the back and forth is fun. You guys have that clown pumping up Rutgers and Penn State that makes Nova fans laugh. We are all able to take shots at Temple which is always a good time.
But let's get on to the game analysis.
First, you will beat Temple. They aren't good. Their defensive numbers are only good because they play weak competition. They take care of the ball and work their possessions, but their offense is real weak. Their only positive is that they have managed to win their close games, so if it is a close game who knows. But you will win by double digits.
On to the Nova game:
Obviously if you guys are hitting your shots, you can beat anybody.
Same holds true for Nova. If our guys hit their shots, they can beat anybody.
If both teams are missing their shots, I think Nova has the advantage. Nova scores out of the transition and plays excellent defense and can find ways to win even if the shots are not falling.
I know we played a couple of years ago in Atlantis. Nova won. Iowa was hitting shots early, but then Nova hit them late was able to pull out the win. Not sure if that means anything for this game as we already know the team that hits the shots can win.
I think Nova fans like the draw for match up purposes. Not because your team is struggling, but just the composition of the team. Teams that give Nova a tough time are those who have a back court that can take care of the ball (Shabazz Napier and Cat Barber come to mind) with quick/big/athletic perimeter players who can jump out at Nova and then teams that hit the boards. The perception of Iowa (not sure if it is true) is that you are more like a Creighton style team, spread the floor and try to hit threes. Not overly athletic on the defensive end (in terms of quickness to get out, not in terms of physicality from your guys with size). Now that doesn't mean Nova will win, as Creighton has certainly had its moments against Nova when the threes drop, but I think most Nova fans prefer to match up with that type of team.
If any of you can provide a breakdown of your team, thank you...
Anyway, here is Nova's breakdown.
8 man rotation. Only one true big (Ochefu, who is hurt), with a more athletic back up big (Reynolds) a bunch of interchangeable forwards (Hart, Jenkins, Bridges), and a couple ball handlers (Archi, Brunson and Booth)
Offensively we spread the perimeter, put one guy in the paint (Ochefu or Reynolds), will dribble drive to create space, and move the ball around the three point line. We take a ton of threes. Most of them are open, but we aren't the best three point shooting team. The guards are pretty good and can beat guys off the bounce and get into the lane.
Defensively we start with the signature Jay Wright 1-2-2 "diamond" 3/4 court trapping pressure. Put a bigger guy out front (Bridges is perfect for the role). It's more of a slow down the other team, try to force bad passes, and limit the time for half court possession, than it is a Louisville or shaka smart style turnover frenzy focused press.
The half court defense is a lot of switching and trapping. Statistically it is one of the best defenses in the nation, but now and then it has some holes. Sometimes a team, like say Iowa with a real specialty in shooting, can expose the holes and take advantage of it. I think if you asked most Nova fans their biggest fear it would be that type of situation whereby our guys are just out of position and you guys are knocking down open looks.
Nova generally plays a small team, but they are athletic and aggressive and get at the boards hard.
Nova is the best foul shooting team in the nation.
The Players:
PG Archi. The senior leader. Real good assist to turnover ratio. Will take some threes (okay long ball shooter), takes some mid range shots, and can drive. But he is more of a play maker than a scorer.
PG2: Brunson. Starts along side Arch. #1 PG in the nation last year out of high school Chicago kid who opted to play for a mid-major instead of all the Big 10 schools that recruited him (joke for the guy who thinks Rutgers and Penn State are big time!!). He is not super athletic given all the hype, but he is solid. He has a nice shot, I think he is the second best shooter on the team. His game resembles Archi's in that he will take some 3's, take some mid-range, drive to the lane off the bounce, and has a good eye for kick outs for his teammate.
PG3: Booth. He comes off the bench. Nova usually has 2 of the 3 PGs on the floor at all times. Sophomore from Baltimore. Solid, but not spectacular player. Had a bit of a sophomore slump, but seemed to come along later in the year. Same style play as Archi and Brunson.
Wing Forward 1: Jenkins. Big Smooth has really come along. Junior from DC. Kid is shooting at a great clip these days. Would have been the Big East Tourney MVP if Nova could have pulled it off on Saturday. Struggled early in the year, but has found his stroke. Great shooter, offense derives from catching the ball in a good position on the perimeter. Has developed a bit of a create game, usually off a head fake. Has some size and isn't afraid to post up smaller defenders. Plays solid defense and rebounds well for his size.
Wing Forward 2: Hart. Junior from DC. One of the 15 finalists for the Wooden award and first team all big east. Plays the same position as Jenkins, and defensively is similar, but his offense is more slashing based, dribble drives, and transition points. Has a decent long ball shot. Very good defender and rebounder. There were talks about him as Big East POY and possible early NBA entry this year, but those talks have cooled.
Wing Forward 3. Bridges. Red Shirt freshman. NBA potential. Like a lighter version of Hart. Super athletic for his size. Plays a very similar role as Hart in that he slashes a lot from the perimeter and takes some threes. Plus defender who might be put on your big shooter a lot as he seems like a good match up for that type of defensive role. Plays the top of the 1-2-2 diamond when in the game.
Center 1: Ochefu. Senior from Baltimore. The big man is hobbling. Hasn't dunked the ball in two weeks. Huge question mark. He's a very good traditional center. The key to the 4 out 1 in offensive set and mans the paint on defense.
Center 2: Reynolds. Not a true center as he isn't that big, but Nova has often used undersized centers in the past (Dante Cunningham for example). Was a little used bench guy until conference play started and Ochefu went out with a concussion. Reynolds has really stepped it up the past two months. He is much more athletic than Ochefu, but much less of a traditional big man threat in the 4 out 1 in offensive set. Is able to hit the 15 footer more than Ochefu. Leaves a big hole defensively when he is in instead of Ochefu.
Sagarin has Nova as a 3 point favorite, which is a real nasty spread for a 2 seed in the second round. Usually want a team in the 5-9 pt range. Hopefully the recent Iowa swoon gets the spread back in that range.
by the way, our message board is vusports.com. Lots of action over there. We are infested with Temple trolls (wcburrsies is their leader) so should have some interesting banter over there this week. The Temple message are subscription/application only, so not much action on those.
But let's get on to the game analysis.
First, you will beat Temple. They aren't good. Their defensive numbers are only good because they play weak competition. They take care of the ball and work their possessions, but their offense is real weak. Their only positive is that they have managed to win their close games, so if it is a close game who knows. But you will win by double digits.
On to the Nova game:
Obviously if you guys are hitting your shots, you can beat anybody.
Same holds true for Nova. If our guys hit their shots, they can beat anybody.
If both teams are missing their shots, I think Nova has the advantage. Nova scores out of the transition and plays excellent defense and can find ways to win even if the shots are not falling.
I know we played a couple of years ago in Atlantis. Nova won. Iowa was hitting shots early, but then Nova hit them late was able to pull out the win. Not sure if that means anything for this game as we already know the team that hits the shots can win.
I think Nova fans like the draw for match up purposes. Not because your team is struggling, but just the composition of the team. Teams that give Nova a tough time are those who have a back court that can take care of the ball (Shabazz Napier and Cat Barber come to mind) with quick/big/athletic perimeter players who can jump out at Nova and then teams that hit the boards. The perception of Iowa (not sure if it is true) is that you are more like a Creighton style team, spread the floor and try to hit threes. Not overly athletic on the defensive end (in terms of quickness to get out, not in terms of physicality from your guys with size). Now that doesn't mean Nova will win, as Creighton has certainly had its moments against Nova when the threes drop, but I think most Nova fans prefer to match up with that type of team.
If any of you can provide a breakdown of your team, thank you...
Anyway, here is Nova's breakdown.
8 man rotation. Only one true big (Ochefu, who is hurt), with a more athletic back up big (Reynolds) a bunch of interchangeable forwards (Hart, Jenkins, Bridges), and a couple ball handlers (Archi, Brunson and Booth)
Offensively we spread the perimeter, put one guy in the paint (Ochefu or Reynolds), will dribble drive to create space, and move the ball around the three point line. We take a ton of threes. Most of them are open, but we aren't the best three point shooting team. The guards are pretty good and can beat guys off the bounce and get into the lane.
Defensively we start with the signature Jay Wright 1-2-2 "diamond" 3/4 court trapping pressure. Put a bigger guy out front (Bridges is perfect for the role). It's more of a slow down the other team, try to force bad passes, and limit the time for half court possession, than it is a Louisville or shaka smart style turnover frenzy focused press.
The half court defense is a lot of switching and trapping. Statistically it is one of the best defenses in the nation, but now and then it has some holes. Sometimes a team, like say Iowa with a real specialty in shooting, can expose the holes and take advantage of it. I think if you asked most Nova fans their biggest fear it would be that type of situation whereby our guys are just out of position and you guys are knocking down open looks.
Nova generally plays a small team, but they are athletic and aggressive and get at the boards hard.
Nova is the best foul shooting team in the nation.
The Players:
PG Archi. The senior leader. Real good assist to turnover ratio. Will take some threes (okay long ball shooter), takes some mid range shots, and can drive. But he is more of a play maker than a scorer.
PG2: Brunson. Starts along side Arch. #1 PG in the nation last year out of high school Chicago kid who opted to play for a mid-major instead of all the Big 10 schools that recruited him (joke for the guy who thinks Rutgers and Penn State are big time!!). He is not super athletic given all the hype, but he is solid. He has a nice shot, I think he is the second best shooter on the team. His game resembles Archi's in that he will take some 3's, take some mid-range, drive to the lane off the bounce, and has a good eye for kick outs for his teammate.
PG3: Booth. He comes off the bench. Nova usually has 2 of the 3 PGs on the floor at all times. Sophomore from Baltimore. Solid, but not spectacular player. Had a bit of a sophomore slump, but seemed to come along later in the year. Same style play as Archi and Brunson.
Wing Forward 1: Jenkins. Big Smooth has really come along. Junior from DC. Kid is shooting at a great clip these days. Would have been the Big East Tourney MVP if Nova could have pulled it off on Saturday. Struggled early in the year, but has found his stroke. Great shooter, offense derives from catching the ball in a good position on the perimeter. Has developed a bit of a create game, usually off a head fake. Has some size and isn't afraid to post up smaller defenders. Plays solid defense and rebounds well for his size.
Wing Forward 2: Hart. Junior from DC. One of the 15 finalists for the Wooden award and first team all big east. Plays the same position as Jenkins, and defensively is similar, but his offense is more slashing based, dribble drives, and transition points. Has a decent long ball shot. Very good defender and rebounder. There were talks about him as Big East POY and possible early NBA entry this year, but those talks have cooled.
Wing Forward 3. Bridges. Red Shirt freshman. NBA potential. Like a lighter version of Hart. Super athletic for his size. Plays a very similar role as Hart in that he slashes a lot from the perimeter and takes some threes. Plus defender who might be put on your big shooter a lot as he seems like a good match up for that type of defensive role. Plays the top of the 1-2-2 diamond when in the game.
Center 1: Ochefu. Senior from Baltimore. The big man is hobbling. Hasn't dunked the ball in two weeks. Huge question mark. He's a very good traditional center. The key to the 4 out 1 in offensive set and mans the paint on defense.
Center 2: Reynolds. Not a true center as he isn't that big, but Nova has often used undersized centers in the past (Dante Cunningham for example). Was a little used bench guy until conference play started and Ochefu went out with a concussion. Reynolds has really stepped it up the past two months. He is much more athletic than Ochefu, but much less of a traditional big man threat in the 4 out 1 in offensive set. Is able to hit the 15 footer more than Ochefu. Leaves a big hole defensively when he is in instead of Ochefu.
Sagarin has Nova as a 3 point favorite, which is a real nasty spread for a 2 seed in the second round. Usually want a team in the 5-9 pt range. Hopefully the recent Iowa swoon gets the spread back in that range.
by the way, our message board is vusports.com. Lots of action over there. We are infested with Temple trolls (wcburrsies is their leader) so should have some interesting banter over there this week. The Temple message are subscription/application only, so not much action on those.
Last edited:
