[washingtonismoney]

Watching Jarrett Mann single-handedly allow Kal to play four guys in the lane (at one point Jorge Gutierrez was underneath the dashed circle while Mann was beyond the 3 pt line) is frustrating.

kal came out of the half guns blazing and now have a 40-38 lead. Johnny Dawkins has little to no idea how to coach and gave up the lead.

The man has played substantial minutes with Zimmerman, Trotter and Huestis (or Mann) on the floor together. These are all players who can contribute, in their own ways. But if you put them on the floor together, you won't score! The team was getting beaten by simple pushes in transition down the floor--does Dawkins stanch the bleeding by calling a timeout? No. They don't run plays and when they do they screw them up. It's a miracle this game is close at all because Dawkins appears to have no functional idea of what his team is good at and what it needs to do at any given situation. To wit, you actually need to score to win.

(The sideline reporter gave us the information that Dawkins requires his players to be clean-cut, which reveals he is George Steinbrenner or Montgomery Burns, only without the winning or commitment to quality. I'd fire Dawkins right now in the middle of the game if I could hire someone on such short notice. This should be a blowout--in Stanford's favor.)

[washingtonismoney]

Watching Jarrett Mann single-handedly allow Kal to play four guys in the lane (at one point Jorge Gutierrez was underneath the dashed circle while Mann was beyond the 3 pt line) is frustrating.

kal came out of the half guns blazing and now have a 40-38 lead. Johnny Dawkins has little to no idea how to coach and gave up the lead.

The man has played substantial minutes with Zimmerman, Trotter and Huestis (or Mann) on the floor together. These are all players who can contribute, in their own ways. But if you put them on the floor together, you won't score! The team was getting beaten by simple pushes in transition down the floor--does Dawkins stanch the bleeding by calling a timeout? No. They don't run plays and when they do they screw them up. It's a miracle this game is close at all because Dawkins appears to have no functional idea of what his team is good at and what it needs to do at any given situation. To wit, you actually need to score to win.

(The sideline reporter gave us the information that Dawkins requires his players to be clean-cut, which reveals he is George Steinbrenner or Montgomery Burns, only without the winning or commitment to quality. I'd fire Dawkins right now in the middle of the game if I could hire someone on such short notice. This should be a blowout--in Stanford's favor.)