our team to theirs in style and philosophy only. They would beat us if they played just like us but some of it is coaching philosophy. I don't see any lottery players over there.

Method Man said:

---

Yes, I know they're good. They're approach is opposite of ours in every way. Not saying we could pull it off.

---

Their size was certainly a factor. Newton is listed at 6'5", Cam Spencer 6'4", Castle is 6'6". Karaban is 6'8". Then you got a guy like KlingKong inside. And a roster with several good role players like Diarra.

Of course.

It's a very weak draft but I think they have 2 lottery players on the team and more that will get drafted.

But I agree that their approach and philosophy is better than our's.

Other than Robert Williams, we haven't had a big lanky enforcer in the lane. That helps a bunch in not having to double the post and protect the paint... So everyone else can guard the perimeter..

And Robert was too raw to be effective like UConn's big guy...

Method Man said:

---

Yes, I know they're good. They're approach is opposite of ours in every way. Not saying we could pull it off.

It's a discussion of approach. Comparing our team to theirs in style and philosophy only. They would beat us if they played just like us but some of it is coaching philosophy. I don't see any lottery players over there.

---

Echoing Aston04, if we assumed there was a high quality rim enforcer on the roster like UCONN had, would that mere roster addition alone have allowed for changes in our defensive style of play this season?

Method Man said:

---

Yes, I know they're good. They're approach is opposite of ours in every way. Not saying we could pull it off.

It's a discussion of approach. Comparing our team to theirs in style and philosophy only. They would beat us if they played just like us but some of it is coaching philosophy. I don't see any lottery players over there.

---

Yes it could work better than what we are doing. Take the obvious player advantage out and Hurley is a better coach than Buzz and his offensive and defensive philosophy are better.

I am having to suffer through AAU tournaments each weekend right now and every kid wants to stand on the perimeter and shoots threes. Midrange and low post games are non existent for the vast majority of youth basketball today. Over correct and make them beat you with the areas of weakness would be wise.