Taking Grinding to a Whole New Level

Two of our authors were writing simultaneoulsy loggin similar entries about last night’s loss to Iowa, so we have put them together here.

BJD:
On a late field goal, Kirk Ferentz’ Iowa Hawkeyes edged out the visiting NC State Wolfpack 45-42, in a high-scoing gridiron affair…wait a minute, wrong sport. A 45-42 BASKETBALL game? In the 21st century? Yes, it really happened.

I will nominate this contest as perhaps the ugliest game ever between two ranked teams (as the announcers pointed out, neither squad played like a ranked team). It was fitting that the game ended with an airball from NC State, a familiar ending to anybody who follows the Pack closely.

Still, there were a few positives. Cedric Simmons was a dominating force in the low post, especially on defense. He’s a good passer, too. IMHO, he has the chance to be NC State’s best low-post player in about 30 years (yes, better than Fuller, Shack, and Washburn – Bailey is a tougher call). To his credit, Sendek did seem to run plays for him to operate like a traditional low-post offensive threat (which is why we broke the 30 mark). And we all know that Sendek’s teams often look horrible in November/December. Basketball is still a tournament sport, and this one game really did nothing to hurt our tournament standing.

But damn, was it ever ugly to watch.

Jeff
I was going to apologize for falling asleep in the middle of this ‘big’ game…but, when I turned on ESPN this morning and heard them describe State’s 42-45 loss to Iowa as an “ugly game” I didn’t feel the need. Every time that I started to dose, I would flip over to Duke @ Indiana and get refreshed with high-level play and excitement.

(You know…Indiana…whose coach played one of the toughest OOC schedule’s in the country last year despite the fact that his job was on the line because the Hoosiers missed the NCAA Tournament the previous year? Oh…to have standards)

* The N&O described the game as “sloppy”.

* Iowa announced attendance less than 13,100 for the Big 10 Challenge and for the ranked Wolfpack. Surely, NC State’s criticize your own fan suppot brigade will find a way to criticize the Hawkeyes for only 13k fans?

* The beginning of the game reminded me of the egg that NC State laid at Michigan just two years ago. (See a pattern?) But, after five minutes on Wednesday night…State’s horrible performance translated into bad performance by Iowa, so the loss didn’t ultimately look as bad.

* Congratulations to the Wolfpack women for their big win last night and to the ACC for winning our seventh ACC-Big Ten Challenge. The ACC has won EVERY Challenge ever played with the Big Ten. (I really thought that this was going to be a year that the Big Ten finally got on the board).

* What is the purpose of recruiting McDonald’s All-Americans if they aren’t even good enough to get into a game where the guys on the court are obviously playing of their worst games of the season?

“This was an ugly game”

-ESPN Sportscenter

About BJD95

1995 NC State graduate, sufferer of Les and MOC during my entire student tenure. An equal-opportunity objective critic and analyst of Wolfpack sports.

General NCS Basketball

58 Responses to Taking Grinding to a Whole New Level

  1. Trout 12/01/2005 at 2:52 PM #

    Gavin needs to work on his ball handling. He and Bennerman are most suspect on our team to the new emphasis on carrying.

  2. VaWolf82 12/01/2005 at 2:53 PM #

    Finally, I agree with the McD’s AA’s? Where are they? We obviously weren’t getting it done wiht the guys on the floor. Where were the recruits? They could not have done any worse, give them a shot.

    What do you have besides high school ranking that suggests that any of the freshmen should have played last night? Of all of the things that Sendek can be justly criticized for, I don’t see the point in wasting time arguing about which kids should be playing. Playing time is earned in practice and I know of no reason to think that Herb has any other reason to have kept them on the bench.

    Herb has played freshmen in the past so there is no reason to think that he won’t play these as soon as they are ready. You assume that they couldn’t do any worse……what do you base that assumption on? You think that Herb should play people that looked worse in practice just because other kids are looking bad in a particular game?

    As far as I’m concerned, the coach gets to institute whatever systems he wants, recruits the kids he wants, and plays the kids that he wants. In return, he should be held accountable for the results….but we don’t really need to get into that part again.

  3. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 2:57 PM #

    Trout, the word INDEPENDENT in NO WAY equates to OBJECTIVE. I have no desire to spend my time wanting to be OBJECTIVE. I’d rather be right.

  4. Mr. O 12/01/2005 at 2:58 PM #

    John: Personally, I think Grant is going to be a very, very good player for us for the next three years. He is a better ballhandler than Julius, but not the scorer. He can pass, defend and rebound also. So, IMO he is going to be a very good player for us and will likely be a primary ballhandler for us for the next 3 years.

  5. Rick 12/01/2005 at 3:04 PM #

    “Seriously…what the F* happened to Tony “The Answerâ€? Bethel? Listening to the HSSS and excuse-crowd last year, Tony was the missing link from a national championship. We were all told how much better that we were going to be with old TB. How does Atsur mean so much to us when we have Bethel, Grant, and Bennerman playing the same position? Courtney Fells?”
    One thing that is consistent, the player that is missing is the most important one. When Scooter went down he was “the most important cog”, when he graduated we are”better off without him”. When Bethel went down “he was the missing PG” and now it is “Atsur was out of rythm”. The best way for a player to improve to this crowd seems to be to get hurt.
    When players are playing poorly we should try something else and yet we never do.

  6. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 3:08 PM #

    “Because the level of performance of the last 4 years doesn’t bother me to the point of wanting Herb Sendek fired. “

    And here is the issue — Just because I highlight, criticize, analyze stuff related to Herb Sendek does not mean that I am doing it with an understood “…therefore he should be fired” at the end of everything that I say. I’ll make EXPLICIT CONCLUSIONS when I want to make conclusions. Oddly enough, readers seem to apply their own conclusions (or presumptions) onto me.

    Just because someone criticizes or complains or highlights issues of discussion doesn’t mean that they want someone fired. I know everyone thinks that everything I say is to support the firing of Sendek…when, in fact, at the end of each of the last 4 seasons I would have never fired him.

    That doesn’t mean that I don’t think that there are major issues with the way our Athletics programs are managed and are assessed nor does it mean that sets of stats and facts should NOT be talked about or ignored.

    I beg everyone to read things WITHOUT the prevelant presumption that criticism = endorsement for firing.

  7. John 12/01/2005 at 3:09 PM #

    Mr. O: I hope you are right. I like the fact that he can guard 3 different positions on the court. I still remember the stretch he played in the 2nd half against Wisconsin which was awful. I agree that he has a tremendous upside but I would like to see Bethel start once he is full strength. In fact, I would also bring Brack off the bench, because with Evtimov, Ced, and Brack- I think we can’t necessarily push the ball.

    Finally, my biggest problem with Herb is his unwillingness to try different things for short stretches in the game to mix things up. I would have played the 2 Freshmen a little (I realize Costner was out) and I would have pressed just a bit.

    By the way, I respect your BB knowledge. I have been on Statefans for years, but more as one of the viewers.

  8. Trout 12/01/2005 at 3:11 PM #

    I was equating “independent” with “agenda,” not with objective. I dont at all expect this Blog to be objective. I wouldnt want it to be objective. I doubt you would have readers if it were objective. But when you start segmenting NC State supporters, and belittling their beliefs, to me that leans more toward agenda than being “right.”

    I’ll leave it alone. You asked for a perspective from the NC State side, there it is.

  9. Jim 12/01/2005 at 3:12 PM #

    What is HSSS?

  10. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 3:14 PM #

    What do you have besides high school ranking that suggests that any of the freshmen should have played last night?

    The only thing that I have is that I saw how the non-freshmen were playing and can only wonder if anyone else could have stunk as badly?

    But, I totally agree with the basis of your comments, VaWolf.

  11. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 3:26 PM #

    HSSS = Herb Sendek Sunshine Squad

    Where everything in the world is rosey, where many things in the world aren’t even reality, and where a reason outside of everyone’s control always exists for everything that happes to NC State.

    I was equating “independent� with “agenda,� not with objective. I dont at all expect this Blog to be objective.

    My Agenda = a dynamic weblog.

    This is a weblog. A diary. An informal community. There are no obligations to anyone. No responsibilities to make anyone feel good, happy, welcome, whatever. No goal to make money. Therefore, no goal to increase traffic. Therefore, no need/desire to be ‘official’, do ‘news’, or be ‘objective’.

    The quality of the site, the analysis, and the conversation will speak for itself. But, there is no “agenda” other than a place to talk about the Wolfpack at a level with significantly more intellect than exists in other places.

    But when you start segmenting NC State supporters, and belittling their beliefs, to me that leans more toward agenda than being “right.�

    When I start segmenting NC State supporters, then I am no different than every other website – be it the propagandists, the profiteers, and the HSSSers who…on the day that the next coach is hired…will suddenly become the biggest supporter of the next guy and never realize the hypocrisy that exists in their ‘beliefs’ since that guy would have never been hired if their old ‘beliefs’ had won out.

  12. DRO 12/01/2005 at 3:50 PM #

    The problem for State and Sendek is that in the Princeton (albeit modified) system you need good passing and few turnovers. Of course that can be said of any system :-). So far this year State has about a 1.2:1 assist-TO ratio, and that’s not going to cut it against teams who pressure the ball well. Added to that, the high # of turnovers means missed scoring opportunities, and State can ill-afford this considering their typically low points per game average. You can live with poor shooting % to a degree, since there’s always second chance points and shooting slumps will end, but you can’t live with 24 turnovers.

    The good thing is that State’s style tends to cause the other team to reduce their output as well. I don’t know if this is good defense or maybe the other team gets lulled into the same style of play.

    No matter what, Sendek is not going anywhere any time soon and neither is the Princeton offense. Therefore these guys need to step up and protect the ball or State is going to have some tough times ahead.

  13. BJD95 12/01/2005 at 4:11 PM #

    I’ll still try to be as maddeningly objective as always! As we all know, I’m the last person to be defending Herb Sendek. But I do want to be even-handed and fair about the whole thing. It’s just my mushy moderate nature, I guess.

  14. Mr. O 12/01/2005 at 4:41 PM #

    Jeff: You are definitely highly critical of Herb Sendek. The opposite of the HSSS had something to do with firing Herb Sendek. I don’t remember exactly what the opposite side was labeled, but if you are going to bring up labels then you would definitely fit into the side opposite HSSS that was always associated with wanting Herb Sendek fired.

    John: I appreciate that, but I assure you that I don’t know anymore than anyone else.

  15. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 5:13 PM #

    I’ve been very careful (for 6 years) to NEVER have been critical of Herb Sendek. I have definitely been critical of RESULTS generated by Herb Sendek.

    What’s ‘funny’ is that you & others look at stats like these and call me ‘critical’. Yet, all I am doing is sharing the stat. It’s your conclusion that the stat is ‘critical’. I also share ‘positive’ stats when they exist. I don’t make stats positive or negative…each individual makes that conclusion on their own.

    For example…when I do this analysis and share this stat — I choose to look at it as sad that NC State manages their program so much differently from others. (Critical). Other people may choose to look at these numbers and think that it is wonderful that we run such a different program with a different level of acceptance than others. My sharing of the stat is not ‘critical’.

    What a ‘coincidence’ that 2 years ago I was not critical as critical of the program? Gee…wonder what made that year different? Oh yea…the RESULTS of the regular season.

    We can politely disagree on our conclusions of if the results of Sendek’s program are the best that can be, or should be expected of the program. I obviously feel as though we continue to underachieve. I can’t make an apology for that.

    Everybody keeps telling me that the results are going to get better “over the long term”. And, I keep waiting to see it. I would welcome it.

  16. VaWolf82 12/01/2005 at 5:15 PM #

    I try to be accurate, complete, and thorough. I don’t care what you label my conclusions as long as you don’t accuse me of making stuff up or manipulating the data to fit a given conclusion. (Of course if I have made a mistake, I would appreciate that being pointed out.)

    The saddest thing to me about the Great Herb Debate is that too many people appear to be more interested in being proven right than anything else….and what they want to be proven right about is predictions made at some time in the past. I can’t think of anything sillier to argue about than predictions.

    A lot of people strive to be politically correct, even if they don’t realize it. They try to find a reason for losses that do not directly correlate to the players or the coaches. Injuries are the favorite example here. Somehow free-throw shooting is the next favorite thing to blame a loss on.

    NEWSFLASH……Teams win and lose because of decisions and actions taken by the players and the coaches. You may not be able to blame one loss on the coach (or give credit for a victory), but over the course of a career, the good coaches accomplish meaningful goals and the rest do not. “Bad luck� evens out over time…top-level coaching will win out in the long run.

  17. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 5:23 PM #

    ^ That should be bronzed and put into a Hall of Fame.

  18. SaccoV 12/01/2005 at 5:26 PM #

    Let’s take down our effigies for a moment. This game was just terrible all the way around. Because of turnovers, the only thing that really mattered was Iowa’s ability down the stretch to score on three straight possessions–something that State could not accomplish. Furthermore, I wouldn’t give Iowa credit for winning, just like I wouldn’t immediately blame Sendek for the loss. This team is NOT the Sweet 16 team from last year and the main reason is Jordan Collins. Considering that Brackman and McCauley are the ones who can shoot from the outside, it’s not surprising that Simmons got zero attention on the perimeter. Iowa played poorly and State played just a little worse. In Raleigh, State would have narrowly pulled out the win.

    The real problem with the guys last night was a complete lack of patience. They didn’t run the system as well as they could. The veterans performed in a mediocre fashion, and thus the game was lost. Whether you’re a senior or junior, you have to follow the system a bit more strongly at first until the younger guys have figured out most of their assignments. Then, you can implement a few new wrinkles. Grant, Bennerman and Brackman all made horrinle passes, refused to move for a better shoot. Several settled for quick outside shots that were badly missed. I’m not sure where I can remember where both teams had this many turnovers and so few points.

  19. Mr. O 12/01/2005 at 5:51 PM #

    Jeff: OK, you are critical of Herb Sendek’s results.

    I guess I just don’t understand the point of going through all of this after 1 game in November. It is a long year.

  20. packbackers 12/01/2005 at 5:51 PM #

    It’s really funny to see all of our “supporters” make comments about a three point loss on the road to a Top 15 team. Where were all the good comments when we beat Notre Dame? If Herb gets bashed when we lose, then maybe he should get credit when we win, right? If we had won last night, what would all the HBs (Herb bashers) be talking about today? Oh yeah, they only have an opinion when we lose.

  21. Mr. O 12/01/2005 at 6:13 PM #

    “The real problem with the guys last night was a complete lack of patience. They didn’t run the system as well as they could. ”

    That is a great comment. I totally agree. I almost posted earlier that what got us in trouble last night were quick shots and guys not running the offense as opposed to us actually running an offense that cannot win at a high level. In the first half, I remember quick threes by Grant, Bennerman and Bethel all within a couple of posessions. The announcers and the half-time guys kept talking about how we like to work the full shot clock when in reality lots of our problems were simply from not running the offense.

  22. Mr. O 12/01/2005 at 6:42 PM #

    “What is the purpose of recruiting McDonald’s All-Americans if they aren’t even good enough to get into a game where the guys on the court are obviously playing of their worst games of the season?”

    For everyone’s information, I read over at Pack Pride that according to the radio broadcast our McD AA, Costner, had a leg injury and was out for last night’s game.

  23. Cardiac95 12/01/2005 at 6:51 PM #

    Given our knowledge of the Sendek Seasonal Pattern of Play….its hard to get worked up over last night’s loss. We all know we’ll get better by January, start cookin in February, make the NCAA Tournament & finish in the Top 5 of the conference.

    The real question (and source of so much frustration) is….will this season be more than that? What last night’s loss represents is a lost opportunity to help answer that question. We had a chance to make an early statement & we blew it. We had a chance to be undefeated going into January and couldn’t close the deal.

    In fact, “closing the deal” is now my biggest concern for this team. We played well against N.Dame, but allowed a huge surge at the end of the game. We almost seemed lost as to how to play with a big lead. We’ll need the piece to that puzzle before we can dream of championships.

    The good news is the team learned alot more about itself in this ugly loss than they would have with a home blowout of Arkansas St.

  24. BJD95 12/01/2005 at 8:02 PM #

    I agree with VaWolf and Cardiac. Personally, I gave Sendek a great deal of credit for last year’s Sweet 16, and Jeff gave him lots of credit for the strong regular season from 2 years ago.

    I disagree that last night was due to a failure to stick to the system. The strengths of this team are: (i) Bennerman’s athleticism; (ii) Atsur’s steady hand; (iii) Brackman’s versatility and midrange game; and (iv) Big Ced in the low post. Being true to the system is good for Evtimov (when hot), but that’s it – at least in pure form. The only reason why I feel a sense of hope this year is the presence of Brackman and Big Ced – a much different mix than fielding 5 swing forwards at a time. Sendek has to make that mix work, using elements of his system AND more traditional offensive sets.

    Jeff is definitely right about Sendek being RESPONSIBLE for evrything that goes on with respect to the basketball program. Blame’s completely irrelevant (other the long term), IMHO. It’s the CEO model of accountability that I like to refer to.

    Or, as Clint Eastwood quipped to Gene Hackman towards the end of Unforgiven, “Deserve’s got nothin’ to do with it.”

  25. Jeff 12/01/2005 at 10:35 PM #

    “It’s really funny to see all of our “supportersâ€? make comments about a three point loss on the road to a Top 15 team. Where were all the good comments when we beat Notre Dame? If Herb gets bashed when we lose, then maybe he should get credit when we win, right? If we had won last night, what would all the HBs (Herb bashers) be talking about today? Oh yeah, they only have an opinion when we lose.”

    Gotta love the “IF” we would have won.

    Gotta love the quotes of “supporters” as if the people here don’t support the program. (By the way, Packbacker…this “supporter” has some tickets to sell you)

    Gotta love the comparison of unranked Notre Dame to ranked Iowa as if both games were against equal opponents.

    Gotta love the inability to recognize the point about “blaming/credit/RESPONSIBILITY” that was made just a few comments previously.

    Gotta love the decision to ignore 10 years of ‘performance’
    http://www.statefansnation.com/index.php/archives/2005/12/01/sendeks-ooc-record/

Leave a Reply