[M T]

And our defense today was almost our undoing....because Georgia Tech had 4 players in double digits, and one player who averages around 10 getting 31.  Balanced scoring is so difficult to defend--because it will always find the weakest link in a defense.

Oh, did we play defense?  I must have missed that.  (To be serious, imagine if you were a fan of  GaTech, imagine what you'd think about their defense today.)

Stanford's offense faded in the 4th quarter (46.2% FG%), all the way down to 61.4% FG% for the game, which GoStanford says is an ACC-best for conference games this year.  We were hanging around 70% (69.2% at the half)

The question I had while watching, was how was Georgia Tech hanging in against Stanford's ability to get to the basket?  If you didn't see the game, Stanford scored 52 points by layups!   The team did amazingly well on offense.   Unfortunately with today's refs, this didn't often turn into defensive fouls by GT.

Looking at the stats, GT had 10 more shots (13 more rebounds at their goal), with 11 more 3pt shots.  They also had a high FG% (46.3%) but only 18 points from layups.  The extra shots mostly came off 9 extra offensive rebounds.

While watching the game in person, when we were in half-court man-to-man, it seemed we played very good defense to prevent them from getting to the basket.  Good switching.   We did have some trouble in the 2nd quarter where they would pass out for an open 3pt shot (GT hit 5/10 3pt shots in Q2).  We seemed to shut that down in the 2nd half, but I felt GT got more transition scoring because we were not getting back fast enough or were not organized.


Where have we heard this before?  The winning team had a big first quarter, and lost the rest of the game but hung on for the win.
Is that symptomatic of the traveling team losing?

Other than some lax getting back on defense, the only thing I remember being disappointed in was the late 3 missed FTs.  We were 100% up to that point.  Nerves?

[M T]

And our defense today was almost our undoing....because Georgia Tech had 4 players in double digits, and one player who averages around 10 getting 31.  Balanced scoring is so difficult to defend--because it will always find the weakest link in a defense.

Oh, did we play defense?  I must have missed that.  (To be serious, imagine if you were a fan of  GaTech, imagine what you'd think about their defense today.)

Stanford's offense faded in the 4th quarter (46.2% FG%), all the way down to 61.4% FG% for the game, which GoStanford says is an ACC-best for conference games this year.  We were hanging around 70% (69.2% at the half)

The question I had while watching, was how was Georgia Tech hanging in against Stanford's ability to get to the basket?  If you didn't see the game, Stanford scored 52 points by layups!   The team did amazingly well on offense.   Unfortunately with today's refs, this didn't often turn into defensive fouls by GT.

Looking at the stats, GT had 10 more shots (13 more rebounds at their goal), with 11 more 3pt shots.  They also had a high FG% (46.3%) but only 18 points from layups.  The extra shots mostly came off 9 extra offensive rebounds.

While watching the game in person, when we were in half-court man-to-man, it seemed we played very good defense to prevent them from getting to the basket.  Good switching.   We did have some trouble in the 2nd quarter where they would pass out for an open 3pt shot (GT hit 5/10 3pt shots in Q2).  We seemed to shut that down in the 2nd half, but I felt GT got more transition scoring because we were not getting back fast enough or were not organized.


Where have we heard this before?  The winning team had a big first quarter, and lost the rest of the game but hung on for the win.
Is that symptomatic of the traveling team losing?

Other than some lax getting back on defense, the only thing I remember being disappointed in was the late 3 missed FTs.  We were 100% up to that point.  Nerves?