Defense comparison (split)

#27

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
28,674
Likes
32,489
#27
And again, I'm not anti-CCM. I just prefer Pearls defensive gameplan. The full-court, up and down defense that he used his first three years. I prefer it and think if is more effective than the style Martin employs. I don't have to use his seven games at UT to make this determination. It's the same style defense he used for three years at MSU as well. You can look at the stats and defensive rankings from his time there and determine that his teams are not going to be known for their aggressive defense. He was middle of the road in a mid-major conference for three years. That doesn't make him a bad coach. I just prefer a different approach, and Pearl employed that approach.
 
Likes: 1 person
#29

alumvol08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
1,175
Likes
1
#29
And again, I'm not anti-CCM. I just prefer Pearls defensive gameplan. The full-court, up and down defense that he used his first three years. I prefer it and think if is more effective than the style Martin employs. I don't have to use his seven games at UT to make this determination. It's the same style defense he used for three years at MSU as well. You can look at the stats and defensive rankings from his time there and determine that his teams are not going to be known for their aggressive defense. He was middle of the road in a mid-major conference for three years. That doesn't make him a bad coach. I just prefer a different approach, and Pearl employed that approach.
Thanks. Back to Stokes.
 
#30

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
28,674
Likes
32,489
#30
You can laud or criticize all you want. However, I don't think that lauding or criticizing him requires constant comparison to Bruce Pearl.
Constant comparison? A bit of an exaggeration. I used one comparison and it fits in this discussion. I prefer Pearls defensive gameplan to Martins. I could have said Pitino or Nolan Richardson as examples. Maybe should have to keep the Pearl-hatred at bay.
 
#32
Joined
Oct 2, 2009
Messages
676
Likes
1
#32
Constant comparison? A bit of an exaggeration. I used one comparison and it fits in this discussion. I prefer Pearls defensive gameplan to Martins. I could have said Pitino or Nolan Richardson as examples. Maybe should have to keep the Pearl-hatred at bay.
Actually this is a thread about Stokes in case you mis-read the title...the only comparison made was about recruiting in Memphis which Pearl failed to do successfully during his tenure here
 
#33

LawVol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
11,521
Likes
0
#33
Constant comparison? A bit of an exaggeration. I used one comparison and it fits in this discussion. I prefer Pearls defensive gameplan to Martins. I could have said Pitino or Nolan Richardson as examples. Maybe should have to keep the Pearl-hatred at bay.
What defensive gameplan you prefer is not relevant to where Jarnell Stokes goes to school. Thus, no, it's not relevant. And, it's stupid. You didn't prove a point other than to just say, "hey, I like Bruce's defense." Guess what? No one cares.
 
#34

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
28,674
Likes
32,489
#34
That's fine. However, defense that is predicated on turnovers rarely wins championships. It's those teams that can lock you down in the halfcourt that do.
Well in a perfect world, you would prefer a team be able to play both, but Kentucky won a championship with Pitino playing that style, as did Arkansas under Nolan Richardson, and both went to the title game additional times as well I believe, so its not unheard of either.
 
#38

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
28,674
Likes
32,489
#38
What defensive gameplan you prefer is not relevant to where Jarnell Stokes goes to school. Thus, no, it's not relevant. And, it's stupid. You didn't prove a point other than to just say, "hey, I like Bruce's defense." Guess what? No one cares.
Again, why be a jerk? You post constant drivel with your opinion, and its ok. Why can't I? And furthermore, you have engaged in a conversation about it for three pages now with me, so obviously, you do care.

I just don't get why some of you think acting like a total ass contributes anything. Why can't we just discuss it and agree to disagree if it comes to that point?
 
#39

MTSUDaff

Division Manager
Joined
Apr 2, 2008
Messages
778
Likes
0
#39
It's not even debatable, guys. I was not the biggest Pearl fan in the world, full disclosure. The bottom line is sometimes you would watch games that Pearl coached and just wonder what they did in practice, because there was no cohesion at all on the floor.

Two years ago we went to the final four because Brian Williams played out of his mind, and Prince actually played defense (half due to his length). After Pearl's first two years, he did nothing but go downhill.

You can watch a Martin coached team for 10 minutes and it is not even up for debate that Pearl can't touch Martin in coaching.

And to add to what LawVol has already spoken about, what was sad about Pearl's decline was that he recruited the kids who he could not get to play well together. Period. He tried to pull a Calipari and just put good players on the court, then give them minimal direction. Problem is Cal gets the best of the best, so it pans out.
 
#40

LawVol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
11,521
Likes
0
#40
Again, why be a jerk? You post constant drivel with your opinion, and its ok. Why can't I?
I couldn't care less if you post something on your opinion. You're simply wrecking a thread that shockingly people are looking in to see where Jarnell Stokes may want to go to school rather than seeing your opinion on defensive philosophy. If this means so much to you, start a thread on it, and quit hijacking this one.
 
#41

cncchris33

Well-Known Member
Joined
Nov 14, 2009
Messages
28,674
Likes
32,489
#41
I couldn't care less if you post something on your opinion. You're simply wrecking a thread that shockingly people are looking in to see where Jarnell Stokes may want to go to school rather than seeing your opinion on defensive philosophy. If this means so much to you, start a thread on it, and quit hijacking this one.
That's fine. It was an attempt to hijack the thread, it was simply a discussion that evolved from a statement that someone else started regarding coaching philosophies, so actually you can jump on whomever made the original remark. You have contributed to the discussion going on 5 pages now, so what bothers you more, the inadvertent hijacking, or the fact that you disagree with my thought? You have argued both. I just don't see why you have to be such a dick to people when you disagree with them. There doesn't seem to be a civil bone in your body. I'll expect a smart ass remark back from you, because that is seems to be your M.O. I just don't understand why you think it further drives home your point to belittle people over cyberspace. I wish you could read the way you communicate with people from an outside perspective. I would hope you would be embarrassed. There are several others that this description would fit as well, but you particularly, are a serial offender.
 
#42

l3rewski

Well-Known Member
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
603
Likes
9
#42
That's fine. It was an attempt to hijack the thread, it was simply a discussion that evolved from a statement that someone else started regarding coaching philosophies, so actually you can jump on whomever made the original remark. You have contributed to the discussion going on 5 pages now, so what bothers you more, the inadvertent hijacking, or the fact that you disagree with my thought? You have argued both. I just don't see why you have to be such a dick to people when you disagree with them. There doesn't seem to be a civil bone in your body. I'll expect a smart ass remark back from you, because that is seems to be your M.O. I just don't understand why you think it further drives home your point to belittle people over cyberspace. I wish you could read the way you communicate with people from an outside perspective. I would hope you would be embarrassed. There are several others that this description would fit as well, but you particularly, are a serial offender.
My lord, internet srs bzns.
 
#44

LawVol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
11,521
Likes
0
#44
That's fine. It was an attempt to hijack the thread, it was simply a discussion that evolved from a statement that someone else started regarding coaching philosophies, so actually you can jump on whomever made the original remark. You have contributed to the discussion going on 5 pages now, so what bothers you more, the inadvertent hijacking, or the fact that you disagree with my thought? You have argued both. I just don't see why you have to be such a dick to people when you disagree with them. There doesn't seem to be a civil bone in your body. I'll expect a smart ass remark back from you, because that is seems to be your M.O. I just don't understand why you think it further drives home your point to belittle people over cyberspace. I wish you could read the way you communicate with people from an outside perspective. I would hope you would be embarrassed. There are several others that this description would fit as well, but you particularly, are a serial offender.
You can pretend that me pointing out that you're hijacking a thread is because I disagree with you all you'd like. This is the last time I'll respond to this. If you want to debate defensive philosophy, start a thread on it. I don't see how that's difficult.
 
#45

alumvol08

Well-Known Member
Joined
Aug 4, 2009
Messages
1,175
Likes
1
#45
That's fine. It was an attempt to hijack the thread, it was simply a discussion that evolved from a statement that someone else started regarding coaching philosophies, so actually you can jump on whomever made the original remark. You have contributed to the discussion going on 5 pages now, so what bothers you more, the inadvertent hijacking, or the fact that you disagree with my thought? You have argued both. I just don't see why you have to be such a dick to people when you disagree with them. There doesn't seem to be a civil bone in your body. I'll expect a smart ass remark back from you, because that is seems to be your M.O. I just don't understand why you think it further drives home your point to belittle people over cyberspace. I wish you could read the way you communicate with people from an outside perspective. I would hope you would be embarrassed. There are several others that this description would fit as well, but you particularly, are a serial offender.


*sorry couldn't resist....
 
Likes: 1 person
#46

PoochPunt3rdDown

Boom. +14. Moby Dick.
Joined
Jan 6, 2010
Messages
29,218
Likes
21
#46
I'm gonna take this opportunity to ask a very important question: as a Tennessee basketball fan, how can you not be bitter towards Pearl after what he and his staff did to your favorite, beloved basketball program? I'll read your replies and will not respond. The floor is yours.
 
#47

Mr. Tri Star

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 13, 2010
Messages
335
Likes
27
#47
Lawvol is untouchable. He is never wrong. Way to go Lawvol, the bamf behind the keyboard always waiting to persecute somebody or call them out. Your soooooo scary, no one wants to mess with Lawvol. He is way smarter than all of the rest of the morons on VN. If your such a bamf, why aren't you a moderator? Noob, you have no power.
 
#48

LawVol13

Well-Known Member
Joined
Feb 17, 2009
Messages
11,521
Likes
0
#48
Lawvol is untouchable. He is never wrong. Way to go Lawvol, the bamf behind the keyboard always waiting to persecute somebody or call them out. Your soooooo scary, no one wants to mess with Lawvol. He is way smarter than all of the rest of the morons on VN. If your such a bamf, why aren't you a moderator? Noob, you have no power.
:eek:lol:
 
#49

rickyyrs

Well-Known Member
Joined
Dec 3, 2009
Messages
4,988
Likes
1,664
#49
Without turning this into a Pearl vs Martin saga, Pearl's defensive philosophy and coaching ability was light years better than what Martin has shown so far. I will agree that Martin's motion offense looks much more fluid than what Pearl was running.
You have no ideal. If you give Martin the same team Pearl had last year he would win alot more games with them. If Pearl's defensive philosophy and coaching ability was light years better how did Pearl's team lose all those games last year to teams we should have beat. And got blew out by Michigan. Martin is a better coach.
 
#50

calban

Well-Known Member
Joined
Sep 19, 2009
Messages
14,052
Likes
5,629
#50
Without turning this into a Pearl vs Martin saga, Pearl's defensive philosophy and coaching ability was light years better than what Martin has shown so far. I will agree that Martin's motion offense looks much more fluid than what Pearl was running.
Keywords : so far.
How can you even begin to make such a comparison at this stage of the season?
Try it again in March.
 

VN Store




Top