Friday, February 22, 2008

Battle of the Boulevard -- Preview

4 hours from tip-off, here's my take on the game:

When Lipscomb has the ball, they need to take smart shots. LaKory Daniels needs to stay involved in the offense to keep the Belmont defense honest, but the Bruins' Achilles heel is 2-point defense. Belmont has adapted to a running style this year, and it leaves them tired on the defense end at times. If they play it right, Lipscomb is capable of hitting 50% or better inside the arc.

Of course, if Lipscomb tries to exploit Belmont's weakness inside, they may end up at the foul line a lot, which could play into Belmont's hands. Lipscomb only shoots 67% from the line in conference play. Lipscomb will need to make at least 70% to have a good shot tonight, especially if he game is close.

Wait, if? This is the Battle of the Boulevard. These games are always close.

If Daniels gets off to a good start, that will open up the inside game for Lipscomb. It will also create space for Eddie Ard to, well, be Eddie Ard.

Lipscomb also needs to take care of the ball. They average 15 turnovers per game in conference, and Belmont forces 16.

When Belmont has the ball, they will want to run. To do that well, they will need quality minutes out of all 9 guys in their rotation. This means not just scoring. They need to do the "other things" -- rebounding, passing, taking care of the ball, capitalizing on Lipscomb's mistakes. If Belmont will play their game at their pace, the points will come.

Fortunately for Belmont, Lipscomb's defensive style plays into their hands a bit. Lipscomb defends 2's and 3's at about the same rate. Plus, Belmont has 3 lights-out free-throw shooters.

If you're listening to the game on the radio (like I will have to), count the number of times you hear the names "Andy Wicke" (Belmont) and "Michael Lusk" (Lipscomb). Whichever name gets mentioned the most often will be on the winning team.

Now the pick -- Close game, down to the wire, but Belmont pulls it out at home. 83-81 Bruins.

Here's hoping I'm wrong.

No comments: