MBB at Tulsa, WBB hosts Tulsa

[PeteRasche]

Women play at 3:30 CT, Men at 4 pm CT.

I saw some interesting stats on our MBB team on my sports app on my phone. Take these in light of there being currently 357 D1 basketball programs (350 "full" and 7 "provisional/transitional", or at least that's what the internet said):

- The good: Our overall defensive rating (you can google the calculation) is tied for 88th. We are tied for 77th in steals per game. We only turn it over 11.3 times per game, tied for 38th in the nation. And as has been mentioned here before, our FT% is tied for 13th in the country.

- The bad and/or ugly: Our FG%... tied for 341st. Out of 357. And our 3pt FG% is tied for 331st (you'd expect it to be worse than overall but I guess some other teams who are really bad at 3s just don't take as many). We are at 270th in RPG, 265th in ORPG, 281st in assists per game, and our overall offensive rating (again, google it) is tied for 295th. These are... not good.

Quick (perhaps obvious) take: our shot selection and/or ability to shoot when guarded is really bad if we are top 15 in FTs but bottom 20 in FG%.

[TU77CAL82]

Tulane with a 13 point lead at halftime.

[waverider]

Tulane with a 13 point lead at halftime.

Finished the half on a 19-2 run. Shot 6-11 from 3pt land in the first

Tulsa opened the second half on a 10-0 run ended by a Coleman 3ptr. Tulane up 41-35.


Women won 64-47
Men complete the sweep with a 58-48 win.

[Roller]

TOBTTW, 58-48.

[Johnny Mac]

very good road win.. not as consistent as they were against Temple but still had enough strong stretches to win by double digits

the Jayden Coleman show was fun to watch.. I thought he was just in there early to open up the paint but I guess coach had a "feeling" the kid was going to have a career night

it was interesting to see Tulsa look like "January Tulane", hoisting up bad three after bad three

[tulaneoutlaw]

Men win, 58-48. This was a really nice answer to the disappointment of losing close to Cinci. Can't say enough about the defensive effort these guys put forth. Unless they are completely out talented like against Houston, this team comes to play hard. They are winning me over on program direction.

That said, hoo boy is the offense tough to watch. Points come in spurts here and there but long droughts between. Most of the second half of the second half it seemed like we were just running clock. Going to have to get more active with screens and getting to the hoop. Fortunately free throws are a thing and we are good at them. And tonight Tulsa couldn't hit anything so we come away with a win. ROLL WAVE!

[tjtlja]

Coleman came in with the reputation of a shooter. Hope he continues to get an opportunity to get off 10 shots a game.

If the staff could figure out a way to average 65-70 a night, our record would be top half of this league. Good to see them win again convincingly on the road. Roll Wave!!!

[NJwave]

We are tied for 8th in the league at 3-7. In Dunleavy’s final year we were winless in conference play and last year we finished last with 4 wins. We are improving. Maybe not as quickly as we would like, but Hunter is doing a good job.

It’s the first time in a while where I look at the roster and honestly think most of the guys are legit AAC players that will only get better as they play together.

[tjtlja]

But will they get better offensively as a group. Their is nothing in their resume this year that says yes. When you are ranked in the 300’s offensively, that is terrible. If we don’t sign at least two players this year that can consistently score, this group will find it very difficult to consistently win. Look no further than the current Kentucky team. Super athletic, long, can rebound, but they can’t throw it in the ocean from outside. I don’t agree that we will be much better next year without the addition of some offense. Look no further than this from Pete -

“The bad and/or ugly: Our FG%... tied for 341st. Out of 357. And our 3pt FG% is tied for 331st (you'd expect it to be worse than overall but I guess some other teams who are really bad at 3s just don't take as many). We are at 270th in RPG, 265th in ORPG, 281st in assists per game, and our overall offensive rating (again, google it) is tied for 295th. These are... not good.”

These statistics are horrible. In order to make that jump next year, we need offensive help immediately. The statistics don’t lie.

[Baywave1]

Let’s celebrate the win. Threshold for this group to be consistently competitive is only shooting about 40% FG. It’s doable this year. (It did 40% against UC and 39% last night.). Maybe just Coleman getting significant minutes will do the trick? It will make Tulane a mid level AAC team. Not your goal but not cellar dwelling either.

No doubt amping it to 45% to make it elite AAC probably requires a scoring transfer.

[tulaneoutlaw]

It definitely seems like this team will need some offensive help to take a big leap. But honestly, when is the last time we finished top half in any league in basketball? I can't remember doing so even in CUSA, though it may have happened a time or two. We aren't there yet, but the fact it might be in reach is an improvement.

The thing I like about this team is they are not a guaranteed win for the opponent. They are going to show up and give full effort and play strong defense. Opponents have to come to play with their A game or they risk taking an L. Even with this team's limitations I can appreciate trying to maximize what we've got. We just need to let Hunter work because it seems to me he knows what he's doing

[gerryb323]

It definitely seems like this team will need some offensive help to take a big leap. But honestly, when is the last time we finished top half in any league in basketball? I can't remember doing so even in CUSA, though it may have happened a time or two. We aren't there yet, but the fact it might be in reach is an improvement.

The thing I like about this team is they are not a guaranteed win for the opponent. They are going to show up and give full effort and play strong defense. Opponents have to come to play with their A game or they risk taking an L. Even with this team's limitations I can appreciate trying to maximize what we've got. We just need to let Hunter work because it seems to me he knows what he's doing

2000 was really the last time we were close to good. Finished at the top of our side of the conference, although there were like 5 teams on the other side who were better (at least). 2007 we were technically 6 out of 12. Other than that it's been bottom or close to it.

[NJwave]

Maybe I am crazy for continuing to think differently. I think the poor field goal percentage is attributable to bad shot selection, lack of ball movement and the lack of an inside game rather than lack of shooters. Most of that will improve as these guys get more and more comfortable playing together.

Pope is getting better and better. Suddenly, we are getting some baskets inside and some offensive rebounds. He needs to learn how to finish which he will learn to do. When he does, our opponents will need to cheat down a little leaving better looks for shooters when he kicks it out. James is clearly very talented, but like many freshman lacks confidence. Assuming that improves he won't hesitate as much on his shot and will start to put the ball in the basket or draw fouls when he drives to the hoop.

Yes, we could use another shooter or two and some more inside help. However, we are already better in conference play than the last two years. There is no reason to believe we won't continue to improve.

[Johnny Mac]

as with all ESPN+ broadcasts, the home team hires the play by play team... Tulane's announcers have been pretty neutral, but the Temple game...wow, what a pair of homers those guys were... well last night, the Tulsa pbp crew was pretty neutral, heaping praise equally on both teams. The one theme about Tulane they continued to harp on was our youth and lack of playing time together... and they are right. Ten freshmen and sophomores on the roster. Watson and Walker are the only upperclassmen.. and they are juniors. We are going to get better as the team continues to gel and they get more experience.

Since we do have so much youth, I hope Hunter opts to bring in a grad transfer next year... preferably one about 6 10

[gerryb323]

as with all ESPN+ broadcasts, the home team hires the play by play team... Tulane's announcers have been pretty neutral, but the Temple game...wow, what a pair of homers those guys were... well last night, the Tulsa pbp crew was pretty neutral, heaping praise equally on both teams. The one theme about Tulane they continued to harp on was our youth and lack of playing time together... and they are right. Ten freshmen and sophomores on the roster. Watson and Walker are the only upperclassmen.. and they are juniors. We are going to get better as the team continues to gel and they get more experience.

Since we do have so much youth, I hope Hunter opts to bring in a grad transfer next year... preferably one about 6 10

I guess we're assuming someone leaves? (Pretty safe assumption, seems to happen every year)

[Bham Wave]

I agree with the poster above. I think some of our shooting issues come from poor shot selection. Too often we get stagnant on offense and get 3 pointer crazy. We end up taking contested shots that aren't in rhythm and with shot clock running down. When we move and pass more and attack the rim we end up doing so much better. I know that is easy to observe but it must be harder to implement.

Pope isn't that big but lately he has been quick and decisive when attacking the rim and that has been a hug plus. Even though Walker is the smallest guy out there he is at his best when in attack mode.

[randymc]

on the topic of TV ESPN+ broadcasts, I must say I have found the majority of road game announcers, well their color or sidekick announcers, 100 percent better than David Grubb who often is color guy on the Tulane home games. I have had no quibbles with the play by play folks but Grubb just talks too much, nonstop actually, and rather than explain or enhance the game ...he detracts from it and distracts the viewer.

[Baywave1]

View from Tulsa.

https://tulsaworld.com/sports/college/t ... 64e7f.html

When you've been cellar dwelling for years as noted above, you have to expect quotes like this (but I did smile reading it.)

"The uninspired 58-48 defeat against Tulane, one of the teams near the bottom of the American Athletic Conference standings, felt like rock bottom. It was the sixth setback in eight games, another outing in which Tulsa was minimally competitive against a lesser opponent."

"

[gerryb323]

View from Tulsa.

https://tulsaworld.com/sports/college/t ... 64e7f.html

When you've been cellar dwelling for years as noted above, you have to expect quotes like this (but I did smile reading it.)

"The uninspired 58-48 defeat against Tulane, one of the teams near the bottom of the American Athletic Conference standings, felt like rock bottom. It was the sixth setback in eight games, another outing in which Tulsa was minimally competitive against a lesser opponent."

"

If all of your outings are minimally competitive, maybe it's not the competition that's lesser?

[PeteRasche]

To me the key is the last sentence of the Tulsa story:

Only five other players scored for Tulsa, which had a season-low 48 points.

You should win a majority of your games where you hold the opponent to 48 points. Hold everyone to below 50 and you can even win games shooting the poor percentage we have been this year.

Hold teams below 50 and shoot a "decent" percentage - not even necessarily setting the world on fire, but just average - and you will win a LOT of games.

[NJwave]

View from Tulsa.

https://tulsaworld.com/sports/college/t ... 64e7f.html

When you've been cellar dwelling for years as noted above, you have to expect quotes like this (but I did smile reading it.)

"The uninspired 58-48 defeat against Tulane, one of the teams near the bottom of the American Athletic Conference standings, felt like rock bottom. It was the sixth setback in eight games, another outing in which Tulsa was minimally competitive against a lesser opponent."

"

If all of your outings are minimally competitive, maybe it's not the competition that's lesser?

Insert one of the blue bloods having a bad year like Duke, Kentucky, Michigan State or North Carolina and I'm ok with the quote. I'm not sure when Tulsa became an elite program or why they think with their roster they should be blowing out anybody.

[GretnaGrn]

I'm cautiously optimistic. We're slowly improving, and that will be true even if we drop all of the games remaining on this hellish road trip. What most glaringly shows through, for me, is how much more time these guys need to play together on offense. Those lost games and practices due to COVID are glaringly apparent. The defense is way ahead, which makes sense given coach's philosophy.

We do need more scoring, which could come from a few additions or development of some of the folks on the roster (we are very young, and some of those guys could develop better shots and (more importantly) shot selection with time and coaching). We're in no danger of winning the conference (or even being in the top 4-5) yet, but we are dangerous on the right night for anyone. It's progress; let's hope it can continue.

[tjtlja]

I agree with the poster above. I think some of our shooting issues come from poor shot selection. Too often we get stagnant on offense and get 3 pointer crazy. We end up taking contested shots that aren't in rhythm and with shot clock running down. When we move and pass more and attack the rim we end up doing so much better. I know that is easy to observe but it must be harder to implement.

Pope isn't that big but lately he has been quick and decisive when attacking the rim and that has been a hug plus. Even though Walker is the smallest guy out there he is at his best when in attack mode.

I agree with you about Pope. He is getting better and better.

I don’t agree with the offense. We are ranked 341 and 331 on FG% and 3-pt %. It is so difficult to make someone a shooter. Like baseball, you either can hit or you can’t (especially anything off speed). Another comparison would be speed.

Regarding next year, as of today scholarship players include -

Forbes
Pope
Coleman
Watson
James
Walker
McGee
Days
Cross
Jankovic
Ali

If this is correct, that is 11 on scholarship. That leaves 2 openings and I guess we can presume two opt-outs. Given we didn’t sign anyone early, the high school market should be slim pickings. I presume we will be exclusively in the transfer portal. Is that what you’ll are hearing?

[Tito]

If you haven’t read this yes, we all should:

https://www.nola.com/sports/tulane/arti ... 1vtTzhalFk

We’ve got a coach who does get it.

[wavedom]

There are some positive signs and we are young. As to Hunter if he got it the change would have occurred much earlier. Since early last season our fan base has been complaining loudly about the offense. Glad he's seen the light but he should have seen it much sooner than this.