We're watching a poorly coached team

[Duck07]

I am not all that impressed with what Altman has done this year...

Let me know when you get your venue. You might be on to something here.

[OregonFan4Life]

In response to OregonFan4Life:
You do realize that Ernie's teams took multiple years to find chemistry, right? We don't even have a true point guard as a starter and we all know that Ernie needed a great point guard to find success. We have talent, but part of the problem is the lack of a true point guard running the show, and yet Altman has been able to mask that deficiency and make us a very solid basketball team.

With all of the pieces in the fold it was a given that it would take time to look good, but this season should exceed everyone's expectations thus far. What are you looking for in a coach? Did you honestly expect Oregon to win the conference going away, because that seems like your expectation. Kentucky is the exception, not the rule with regards to bringing in a whole new team and being ready to rock. The only issue I have with Altman is the fact that he didn't do nearly enough homework in the recruitment of Jabari Brown and Bruce Barron, but the coaching staff will learn from that. With Ernie we were lucky to be a competitive team for two years out of the four for every massive class he brought in, and we are still trying to overcome his extremely unbalanced classes, that takes time..

Let's stop looking to the past and look to the future, because Altman will find a way to keep us competitive every season in my opinion.

I just believe with the way Oregon is currently playing, we will see the team's record start to fall later in the season. I think Oregon has superior players to most teams in the conference, exceptions are Washington, Cal, Stanford, and possibly UCLA, but besides that, Oregon seems to just plain have better players. Maybe I'm just overly critical of teams who don't play organized basketball and I'm overly obsessed with organized and fundamentally sound play from players, but from my view, I thought I saw a poorly coached team. Granted they did make a big comeback, but it was not at all how a team traditionally wins game. I know he can inspire very well, and this team is surprisingly playing with a lot of chemistry which is a huge reason they are doing so well. I just fell given the players that Oregon has, that if there was more discipline and organization, that Oregon could be even better.

[woundedknees]

IMO, Oregon has decent talent, that has learned to play together, in a very short time... Something the more talent laden teans in the PAC have failed to do consistently.

Washington, for example, has more stars than you can shake a stick at, yet they seem to be so busy shining individually, they forget to work together at times.

[oregontrack]

I just believe with the way Oregon is currently playing, we will see the team's record start to fall later in the season. I think Oregon has superior players to most teams in the conference, exceptions are Washington, Cal, Stanford, and possibly UCLA, but besides that, Oregon seems to just plain have better players. Maybe I'm just overly critical of teams who don't play organized basketball and I'm overly obsessed with organized and fundamentally sound play from players, but from my view, I thought I saw a poorly coached team. Granted they did make a big comeback, but it was not at all how a team traditionally wins game. I know he can inspire very well, and this team is surprisingly playing with a lot of chemistry which is a huge reason they are doing so well. I just fell given the players that Oregon has, that if there was more discipline and organization, that Oregon could be even better.

i am floored by this take. if nothing else, i almost want to applaud you for sticking to your guns, even though your theories and arguments are completely nonsensical.

oregon's offense is flawed because we don't have a point guard and we lack explosiveness on the perimeter. those are fairly severe limitations; the offense we can manufacture despite these limitations is nothing short of spectacular. we're not perfect from a fundamentals standpoint, but we're far, far more ahead of the game in that department than we should be considering how many new pieces we have. it's interesting to me that you look at that as a negative.

washington, ucla, arizona, cal, stanford, and oregon state are all more talented than we are. that's half the conference. despite that, we're in first place, with one game to go before the halfway mark. this team is well coached. the team you SEEM to be describing is oregon state -- they're a talented bunch that completely lack discipline and are almost exclusively out of position.

[TheMaehlMan]

I just believe with the way Oregon is currently playing, we will see the team's record start to fall later in the season. I think Oregon has superior players to most teams in the conference, exceptions are Washington, Cal, Stanford, and possibly UCLA, but besides that, Oregon seems to just plain have better players. Maybe I'm just overly critical of teams who don't play organized basketball and I'm overly obsessed with organized and fundamentally sound play from players, but from my view, I thought I saw a poorly coached team. Granted they did make a big comeback, but it was not at all how a team traditionally wins game. I know he can inspire very well, and this team is surprisingly playing with a lot of chemistry which is a huge reason they are doing so well. I just fell given the players that Oregon has, that if there was more discipline and organization, that Oregon could be even better.

What you are noticing is correct in some ways, but the reasons behind those issues are flawed. What you can't seem to grasp is the fact that we lack a true starting point guard, which is why our offense looks the way it does. The most fundamentally sound teams in college basketball always have a point guard that can run the show and get everyone involved in the half court game, that's Basketball 101 knowledge. Garrett Sim is a terrific player, but ideally he would be playing off the ball as a two guard, but that currently is not a viable option due to our personnel. If we had a true point guard then the skill-set of a player like Olu Ashaolu would be much better utilized, yet Altman has still found a way to get the offense back on track.

The offensive stagnation that you speak of directly relates to our issues in the half-court, and that's why you are overrating the personnel we currently possess. Unfortunately I was one of those people who believed in Loyd too much, but he doesn't know how to play fast while having a plan at the same time. In time he could develop into that player, but he just isn't there yet. Thankfully Altman has found our point guard of the future in Dominic Artis, and this will allow us to have a complete team once he develops. If Ernie Kent had this team we would be right around .500 or possibly worse, he just was not capable of masking deficiencies in the way Altman can.

Maybe I lack basketball knowledge, but this all seems pretty clear to me. We may even fall off a bit to finish the season, but that will not be due to Altman lacking the ability to coach up players.

[Duckattack7]

What? This team is beating teams with WAY more talent and are second in the pac. Most thought they wouldnt even be top 5 and look where they are at. Just wait until he can bring in some top players and they will be fine. Ernie sucked @$$ idc what people say.

[OregonFan4Life]

I just believe with the way Oregon is currently playing, we will see the team's record start to fall later in the season. I think Oregon has superior players to most teams in the conference, exceptions are Washington, Cal, Stanford, and possibly UCLA, but besides that, Oregon seems to just plain have better players. Maybe I'm just overly critical of teams who don't play organized basketball and I'm overly obsessed with organized and fundamentally sound play from players, but from my view, I thought I saw a poorly coached team. Granted they did make a big comeback, but it was not at all how a team traditionally wins game. I know he can inspire very well, and this team is surprisingly playing with a lot of chemistry which is a huge reason they are doing so well. I just fell given the players that Oregon has, that if there was more discipline and organization, that Oregon could be even better.

What you are noticing is correct in some ways, but the reasons behind those issues are flawed. What you can't seem to grasp is the fact that we lack a true starting point guard, which is why our offense looks the way it does. The most fundamentally sound teams in college basketball always have a point guard that can run the show and get everyone involved in the half court game, that's Basketball 101 knowledge. Garrett Sim is a terrific player, but ideally he would be playing off the ball as a two guard, but that currently is not a viable option due to our personnel. If we had a true point guard then the skill-set of a player like Olu Ashaolu would be much better utilized, yet Altman has still found a way to get the offense back on track.

The offensive stagnation that you speak of directly relates to our issues in the half-court, and that's why you are overrating the personnel we currently possess. Unfortunately I was one of those people who believed in Loyd too much, but he doesn't know how to play fast while having a plan at the same time. In time he could develop into that player, but he just isn't there yet. Thankfully Altman has found our point guard of the future in Dominic Artis, and this will allow us to have a complete team once he develops. If Ernie Kent had this team we would be right around .500 or possibly worse, he just was not capable of masking deficiencies in the way Altman can.

Maybe I lack basketball knowledge, but this all seems pretty clear to me. We may even fall off a bit to finish the season, but that will not be due to Altman lacking the ability to coach up players.

Sounds like you have watched this team a little more than I have, I have noticed that problem with Lloyd, but I always thought Sim could be a capable PG, and I thought that since his Freshman year. But just because Oregon doesn't have a true PG doesn't mean they can't run sharper cuts and put more effort into their screens. You don't need a true PG to run simple plays and make then effective, Oregon seems to be most effective when not running any organized ball. I don't want to call it street ball, because Oregon has more fundamentals than that, but that's the only way I can describe it. Also, not having a true PG isn't causing the lack of certain fundamentals, Oregon has big and athletic guys, Woods, Nared, Jacobs, these guys are great rebounders, Oregon should be doing better on rebounding. Watch their blocking out, it's not very good. One of the worst at blocking out on the team is Singler. Another issue is Woods, again, he gets so greedy it's frustrating. Sure he can get 4 or 5 blocks and they look sweet, but yesterday I counted at least 6 or 7 times where he gave up a wide open hoop because he left his man to try and block a shot leaving him wide open for an easy bucket. Sometimes it's necessary to leave your man to help, but a lot of the time he does, it isn't necessary. He needs to trust his teammates more that they'll recover when they get slightly beat and he needs to stay in position.

I am a stubborn person, it takes a lot for me to change my opinion, and I've believed this since last year when I watched Oregon lose in Mac to Idaho and other games in the Pac-10. You're right a true PG does help, and Artis will help a lot, but it's not like a true PG is the difference between really organized play and street ball, you can still manage.

[Duck07]

Just stop. If you're not going to do that, then go give an example of what this Oregon team "should" look and be playing like. Also, give me the names of those coaches who we could get that would show Altman up. Then go watch film of Oregon BB under Ernie Kent. No, not the Lukes or AB's SR year because if you don't know the qualifier's behind those seasons, then you need to self-educate yourself about the last decade of Oregon BB because it has nothing to do with you being stubborn or a loss to Idaho.

[oregontrack]

i would implore you to go to a park sometime and watch some "streetball" so you can figure out the difference between that and what the ducks do. it's anything but streetball. at this point i would suggest you just stop posting.

everybody is flawed. it's weird that you point out one or two flaws and draw a baseless "this team is poorly coached" conclusion, but you literally gloss over everything we do well and assume it has nothing to do with coaching, just disorganized blind luck.

your idaho talking point works against you. yes, we lost to idaho at home last year. san jose state, too. horrible teams. after a season playing together, the same untalented bunch that couldn't beat bottom-tier WAC schools was beating much better mid-major programs en route to the cbi championship. it was all about coaching.

[northbeachsf]

If EK had this same team, would he even be at .500 right now?

[justducky0]

if EK was coaching there is no way in hell we would have won the game... although we would have been able to watch and hear him yell "move!!!" over and over again. Altman is doing a great job right now and made some great half time adjustments and got this team refocused as they came out of the locker room.

[duckfan22]

Ok go back and watch replays of ernies last year. What whould you call his offense?
His offense consisted of Porter dribbling out front for 30 seconds before getting a
shot blocked. While the rest of his team was standing around. Also look at the number of assists in a game for the ducks. If they hit 10 for a game they were doing good. This years team has considerable more assists per game. If your playing so called street ball you would not have the assists they have. These guys play together, watch their press when they set up. They all go to where there supposed to be. With out that press they don't UCLA. In street ball that would never happen.
They are this far along because of coaching. It's not everyman for them selves.
Ive been watching and studying basketball for along time. What you might see as
street ball is called a fast break. Pressure D starts a lot of fast breaks. When they
are in the half court they are setting screens and moving the ball around. I have
seen more passes go into the post this year they i have seen in years. Sorry this is not a poorly coached team.

[buckmarkduck]

Wow more Kent lovers who can't let go that he was just a below avg coach. In the Pac 12 right now I would rank Altman as the 3rd best coach behind Monty and Howland. Kent was never better than the 6th best coach at anytime in the conference.

[oregontrack]

i wouldn't make a new thread for this, but since kent was brought up, you know what always bugged me most about him?

it wasn't that he "couldn't coach." i never bought the idea that some had that centered around "kent let the players do whatever they want, there was no plan". sometimes, what bugged me most was when he tried to OVER-coach, or over-think a situation. his best seasons -- 2000, 2002, 2007 -- he had a plan, a scheme, and a system, and ran with it. he put out the same line-up every night and we just did what we did (and we did it well), but at other times, he completely lost faith in what he did. if we were playing a school with a tall line-up, he would tinker with our starting five and he'd put in an extra big. naturally, this screwed us up more than the opposition, as it pulled us out of our game and what we were best at. that 2007 team was small -- 6'6 and 6'8 at the 4/5 spots -- but did we ever throw in an extra big because we were scared of any matchups? no, we made OTHERS adjust for US. i hated when kent would bend over backwards trying to play chess with himself, running scared and trying to adjust to others.