Mark Humphrey - AP
Hey, we had that look on our face too!
Well, if you were worried about overconfidence, you can relax.
Vanderbilt dominated this game from tip to buzzer, leading by as many as 27 and taking home the victory by 18. Jeffery Taylor was sensational with 23 points, 9 rebounds, and 4 steals. John Jenkins added 16, and while the Commodores shot just 42.6% from the floor - consistent with what the Vols have been giving up in SEC play - they shot 44.4% from the arc, knocking down eight threes.
On the other end of the floor, the offense we saw on our last road trip in Athens reappeared, and we got a taste of what will happen when we do so against a good team. The Vols shot just 35.3%, made only one three, and turned it over a stunning 25 times. It was the most the Vols have turned it over since the second game of last season against Belmont (27).
And there was clear separation tonight: Jeronne Maymon, Jarnell Stokes, and a special guest appearance by Yemi Makanjuola (which went really well until he committed a dirty foul on John Jenkins and was rightfully ejected; we have to be better than that) produced fairly well for the Vols. They were Tennessee's top three scorers, 28 of UT's 47 points on 11 of 19 (57.8%) shooting and grabbed a combined 24 rebounds. Stokes was credited with 7 turnovers to go with his 10 rebounds - first hostile environment for our true freshmen, and it was nice to see him making friends with the Memorial crowd. He'll get better.
But the rest of the Vols were absolutely atrocious on the offensive end: 7 of 32 outside that post trio, 21.8%. The Vols were 1 for 10 from the arc.
We can score in the paint on anybody. And the defense had some lapses, but was still okay given the opponent and the environment. But we cannot turn the ball over 20+ times, and we can't have all of our backcourt players fail to contribute. We don't have to be great on offense, but as was the case in Athens, we can't be this...and when you're this against a good team like Vanderbilt, you get it handed to you. This game was never close - the Vols could never get it going offensively, and Vandy was plenty good in transition and from the arc as usual.
So, we burn the film on this one along with any NCAA Tournament talk. Tennessee has to finish 8-8 in the SEC to qualify for the NIT. That number is still out there, but Tennessee can't afford to lose games they shouldn't lose. That means the Vols must bounce back and must win at home against Auburn on Saturday.
0 recs | 37 comments
Tough loss for you guys, but if it makes you feel any better, no one in Nashville is happy with the prospect of playing against a Stokes/Maymon front court next year.
Train Island - January 24, 2012
Thanks
You guys look like the real deal. Best of luck until the season finale.
Will Shelton - January 24, 2012
Didn't see the game (thanks dorm room cable)
But from the sound of it we’re suffering from inconsistency problems. But someone correct me if I’m wrong
Ben Miller - January 24, 2012
We're very consistent on defense
and on offense, we consistently struggle on the road
Will Shelton - January 24, 2012
NIT math:
if you assume losses against the following: at Kentucky, at Florida, at Alabama, vs Vanderbilt
It means the Vols have to win all of these, in this order: vs Auburn, vs Georgia, vs South Carolina, vs Arkansas, vs Ole Miss, at South Carolina, at LSU
So the road to the NIT is win at home, then figure out how to win on the road by late February. If we can’t win in Columbia we don’t deserve to make the NIT. If we can’t win in Baton Rouge, we’ll have to trade it with an upset somewhere.
This is going to be close. And interesting.
Will Shelton - January 24, 2012
I think we have a better than average chance of taking one of those four assumed losses
(most likely Vandy, but I do wonder if our confidence against Florida might reverse some road fortune). But I also think the chances are very small that we win all of those that we need to win. I’ve been saying between 6-10 and 8-8 all season (depending on when you ask me), and I think that’s probably still the range.
as you say, gonna be close.
Incipient_Senescence - January 24, 2012
I'm sure this is comforting Alabama right now
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
ugh...uggggleeee...
Front court played well enough to win with the exception of all the turnovers. Grateful we didn’t hammered any worse than we did. It was looking rough at the under 12:00.
chuckiepoo - January 24, 2012
Behind Kentucky...
there is no one in the country that i hate losing to more than Vanderbilt……and they are nipping at Kentucky’s heels for number one on that list. Just makes me sick to my stomach
gouda3 - January 24, 2012
The message boards are a terrible place to read sometimes, and I realize that
and apparently so is my facebook feed tonight. Because apparently a significant percentage of UT fans think so many of our problems would go away if we just quit playing Skylar McBee.
McBee is shooting 41.3% from the arc. Here are the only players to do it better at UT in the last decade:
2005 Chris Lofton – 46.5%
2006 Chris Lofton – 43.7%
2006 C.J. Watson – 42.2%
2007 Chris Lofton – 41.9%
That’s it. Not JaJuan, not Jon Higgins, not Scooter McFadgon. McBee also locked down Doron Lamb at UK. He has issues, sure, but our team has much bigger problems than him, and it’s so frustrating to constantly hear/read “OMG McBee sucks why is he playing I could hit those shots if I was open why did Pearl give him a scholarship he sucks we suck rabblerabblerabble.”
/rant
Will Shelton - January 25, 2012
Agreed 40+% is extremely good from the arc.
I watch UT bball but havent posted a comment on a bball article until now. I think the biggest problem with this team is the lack of a pg. I’m not a Golden fan. He doesnt seem like a true pg, he’s inconsistent and often out of control. This may have been touched on in other threads, but that’s my 2 cents.
cerebralfish - January 25, 2012
this is my opinion as well
unfortunately, our next PG commit is for the ’13 recruiting class, so the problem remains. If we can go out and find a serviceable JuCo (can I dream of Bobby Maze?) and slide Golden over to the two-guard, we will have a very good team next year.
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
Now with the addition of Stokes
its really glaring how much of an impact a solid pg could make on a team with this kind of front court.
cerebralfish - January 25, 2012
absolutely
before Stokes, we just looked really far away. Now we look one piece away. Although even the addition of a point guard won’t heal our inconsistent three point shooting. But it will make us a tournament team next year, of that I’m pretty convinced.
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
This sounds ...right.
Basically, when this team plays smart, they can hang with anyone. When it plays dumb …well, last night. Having a good PG puts them way closer to smart than dumb.
Chris Pendley - January 25, 2012
Not to mention
Tatum goes from a pretty good game against UConn to an absolute no show at Vandy. I feel like his inconsistency from game to game has become…well…consistent
gouda3 - January 25, 2012
he's consistently not shown up on the road
in the past four road games, Cam Tatum’s stat line:
13 points (4.25 per game), 6/27 from the floor (22.2%), 1/8 from three (12.5%), 13 rebounds (3.25 per game), 7 assists (1.75 per game), 11 turnovers (2.75 per game)
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
I'd call it home/road issues
if we weren’t already used to him being inconsistent. But he’s been very good at home this month:
at Memphis: 5 points
Florida: 9 points, 5 rebounds, 2 assists, 2 steals
at Miss State: 0 points on 0 for 7
Kentucky: 16 points, 3 assists
at Georgia: 6 points on 3 of 9 (did have 6 rebounds and 3 steals, but 5 turnovers)
UConn: 15 points, 4 threes, 3 assists, we absolutely don’t win without him
at Vandy: 2 points, 2 turnovers
…but it’s been the roller coaster all year, really. He had 1 point against Austin Peay and a deuce at Charleston. But he was really good against Duke and had a season high 19 at Oakland. To me it’s not as frustrating as last year, because I’m not even sure we need him to be the number three guy…but it’s just who he is at this point. Would love to see him finish strong.
Will Shelton - January 25, 2012
yeah, I didn't really have time to look up home stats
but I did remember Kentucky and UConn being good and Florida being at least not bad. So this jibes with what I was noticing.
and it really looks like Oakland is the outlier here, doesn’t it? In the first road game, he scores 19 points. In the next five, he scores 15 points (3 points per game).
I agree with your final comments. I think if we can get one more SEC-quality guard (particularly if it’s a point guard), we can improve the team as a whole when Tatum graduates. ???/Golden/Richardson/Maymon/Stokes sounds like a pretty encouraging lineup to me if we can fill that question position with a good ballhandler and passer
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
Tatum reminds me of Hopson, albeit a little less talented
memphispete - January 25, 2012
We really...
need to focus less on recruiting scorers to play PG. That seemed to be a theme under Bruce, and it’s obviously carried over.
Much rather have a PG who scores 3ppg with 10 assists than 10ppg with 3 assists.
Caban - January 25, 2012
I don't know if its fair to say its carried over
Cuonzo has only had the opportunity for one recruiting class and pickin’s were slim when he came on board. I think Washpun has the potential to be a nice point guard for us in the future but he still needs to grow.
Getoffmyvols - January 25, 2012
meant its carried over in terms of personnel
Cuonzo hasn’t really had the opportunity for a “real” recruiting class. You really need more than a single offseason to build the relationships you need to actually be somewhat selective.
Gotta figure Cuonzo largely took the best he could get given the situation.
Caban - January 25, 2012
gotcha, agreed
Getoffmyvols - January 25, 2012
I wouldn't say it's "extremely good".
It’s good. It’s good for a shooting guard. But for a guard who has no ability to create of the dribble, it’s not “that” good. He doesn’t stand great comparisons when you look at the other “sharpshooters” in the SEC.
bobothevol - January 25, 2012
Case in point:
Florida has two players (Boyton 45%, Murphy 48%) making more 3’s per game than Skylar. Vanderbilt has two in Jenkins (45%) and Taylor (49%) with Tinsley shooting a few fewer but more accurately at 43%. Lamb, for Kentucky, is shooting 46%.
Skylar’s a good shooter. But he’s far from a great one and, let’s be honest, what else does he have?
bobothevol - January 25, 2012
Lofton was great. JuJuan was very good. Skylar is just good. But I still love the stache.
memphispete - January 26, 2012
They certainly wouldn't go away...
But McBee’s role on a team with the level of talent we aspire to would be solely as a sharpshooter with limited minutes. He’s been forced into taking a much bigger role than is really fair to expect of him.
Offensively, he’s a high SEC level player… but defensively he’s an average mid-major defender. Which means he can usually keep up OK, but there are some guys that absolutely eat him alive. Massively respect the guy for walking on at UT when he could have gone elsewhere on scholarship, but there is a reason he had to walk on.
I would absolutely kill for some sort of hybrid Cameron Tatum/Skylar McBee.
Caban - January 25, 2012
I want to like Skylar
Most of the time I do like Skylar…but I think it’s a bit of a stretch to label him a “high SEC level player” on offense. He has one skill that he’s doing pretty well. To truly be high level, he’d have to have something to complement that (ability to pump fake his defender and pull up for a 15-foot jump shot, ability to drive and kick, something). He can’t get to the rim and that really limits what he can do on offense.
I feel like his defense has been better this year, but you’re right, maybe that only gets him to average mid-major level. He’s certainly gotten some interesting assignments (Lamb on Saturday, Taylor last night) and done…ok…in those spots.
VolnVA - January 25, 2012
High level sharpshooter...
definitely doesn’t do much else.
Caban - January 25, 2012
I'm not sure we have anyone on our team that can guard Taylor
He’s a first round draft pick.
Speaking of, we’ve played against the Top 3, six of the top 11, and 12 projected first rounders over all in the mock at Draft Express
Will Shelton - January 25, 2012
throw in the top three of the 2nd round for good measure (Lamb, Jenkins, W Barton)
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
I think Skylar's an easy guy to dislike.
But that doesn’t make him dislikeable. He has the role of being the guy who gets the wide open shots on this team. My irritation with him, more than anything, is that there’s been seemingly few (not none, mind you. We can make a fairly nice list of the shots Skylar has hit) of those dagger threes. The ones that put an exclamation point on a 6-0 run that might seal a game away or this or that. He is 41% from the arc, sure, but does anyone on this blog think “He’s going to make it” anytime he shoots?
bobothevol - January 25, 2012
At home
yes I do.
Will Shelton - January 25, 2012
NIT would be a great way to finish
I’ve thought all year that the team’s goal should be the NIT – that just to be able to get there would be a huge accomplishment and I still think that. Even if we don’t finish above .500 and make it but finish close and we’ve already had 2 huge wins, I think we can be proud of how far this team has come.
I have no problem with McBee – he can be a liability on defense but as was stated, he can be lights out from 3. My issues with the guards are two-fold: First is Cam Tatum (most frustrating UT basketball player to watch since J.P.) and for the love of Cuonzo, we need a point guard!! 25 turnovers is ridiculous
Solid Orange - January 25, 2012
JP stopped being frustrating during the 2nd half of his senior year
Cam. . .
pretty much on board with the rest of this
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
Our defensive numbers weren't actually that bad last night
even though the offense allowed them far too many transition points, and it seemed like they were killing us with backdoor cuts and open threes. Our defensive efficiency was still above our season average (and was our best road defensive performance of the year). Which I guess just says something about increased standards recently.
The offense, on the other hand. . . our average offensive efficiency this season is 104.2. In November and December, our lowest was 94.4 against Duke. In our four January road games, our offensive efficiency is 75.0, 96.7, 74.6, and 70.1. This is why I remain in the “believe it when I see it” camp for road games in general.
Incipient_Senescence - January 25, 2012
You must Login with your SB Nation account and be a member of Rocky Top Talk to post a comment.