Dayton-Xavier III: Devastation

I've tried to wait awhile and separate myself from the game that happened yesterday before writing this. While emotion can be an excellent catalyst for writing, the kind of emotion being spouted by me last night was going to be in no way conducive to any sort of creative function.

And with some time to step back and think about the game, I keep coming back to the same thing:
With 5.3 seconds left, Dayton was down one point and inbounding the ball. There is no question that 5.3 seconds is a delicate amount of time. Not enough time that you can really worry about trying to move the ball for a good shot (ideally, you want the opportunity to foul if you miss), but also enough time that a shot does not have to come immediately. Being calm about 5.3 seconds and the opportunity it represents as an offense (Christian Laettner got off a fake, dribble and turnaround-fadeaway in 2.1 seconds. Yes, I'm posting this video and watching it as a means to feeling better) can be the key to winning a game in the closing seconds. Unfortunately, whatever happened in the UD huddle leading up to Chris Johnson's final meaningful shot of his career, calm was not instilled.

CJ received the inbound pass from Kevin Dillard running away from the basket and immediately put up a nearly impossible shot. With that type of momentum going in the wrong direction, to put up a shot was ludicrous. But CJ did, and it fell short, as all such shots do, and Dayton lost, as most such games turn out. Watching with my dad, he immediately spouted, "That's a horrible shot. That was a horrible shot, what was he doing? You've gotta shot fake, and go to the basket!" After about 60 seconds of my staring at the TV screen and not moving, I answered a call from my brother. The conversation went something like this.

"Hey."
"What was he doing shooting that ball?"
"I don't know, man. I don't want to talk about it."
"Yeah I know it bud. Bottom line is down one you always go to the rim to try and score."
"Yeah."

Bottom line is whatever happened during the final two timeouts of Dayton's 70-69 loss to Xavier in the A-10 Quarterfinals, it was at least clear that Chris Johnson was considered a solid option. Whatever was drawn up or directed, the way CJ took his shot so quickly, it seemed clear with Dillard throwing the ball in that he was the desired option. Upon catching the ball, CJ had three options, two involving pump fakes (fake and go past Mark Lyons to the basket, or fake and go into Lyons to draw a foul). He chose option three, which was shoot immediately. You know the rest.

Two years ago, Xavier beat Dayton at the Cintas Center 78-74, due to some unbelievable individual plays from Jordan Crawford. After Dayton exacted its revenge and throttled X 90-65, a member of the UD staff said that he knew they were a better team than Xavier was, citing the 4-point loss away from home and 25-point win at home as proof. And at the time, I certainly agreed with him. But in game three, in the A-10 Tournament, Dayton gained an early lead, couldn't hold it, and fell apart in the end in a 78-73 loss. This year, Dayton beat Xavier easily at home and barely lost on the road again, but which team was really better was anyone's guess. What hurts so bad about this loss is Dayton had the game won. Matt Kavanaugh hit two free throws with 3:02 remaining to put Dayton up 69-63. Those were the last points Dayton scored. UD spent the rest of the game allowing Mark Lyons and Tu Holloway to get to the basket, and stalling on offense until a three-pointer had to be thrown up to avoid a shot clock violation (unsuccessfully once).

One basket during that stretch and Xavier starts fouling, sending Dayton's excellent foul-shooters to the line. Kavanaugh, Dillard, CJ and Paul Williams combine to go 7-8 or 9-10 from the line to close the game. Holloway starts crying when he realizes that not even his 30-foot step-back threes are going to win the game for Xavier this time. Dayton fans start rejoicing, first because Holloway is crying, and second because Dayton has now won the game.

But that made basket never came. Kavanaugh's cutting, leaning layup wouldn't drop, and CJ's no-pump last gasp never stood a chance. Dayton's shot at knocking Xavier out of the NCAA Tournament and bringing itself a step closer fell by the wayside, like many of the Flyers' losses this year.

In the end, what said it all was one bullet-point from Joe Lunardi's late-night Bracketology update after the action last night: "Dayton drops of the bubble with a loss to Xavier in the A-10 quarterfinals." Meanwhile, Xavier appears to have removed itself from the bubble, and win or lose against Saint Louis on Saturday, Tu Holloway will be dancing once more.

When are things going to to turn for Dayton?

UD's shot to take down Xavier

When a Duke-North Carolina game is upcoming, the ESPN pundits typically end up speaking to a player from one or the other team. Every time, the conversation ends up going to the relationship between the players on the two teams. And typically, what we find out is that the Duke and UNC players do not hate each other like the fans and students of the two schools do. While they do play hard against each other on the court, they get along pretty well outside of their games against each other. They play pick-up games together and hang out.

The same may or may not be true for the Dayton and Xavier players. A story from last year quotes Chris Wright as saying he knows many Xavier players and gets along with some of them. Whatever the relationship between Chris Johnson and Tu Holloway may be, I prefer to think of it as one with no love lost. Same with that between Matt Kavanaugh and Kenny Frease. It's more fun to think of it that way, because it gives me reason number 1,743 why it would be sweet if Dayton were to beat Xavier in the Atlantic 10 Tournament Friday.

For the third year in a row, the Flyers and Musketeers will meet in the A-10 Tournament. Last year, Dayton upset Xavier in the quarterfinals and it was cool because UD was beating Xavier; that's always cool. Still, Dayton lost in the A-10 Finals to Richmond and did not make the NCAA Tournament; Xavier did. Two years ago, in the now-infamous (at least among UD fans) Rob Lowery "punch" game, Dayton lost late to Jordan Crawford and Tu Holloway and had its NCAA Tournament hopes dashed. Crawford and Xavier went on to have an excellent tournament. I was at that game, and had as sour a taste in my mouth as I can remember.

Reason No. 1 why it would be sweet if Dayton were to beat Xavier tomorrow? UD can repay the favor from two years ago. Xavier currently sits as one of the final four teams in the bracket in Joe Lunardi's Bracketology, while Dayton is about the ninth team outside the field of 68. If they were to lose to Dayton, Xavier would finish the season at 19-12, and you would have to figure that it would end Xavier's hopes at an NCAA bid. To be 1-2 against a team from the same conference that is close to a bid, with similar records, RPIs and Kenpom ratings would be a dagger.

And how awesome would that be? Even if Dayton were to miss the tournament in the grand scheme of things, the possiblity of being 2-1 against Xavier and also being the cause of their demise from the dance is an enticing prospect. To know that Dayton had been better than Xavier in a year in which X was looking like one of the best teams in the country (ranked in the top 10 in the country early in the year), in Tu Holloway's senior year, gets me as excited as the thought of a night on the town with Katy Perry.

Now of course, I shouldn't get ahead of myself. Dayton still has to beat Xavier for any of these beautiful fantasies to come true. And that is going to be no easy task. Dayton played a great game in beating Xavier at home, and then played pretty well but still lost in overtime to the Musketeers at the Cintas Center. Holloway and Mark Lyons were pretty incredible (it hurts me to say that) in both games. But those two are going to score no matter what. They take a ton of shots and are very talented players. The key for Dayton will be winning at every other position on the court. Chris Johnson has played excellent basketball over the past few weeks. He must continue. Matt Kavanaugh and Kenny Frease traded good games in the two matchups this season; Kavanaugh will have to be the better player this time. And Devin Oliver, coming off the best game of his career, will have to follow it up and play well again. Oliver has not scored in his career against Xavier (that's completely true. Unbelievable, but true). Obviously, that's going to have to change.

The good news is UD fans shouldn't (repeat: shouldn't) have to worry about the Flyers not showing up for the game. We've seen before how Dayton has been poor in important games against inferior competition. In my experience, UD has not had trouble being prepared and coming out playing hard for games against Xavier. Even last year's teams, underachievers extraordinaire, played Xavier close at home and then of course beat X in the A-10 Tourney.

Man, it would be sweet to see that happen again. Extra sweet in 2012.

What happened at UD Arena Saturday?

The bad news: UD is 1-5 in games that I've been able to watch on TV or in person (not actually bad news anymore)

The good news: that one win came against Xavier in spectacular fashion at UD Arena.

So what happened at UD Arena? Dayton had the best two players on the court at any given time in Kevin Dillard and Matt Kavanaugh. I wrote earlier this week that I felt both Dillard and Kav had a shot at matching up and playing well against this particular Xavier team. I would never have taken it as far as a 16 point, nine assist performance from Dillard accompanied by a 20 point, nine rebound performance from Kavanaugh. Dillard went up against one of the premier guard tandems in the country and came out better than both of them. No matter what matchup Xavier threw at Kavanaugh (slow and strong Kenny Frease, or lighter and quicker Andre Walker, he was assertive and dominant on the offensive end. The performances of those two cannot be lauded enough.

But don't let that take away from everyting else that went on in this game. It was perhaps the finest offensive game I've ever seen UD play (I'm known to use hyperbole quicker than most, but this was no doubt a top-3 performance). Whatever Archie Miller saw in Xavier that he wanted to exploit, whatever motivation Jon Gruden's speech gave to the Flyers, however fired up the players were, they came out and delivered a magnificent performance. The ball movement was incredible, as Dayton put in open layups time and again versus a weary and confused X defense. The shot selection (for the most part) was solid; even with several inadvisable three-point attempts, Dayton shot 50 percent from the field. The players aside from Dillard and Kavanaugh also delivered. Chris Johnson only scored five points, but each of his six rebounds was a ferocious board in traffic, the type of vintage CJ rebounding UD fans had grown accustomed to, but had not seen as much of this season. Off the bench, Josh Parker continued his elevated level of under-control play contributing 16 points on 5-7 shooting, all good shots. Perhaps most surprising of all, Ralph Hill, the sophomore who at the beginning of the year was probably not expecting to see a minute in this game, logged four points, five rebounds (in traffic, against bigger, more season Xavier players) and an assist.

In this game, not only did Dayton dominate more-or-less from the tip and take the lead in the Atlantic 10 standings, but it established a blueprint for how to continue winning games. In this game, the desired product of coach Archie Miller's offense was realized. What's more, it didn't even look that difficult. Yes, UD players were knocking down shots, and that will continue to be the most important aspect of any offense, but today, the shots were easy. How hard is it going to be to replicate the performance against X? Very, especially without a raucous crowd backing them. But how hard is it going to be to deliver the same type of effort and ball movement? In theory, not at all. So far, Miller gets props for his coaching in improving his players. He has coached a group of players to a 14-5 record that it is hard to believe Brian Gregory would have at better than 11-8. Now, however, the test really begins. Will he be able to get them to keep it up? Where will the motivation come from when there is no rivalry game, no home crowd, no Jon Gruden? If Miller has the answer to that question, we could be in for a special month-plus of UD basketball.

No point in worrying about all that for now, though. Today, UD basketball beat Xavier. Easily. They made Tu Holloway and Kenny Frease look bad. Today, that's about as sweet as it gets.

What's going to happen at UD Arena this Saturday?

Well, for starters, Xavier, Tu Holloway, and all the gangsters will be visiting. But hopefully you already knew that. What's going to happen in the game?

Last year when Xavier came to Dayton, partially because of the type of team Dayton had last year and partially due to that being the second game between the two teams, I hoped UD would beat XU just for the sake of having a win over them on the year. UD was 7-6 in the A-10 at the time and it was clear the team wasn't going anywhere. Beating Xavier would have just felt good and assuaged some of the pain of the season, kind of like scoring a garbage-time touchdown to avoid a shutout feels. That didn't happen (it would later in an Atlantic 10 Tournament game, which was sweet), but regardless, that is not the atmosphere this year. Aside from the rivalry between the schools, aside from the rivalry between these players (Chris Johnson will be playing his ninth game against Tu Holloway and Kenny Frease), this game is important because of where the two teams stand at the moment. Despite getting there in two different ways (The Flyers by surprising a bit, the Musketeers by having a disappointing stretch), each team sits at 13-5. They are sitting 1-2 in the Atlantic 10 (Xavier a 4-1, UD 3-1). Most importantly, due to Xaviers midseason struggles, both teams' NCAA Tournament chances are delicate, to say the least. In his most recent Bracketology, Joe Lunardi has four Atlantic 10 teams in the tournament (UD, Xavier, Saint Louis, Temple). All four are 10 or 11 seeds, meaning they are among the last to get in. So while this game is not going to be a win-and-you're-in type situation for either team, it would be a great help as far as positioning goes.

Last year, Dayton lost two five-point games to Xavier and won one by a point. There is no reason to expect that this game will not also be close, but then again, there is no reason to expect anything from this game. Dayton is a completely different team than it was last year, in terms of who its coach is, who its starting five is and the style of basketball it plays. Whereas the Brian Gregory-era Flyers made their mark on playing defense, grabbing rebounds and dunking in transition, this year's Dayton team relies a lot more on shooting well and scoring points. They are not nearly as good on defense. Xavier still relies on Holloway and Mark Lyons to do pretty much everything for them, with other guys taking advantage of their guards' excellent play.

So what's going to happen in this game? A very interesting set of matchups. In last year's matchup, Dayton fans felt they finally had a set of guards good enough to compete with Holloway and Lyons with Juwan Staten, Josh Parker and Paul Williams. That wasn't the case. Holloway especially was still the dominant player in those games in crunch time. This year, Dayton fans feel like they've got another point guard to contend with Holloway. This year, I am among that group. Kevin Dillard has been very good this season, and would definitely appear to be capable of going step-for-step with Holloway. Dillard has had his best games in important ones, and this game qualifies. In addition, Dillard has made the other guards on this team better. Even Josh Parker, who I have disliked as a player since he came to UD, has been much improved this season, especially against Saint Bonaventure, when even in a loss, he kept UD in the game by making good basketball plays, not just having a good shooting night.

What really interests me for this game though is the Kenny Frease-Matt Kavanaugh matchup. In years past Xavier games made Kav's eyes light up because it meant he might get some playing time against the equally inept and slow Frease. This year, though, it's no secret that Kavanaugh has made a giant leap from close-your-eyes-when-he-gets-the-ball to quite serviceable. I have the insane thought that this may be a matchup Kavanaugh can win on the interior.

Beyond that, Dayton has the best forward on either team in Chris Johnson. While he may still be a bit limited from suffering a head injury, CJ has also typically had a knack for strong play in big games.

What's going to happen in this game, though? Well, considering every game I've been able to attend or watch on TV (Miami, Buffalo, Murray State, Seton Hall, St. Bonaventure--seriously, those are the only five I've caught in their entirety. I saw the last five minutes of the Minnesota game, but that was well in-hand) has resulted in a loss, and I'm going to be able to watch the game on TV this Saturday, it will probably be a loss.

I sure hope I'm wrong.

The Xavier Conundrum

Let me start this column by saying I can't believe it came to me to defend Tu Holloway, Chris Mack and Xavier. But some of the things that have been said about the situation are really starting to aggravate me, and I just couldn't sit idly by anymore.

First, a quick recap. Xavier and Cincinnati fought at the end of their game last week. Yancy Gates cold-cocked Kenny Frease with an absolute haymaker while Frease was in the middle of it all, seemingly trying to break things up. Frease was also stomped on after the punch. The fight spawned from Tu Holloway and a Cincinnati player talking trash to each other in a 23 point game with 9.4 seconds to play. Then Xavier freshman Dezmine Wells came over and shoved the UC player, and chaos ensued. The nation was shocked at the ugly scene after the fact. When I first saw the video of the fight shortly after it happened, I was not surprised at all to see Holloway at the root of it, nor was I surprised to see Mark Lyons screaming and gesturing throughout the fracas. I've seen the two talented guards up close plenty of times to know they are in-your-face, confrontational-type players. They talk trash. They delight in their opponents' downfall. Up til now, most of the nation gave them a pass for it, because of their prodigious talents on the court.

That is, up until their press conference after the UC game, when both Holloway and Lyons came off as unapologetic and shrugged their shoulders, saying that's who Xavier is, that's the way they play, they won't back down. The quote that has lingered in the media is Holloway describing the Xavier locker room (and therefore team) as full of "gangsters". I, like most people I know and read content from, thought Lyons and Holloway came off sounding foolish, like they had no idea what they were talking about, and that Xavier should never have let them speak to the media.

Since then, weak suspensions have been handed out. Gates' 6-game hiatus was the largest of all, and Holloway received one game. Despite his role in getting the fight going (supposedly cursing at the UC bench throughout the game, and obviously being one of two guys talking to get the melee started), I didn't see much room to argue Holloway's suspension. He didn't actually do anything other than talk. No thrown punches or elbows that I saw in the video.

At any rate, the suspensions (in particular Holloway's, because he is by far the highest-profile player affected) have been under a great deal of scrutiny since. Then Chris Mack spoke with Doug Gottlieb on ESPN radio. Among the things they talked about were Holloway's comments about gangsters and Xavier "zipping it up" at the end of games. Mack was, as one would expect, defending his player. In particular, during his interview with Gottlieb, he described Holloway as a "good kid". I had a problem with that word choice, as did many people, which I discovered later in the day. Mack was being ripped for labeling Holloway a "kid." Up til now, I had been in the same camp as most other people. But I have no problem with the use of the word "kid." I disagreed with the word "good."

Quick (maybe) sidebar: Tu Holloway is my least favorite college basketball player ever. It should be noted that as a UD fan, I have been bred to hate him, and so perhaps I am not worth listening to on the matter. But during my time with the UD paper, I sat on the sidelines and in the postgame media room, watching and listening Holloway up close for several games. I spent time in the stands watching him before that. I feel more qualified to write about him than many of the things I write about on this blog. I've seen him constantly talk trash, try to get a rise out of his opponents, act smugly on the court and act smugly after games are over. The guy is not a "good" dude in any sense of the word I can think of beyond his basketball skills. Having said that, I can completely understand why Chris Mack thinks he is a good guy, and I can even see how Holloway would come off as good if you just sat down and had a conversation with him. He is confident, talkative, charismatic--what wouldn't you like about speaking with a guy like that? Don't be fooled though, his attitude will be his downfall if he ever makes it to the next level.

So imagine my surprise when nobody had a problem with "good" but rather "kid." Certainly, Holloway is legally not a child at 22 years of age. I'm just guessing here, but I don't believe when Mack referred to him as a kid, he was thinking about any legal definition. I think what he meant was that Holloway is more immature than what most Americans expect out of an adult, just like 98 percent of 22-year-olds are. When speaking about it with my dad, I told him I had no problem with Mack calling him a kid, because I'm a kid too (same age as Tu and everything!) He told me, "No, you're an adult, you're responsible for what you say and do." Hard to argue with that. But once again, not the point that was being made. The point was, Holloway was speaking off the cuff about a high-intensity situation, and he used an unfortunate word. Young people do that. Do all you 40-plus people out there really think 20-25 year-olds are as mature as you? Holloway even corrected himself immediately afterward, saying "Not thugs, but tough guys on the court." He didn't mean gangsters with baseball bats and guns looking to commit crimes or intimidate court witnesses, and anyone who didn't get that wasn't listening. Of course Holloway is responsible for using the words he did, but he isn't trying to back down from them. He regrets using them, just like any of us regret making any bad decisions in life.

One more point about the "kid" debate. Whenever I get into a discussion with my parents about some real-life issues like finances or politics (admittedly a rare occurence), and am unwilling to back down from my position, their response is predictable. It goes something like, "Nate, you just don't understand, you don't have the experience, you haven't been in the real world, you don't get it." Essentially, because I'm young and haven't been in the world for as long, what I have to say is not as valid. (In fact, that's probably what the old-timers are thinking right now as they read this: "This young guy. He just doesn't get it.") And that's fine. (Not really; I hate that argument, but it's probably true). But that sure sounds like a "kid" to me. No, I'm not (and Tu Holloway's not) a kid in the sense that we believe in Santa Claus or are still working on our multiplication tables, but you better believe I'm still a kid when it comes to the real world. I have no idea what I'm doing. Just read this blog for evidence.

Probably even more so than me, Tu Holloway is a "real-world kid". He has gotten things his way since high school at least, because schools are always trying to please the star basketball player. That's the way it works in this world. Holloway is still going to be one of my least favorite athletes of all time when this situation blows over and the next big one comes along. But even then, I'll know, and I think you should try to understand, he's still a 22-year-old kid (or young man, whatever you prefer, they're the same thing), like me.