Before 70-60 at 3:41!

#1
SeniorDrill

SeniorDrill

Well-Known Member
Joined
May 13, 2013
Messages
4,891
Likes
1,955
#1
What effect does it have that the floor general who took you to the Sweet 16 only played 14 minutes? How much did that disrupt the offense? The defense certainly did no improve! Just asking?
 
#2
#2
Barton wasn't playing well and Thompson was. Simple as that, McRae, Stokes, and J Rich got us this far. We had them on the floor... Just didn't go the way we wanted it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#3
#3
colvol said:
Barton wasn't playing well and Thompson was. Simple as that, McRae, Stokes, and J Rich got us this far. We had them on the floor... Just didn't go the way we wanted it.
Click to expand...
Thompson had 0 assists in 26 minutes, Barton had 1 in 14 minutes. Thompson was 1 for 2 on layups. Barton was 1 for 2 from three. Just saying!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 people
#4
#4
I was baffled by Barton on the bench as well. A true freshman PG in a game of this magnitude? He did ok but to be honest, PG was our weakness all season long. Looking forward Austin coming in and being the starting PG next year. Thompson moves to two guard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#5
#5
Barton wasn't tall enough to bother their 3 point shooters. Thompson could, and he pulled down a few important rebounds. While he had no assists I can think of 2 passes that forced the defense to foul, or essentially lead to a layup.
 
#6
#6
Thompson was the right call. People look at the stats and try to say it wasn't the right call. Thompson and Moore helped stop the 3 point barrage.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#7
#7
Was surprised. Seems Barton was yanked after a turnover. He was playing good d and shooters werent hitting shots on him. We almost made it back with DT. However, being that CM mentioned Barton being a leader and his play one of the biggest reasons they were playing well and winning games it was odd to see him sit, and he wasn't playing badly, just not doing much. The flow and style we played last night didn't allow or ask any pg to do much except get rid of the ball, whomever it was.
 
#9
#9
1985Vols said:
I was baffled by Barton on the bench as well. A true freshman PG in a game of this magnitude? He did ok but to be honest, PG was our weakness all season long. Looking forward Austin coming in and being the starting PG next year. Thompson moves to two guard.
Click to expand...

So we finally get a true pass first PG and you want to move him to SG? Have you watched DT play? He is not even close to a SG.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#12
#12
1985Vols said:
I was baffled by Barton on the bench as well. A true freshman PG in a game of this magnitude? He did ok but to be honest, PG was our weakness all season long. Looking forward Austin coming in and being the starting PG next year. Thompson moves to two guard.
Click to expand...


This has to be one of my favorite Volnation trends....the guy NOT on campus is ALWAYS better than the guys who actually are on campus!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#13
#13
Two things...

1. The comeback happened with Thompson, not Barton....not sure what there is to question about that.

2. That 1-3-1 did not work well at all.
 
#14
#14
So you are saying the comeback was due to Thompson being in the lineup, give me a break! It occurred in the last 3 minutes and he had very little to do with it. They were down 10 with 3:41. Don't remember, did Thompson even touch the ball?
I think they ran it one possession,right? Big deal if they made a three! They made 6 in the first half against the man-to-man.
Still think you are paid to defend Martin!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#15
#15
drewtigeralum said:
Barton wasn't tall enough to bother their 3 point shooters. Thompson could, and he pulled down a few important rebounds. While he had no assists I can think of 2 passes that forced the defense to foul, or essentially lead to a layup.
Click to expand...

So with 9 seconds left and we have the ball Martin was worried about their 3 point shooters so he lets a true freshman pg take the ball out of bounds while the senior pg watches from the bench?
 
#16
#16
SeniorDrill said:
So you are saying the comeback was due to Thompson being in the lineup, give me a break! It occurred in the last 3 minutes and he had very little to do with it. They were down 10 with 3:41. Don't remember, did Thompson even touch the ball?
I think they ran it one possession,right? Big deal if they made a three! They made 6 in the first half against the man-to-man.
Still think you are paid to defend Martin!
Click to expand...

I noticed Barton being out with 5 minutes left, but you really can't complain about the results. I think Thompson was used for perimeter defense. He also had two takes to the basket, and even though both were missed, one resulted in points. We made the comeback so again, you can't complain with results- unless you think Barton would have win the game.
 
#17
#17
Can't complain really since we had the ball with a shot. Problem is the inbounder wasn't a threat in Thompson on the last play.
But also can't compare to the intensity with which we played the whole game until desperation time. I dont feel Thompson is really the reason why we turned up our intensity.
 
#19
#19
SeniorDrill said:
So you are saying the comeback was due to Thompson being in the lineup, give me a break! It occurred in the last 3 minutes and he had very little to do with it. They were down 10 with 3:41. Don't remember, did Thompson even touch the ball?
Click to expand...

We were down 15 with 10 minutes left, Thompson came in and we slowly chipped away at the lead. Why when you get it down under single digits do you pull the guy who's been out there for a guy who was in there while you were down 15?

I think they ran it one possession,right? Big deal if they made a three! They made 6 in the first half against the man-to-man.
Still think you are paid to defend Martin!
Click to expand...

The concern was how easily Michigan dismantled it, they see the 1-3-1 everyday, their eyes bought popped outta their head when they say it.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 person
#20
#20
volfanjustin said:
So with 9 seconds left and we have the ball Martin was worried about their 3 point shooters so he lets a true freshman pg take the ball out of bounds while the senior pg watches from the bench?
Click to expand...

Barton's a better passer and has much better vision, absolutely the right call
 
#21
#21
SeniorDrill said:
So you are saying the comeback was due to Thompson being in the lineup, give me a break! It occurred in the last 3 minutes and he had very little to do with it. They were down 10 with 3:41. Don't remember, did Thompson even touch the ball?
I think they ran it one possession,right? Big deal if they made a three! They made 6 in the first half against the man-to-man.
Still think you are paid to defend Martin!
Click to expand...

I was wondering about Barton on the bench as well. But to say Thompson did not have an impact is inaccurate. If you think the only way someone impacts the game is with points and steals then you don't understand bball. Thompson defended the Michigan inbounds plays in the closing seconds very well (he was the one responsible for the pressure that caused the UM player to step out of bounds). Not to mention, in the last 5 minutes or so we really buckled down on defense and for the first time our length was giving them problems getting shots off...I think Thompson played a significant role there. He is not a good on ball defender but his length helped him recover a couple of times to deter long shots.
 
#22
#22
So the question remains. What rationale do you use when you replace your graduate student point guard who has already been in two or three NCAA tournaments and has led your team into the Sweet 16 for two thirds of the game? Michigan's point guard hit one three on Barton and one three on Thompson plus the 3 free throws he hit when Barton was busting his ass to defend. Makes no sense at all! Would Tennessee have been so far behind at the 3 minute mark when they made the comeback from 10 down had Barton been in the lineup. Seems to me that you would want the guy in there that had got you to that point instead of a true freshman point guard. That is coaching pure and simple. You can bet the Michigan coach would never have done that.
 
#23
#23
volfanjustin said:
So with 9 seconds left and we have the ball Martin was worried about their 3 point shooters so he lets a true freshman pg take the ball out of bounds while the senior pg watches from the bench?
Click to expand...

Thompson has the size to see over the pressure on the inbounds pass, and he is the better passer over all. He inbounded the ball to U.T.'s best player. I'm not sure what else you want from the in bounder.
 
#24
#24
SeniorDrill said:
So the question remains. What rationale do you use when you replace your graduate student point guard who has already been in two or three NCAA tournaments and has led your team into the Sweet 16 for two thirds of the game? Michigan's point guard hit one three on Barton and one three on Thompson plus the 3 free throws he hit when Barton was busting his ass to defend. Makes no sense at all! Would Tennessee have been so far behind at the 3 minute mark when they made the comeback from 10 down had Barton been in the lineup. Seems to me that you would want the guy in there that had got you to that point instead of a true freshman point guard. That is coaching pure and simple. You can bet the Michigan coach would never have done that.
Click to expand...

You mean putting in the little used Spike Albrecht at the end of the game. Yea, Michigan would never change point guards like that.
 
New posts
You must log in or register to reply here.
Advertisement



Back
Top