From: Craig.Simpson@launchpad.unc.edu (Craig Simpson)
Newsgroups: rec.sport.basketball.college
Subject: Re: Dean Smith (Re: UNC TARHEELS--1992/93 NCAA BSKTBLL. CHAMPS)
Date: 7 Jan 93 00:45:01 GMT
Organization: University of North Carolina Extended Bulletin Board Service

In article <29318@oasys.dt.navy.mil> swilliam@oasys.dt.navy.mil (Steve Williams) writes:
>In rec.sport.basketball.college, Craig.Simpson@launchpad.unc.edu (Craig 
>Simpson) writes:
>
I will comment on Steve's statements on UNC's NCAA record in another
post.  His comments are deleted here.
>
>Ever since I have seen UNC disintegrate to almost any team.

If by this you mean that on any given night UNC might lose to another
team then yes this is true, however show me another team where this
is not the case.

>UNC has had a lot of superstars over the years; some get green light to
>score at will; many don't.

I have no idea what you mean here, are you trying to say that Dean keeps
superstars from scoring?  If so then please give me their names.  Until
you do I'll assume that you meant that Dean will not give players the
right take over the game by doing what ever they want.  Well this is
true but I don't see your point.  Very few teams with one player doing
all the scoring really do well.  Also remember that superstars like
Jordan also played with some very talented players, players like
Worthy, Perkins, Daughtery, Smith, Wolf.  This is the case with almost
all players at UNC.  However if you must look at *scoring machines* then
you only have to look to last years team.  Davis was the only real
scoring threat and Dean let him do anything he wanted.  You will note
that when Davis strugled, the whole team did as well.  Again please
give the names of the players that Dean has kept from scoring.

>I have recognized many characteristics that UNC 
>& Dean Smith developed over the years and display every year. Some are: 
>slow starts, falling back and chasing up; losing to "surprise teams"; 
>lacking good point guards (this often doesn't show up until at critical 
>games); lack of leadership at awkward times (because of point guard); 

This statement alone shows that you don't much about UNC basketball,
from Ford to Black to Smith to Phelps UNC has had *outstanding* point
play (Lebo and Rice were good but not great).  All had outstanding
leadership, shown by the fact that Ford, Black, Lebo and Rice all
all coaches (not to mention Eddie Fogler).  Ford was a three time
AA and national player of the year and Smith was a two time AA and
the Basketball Times POY.  Since you have not really seen Phelps 
play this year, you have no right to comment on his play.  This statement
is a joke and shows you to be a fool.

>too many passes and no one willing to take a shot; the seniors have 
>it all; once a player becomes a starter, he's a permanent starter
>regardless he's improving or not; etc.
>

Names, names, names!!!! Who the hell are you talking about????
I'm sure that Wenstrom, Cherry, and Stephenson might disagree with
you about seniors *having it all*.  With regards to starting, well
Dean says the best *defensive* players earn the starting spot and that
he does not really consider it importent.  What he looks at is playing
time.  So instead of looking at starters look at PT.

>Believe it or not, I keep seeing
>the same characteristics every year,
>for many years.  That's why I said that UNC and Dean need to do something 
>if they're going to beat the teams in the likes of Michigan.  I don't
>have to see many games to identify the kind of the season UNC is going 
>to have this year.  

This is total BS.  They play essentially the same system but with
better talent they will play it better.  To not watch games and
see how the players are playing that system you have no basis to
judge anything.

>The UNC team is pretty much the same team year after 
>year, regardless of who's on the team.  Some UNC teams do get better, 
>like this year's team because of a solid center in Montross. And some 
>UNC teams do get worse.  However, because of Dean's teamwork philosophy, 
>excellent coaching, etc., UNC will do well year after year. But UNC 
>won't have a championship team unless Dean Smith eliminates some of 
>the bad characteristics that I've pointed out. 

Of course you do know that UNC already has a championship under Smith
(or perhaps you forgot, you don't seem to know much else).  The 
amazing thing is that he did so with those same "bad characteristics".

>Or several bad
>characteristics don't exit in any UNC team.
>

I have no idea what you mean by this.


>Let me point out something.  Why did UNC happen to have a slim (one-point) 
>lead near the end of the game?  This is another characteristic of the 
>UNC teams, which explains why many teams pull an upset at the last second, 
>just like what Michigan did.
>

Ok, first you say that UNC must do a, b, c to be able to beat teams like
Michigan then you say that Michigan pulled an upset.  You can't have it
both ways.  

As far as UNC *only*
having a 1 point lead, well how about the fact that Michigan is a really
good team.  To me it looked like to very evenly matched teams slugging it
out for 40 minutes.  Do you really think that UNC should have blown out
Michigan?  Anybody else out there agree with Mr. Williams?

> >Just what do you consider a "slow start"?
>
>At opening tip-off, when UNC immediately falls behind by at least 8
>points and has to spend the rest of the half catching up, this is what 
>I call a slow start.  By the way, this is another characteristic of 
>the UNC teams.  Not only in first half, but also in second half.
>

Then by you own definition, UNC has not had a slow start this year
(first or second half).  The most UNC got down against tOSU was ~5
points and the most against Michigan was 7 and that was about at
the 10 minute mark.  Of course if you *actually* saw some games then
you might know this!!!

As far as the second half slow starts, I've not noticed this at all.
UNC usally comes out real strong.  Unless they really don't have
a strong team (like last year).  So come on Steve, teams and dates.

>
>True.  UNC has had several great comebacks.  However, UNC shouldn't
>have gotten so far behind in the first place.  Furthermore, I don't 
>remember any UNC comebacks against strong teams in the NCAA playoffs.
>

Show me one team that has *never* gotten down to a lesser team.

I also don't remember any opponents of UNC stagging any big comebacks
against a strong UNC team.

>Perhaps you'll like to humor us by explaining why UNC lost to Kansas
>two years ago in the Final Four?  Or what about the loss to Ohio State
>in the NCAA playoffs last year?  In both games UNC was favored to win.
>

Why did Arkansas (ranked in the top 5) also lose to KU?  Why did
Indiana (ranked in the top 5)?  Maybe because KU was a *good* team.
Steve if you really expect UNC to win every game then you really
need to get a grip on reality.

>
>How come Duke was able to deal with Webber and Rose while beating Michigan 
>last year in the NCAA Championship game and again, earlier this season?  

Of course Webber had a big game last year in Ann Arbor.  As for this
year, well Duke was very fired up and Michigan played scared.

>To say that Webber and Rose would never be stopped is ridiculous; these
>players are very good, but they're not supermen.  Also, Michigan isn't 
>a two-man team; there are also three other Michigan players on the court
>along with Webber and Rose.  It takes a real teamwork to win games.
>

Yes it does, but Webber and Rose were the only ones to score in double
figures.  Since you did not see the game, let me tell you that the
D on Webber and Rose was execelent, they hit very tough shots.  That
is all any coach can ask, make them work for their shots.

>>Lastly, this was not a upset. 
>
>Not an upset????  UNC was favored to win the game, and UNC was ranked
>higher than Michigan.  Therefore, UNC was supposed to win.
>

The line I saw was even.  I thought UNC would loss.  It was a good
game between two evenly matched teams.  To bad you could'nt see it.

>>         .......  Yet with a real bad shooting [UNC's] first half,
>>against Michigan playing the best they have played so far this year
>>(Dean said this), UNC lost by one point on a shot that Rose could
>>take 100 more times and not make again. 
>
>Exactly what are you saying?  Is UNC better than Michigan or not?  From 
>what you said, UNC should win the game, but had bad shooting in first 
>half while Michigan had a great game.  Doesn't this mean that Michigan
>pulled an upset over UNC?
>

No it means that UNC did not shoot real well and Michigan played great.
UNC should have won the game, but they did not lose it, Michigan won it.
Find someone, hell anyone, who will agree that this was an upset.
OBTW, I also did not think that Duke over Michigan was an upset even though
Michigan was ranked higher.

>And Rose could take 100 more times and not make again?  Is Rose a *great*
>player or not?  Remember Laettner who made two great shots in the NCAA 
>playoffs against Connecticut in 1990 and against Kentucky last year.  
>Are you implying that Rose won't ever be as *great* as Laettner? Exactly 
>what do you mean by a *great* player?
>

No, but are you saying that he is as great as Laettner was now?  Lets
also look at the shots,  Laettner was able to catch the ball and square
up before taking the shots (this is not to belittle Laettner, they
were two great clutch shots), Rose on the other hand just tried to 
bat the ball towards the goal.  The ball bounced around and fell through.
A much harder shot IMHO.

>I am an UNC fan who happens to know that Dean Smith isn't a basketball 
>god.  Perhaps just an angel or a saint or something.  Perhaps another
>NCAA title will make Dean a god? :-)
>

I never said he was god, I never even said that he was the greatest
coach of all time, but he knows more then you (or I).  To constantly
whine about what *you* think he should have done and give vague 
reasons like "he always does this" Or "He always holds players
down" with out giving any facts is a joke.

Craig Simpson
craig@unx.sas.com



--
   The opinions expressed are not necessarily those of the University of
     North Carolina at Chapel Hill, the Campus Office for Information
        Technology, or the Experimental Bulletin Board Service.
           internet:  laUNChpad.unc.edu or 152.2.22.80